Many with PFAS in their West Plains wells question airport leadership and Commissioner Al French; he blames criticism on election year politics

West Plains resident Craig Volosing stood up in a June public meeting to allege County Commissioner Al French and Spokane International Airport engaged in “absolute silence” on water contamination first discovered in 2017.

“Why did you feel it necessary to keep this from us, knowing full well for years you’re basically sending pollution into our wells?” Volosing demanded of French.

President of Friends of Palisades, Volosing has long been an activist on the issue of PFAS contamination, and, according to his own description, a perpetual thorn in French’s side.

Claims of a cover-up are vehemently denied by French and the airport. But among those whose private wells have been contaminated by these dangerous chemicals, it is commonly believed leadership at the airport, and specifically French, bears blame for slowing down the discovery of PFAS in the West Plains and subsequent cleanup efforts.

“You’re certainly entitled to your own opinion. I think you’ll find the record doesn’t support that,” French told his constituent.

The Republican politician had been at the June 3 community meeting to outline his ambitious plan to bring a clean water source to the West Plains. But many at the meeting remained skeptical of the proposal.

To many of these activists, French seems like the only elected official accountable to them, sitting at the nexus of all the decision-making that has failed to address PFAS in the West Plains since 2017. While representing the West Plains on the Spokane County Commission, French has at times also served on the Spokane International Airport board, Spokane Regional Health District Board of Health and S3R3 Solutions – a public board tasked with facilitating private investment and development on airport property.

At the meeting, French said he had staff going through seven years of his activity at the county, airport and other boards. Once these records were collected, French planned to publicly release the documents.

“We do have the records that can identify that, and we’re going to make that public, because quite honestly, I don’t remember everything that happened seven years ago,” he said.

At the time, French hoped to release this information in “two to three weeks.” As of Friday, French had not provided such documentation. In subsequent interviews, he has said, “Everything we did was totally appropriate.”

At a May 6 Department of Ecology meeting answering questions about the ongoing airport cleanup of PFAS, West Plains Water Coalition President John Hancock alleged French was the only leader with the “knowledge and power” to facilitate a coverup. While stressing he was speaking for himself as a resident affected by PFAS and not on behalf of his nonpartisan advocacy group, Hancock claimed French betrayed those he represents in favor of “loyalty to the airport’s real estate speculation.”

West Plains resident and retired fire chief Nick Scharf said he has “lost all faith” in French “as a public servant.”

“Al only admitted that there was even a PFAS problem to the community in the last few months. He was aware of that situation for a long time, and he did nothing to protect the community,” Scharf said.

In a June news conference, Spokane County Commission candidate Molly Marshall alluded to these same allegations – without accusing her opponent of any specific wrongdoing.

“This is unacceptable. I and all the people who stand with me today urge you, the media and voters, to dig deep and investigate these allegations,” she said of French.

In an interview with The Spokesman-Review, French categorically denied facilitating any PFAS coverup.

“There’s only one special interest that I have, and that’s the public. That’s why I serve on different boards, because I have skill sets that contribute to the success of that board. And that’s what the people in the community want – outcomes. They want success. They want progress,” French said.

French pointed to a November 2017 disclosure to KREM 2 News in which the airport provided a summary of the PFAS test results. In a statement, airport spokesperson Todd Woodward cited the same disclosure.

“In November 2017, we provided a summary of the test results and a discussion of our actions to the media in response to their inquiry. The results were available to anyone through the typical process to obtain public records from the Airport,” Woodward said in a statement.

According to French, he has and is leading on the PFAS issue by proposing an ambitious plan to get a new water source to the West Plains – working with federal and tribal governments to make it happen. Any efforts to undermine him are political in nature, he said.

“It is a reality I am on the ballot this year for re-election. And there are folks that would like to see me unelected and will abuse this as a political issue,” he said of PFAS. “But my motivation is how I get clean drinking water, and this is something I’ve been working on for almost a year to try and find a solution.”

Scharf and Volosing said they are supporting Marshall in the fall campaign, but said that support was a symptom of their outrage at French – not the cause of it.

PFAS on the West Plains

In 2017, PFAS was first discovered in West Plains groundwater at Fairchild Air Force Base. That result was soon replicated in the water systems of nearby Airway Heights, which promptly switched to Spokane’s municipal water system.

Known as “forever chemicals,” perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances are man-made chemicals used in thousands of products over the decades. High levels of the chemicals have since been linked to cancers, heart disease, high cholesterol, thyroid disease, low birth weight and other diseases. High levels of PFAS on the West Plains have been linked to firefighting foam used at the Air Force base and Spokane International Airport.

In November 2017, Spokane International Airport conducted its own PFAS testing in two groundwater wells on airport property. Both of these tests found levels of PFAS exceeding 70 nanograms per liter. The airport tested again in March 2019 and found levels between 60 and 5,200 nanograms per liter across several wells and different forms of PFAS.

The screening level of 70 nanograms per liter is based on guidance from a 2016 EPA fact sheet. Estimates of a safe level of PFAS have lowered in the years since. In 2021, Washington adopted regulations limiting acceptable levels of PFAS in water systems. Those limits were lowered again by new EPA regulations released in April . According to the EPA, there is no safe level of PFAS exposure, and public water systems are not permitted to contain more than between 4 and 10 parts per trillion of PFAS.

In his statement, Woodward noted that knowledge of the compounds in 2017 was “in its infancy,” and there were “no federal or state requirements for any organization to test for PFAS or to report test information.” Data from the tests was used to “guide future decision-making following the emerging information about the groundwater contamination caused by military activities near Airport property,” he added.

“Our actions, made clear in our response to the media in November 2017, were to initially explore the on-airport environment in response to Fairchild Air Force Base activities relative to the City of Airway Heights water system intake well. This provided the baseline data to help the Airport to prepare for any regulatory process once initiated by agencies having jurisdiction,” Woodward wrote.

Despite claims the airport disclosed the initial test in 2017, such results were not reported on at the time and only became widely known last year. KREM did not respond to a request for comment about the airport’s disclosure.

Earlier this year, this claim was also reported by Range Media, which obtained an internal email from airport CEO Larry Krauter claiming information from the 2017 test had been emailed to KREM reporter Whitney Ward. Speaking to Range Media, Ward said she had not been aware of the test until 2023, and that searches of email history could not find any such disclosure.

Knowledge of this potential disclosure did not mollify Scharf, who said the airport could have told nearby residents of the tests and did not.

“It would seem to me that being a good neighbor would include notifying neighboring landowners downstream of a potential hazard that may be in the area. It appears to me that there’s no correspondence to the community,” he said.

Results of the test were made public last year through a public records request to the airport submitted by community group Friends of Palisades, which then shared the results with the Washington Department of Ecology in 2023.

The alleged deception is central to many West Plains residents’ distrust of the airport. Speaking at the May meeting, Hancock claimed the airport’s “single strategy” was to “dodge responsibility” for the contamination from firefighting foam.

“After the Airport’s own PFAS well testing, its only considerations were legal and political. There is no record of science or health inquiries. The factual uncertainties of regulation and toxicity were treated as an opportunity to evade, not a responsibility to discuss, or protect,” he said.

The airport has since been added to the state agency’s Contaminated Sites List, and an investigation into the contamination is ongoing. Unable to reach an agreement on how to conduct the cleanup investigation, Ecology placed the airport in an “enforcement order” legally requiring it to conduct an investigation and cleanup.

At the time, a spokesperson for the airport referenced FAA regulations that may have prevented them from using airport funds for cleanup efforts. Guidance from the FAA obtained through a public records request states the agency’s regulations appeared to suggest that FAA rules don’t conflict with environmental laws in general. The airport has also argued that because federal regulations required them to use PFAS-laced firefighting foam, it is the ultimate responsibility of the federal government for the cleanup.

As of this month, the airport has complied with the enforcement order, according to Ecology site manager Jeremy Schmitt. The agency has required the airport to submit two reports updating them on the investigations. Both were turned in on time.

“They did not miss any deadlines. They have completely complied with the enforcement order,” Schmidt said.

In his statement, Woodward said the airport is following the enforcement order.

“Since contact was initiated by the Department of Ecology regarding the matter in 2023, the Airport has cooperated and is proceeding with a site investigation on Airport property under an Ecology Order as the first part in a scope of work contained in the Order. We have been proactively working with a team of nationally recognized experts, prior to the Department of Ecology’s March 29, 2024, Order, on a scientific, data-driven investigation for the presence of per-and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances on our property. We will continue to coordinate with the Department of Ecology in accordance with the Order as appropriate,” he wrote.

Schmidt said he does not know why the 2017 and 2019 tests were not widely known before last year, and Ecology does not plan to investigate why the tests weren’t shared with the agency.

“We are not aware of why that information was not provided or otherwise released. We have not had a discussion about that with the airport,” he said. “From my perspective as a site manager responsible to ensure sites are cleaned up in the state of Washington, my goal is that and only that – to spend time looking into the past would take resources and effort away from our current goal of identifying where contamination is and getting it cleaned up.”

French has served on the airport board since August 2017. He said he did not become aware of the 2017 test until “2018 or 2019.” French questions why some place the ultimate responsibility on him and not other individuals on the seven-person airport board.

“The airport is owned by the community. The fiduciaries for it are the city of Spokane and the Board of County Commissioners. It’s interesting from my standpoint that the airport lies within the city of Spokane and its boundaries. There have been three Council presidents that were on the airport board that have the same knowledge that I have, and yet none of them have been targeted as the problem. I didn’t create the FAA regulations. I’m trying to find a solution for it. And so that’s been my role – is finding a solution,” he said.

Former City Council President Ben Stuckart served on the airport board from 2014 to 2019. Stuckart does not recall whether he was informed of either PFAS test during his tenure, he said in an interview. PFAS on the West Plains was “never a big topic of conversation” while he was on the board. Stuckart only learned of the two positive PFAS tests last year, he said.

Several other airport board member declined to comment on the issue. Woodward declined to state when airport board members were informed of the PFAS tests.

“Discussion of litigation, legal risks, financial risks or other privileged matters with the Board are confidential,” he wrote.

Some residents believe the airport, and French more broadly, were more concerned by the possible economic impact of PFAS being discovered on airport property than the health of those on the West Plains.

“I think that the ‘buy low, sell high’ opportunities of quasigovernment economic development have been too juicy to risk truth-telling about groundwater,” said Hancock, the West Plains Water Coalition president.

French denied any decisions he has made on the airport board or County Commission are due to any “special interest.” Still, he said the “presence” and “knowledge” of PFAS at the airport has had a negative economic impact on the airport and the West Plains more broadly.

“We need to address this in a very proactive basis if we are going to continue to see growth on the West Plains. There is a negative impact associated with it, and we’re aggressively trying to deal with that,” he said.

Grant on West Plains

Chad Pritchard is an Eastern Washington University geology professor whose research has focused on the underground channels carrying the West Plains’ contaminated groundwater.

Pritchard is testing approximately 40 wells on the West Plains as part of a study to map out where PFAS-laced groundwater is moving across the region. Over the summer, Pritchard plans to add approximately 100 more wells to his study, which is set for completion by June.

The model he develops also will include well testing conducted by the EPA and Department of Ecology. But unlike these other efforts, Pritchard’s study will be testing multiple times over a year to record how PFAS levels change over time. The hydrology expert hopes the information will illuminate where the PFAS is coming from and assist regulators in cleaning it up.

“It will help us locate wells we need to filter, and also potentially might find extra sources like a landfill or very large septic systems. Right now, we don’t know how far PFAS is extended. But if we know when it happened, we can sort of estimate how long and how far it would have gone,” Pritchard said of his study’s aim.

The study is funded through a $450,000 area-wide groundwater investigation grant awarded through the Department of Ecology. Needing a local governmental entity to apply for the state grant, the City of Medical Lake is acting as a fiscal agent for the study.

But Medical Lake is not the governmental entity Pritchard initially wanted to apply for the grant. He first learned of the grant in 2019 and looked to Spokane County to take up that role. But the grant was in part blocked at the County Commission by French, who says the grant would have conflicted with the county’s contractual obligations.

At least one current Spokane County employee publicly alleged French’s actions regarding the grant were improper. Speaking to journalist Timothy Connor last year, Spokane County Environmental Services Manager Rob Lindsay claimed French told him he removed the grant because of its “potential effect on the airport.”

Lindsay then linked the scuttling of the grant to a broader scheme intent on hiding the airport’s complicity in PFAS contamination.

“I’m just very concerned about being potentially implicated in what I see as an obvious attempt on the part of the airport director and potentially others to hide information,” Lindsay told Timothy Connor’s Rhubarb Skies blog.

By not disclosing the 2017 and 2019 PFAS tests, airport leadership was “lying by omission,” he said.

Lindsay declined to be interviewed by The Spokesman-Review – having already “said his piece” on the issue.

Asked about Lindsay’s comments, French said he had helped stop the grant from moving forward at the county but denied the nefarious intent the county employee attributed to him. The county could not legally have accepted the grant because it would violate a joint operating agreement between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the airport. According to French, the initial grant would have required “going on the airport property and doing testing,” which the County Commission did not have authority to authorize.

“That agreement says anything that affects the airport is under the authority of the (airport) board and CEO. And so I consulted with both the attorney for the airport and our county attorney about whether we are in a position to enter into a grant when we don’t have the right to authorize anybody to go on to the airport,” French said.

The joint-operating agreement states that the three parties give the airport board “complete authority for the management and operation of the airport.”

According to Pritchard, the current grant does not require for testing to be completed at the airport. While he has asked the airport to participate in his study, Pritchard said he has “not received communication back from the airport.”

Because the grant included a health analysis, the county sent the grant proposal to the Spokane Regional Health District. Though he was on the SRHD Board of Health at the time, French said he was not part of the decision on whether to move forward with the grant at the health district. In a statement, SRHD spokesperson Kelli Hawkins said the health district did not have the “technical expertise” to accept the grant or conduct the study.

“We would have needed technical help from Spokane County Water Resources. We were unable to get that help and were therefore unable to accept the grant. We continued to work with EWU and the Airway Heights community to address PFAS contamination and were pleased to see that with the help of the City of Medical Lake, these funds were able to be used in our community,” Hawkins said.

The county also “fully supported” Medical Lake moving forward with the grant application in 2023, French said.

“It was a matter of what was required in the grant and if you could you meet the obligations. I know that folks want to take things out of context and create another scenario. But, you know, I had a legal obligation to the airport, to the City of Spokane and the county to give that to the airport, because I can’t regulate the airport either by contract or by law,” French said.

The county commissioner said Lindsay “didn’t know about the contract or contractual obligations” when he accused French of wrongdoing.

“We’ve got some staff that don’t know about all of our contractual obligations. That’s unfortunate, but it doesn’t change the fact that I complied with the contracts and that’s what I’m legally required to do,” he said.

Asked if he had been frustrated by delays to conducting his study, Pritchard said he just wished he could have received answers to the residents of the West Plains earlier.

“I don’t know how that would have made anyone act differently if people would have known sooner. I don’t know,” he said. “But it would have been a nice thing.”