Panel eases up on small airports
Owners say cost of rules too high

By Raphael Lewis, Globe Staff, 10/11/2001

After ordering small airports last week to implement tough security measures
like video surveillance, perimeter fencing, and 24-hour armed guards, the
Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission yesterday backed off when several
airport owners said they would go broke if forced to comply.

The commission quietly issued the security directive on Oct. 2 to 41
municipal, regional, and privately owned airports, which currently have
little or none of the security that large commercial airports consider
minimal to protect passengers and crew.

The directive, obtained by the Globe, insisted on 14 costly measures,
including a requirement that airports conduct background checks of
employees, take weekly inventories of aircraft, and place barriers around
fuel storage facilities.

But the move met with strong opposition from many of the airport owners, who
are already suffering enormous financial losses in the wake of the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks.

In response, the commission yesterday held a closed-door meeting with
airport officials. They emerged 21/2 hours later willing to compromise and
scale back expectations for beefed-up security.

''We're going to refine this and change it,'' said Sherman Saltmarsh Jr.,
the commission's chairman. ''I mean, some of these airports have one runway.
We can't ask them to have 24/7 armed patrols.''

Even though the commission backed off its initial, hard-line stance on
security at small airports, officials yesterday said they will nonetheless
move forward on most, if not all, of the items in the directive, whether
airports can afford them or not. They did not, however, provide details on
when or how they will proceed.

''We have a tremendous responsibility here,'' said Robert Mallard, the
commission's executive director. ''Not just to the flying public, but to the
general public. We have to maintain safety.''

Currently, few of the state's small airports employ security systems common
at large facilities like Boston's Logan International. Many have no fencing
around runway areas, few have permanent security guards, and almost none
have video monitors in place.

But in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, undertaken by men who
were trained as general aviation pilots, federal authorities have
highlighted small airports as a particularly vulnerable piece of the
nation's aviation system. Most of the state's small airports are dominated
by general aviation traffic, but some, such as Beverly Municipal Airport,
serve a small number of jets and multiple-engine propeller planes.

Last week, the Aeronautics Commission ordered all small airports to devise
detailed security plans and submit them to the commissioners, but many
failed to do so, Saltmarsh acknowledged.

To help the airports move forward, Acting Governor Jane Swift last week
offered $3 million in grants for the airports to tap, money they could use
for permanent upgrades to security.

But the money is only available to airports that install permanent armed
security personnel, a requirement few owners said they can afford.

As a result, some owners said, they can neither qualify for the grants nor
answer the Oct. 2 directive.

''The directive is basically impossible to implement, and forget about the
grant money,'' said Murray Randall, owner of Myricks Airport in Berkeley,
which handles just 63 flights a week, making it the state's smallest
airport. ''It would cost at least $2 million in initial capital outlays, and
another $1 million per year to maintain. And for what? We only have 14
airplanes.''

Randall said he would do nothing until the Legislature passed a law
requiring the changes, contending that the commission cannot unilaterally
force owners to upgrade security.

The commission was created in 1935 to regulate all airports in the state,
except for Logan and other facilities operated by the Massachusetts Port
Authority. It inspects airports annually, assists them in getting federal
and state grant money, and promotes air travel.

Saltmarsh said he believes the panel has the power to force airports to
comply with the directive. Nevertheless, he agreed that the Oct. 2 order is
financially unrealistic, and he predicted that the commission would be
forced to offer much more money to ensure the measures get implemented.

''I think it's going to take a lot more - how much, I simply don't know,''
Saltmarsh said.

Commission executive director Robert Mallard said the agency operates with
only a dozen staff members and a budget of $625,000 a year.

All told, it has just $5.2 million a year to allocate toward capital
projects, an amount that had largely been earmarked prior to Sept. 11.

In an open meeting held before the security session, the commission
yesterday agreed to spend $15,000 to create a security identification card
system for the airports, only four or five of which use one now.

At first, the cards will merely work as a visible identification system, but
will eventually be used to create detailed databases, said commissioner
Arthur G. Allen. The database will include pilot and airport employee
photos, information from drivers' and pilots' licenses, and will even detail
when employees enter and leave airports, he said.

''Basically, we want to know who's on our airfields, and when,'' Allen said.
''The photo ID system is crucial.''

This story ran on page B1 of the Boston Globe on 10/11/2001.
© Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper 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.**
==========