Navy towers planned for St. Inigoes, Maryland may be hazardous to the community’s health

Counter-Unmanned Aerial System Jamming Operations (CUJO) will emit dangerous radio frequency radiation just 400 feet from homes

The Navy will be radiating the birds and the bees, the flowers and the trees

By Pat Elder
April 6, 2022

Homes along Villa Rd. in St. Inigoes, Maryland will be most impacted by Tower #6, depicted here in red. The proposed tower is just 400’ away.

On March 21, 2022 the Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland Public Affairs Office responded to the 23 questions I sent them regarding their plans to erect six 150’ towers directly across St. Inigoes Creek from my home. The towers are part of the Counter-Unmanned Aerial System Jamming Operations (CUJO) program.

Actually, the Navy didn’t reply directly to me and they failed to answer most of my questions. They did say certain questions fall under operational security and can't be answered in full or in specific detail.

Their reply came after I enlisted the help of Congressman Steny Hoyer to get the Navy to acknowledge citizen concerns. Hoyer’s office replied, “We will do our best to help you find answers but can make no guarantee to the outcome or the timeframe under which this matter may be resolved.”  In other words, the Navy is going to do whatever it wants to do.

The Navy produced a document, Tower Frequently Asked Questions - NAS Patuxent River, Maryland.  It’s a tactic they’ve used to repel citizen concerns ranging from chemical contamination of our rivers - to the incineration of dangerous chemicals - to noise levels associated with the screaming F-35’s - to unfair recruiting practices in the nation’s high schools. They make up their own questions and answer them, rather than dealing directly and honestly with the public’s concerns.

Here’s an example of how this works, taken from the Navy’s response. Can you discern the psychology here? Apparently an “insider” used the abbreviation of “T&E facilities”  (Assume the Navy wrote the Q and the A.)

Q9.   Why does this have to be done at Webster Field? (On this one, we were told that Webster Field was the only facility with a maritime environment that satisfies the need. This is hard to believe – the Navy has T&E facilities on the water at several places in the country).

A9.   Webster Field is uniquely positioned among DoD research installations as one with maritime environmental qualities specific to the testing and evaluation of this system and home of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron Two Four (UX-24), the DoD’s Test and Evaluation UAS squadron. Webster Field is also the optimal facility for such testing as it offers the land-based and maritime solution in such close proximity.

The Navy has provided the location of the proposed towers. Tower # 6 is dangerously close to homes on Villa Road.

 People sleeping in homes with windows facing antennas suffer the highest exposures of radio frequency radiation. Tower #6 will be located approximately 350’ to 400’ from homes on Villa Road.

One influential study evaluated effects in the human blood of individuals living near towers (within 262’) compared with living over 1,000 feet from the towers. The study found higher radiofrequency radiation exposures and statistically significant differences in the blood of people living closer to the cellular antennas. The group living closer to the antennas had for example, statistically significant higher frequency of micronuclei and a rise in lipid peroxidation (cell damage) in their blood. These changes are considered biomarkers predictive of cancer.

Many jurisdictions have halted the placement of cell towers  and cell antennae near schools and residences because of the higher density of radiation in close vicinity to cell antennas.

David O. Carpenter, former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany/SUNY is one of the nation’s preeminent experts on the effects of  electromagnetic fields emitted by cell towers. Carpenter fought against the construction of a 120-foot cell tower that was proposed to be located 1,500 feet from homes. One of the Navy’s towers, expected to be 150 feet tall, will be constructed about 400 feet from homes.

Carpenter says there is strong evidence that “intensive use of cellphones increases the risk of brain cancer. The difference between a cellphone and a cell tower environment, however, is that the cellphone is used only intermittently.  While the intensity is much less than one would receive holding a cellphone to your head, the emissions from a cell tower are continuous.” Thus, he says, “The aggregate exposure over time coming from being close to a cell tower can be very significant.” People living on Villa Road and St. Inigoes Shores will be exposed every moment they’re at home.

Studies have reported elevated rates of cancer, especially leukemia, in residents living near cell towers.  Other studies have found individuals have abnormal levels of several different hormones and suffer from reduced cognitive ability. Placing a cell tower 400 feet from residential housing is dangerous to health. 

Here are the questions I sent to the Navy and to Rep. Hoyer, followed by the Navy’s responses and my commentary.

1)   What is being proposed?

 We have a better idea where the towers will be located, although the Navy has not shared information on the potential harm to our health. Judging from the chemical contamination of our water and seafood, they aren’t going to tell us much. No one from the Navy approached our community about this project, even though County Commissioner Todd Morgan said the plans for the towers have been in the works for five years. This is one hell of a way to treat us!

2)   Where are the drawings and designs of the towers?

The Navy has not answered this question.

3)   Is there a map of where these towers will be located? 

See the map above.

4)   What is the process?  Will there be a vote?

The Navy has not answered this question.

5)   Is an entity okaying this? If so, which entity?

The Navy says the Department of Defense is the ultimate authority. The DOD dictates environmental policy in the United States.

Ospreys nesting above St. Inigoes Creek are threatened by the radiation from the Navy’s towers while the fish they consume are poisoned by the Navy. The seahawks mate for life and winter in Venezuela.

6)   Has an environmental impact statement been done, looking at impacts to birds?

Pax River says environmental impact statements are “typically done for major federal actions that involve significant impacts to the environment.”

Research shows harm to flora and fauna from cell tower radiation. A three-part 2021 study published in Reviews on Environmental Health by leading U.S experts found harmful impacts to orientation and migration, reproduction, mating, nest, den building and survivorship.  Levitt et al., 2021a  Levitt et al., 2021b , Levitt et al., 2021c. The Navy says information on cell tower radiation “cannot be shared at the unclassified level due to operational security.”

7)   What will the impact be on property values?  Has this been assessed? 

The Navy has not answered this question.

8)  If I am on my dock, 1,600 feet from the shores of Webster Field, can you provide an estimate of the SAR in watts per kilogram from each tower?

The Navy has not answered this question.

9)  If I’m in my boat, directly across from my property, along the shores of Webster Field, can you provide an estimate of the SAR from each tower?

The Navy has not answered this question.

10) Have you performed studies that estimate the levels of radio frequency radiation from the types of towers you are constructing? If so, could you share them with us?

The Navy has not answered this question.

11) If you have not performed a study, are you willing to commission a study in this regard and share the results with us?

The Navy has not answered this question.

12) What frequency ranges will the Navy be using at each of the six towers?

The Navy says, “Frequency ranges for this system cannot be shared at the unclassified level due to operational security.”

13) Is the Navy willing to submit to civilian authority in this matter?

The Navy has not answered this question.

14) Could you describe for us the exact type of stations you are planning to build?

The Navy replied, “Certain questions fall under operational security, and can't be answered in full or in specific detail.”

15)  What are the design characteristics of the antennas being used?

The Navy has not answered this question.

16)  How much power will be transmitted to the antennas? 

The Navy has not answered this question.

17)  Can you provide the amount of RF energy generated at each tower in terms of increments of 100 feet heading north toward the Rosecroft community?

The Navy has not answered this question.

18)  Could you provide this information for each tower?

The Navy has not answered this question.

19)  Is there a potential for radio frequency interference with our communication equipment such as radios, TVs, wireless, cell phones, garage door openers, etc.?

The Navy says, “There are no concerns over the potential for radio frequency interference with communications equipment such as radios, TVs, cell phones, garage door openers, wireless comms, etc. as the towers will be raising the sensors at ~150' AGL, so there will be far less interference if any at all as compared to the current ground level configuration.”

There is some skepticism in the community. Two have said they feel there is potential for radio frequency interference from the towers. They point to a location on the Pax River base where FM radio becomes garbled while driving.

20)  Is there a project test plan that addresses RFI and RF human exposure issues?

The Navy has not answered this question.

21)  If groundwater is encountered through the construction process of the towers, what kinds of remediation strategies will you employ to clean the water that may be disturbed before discharge into St. Inigoes Creek or the St. Mary’s River?

The Navy has not answered this question.

22)  Can you provide a list and the concentrations of all of the toxic chemicals found in the groundwater at Webster Field?

The Navy has not answered this question.

23)  In the case of PFAS, how will you “dispose” of the GAC filters if they are used to extract PFAS?

The Navy has not answered this question.

The Navy says their goal is to have all towers up and operational by September, 2022. They encourage concerned citizens to contact the NAS Patuxent River Noise Hotline at 1-866-819-9028 or paxnoise@us.navy.mil.

Thank you.

Please support our work.

Previous
Previous

City of Delray Beach, Florida is not telling the whole story on PFAS contamination of drinking water

Next
Next

Seymour Johnson Air Force Base Contaminates the Neuse River and the Goldsboro, North Carolina Region with PFAS