#

Million Air’s controversial plans to build a facility at Pease International Airport have run out of runway and do not appear to be taking off any time soon.

The application deadline for the Texas-based company’s plans to build a new fixed-base operator facility, including a 90,000-gallon jet fuel farm, recently expired. Now, says Tiffany Eddy, a spokesperson for the Pease Development Authority, the project is grounded.

“Pease Aviation Partners has not sought to move its site plan and subdivision application before the PDA Board of Directors acting as a Planning Board. At this point, deadlines for consideration of that application under the PDA land use control have expired. As a result, there is no further action for PDA to take at this time,” Eddy told NHJournal.

Million Air brought the proposal under the Pease Aviation Partners brand name.

NHJournal contacted Million Air last month and asked about reports that its proposal had missed a key deadline and was not moving forward. The company insisted it was still all systems go.

“We are not pulling out of the opportunity at Pease; we’re just working through some things,” said Million Air’s Allison Woolsey.

However, the company did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

Late last year, the Federal Aviation Administration put Pease officials on notice over the Million Air plan. The agency notified Pease it has the authority to review the plans and ordered Pease to have a new environmental impact study done to FAA standards as part of a federal application.

But as of last week, Pease had yet to submit anything to the FAA regarding the Million Air proposal.

“The current Airport Layout Plan for Portsmouth International Airport shows the potential development of an additional fuel farm. The FAA has not received any requests from the airport to proceed with that development,” the agency told NHJournal.

Million Air planned to build a new fixed-based operator facility at Pease to service private aircraft. The proposal included the 90,000 fuel storage system, which worried Seacoast residents. The project’s construction was also close to wetlands that feed into the local drinking water sources. Concerned locals feared construction would mean disturbing those wetlands.

The setback is somewhat surprising for a project that had appeared all but inevitable for months. Opposition from Portsmouth-area political leaders and community members was both vocal and frequent, but it had little effect on the project’s progress.

Skies grew cloudy for Million Air last June when environmental impacts on the wetlands forced the company and the board to put off the approval until at least December. According to a memo from Michael Mates, the PDA’s director of engineering, Million Air needed more time to complete a review of the Gosling Station Wells, which includes water that flows into the Haven Well.

The Gosling Wells were taken offline in the 1950s when Pease was built as an Air Force base. It’s mostly from the use by the military that created the PFAS contamination that has haunted residents on the Seacoast. PFAS is a chemical with a decades-long half-life and is linked to serious illness and certain cancers.

Port City Air, which operates an existing FBO at Pease, had been fighting Million Air’s fuel farm siting proposal for months.

Port City is currently in court trying to intervene in the appeal of state approvals for Million Air. Port City was part of the appeal to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Protection’s Water Council over state approval for Million Air’s wetlands permit. However DES threw out Port City’s appeal on the argument the company does not qualify as an abutter under the law. Port City’s appeal before the New Hampshire Supreme Court is currently pending a decision.

Million Air’s controversial plan to set up shop at Pease International Tradeport could now hinge on tenants’ rights.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court heard arguments this week from lawyers for Port City Air and Million Air over whether or not a tenant has the right to appeal a state permit.

“What Port City Air is asking you to do today is something this court has never done,” said Nathan Fennessy, Million Air’s attorney.

But Jake Marvelley, a lawyer for Port City, said it’s basic common sense that a tenant has legal standing when it comes to the right to protect their property.

“We should have the legal right to standing,” Marvelley said.

Million Air, based in Texas, wants to build a new fixed-based operator (FBO) facility, or FBO, at Pease to service private aircraft, raising objections from residents and nearby communities concerned about the potential negative environmental impacts. 

FBOs provide hangar space, maintenance and repair services, fuel, and other necessities for private planes and pilots. 

The proposed site is close to sensitive wetlands that feed the water supply for Pease and the town of Newington and is already the site of a major PFAS contamination that has impacted drinking water in the Seacoast region. 

Danna Truslow, a hydrogeologist Port City hired to look at the site, found levels of PFAS in the site Million Air wants to use are already ten times higher than the levels considered safe. Million Air will be building near the wetlands close to the aquifer that supplies water for several communities.

Port City filed an appeal when Million Air was granted a permit to work in the wetlands by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Wetlands Bureau. However, the Port City appeal was rejected by the Wetlands Council without a hearing because they are tenants and not property owners.

“As Port City does not qualify as a landowner, it cannot qualify as an abutting landowner and therefore cannot be a ‘person aggrieved’ with standing,” wrote Zachary Towle, the DES hearing officer who issued the denial.

The law Towle cites in the denial, RSA § 482-A:10, does not define the terms for landowner, and Marvelley told the Supreme Court justices during this week’s hearing it ought to be interpreted in order to allow tenants to pursue their rights, not just landowners.

Port City has a 30-year agreement for its FBO at Pease and is one of many tenants in the Tradeport.

Fennessey said Port City has legal rights under the law if there is contamination after Million Air moves in, but not before. The right to stop the project and to appeal state permits belongs to landowners under the law, he said.

“What Port City is asking upends the administrative scheme enacted by the legislature. It would be appropriate, based on the plain and ordinary meaning of the language and your precedents, to uphold the Wetlands Council denial,” Hennessy.

Million Air still needs formal permission from Pease, the actual property owner. The Pease Development Authority is still considering the project and has yet to schedule a vote on its final approval.

The Federal Aviation Administration notified the PDA last year it is reviewing Million Air’s plan and the potential impacts it will have on the airport’s layout. As part of the FAA process, Pease is required to have a new environmental impact study done to FAA standards.

This fall, PDA Chair Steve Duprey started floating the idea that Pease itself could get into the game and start its own FBO business. 

“Obviously, it’s one of those things that you have to consider very carefully, but it just seems to make common sense,” Duprey told New Hampshire Business Review. “It would give us a greater degree of assurance that we had a range of options for people who use FBOs.”

The Federal Aviation Administration is stepping into the long-standing battle at Pease International Tradeport over the proposed Million Air project.

Pease officials have been put on notice by the FAA over the Million Air plan to build a new fixed base operator facility (FBO). The agency is reviewing the plan and the impacts it will have on the airport’s layout and requiring Pease to have a new environmental impact study done to FAA standards.

Meghann Wayss, a Newington resident who is part of the local opposition to Million Air’s project, hopes this FAA review will finally slow the approval for the project, which Wayss and others say poses serious risks to Seacoast drinking water.

“I’m really hopeful all of this will come to a close,” Wayss said.

Peter Bragdon, spokesman for the Texas-based Million Air, declined to comment on the FAA’s review, saying it is a matter for the Pease Development Board.

Million Air wants to build a new fixed-based operator (FBO) facility at Pease to service private aircraft. The proposal includes building a 90,000 fuel storage system. The project’s construction is also close to wetlands that feed into local drinking water sources. Building the facility would involve disturbing those wetlands. 

According to a letter from the FAA to Pease officials, Million Air’s FBO represents a change to the Pease airport layout plan, or ALP, on file with the FAA. Any change to the ALP requires FAA approval under federal rules. That means Million Air’s project is now in the hands of federal officials.

According to FAA Project Manager Sean Tiney, the final approval all comes down to the environmental impact.

“The FAA’s ALP approval authority for the proposed project, and any other federal approvals associated with the project … is a federal action subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),” Tiney wrote. “Therefore, (Pease) will be required to perform an appropriate environmental review consistent with NEPA.”

Million Air’s plans seemed inevitable for months despite vocal opposition from many residents and local leaders. However, the company backed off a bit when the PDA was set to give final approval this summer. 

In June, environmental impacts on the wetlands forced the company and the board to put off the approval until at least December. According to a memo from Michael Mates, the PDA’s director of engineering, Million Air needs more time to complete a review of the Gosling Station Wells, which includes water that flows into the Haven Well. 

The Gosling Wells were taken offline in the 1950s when Pease was built as an Air Force base. The military’s use of products containing PFAS resulted in contamination that has haunted residents on the Seacoast. PFAS — also known as “forever chemicals” –have a decades-long half-life and are linked to serious illness and certain cancers. 

Now, with the FAA oversight, Wayss can see a future at Pease without Million Air. 

“I don’t feel like they would be someone who has true interest and concern for the health and well-being of the community here,” Wayss said. “We want companies who care and are doing their best to be upfront and involved in the community.”

Nothing has been decided yet, and Wayss wants to bring more residents into the coalition opposed to Million Air’s project. The concern has always been for the drinking water, she said.

“This site should be off-limits. Drinking water is our greatest resource,” Wayss said.

Bragdon and other Million Air officials have consistently deflected the criticism and blamed the opposition on potential rival Port City Air. It operates an existing FBO at Pease and has been upfront in its opposition to Million Air on environmental grounds.

Port City is currently fighting in court over state approvals for Million Air. Port City was part of the appeal to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Protection’s Water Council over state approval for Million Air’s wetlands permit. However, DES threw out Port City’s appeal on the argument the company does not qualify as an abutter under the law. 

Port City is now taking the case to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, saying DES’s order is unconstitutional.

The battle over Million Air’s plans to build an air facility close to wetlands at Pease International Tradeport is heading to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Rival aviation service company Port City Air is appealing a New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services ruling that it cannot intervene in the case since Port City does not own land at the Tradeport.

Jake Marvelley, Port City’s attorney, said DES’s order means anyone with a lease or rental agreement is now blocked from ever challenging that state.

“That’s the logical extent of it. That’s what they’re saying. If you’re not a landowner, you can’t appeal,” Marvelley told NH Journal.

Texas-based Million Air wants to build a new fixed-based operator facility at Pease to service private aircraft over objections from residents and nearby communities concerned about the potential negative environmental impacts.

Port City has joined the effort to block the development, and it was part of the appeal to the DES Water Council concerning state approval for Million Air’s wetlands permit. However, DES threw out Port City’s appeal on the argument the company does not qualify as an abutter under the law. 

Now Port City is taking its case to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, arguing DES’s order is unconstitutional. 

“The Order relies on a reading of applicable statutes that leads to an unconstitutional result: depriving Port City Air of any right to be heard, and therefore violating its right to due process under the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions,” Marvelley wrote in the appeal filed with the New Hampshire Supreme Court on Friday.

The Wetlands Council order found that Port City cannot be considered a “person aggrieved,” the legal term of an entity capable of the necessary standing to bring legal action, because the company does not own land at Pease. Port City leases its facility from the Pease Development Authority. Zachary Towle, the DES hearing officer who ruled against Port City, states the company does not qualify under the law to fight Million Air.

“Port City does not possess a fee ownership interest in the relevant land. Port City does not possess an easement on PDA owned land, buildings, other facilities, or improvements. Port City possesses a leasehold interest regarding property owned by the PDA,” Towle wrote. “As Port City does not qualify as a landowner, it cannot qualify as an abutting landowner and therefore cannot be a ‘person aggrieved’ with standing pursuant to RSA § 482-A:10.”

Marvelley argued in his appeal that if Towle’s ruling is allowed to stand, no tenant anywhere in the state could appeal any DES order. 

“That would mean a wide-ranging infringement of constitutional rights of any party that happened to not be a landowner in fee simple. Specifically, the Order’s interpretation of applicable statutes prevents any tenant from ever successfully seeking administrative review,” Marvelley wrote.

If the DES order is allowed to stand, it will impact Port City and all the tenants at Pease, Marvelley said. The PDA is engaged in numerous long-term lease agreements with multiple tenants, some of whom have invested millions in their businesses. Under Towle’s ruling, these businesses have no right to appeal any DES orders. 

“Somewhere like Pease, everyone’s a tenant,” Marvelley said.

Port City has said its opposition to Million Air is based on environmental concerns. Pease is already the site of a major PFAS contamination that has impacted drinking water in the Seacoast region. 

Danna Truslow, a hydrogeologist Port City hired to look at the site, found levels of PFAS in the site Million Air wants to use are already 10 times higher than the levels considered safe. Million Air will be building near the wetlands that feed the aquifer, which supplies water for several communities.

Million Air has maintained Port City’s opposition is more about stopping competition than stopping contamination. Million For has stated its project will be environmentally safe and secure. 

Million Air’s proposed flight facility at Pease International Tradeport is getting closer to a vote by the Pease Development Board. But the project faces objections from some Seacoast residents, and new allegations the board is engaged in a potential conflict of interest.

At issue is Million Air’s use of the engineering firm Hoyle Tanner & Associates to create the plan presented to the board. Residents say this presents a conflict since the PDA has used this firm for environmental reviews on other projects. The PDA brought in a different firm, GM2 Associates, to review the wetlands impact of the Million Air project.

The potential conflict was pointed out in a letter from opponents of the new facility. “This is a frustrating and questionable conflict of interest. How can the PDA allow this to happen?” they wrote.

The Pease Development Board has until next month to take action on Million Air’s application for its fixed-base operator (FBO) facility, after granting the company an extension. It is the location of that FBO, close to critical wetlands, that has residents alarmed. They say they are already dealing with PFAS-contaminated water and they can’t afford the potential risk from the new project.

The proposed FBO includes a new hangar and a fuel farm that can hold close to 90,000 gallons of jet fuel. Residents say the board is rushing the project, and they want the PDA to hire an independent environmental firm to review the project and proposed location.

“The PDA’s concern for water quality and preserving the environment around Pease is certainly not evident from the proceedings in the matter thus far. The PDA has NOT earned our trust,” wrote the group of concerned residents, including Dania Seiglie, Dudley Dudley, Pete Carey, Mary-Jo Monusky, and Jane Man.

Former PDA executive director George Bald and local wealth manager Tom Sedoric have endorsed the project, recently penning an op-ed blaming the opposition on rival FBO Port City Air, which is currently operating at Pease.

“The ‘rest of the story’ is that Port City Air (PCA) wishes to retain its lucrative monopoly at Pease. PCA is cloaking itself as the environmental protector of the public interest. PCA is no protector and is simply opportunistically seeking to retain its monopoly at Pease,” Bald and Sedoric wrote.

However, the opposition of close to 1,000 residents, led by Seiglie, has consistently warned that Million Air poses a risk to the health and safety of residents. Pease Airport is already listed as a Superfund site by the EPA because of the PFAS contamination. Seiglie says the concerns of the residents have been ignored.

“Despite our continued questions, we have received a deafening silence. We get the same message back: trust us, this is a good plan. Worse, some argue that our concerns aren’t worthy of a response because this debate isn’t about the environment,” the opposition letter states.

Peter Bragdon, the New Hampshire spokesman for Million Air, said the proposed FBO will feature state-of-the-art protections and that it will be smaller than Port City Air’s fuel and fluid system currently in use at Pease.

“(It) will include double-walled storage tanks and piping, retention berms, oil stop valves, oversized containment chambers, and oil-water separators, backed up with failsafe alarms, control valves, and high-level gauging instrumentation,” Bragdon said. “It will be far more environmentally safer than Port City Air’s two existing fuel farms, one of which abuts Million Air’s proposed fuel facility, which together store and distribute more than 300,000 gallons of fuel and deicing fluids at Pease.”

Opponents aren’t taking Million Air at its word. They want the PDA to either hire a new firm to conduct a full environmental site plan review, or simply move Million Air’s project to a different location at Pease, one further away from the wetlands.

“We hope the PDA Board will look at this matter objectively and account for the health, safety, and community well-being of those who live and work in and around Pease,” they wrote.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story reported the PDA used Hoyle Tanner & Associates to review the proposal the engineering firm wrote for Million Air. That was incorrect. NHJournal regrets the error.

Million Air, the Texas-based company looking to expand into New Hampshire, is heading back to the Pease Development Authority this month for approval of its proposed new fixed-base operator facility and hangar at the Tradeport. 

A public hearing is set before the Pease board’s Technical Review Committee on Jan. 17, even as residents concerned about environmental impacts are galvanizing into opposition.

“Million Air’s dismissive attitude toward these legitimate environmental concerns tells us a lot about their priorities,” said Dania Seiglie, activist and critic of the Million Air proposal.

Meanwhile, Million Air is currently involved in a messy lawsuit with Westchester County, N.Y. where the company said county officials violated the lease agreement at the county airport.

The proposed Million Air facility at the Tradeport includes a new 12,000-square-foot hangar for a total project footprint of 26,000 square feet. Also included is a 90,000-gallon fuel farm that locals say is too close to the region’s drinking water supply.

The Portsmouth region is already dealing with PFAS-contaminated drinking water as a result of the United States Air Force operations at Pease.

Seiglie said the company is not showing it takes the issue seriously. “This is about credibility. When we initially voiced concerns, Million Air’s leadership publicly responded by dismissing us without direct comment and instead claiming the local opposition is about competition. Million Air isn’t listening and judging by the legal fights this company has had in other states around similar projects, they won’t ever listen if it means abandoning their chosen site. That is one of the reasons local opposition is growing. Several hundred area residents have signed a petition opposing the MA plan and that number will likely grow.”

In Westchester County, Million Air’s plans ran afoul of officials who claim the company started moving forward with buildings and a stormwater system never approved by the county. According to Westchester’s counter-complaint, Million Air is trying to build a facility to service private jets after it was initially approved for light general aviation customers.

The company filed the lawsuit when Westchester officials tried to stop their project. Peter Bragdon, the New Hampshire spokesman for Million Air, said the company is simply trying to get the county to honor the original agreement.

“Million Air is trying to force compliance with the lease agreement, which Million Air asserts the County has violated,” Bragdon said.

Seiglie and hundreds of residents have signed a petition asking Million Air to relocate its proposed FBO away from the wetlands, and to another site at Pease. She wants the committee to stop the plan altogether, or at least delay it and allow the FAA to review Million Air’s proposal.

“We believe this proposal before the technical review committee should be rejected based on specific environmental impact concerns, or at least delayed until the FAA has reviewed the proposed project proposal,” Seiglie.

Bragdon said the concerns of the resident are misplaced. Million Air will build a better, cleaner facility than anything at Pease currently, he said.

“Million Air is proposing a state-of-the-art facility that goes above and beyond required containment standards, many of which the two aging fuel farms operated by the existing FBO, Port City Air, do not meet. The new facility will be decades newer and environmentally safer than the aging – and much larger – existing fuel farms,” Bragdon said.

Pease is already home to Port City Air, which has a fuel farm also close to the same wetlands. Bragdon said Million Air’s facility will be safer than Port City’s.

“The proposed Million Air facility has multiple redundancies to protect the environment, including new technologies that would likely have prevented the several documented spills that have occurred as part of Port City Air’s operations,” Bragdon said. “These protections include double-walled storage tanks and piping, retention berms, oil stop valves, oversized containment chambers, and oil-water separators. The system will be backed up with failsafe alarms, control valves, and high-level gauging instrumentation.”

Roger Wiegley, another concerned citizen turned activist, said the Pease bard needs to show leadership and stop Million Air. The project should have been brought to the FAA for review since it would change the layout at the airport, according to Wiegley.

“A revised airport layout plan must be delivered to the FAA and to date, that has not happened. This critical step in the process has been either deliberately avoided or overlooked,” Wiegley said.

As Seacoast residents raise the alarm about the proposed 90,000-gallon jet fuel storage being built at Pease International Tradeport by private air company Million Air, the company is pushing back. 

“Million Air is proposing new tanks with state-of-the-art leak detection, prevention, and containment systems designed to meet or exceed current best practices,” said Peter Bragdon, a spokesman for the Houston-based company. “As long as planes are flying in and out of Pease, fuel will be needed for those planes. Doesn’t it make sense to have the most modern, up-to-date systems available?”

Concerned residents and environmental activists held a press conference last week to protest the fuel tanks, which they said will be located too close to wetlands that feed into the local drinking water supply.

“What’s concerning is how all this is being handled. For example, Million Air’s site development plans underestimate the wetlands impact of this project, ignore the previous contamination that still exists, and the plan places fuel storage within feet of these sensitive wetlands,” said Seacoast resident Dania Seiglie.

The fuel tanks that make up Million Air’s proposed fuel farm would be about 100 feet away from the wetlands in question. Million Air COO Chuck Suma said the residents’ concerns about the fuel farm are misplaced.

“We know how to manage a fuel farm and we know how to do this in an environmentally friendly way,” Suma said. “I would never allow or sanction or run my facilities in such a way that would negatively impact the area around it.”

Critics argue that even if the fuel farm isn’t technically in the wetlands area — a claim they dispute — even Million Air admits it wants to build a roadway through it. Worse, the area is still dealing with drinking water contaminated with PFAS chemicals left over from the U.S. Air Force base that used to be located at Pease.

“Much like PFAS and previous water contamination concerns, this is a priority for local residents worried about clean water because it’s all connected,” Seiglie said. “This site mid-Pease connects directly to North Mill Pond by Hodgson’s Brook and from here, contamination can easily reach the Piscataqua.”

PFAS chemicals are linked to certain types of cancer, birth defects, and other serious health issues. The man-made chemicals are found in oils, jet fuels, industrial degreasers, and firefighting foam, among other uses. PFAS contamination has been found in the Seacoast region, as well as in communities like Merrimack, Bedford, and Litchfield stemming from the Saint-Gobain manufacturing plant in Merrimack. There is also a PFAS problem in the communities near the Coakley Landfill in North Hampton.

The chemicals have an unusually long half-life and can stay in the human body for decades after exposure.

Bragdon said the company’s plans are environmentally sound. Plans for the driveway have won the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Safety’s approval.

“The only wetland issue involving the Million Air proposal has to do with a driveway that will be needed so customers can access the site from the public streets – dropping off and picking up clients, for instance,” Bragdon said. “Million Air has worked diligently to minimize wetland issues with the driveway, for instance by moving the driveway as far north as possible to avoid wetland impacts.”

The plans are not safe enough for the concerned residents and activists, however. State Rep. Debra Altschiller (D-Stratham) wants the company to change the plans to move its proposed site farther away from the sensitive area, which she said is doable for the business.

“Everyone here knows there is actually another completely appropriate and equally sized piece of property less than a mile from the proposed project space and that land doesn’t need to have a road built through a wetland to roll trucks over,” Altschiller said. “There is an alternative that doesn’t even need variances to operate next to precious water resources. It is available and ready to be developed.”

Million Air is building a fixed-base operations center at Pease that will include a 12,000-square-foot hangar. Bragdon said the company is working with DES and all the relevant agencies to make sure its project is done correctly and safely.

Suma said the company will employ about 30 people full-time. Million Air’s FBO will attract businesses to the region and bring more money to the Seacoast.

“We’re going to be changing the demographics coming in and out of the airport,” Suma said. “There are opportunities there and we want to be a good partner with the community and the (Pease Development Authority) board.”

Seiglie, however, questioned the company’s push to get the FBO up and running, saying it is moving faster than normal to avoid public scrutiny.

“This company has done this elsewhere, getting permissions without public scrutiny or knowledge – including places like New York where there are major environmental concerns and the project was pitched without proper review. So, we are worried,” Seiglie said.

Million Air is currently involved in a federal lawsuit with Westchester County, N.Y. over the company’s project at the Harrisville, N.Y. airport.

Pease already has an FBO operated by Port City Air, and Port City’s company attorney, Dan Hoefle, is joining the chorus of the opposition. He said Port City was never properly informed about Million Air’s proposal, despite Port City being an abutter to the project. Hoefle said the site Million Air is using is not suitable for the project.

“Port City is well aware of this plot of land in question. We would never develop on this particular parcel of land for the very reasons cited,” Hoefle said.

Bragdon and Suma blame Port City for ginning up the opposition to Million Air’s plans and trying to get the competitor’s plans delayed.

“Port City is self-serving and stirring this up,” Suma said.

Suma accused Port City of trying to hold on to its monopoly at the airfield by delaying Million Air’s plans. Suma said he’d not worried about the competition, likening the two companies to Motel 6 versus the Four Seasons. Right now, the Motel 6 FBO, Port City, is scrambling to hold on to the business, Suma said.

“This is all stuff being thrown in the air by Port City Air. They have a monopoly on the airport, and you have a Motel 6 driving what can be done at the airport,” Suma said.

Port City already has fuel storage tanks close to where Million Air plans to put its tanks, Suma said, and those tanks are old and present a danger to the wetlands. The area around Pease is also dotted with gas stations and heating oil companies, which seem to be escaping the ire of the residents concerned about drinking water, Suma said.

“If the community is concerned, they should be looking at Port City fuel farms and the gas stations and heating oil facilities nearby,” Suma said.

Hoefle said Port City’s fuel farm is safe and meets all current standards. He said the company will continue to work with state and federal regulators to make sure the tanks stay in compliance.

“Port City Air’s tanks are regularly maintained, they are in fine shape,” Hoefle said. “They will continually be maintained and regulated.”

Hoefle said Port City has no problem with Million Air bringing an FBO to Pease, just not in the location they have picked.

“We don’t have any problem with competition, but this isn’t the site for it,” Hoefle said.