NEWS

RIAC sees no need for greater study of air cargo plan at this time

By JOHN HOWELL
Posted 1/25/23

Just how much study needs to be done for the Rhode Island Airport Corporation to move air cargo operations to an expanded $100 million facility south of the airport terminal?

Warwick …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
NEWS

RIAC sees no need for greater study of air cargo plan at this time

Posted

Just how much study needs to be done for the Rhode Island Airport Corporation to move air cargo operations to an expanded $100 million facility south of the airport terminal?

Warwick resident  Richard Langseth, who has closely followed developments at Rhode Island T. F. Green International Airport for years, says the plan needs more scrutiny than the Environmental Assessment (EA) currently being undertaken with the expectation that construction would start in the fall of 2024 and be completed and operational by 2026. Langseth and Zarum advocate an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

RIAC officials say it’s too early to know if a deeper dive into the impacts of an EIS is merited.

In an email, John Goodman, RIAC Assistant Vice President Media and Public Relations writes, “Based on the information and analysis contained in the EA document, and public comments submitted about the proposed project, the FAA will make a significance determination. If the environmental impacts are less than significant, the FAA will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). However, if a potentially significant impact on the environment cannot be avoided, then an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared to address the adverse effect(s) of the project.”

Langseth raised the issue of a more intensive study in a letter to the editor published last Thursday under the headline “Sleepless in Warwick.” He writes that AECOM, the firm conducting the current EA looked at an integrated freight terminal when it did an EIS study in 2007, projecting it would bring in 150,000 freight planes to Green a year or about 70 freight departures per business day.

“RIAC is trying to avoid doing another EIS. Ignoring their prior 70-planes-per-day claim in the EIS for the original 53,000 sq. ft. terminal, RIAC's new Vice President of Engineering anticipates only four to five large freight flights will come to T.F. Green daily. This, she claims, will not impact the environment. Considering the words of the consultant back in 2007, this claim is not credible given the sizes of the terminals FedEx and UPS are leasing,” Langseth writes

Mike Zarum, who with Langseth attended the RIAC informational session held at the Sawtooth City Annex building on Jan. 11, has questioned if the EA will review overnight noise at the facility – the beep, beep of trucks backing up – and ultra fine particles of less than one micron “which case premature cardiovascular disease.” He suggests the city retain an aviation expert familiar with FAA administrative law to advise the city on what it can and cannot do under federal, state and local laws.

In a letter published in today’s Beacon, Goodman responds to Langseth’s letter of last week, “Mr. Langseth cites his unswerving, yet unsubstantiated, belief that cargo activity at RIAC’s proposed relocated cargo facility would instantly increase air cargo activity 20-fold, with 70 departures per day, and NOT the one to two additional flights for a total of 7 per day as planned by airport cargo operators.”

Goodman said the FAA expects all commercial airports to have a master plan to identify the next 20 years of projects, which RIAC recently completed “after four years of collaborative work with Warwick and others airport stakeholders.”

That plan calls for a relocated cargo facility to replace the hangar on Airport Road that was built in the 1940s. The hangar is used predominantly by FedEx, however, because it fails to provide adequate space FedEx is using trailers outside the hangar for storage and sorting. UPS, the other large air freight operator at Green, generally sorts and packs modules to be loaded on its planes off site. Both companies have lease agreements for the 100,000 square foot facility proposed to the south of the terminal that would be built by RIAC.

In his letter, Goodman notes, “RIAC was not required to hold its recent public open house regarding the project, but RIAC is proud to reach out to its own community directly to mitigate exactly the type of misinformation Mr. Langseth is intent on spreading.”

City Planner Tom Kravitz said what RIAC is basically doing is relocating cargo operations to an area that is currently paved and “it is not like realigning a road.” He pointed out the city would have the opportunity to review the EA and if additional study is needed make an appropriate request.

Goodman said the EA should be completed by the end of next month.

EDITOR'S NOTE:  Mr. Zarum did not advocate an EIS as reported here.  Here is what he wrote in an email  following publication of this story:

I want to be clear with you and readers, that I agree with Mr. Goodman and the FAA that the "NEPA Process" does not require an EIS at this time.  That RIAC is only required to do an EIS should the EA determine that there will be "Significant Impacts", and if it is determined through the EA that there are "No Significant Impacts", they will issue a FONSI or Finding of  No Significant Impact and no EIS will be done. 

Even if they were to do an EIS, the metrics that the FAA uses would preclude full disclosure of true impacts fo noise and air quality the way neighbors would perceive them.  That is a key issue more important than whether they do an EA or EIS, as neither process uses metrics to fully disclose those impacts!

The consultant presently preparing the 2023 Environmental Assessment (the EA), proposed a 53,000 sq. ft. integrated freight terminal during its 2007 T. F. Green Environmental Impact Study (EIS) meetings on the runway extension. It announced then that the freight terminal would bring in 150,000 freight planes to T.F. Green per year, or about 70 freight departures per business day.  That freight terminal project was deferred until now.

RIAC is trying to avoid doing another EIS. Ignoring their prior 70-planes-per-day claim in the EIS for the original 53,000 sq. ft. terminal, RIAC's new Vice President of Engineering anticipates only four to five large freight flights will come to T.F. Green daily.  This, she claims, will not impact the environment. Considering the words of the consultant back in 2007, this claim is not credible given the sizes of the terminals FedEx and UPS are leasing.  You don't borrow $100,000,000 for four to five planes per day! They don't generate enough revenue to pay off the large loan.

The potential for the proposed cargo project to exceed established thresholds of significance will be addressed in the Draft EA. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is a concise public document that is prepared by an Airport and is used to assist the Federal Aviation Administration in making their decision whether the proposed project is likely to have a “significant” impact on the environment. 

Based on the information and analysis contained in the EA document, and public comments submitted about the proposed project, the FAA will make a significance determination. If the environmental impacts are less than significant, the FAA will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). However, if a potentially significant impact on the environment cannot be avoided, then an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared to address the adverse effect(s) of the project

RIAC has published the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) from which they will seek out FAA grants.  They need to stick to it.  It will be a document that forms part of the bond underwriting. If they plan to move the Northside facility to Phase Two, then they need to announce the same. Otherwise it falls under the EA (EIS)

I have contacted the FAA and the consensus there is that the ALP is a RIAC document for which it is responsible for the facts contained there in.  The Northside situation is not exactly that flights would be unloaded there when the Southside terminal is built, but, that in Phase One there is authorization to rebuild the Northside Terminal.  RIAC told me at the Sawtooth meeting that this Northside location would be used for belly freight with them showing me a map on a cell phone showing that - which was illegible obviously.  The belly freight area is to the west by the fuel tanks and the hotel.  Because Northside falls into Phase One, it falls under the options to be considered in the EA/EIS. Obviously it is too small for the FedEx/UPS leases. But what about the other freight carriers including Amazon and DHL. Where do they go. Most likely to the new UPS terminal. But RIAC needs to say that.

Gladly and graciously I would meet with RIAC to go over the ALP and have them explain Phase One. But they won't even share the Master Plan with me. They need to do both -- and pick up the phone. It's called community outreach.

The problem with the parking lot at the old geodesic dome site is that it does not require any extensive development work so it can easily be used for truck parking and it is on the way to the 500,000 sq. ft. warehouse on Halene. 

The $100,000,000 needs to be put in the capital plan and the borrowing part put into the Kirshner (spelling) Bill report to the General Assembly. By the way something odd happened with the Interlink last year. RIAC was scheduled to pay about $2 million in interest and amortization on the TIFIA loan. The 2022 annual report shows about a quarter of that. I don't know if that was a mistake because Brian left or a US DOT directive.  I will chase that little nasty down.

As far as the Warwick Planning Dept is concerned, there are currently no issues that I am aware of. Mr. Kravitz needs to get engaged and, I would think, start a planning process. Mike Zarum is claiming that RIAC needs to go through Planning??? Zoning??? on this. But I have not looked into that situation.

Sleepless in Warwick

Remember when thundering jets taking off at Green woke us up in the middle of the night?

The same rude awakening was reported at 5:00 a.m. on September 14, 2022, when an airport neighbor was shaken out of his bed in Louisville, home of the United Parcel Service (UPS) air fleet. He posts on the airport complaint board:

“We just had one going to Dubi (Dubai) about 1500' over our house. His number was N624UP a 747-8F.  He shook our house -- unbelievable! They always fly lower at night. They have got to do something different.”

Aviation Herald, the aviation newspaper, reports that this very same plane experienced an engine fire on takeoff on July 20, 2021, in Hong Kong, headed for Dubai. The 747's emergency landing took about 8,200 feet, which would be most of T.F. Green’s runway.

Another sleepless individual in Louisville typed into the complaint board two days later, on September 16, 2022:

“I was just awakened at 3:45 a.m. by a UPS jet that was taking off. It rattled the windows. . . Not getting much sleep because of these jets taking off in the morning. It is every day now.”

So, why do we care here in Warwick?  Amazon is zeroing in on us. A new 500,000 sq. ft. warehouse is going up in the cornfield behind the old geodesic dome on Airport Road. The dome site will be a parking lot for trailer trucks, feeding freight planes coming in and out of T.F. Green International. Green will earn its name "International" the easy way. Open up the freight gates!

The RIAC Board has approved 273,000 sq. ft. of freight handling buildings at the airport in three phases, 92,000 sq. ft. of it leased to FedEx, which reports it ran out of space in Boston and needs to bring its planes here.  UPS is lining up for 39,300 sq. ft. This maxes out the proposed space at T.F. Green pictured in last week's Beacon. 

The airport plan calls for another 53,000 sq. ft. of space on Airport Road, making a total of 184,000 sq. ft. in Phase One. This last space is near the new Amazon warehouse going up behind the geodesic dome on Airport Road. A parking area for trailer trucks is planned for the now empty lot.

The consultant presently preparing the 2023 Environmental Assessment (the EA), proposed a 53,000 sq. ft. integrated freight terminal during its 2007 T. F. Green Environmental Impact Study (EIS) meetings on the runway extension. It announced then that the freight terminal would bring in 150,000 freight planes to T.F. Green per year, or about 70 freight departures per business day.  That freight terminal project was deferred until now.

RIAC is trying to avoid doing another EIS. Ignoring their prior 70-planes-per-day claim in the EIS for the original 53,000 sq. ft. terminal, RIAC's new Vice President of Engineering anticipates only four to five large freight flights will come to T.F. Green daily.  This, she claims, will not impact the environment. Considering the words of the consultant back in 2007, this claim is not credible given the sizes of the terminals FedEx and UPS are leasing.  You don't borrow $100,000,000 for four to five planes per day! They don't generate enough revenue to pay off the large loan.

How many new planes will actually be coming in? The consultant has asked RIAC for $250,000 in additional EA funding to look at truck traffic and to take a quick look at the air traffic situation.

What will the consultants find?  Amazon is building one of the largest warehouses in the world in Johnston: 120 feet high and with 4 million sq. ft. of robots and storage space. The giant cranes peering over the hill on I-295 look like War of the Worlds monsters come to life. And where are the goods coming from to feed these monsters? My guess is T.F. Green. The consultant's original 70- planes-per-day estimate made 15 years ago may be much closer to reality than four or five per day.

Our City Fathers and Mothers are of course receptive to new jobs, but turn a blind eye to all those B787s and A330s buzzing in from Europe at night. They see it as part of the price we pay for living in a little heaven, which RIAC officials boast is within 75 minutes for three-quarters of the people in New England. The Mayor has some explaining to do! Do we really want to hear these flights all night long?

The RIAC Board also needs to explain the presence of a Board member whose partner is the lawyer for the Commerce Corporation. Its mission: creating jobs in Rhode Island.  Other RIAC Board members include:

*The former Mayor of Cranston. He is a union official, looking for those new construction jobs.

*A toy company executive, who ships toys all over the world.

 *The head of global sales for a major computer manufacturer’s media and entertainment operations. 

 *An investment securities manager. This project won’t fly without special bonds. He personally won't take part in the borrowing of hundreds of millions -- but he does support his industry.

 *A pilot. (He is the good guy. Flies out of Quonset.)

Are we to trust these people to have our best interests at heart? The proof is in the drawing of the 747s in the rendering given to the Beacon. Houses would surely shake were these big jets allowed to roar out of Warwick.  But the Johnston Warehouse Monster must be fed, after all.

air, cargo

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here