Contractors Aurecon revealed 75 per cent of the on-site testing had been completed at the Nowra Hill naval base at the latest community information meeting held by Defence on Tuesday, April 11. 

The walk-in session at the Nowra Hill Public School was held to provide local residents and business owners with an update on the environmental investigation into per-and poly-fluoroalkyl substancs (PFAS) on and in the vicinity of Albatross.

Project director Adam Anderson said while the detailed site inspection was well underway, additional works were needed in the next couple of months in relation to groundwater and surface water sampling.

“The Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment (HHERA) and the environment, ecology etc is also being assessed,” he said.

He said Aurecon had undertaken 99 soil samples (boreholes) from 32 new boreholes; 141 spoil samples (hand augers) from 78 locations; and 40 sediment samples (at the bottom of water bodies) from 35 locations.

There has been four rounds of surface water testing (two in dry and two in wet - after a rainfall event) with 92 surface water samples taken from from 43 locations, while 64 groundwater samples had been taken in two rounds of testing.

Mr Anderson said interim findings to date were as expected, that the primary sources of PFAS were in areas of historic use of the products, like the fire fighting training area to the west of the base, the sewerage treatment plant and sewerage treatment plant irrigation areas.

Around 15 residents attended the walk-in session, which was hosted by Defence’s spokesperson on PFAS, Rear Admiral Clint Thomas and HMAS Albatross commanding officer Captain Fiona Sneath.

RADM Thomas again reiterated the Environmental Health Standing Committee (enHealth) guidance statements on PFAS that “there is currently no consistent evidence that exposure to PFOS and PFOA causes adverse human health effects. Because these chemicals persist in humans and the environment, enHealth recommends that human exposure to these chemicals is minimised as a precaution.”

HMAS Albatross is one of 18 bases around the country that investigations into PFAS is being carried out.

RADM Thomas said investigations were all at different stages.

He said Williamtown near Newcastle and Oakey in Queensland, where there had been much higher recorded instances of  the chemicals were further advanced, while Albatross fell into the next level.

“Eleven sites, including Albatross and the Jervis Bay Airfield, are currently undergoing detailed environmental investigations,” he said.

Investigations at seven other bases are expected to start in the early stages of this year.

“The end product is the human health risk assessment and ecological risk assessment, a substantial report that summarises where we get to in terms of human health.”

Questions over changes in reference values (standards) of acceptable human levels of PFAS were raised.

“The Commonwealth Department of Health released final Health Based Guidance Values (HBGVs) for PFAS on April 3, 2017,” he said.

“These HBGVs were developed by Food Standard Australian and New Zealand (SANZ) at the request of the Commonwealth Department of Health and replace the interim enHealth guidelines released in June 2016.

“The HBGVs for PFAS were a precautionary measure to assist people, investigating agencies and affected communities in minimising their exposure to PFAS.”

The work at Albatross will be compared to the new threshold levels.

Mr Anderson said the levels were now lower.

“They are a magnitude lower. Eight or seven times more sensitive, lower – based on conservative unknown nature in terms of human health risk,” he said.

RADM Thomas said the focus all around the country had been on drinking water which was the major pathway of ingestion of PFAS into the human body.

“That is via bore water associated with PFAS contamination,” he said.

“The base here is supplied by town water, which was PFAS free, so it is really the legacy use of fire fighting foams we are talking about.

“We don’t believe those circumstances greatly exist around here.”

Questions on how to remove the possible contamination were also raised.

“There is no easy way to get rid of PFAS,” RADM Thomas said.

“It is not just a matter of cleaning it up.

“You just can’t eliminate PFAS. It is persistent, it doesn't biodegrade or chemically break down. It exists for a long time.

“And before we take management action we want to know where it is.

“New experimental technologies are being trialled around the world, such as water purification plants.”

Electrolysis of the water has also proven successful.

Mr Anderson said the best way to manage PFAS was to isolate or block the source, not allowing the possible contamination to move.

“To remediate soil you would have to heat the soil to about 1200 to 1600 degrees celsius, which is difficult on a big scale and very expensive. In the end the soil is biologically dead and can’t support anything to grow, so you then have to maintain that soil.”