The Martha’s Vineyard Airport is required to use firefighting foam that includes a contaminant known as per- or polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS). It’s required by the Federal Aviation Administration because it’s the best way they know to quickly contain a fire involving an aircraft or other vehicles containing highly flammable fuels, although a recent reauthorization act approved by Congress urges the FAA to find an alternative.
The FAA has known for more than four years of the concerns about this emerging contaminant, and still, even as airports across the country are finding evidence of fouled water, has not come up with an alternative or suspended the requirements for airports to test their firefighting foam capabilities. At the very least, the FAA should be requiring airports to contain the foam when it’s tested, a practice that’s been put into place by Martha’s Vineyard Airport officials fairly recently.
There is no federal requirement for the airport to investigate for the presence of PFAS. There is no state requirement either, although since levels above the state health advisory of 70 parts per trillion have been found in a neighborhood near the airport, Martha’s Vineyard Airport must now report to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on its ongoing investigation.
We’re not sure why airports across the state and country have not been required to do this testing. It’s an obvious lapse by environmental regulators who are supposed to protect the public health.
They have two prime examples in the state — Joint Base Cape Cod and Barnes Air Force Base in Westfield — where investigations have shown PFAS concentrations above 70 ppt. There is also the well-documented case of polluted wells near the Barnstable County Fire Academy. Now environmental regulators have Martha’s Vineyard Airport. It’s more than a trend.
One of the wild cards in the ongoing investigation is that PFAS is found in nearly everything that is waterproof, or in household products that are oil- or water-resistant. Think carpeting and upholstery. So there is a possibility of the chemical compounds making their way into septic systems that leach into the groundwater.
But even with that uncertainty, it’s time to make this testing for PFAS in wells mandatory in neighborhoods surrounding airports that have been required to use firefighting foam, which is any airport where commercial airliners land and take off. There is no such requirement to have firefighting foam at places like Katama Airfield, or the tiny, seldom-used airstrip at Trade Wind Fields Preserve, for example.
We applaud the efforts of Ron Myrick of Tetra Tech, an environmental consulting firm that has worked with the airport for a long time, to alert Martha’s Vineyard Airport officials to this growing concern across the country. And we applaud the officials at Martha’s Vineyard Airport for listening and launching an investigation before it became a requirement.
We also applaud Myrick’s thoughtful description of what was being found, what is known about PFAS, and what steps might be taken down the road — besides bottled water — to address and remediate the issue using carbon filters.
The airport was transparent with its approach, quickly alerting homeowners in the affected areas through letters — some of them hand-delivered. They also quickly scheduled a press briefing, and when another media outlet said that meeting was public, instead of just for the press, airport officials shared a phone number with people who couldn’t attend in person, but who wanted to hear the report from Myrick firsthand.
Myrick and airport leaders didn’t know all the answers, and were honest that an investigation will take time. They committed to pay for tests in the affected areas, to provide remediation when the evidence shows it’s needed, and even to expand the area of investigation if results point to the need.
The airport is doing everything it can to ease the public’s fears, while at the same time making sure the public stays as informed as possible.
You really can’t ask for more.