Boston Globe -- NorthWest section
Thursday, August 4, 2005

Activists challenge Hanscom Field pick

By Davis Bushnell, Globe Correspondent

Activist groups opposed to the expansion of Bedford's Hanscom Field,
especially through increased jet traffic, are challenging on environmental
grounds the selection of a new aviation services company to do business at
the airfield beginning in the spring of 2007.

The groups are contending that the Massachusetts Port Authority,
owner-operator of the airport, did not perform a state-mandated
environmental review before choosing Crosspoint Aviation Services LLC of
Woburn two months ago to join two other aviation services firms, Signature
Flight Support and Jet Aviation, at Hanscom.

Massport asserts the appropriate environmental studies are already in place.
Crosspoint's director of aviation services, Tim Sullivan, declined comment,
deferring to the port authority. Crosspoint intends to build a
60,000-square-foot facility to provide a range of services from aircraft
maintenance to fuel sales.

The dispute intensified Monday, when a group called ShhAir, which stands for
Safeguarding the Historic Hanscom Area's Irreplaceable Resources, filed
documents with administrators of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act,
requesting an environmental review of the Crosspoint project. Save Our
Heritage, a Concord-based historic preservation organization, backed this
action.

State environmental officials have until Oct. 7 to decide whether Massport
should conduct additional studies at the airfield, said Douglas Wilkins, a
partner of Anderson and Kreiger, a Cambridge law firm that represents
ShhAir.

There are also concerns a Crosspoint facility would be another catalyst for
increased jet activity, particularly corporate craft, said Kay Tiffany of
Lexington, an emeritus board member and a founder of ShhAir, who worked on
the appeal to the state. At a Tuesday night joint meeting of the Hanscom
Field Advisory Commission and Hanscom Area Towns Selectmen group, officials
from the four towns surrounding the airport -- Bedford, Concord, Lexington,
and Lincoln -- were expected support an environmental review.

Before the meeting, Sara Mattes of Lincoln, chairwoman of the selectmen
group, said, ''Any infrastructure expansion [at the airport] is of concern.
It is so disheartening that Massport took unilateral action [in selecting
Crosspoint] instead of having a dialogue with us."

Richard Walsh, Massport's chief spokesman for Hanscom Field, countered,
''Massport recognizes the importance of sharing information and seeking
community input in the early stages of planning. We submit monthly reports
to municipal officials on the airport's operations and our planning
efforts."

But the major point is that state environmental policy act rules specify an
environmental review before a go-ahead can be given to an airport terminal,
said Tiffany of ShhAir.

Walsh said the proposed Crosspoint facility ''was anticipated for in the
2000 environmental status and planning report undertaken by Massport through
the auspices of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act."

Implicit in its support of Crosspoint is Massport's ''intentions" for
bumping up jet activity, Tiffany said. ''If these operations are allowed to
grow, in 10 years there will be a jet taking off or landing every three
minutes," she added, citing ShhAir's projections.

Walsh said, ''Hanscom Field is a general aviation airport that accommodates
all types of aircraft."

Last year, there were 33,061 jet arrivals and departures at the airfield, an
8.9 percent increase over 2003.

Save Our Heritage, also critical of jet activity at Hanscom, said the action
being taken by Tiffany's organization is timely. ''We applaud ShhAir's
initiative and join in their request for full environmental review of the
Crosspoint project," said Anna Winter, executive director of the group.

''It is long past time for Governor [Mitt] Romney to keep his campaign
promise to limit Hanscom [Field] expansion," said Winter in a statement.
''For years, our state government has woefully neglected its duty to protect
Minute Man Park and Walden from the devastating impacts of uncontrolled
airport growth. This is one last chance for Massachusetts to show that it is
a worthy steward for these nationally important landmarks."

© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
==========
**NOTICE: In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========