The latest rubber stamp decision from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) endorsing the expansion of the Trenton-Mercer Airport (TTN) and its false narrative denying the expected exponential increase in flight activity and capacity, has galvanized the citizens of the region to take appropriate legal action to challenge this abuse of power.
By deceptively calling this more than $200 million project merely “replacement and modernization,” the airport continues its underhanded strategy of segmenting all capacity expanding approvals into scores of smaller maintenance and repair jobs. These maneuvers skirt the legally required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) essential for a project of this size and scope.
The FAA‘s suddenly issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), despite overwhelming evidence and serious community concern about environmental threats, clears the way for a massive five fold increase in the size of the Trenton-Mercer Airport (TTN) Terminal.
This is an example of the behind the scenes manipulation of the process that serves bureaucrats and political interests, while ignoring the most urgent priority to protect all citizens.
According to official government reports, PFAS (forever chemicals) contamination has been found on airport property threatening streams and runoff flowing directly into the Delaware River – drinking water source for 17 million people. PFAS may have spread to the airport from the adjacent EPA Superfund site. There is no commitment to clean up the airport property prior to construction even though recent news reports on a PFAS contamination in nearby Pennington, N.J., have ostensibly been linked to the airport as the source.
There is no excuse for not doing the appropriate environmental studies. With millions in windfall federal infrastructure funds flowing to the airport, the cost of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is easily covered. So what are Mercer County and TTN officials worried about?
Despite the FAA’s stating in 2006 that a comprehensive EIS would be needed should the terminal more than double in size, the FAA and the TTN Management have refused to acknowledge, investigate, and mitigate the subsequent impacts from this 5 times larger terminal and major airfield changes. By issuing this FONSI the FAA has ignored well-founded concerns raised by citizens and advocacy groups.
George Polgar, Trenton Threatened Skies