Conclusions and recommendations of DPH/BEH study of Logan Airport health impacts

There has been concern voiced here in Milton with regard to the health impact of airplane flights over the town. A group of residents formed an organization, Milton Committee Against Aviation Impacts, has been raising awareness and lobbying town hall to take action on the issue. Of  interest will be a report just issued by the Massachusetts Department of Health and Bureau of Environtmental Health that assesses these impacts on towns with a 5 mile radius of the airport. Milton is included in the study.

The study ranks communities as high, medium and low in terms of exposure. Milton is ranked low, According to the report the purpose was “to investigate associations between potential exposure to airport emissions and adverse respiratory, cardiovascular, and auditory health outcomes among residents of seventeen communities surrounding Logan Airport.”

The Boston Globe has published an article on the study, Lung Illnesses More Likely Near Logan Airport and a companion piece here.

The complete health study can be found here.

Following are the conclusions and recommendations from the Executive Summary of the Logan Airport Health Study.

Results / Conclusions

The major conclusions of the Logan Airport Health Study are as follows:

  • Air dispersion modeling of airport related emissions using a state-of-the-art model indicates that the highest predicted pollutant concentrations associated with airport-related operations are near the perimeter of Logan Airport and fall off rapidly with increased distance.  This is a characteristic of the impact of sources that are primarily located near the ground surface.
  • Consistent with findings of other airport studies, modeled concentrations of air pollutants are low relative to measured background air pollution concentrations.
  • Evaluation of associations between airport-related pollutant concentrations and targeted health outcomes among the study area population detected some elevations in respiratory health outcomes in the high exposure area.

Specifically:

  • Among children, study results identified some respiratory effects indicative of undiagnosed asthma (i.e., probable asthma); children in the high exposure area were estimated to have three to four times the likelihood of this respiratory outcome compared with children in the low exposure area.
  • Among adult residents, individuals diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were statistically significantly more likely to have lived in the high exposure area for three or more years.
  • There were no statistically significant differences in cardiovascular outcomes in the study population across the high, medium, and low exposure areas.
  • There were no statistically significant differences with respect to hearing loss in either adults or children for those living in the high exposure area compared to the lowest exposure area.

Recommendations

  • The results of this study should be reviewed by Massport and others to determine mitigating steps that can be taken across the study area.
  • Massport has undertaken initiatives to reduce air pollution impacts within their control (e.g., providing infrastructure for compressed natural gas (CNG) fuels and electricity charging stations, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program).  Similar initiatives could be considered in consultation with local communities that would serve to further reduce the burden of indoor and outdoor sources of air pollution on residents in closest proximity to the airport.
  • Massport has also been working with the East Boston Neighborhood Health Center (EBNHC) to address workforce issues among Massport employees.  Massport could expand these efforts with the EBNHC as well as other community health centers to better address respiratory health notably among children in closest proximity to the airport.
  • While air dispersion modeling indicates that the contribution from Logan Airport operations across the study area is relatively small, air pollution levels are higher in urban areas.  Predicted pollutant concentrations were higher near the perimeter of the airport; thus, any methods that can be implemented to continue to reduce airport-related air pollution should be explored.
  • MDPH/BEH should work with communities within the high exposure area (in whole or in part) on initiatives that would serve to further reduce exacerbation of pre-existing respiratory diseases (e.g., asthma and COPD) among residents.

Specifically:

  • MDPH/BEH will continue to support MassDEP’s efforts to reduce motor vehicle emissions including implementation of the Low Emissions Vehicle program and diesel engine retrofit initiatives;
  • Upon request MDPH/BEH’s Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Program staff will work with local municipalities to conduct IAQ assessments in schools and public buildings;
  • Upon request MDPH will work with local officials to address concerns that may be associated with local development initiatives;
  • MDPH/BEH will collaborate with the MDPH Bureau of Community Health and Prevention’s Tobacco Cessation and Prevention Program on their efforts to work with local boards of health and tobacco-free community partnerships.  These efforts enforce youth access and secondhand smoking laws and provide educational/outreach resources to support smoke-free workplace and housing programs.

  5 comments for “Conclusions and recommendations of DPH/BEH study of Logan Airport health impacts

  1. Kathy McDonald
    May 29, 2014 at 7:38 pm

    Two things struck me about this: First, the data was gathered long before the change in flight paths increased air traffic over Milton, so it is out of date for us. Second, people develop COPD, a progressive and incurable lung disease, from living near the airport for only 3 years. How horrible. I hope our Board of Health will aggressively pursue this.

  2. Michael Balfe
    May 30, 2014 at 10:52 am

    At our house near the center of Milton I have not noticed any increase in noise following the changes in flight paths. I fear that the most likely effect of the discussions on the issue will be a risk that home values will be decreased by creating exaggerated concerns. I would also note that the study referred to showed a significant increase in COPD only in towns immediately adjacent to Logan Airport. It is certainly an issue that needs to be addressed but is not an issue here in Milton.

  3. Cindy L. Christiansen
    May 30, 2014 at 2:53 pm

    The Logan Health Study was designed to compare health outcomes in people who live within 1 mile of the centroid of the airport with those who live 4-12 miles out in specific towns and cities (and those in-between compare to those 4-12 miles out). It did not compare those who live 4-12 miles from Logan (as much of Milton does) to those who live further – so we do not know if our COPD rates are elevated – the study wasn’t designed to assess that. Our rates could be high – the study concluded that closer to the airport the rates are even higher. It is incorrect to conclude that the results of this study show that this is not a problem for Milton and its residents’ health – that wasn’t the question the study was designed to answer. If one has not noticed an increase in air traffic over their home, it might be that they don’t live directly under one of the new concentrated flight paths (RNAVs). I think the 4r arrival was implemented in 2010 or 2011 with the 4L arrivals following a similar but horizontally shifted path, the 33L departure about a year ago, and the 27 departure back in 1996 with a substantial change in the path (more now over Milton) about a year and a half ago. The pollutants are still there even if not directly under one of these RNAVs. Milton should be very concerned about what the FAA and Massport are doing to this town. To say it is not a problem in fear that if we admit the problem it is bad for real estate prices ignores the cost of residents’ reduced quality of life and their health. Let’s not do that.

  4. Paul Yovino
    May 31, 2014 at 7:58 pm

    MassPort will not support any environmental study for which they cannot predetermine the conclusion.

  5. June 1, 2014 at 10:56 am

    Since Massport didn’t conduct the study, it’s a bit of a stretch to claim they could “predetermine” the outcome. As for the parameters of the study, they were clearly defined by the Legislature in 2000.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *