HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11031992 - 2.2 2. 2
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on November 3 , 1992 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Reports on Helicopter Crash Near Buchanan Field Airport
The Board considered the recommendations of the J. Michael Walford, Public
Works Director, and the reports of the Aviation Advisory Committee and Manager of
Airports relative to the helicopter crash near Buchanan Field Airport. (Copies of
the referenced documents are attached and included as a part of this Board Order. )
Virginia Schaefer, Chair of the Aviation Advisory Committee, noted that the
safety and noise issue have gotten mixed up and that the Committee did not believe
that the safety issue should be used to get rid of helicopters. She advised that
the safety problem is very real and that anything that can be done to mitigate the
noise problem will help the perception of the safety problem. However, Ms.
Schaefer indicated that the safety report will not be available for another 4 to 6
months. She then reviewed the recommendations of the Committee set forth on
Page 9.
The following persons spoke on the noise factor with helicopters, safety
concerns, restriction of certain type of activity at the airport, removal of the
helicopter training operation to Byron, restriction of helicopters to a certain
flight path, impact of noise from helicopters to residents in adjoining mobile
home parks, and lack of noise impact from helicopters:
Clint Ferber, 1136 Temple Drive, Pacheco 94553;
Joyce Church, People Over Planes, 2120 Morello Avenue,
Pleasant Hill 94523;
Wally Wiggs, 187 Freda Drive, Pacheco 94553;
Donna J. Davidson, 1000 Temple Drive, Pacheco 94553;
Don Mount, People Over Planes, 1309 Gregg Lane, Concord;
James High, 3682 Hillsborough Drive, Concord;
Roy Tomlin, 277 Sudan Loop, Pacheco 94553; and
Mr. Alvarenga, 208 Carolos Drive, Pacheco 94553.
All persons desiring to speak were heard. The Board reviewed the comments of
the speakers and the reports presented.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the reports as referenced are ACCEPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Community Development Director and Public
Works Director are DIRECTED to complete the initial study for an off-airport
training site for helicopters in the Praxis/Acme landfill areas and other sites
that may be suitable, and to report to the Board early in 1993 on the conclusion
of that study.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Aviation Advisory Committee is REQUESTED to
review the feasibility of increasing the minimum altitude for helicopters and
establishment of a flight path for non-training flights with a report to the Board
on January 19, 1993.
1 hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
cc: Public Works Director ATTESTED: �y� "^ `� 3, -
Manager of Airports PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board
g P of Supervisors and County Administrator
Aviation Adv. Cte.
Community Devel. Director
By - ,Deputy
a. .2
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: November 3, 1992
SUBJECT: Report Regarding Referral from Board of Supervisors to Aviation Advisory Committee and
Manager of Airports Relative to Helicopter Crash Near Buchanan Field Airport
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &c BACKGROUND AND JUSrIFICA11ON
I. Recommended Action:
ACCEPT report and DIRECT Community Development Department and Public Works Department
to complete Initial Study for an off-airport training site for helicopters in the Praxis/Acme landfill
areas. Upon completion of said Initial Study pursue all other necessary approvals for the
completion of an off-airport training site in the Praxis/Acme landfill areas.
II. Financial Impact:
The estimated cost for the Initial Study should not exceed $30,000. This will be paid for out of the
Airport Enterprise Fund with support from the helicopter operators at Buchanan Field Airport.
A cost of construction of the off-airport site is anticipated to be a maximum of$10,000. This also
would be funded out of the Airport Enterprise Fund. Other costs involved are unknown at the
present time. These unknown costs could include fees for approvals and costs associated with
agreements with the appropriate land owners.
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
The attached report is self explanatory.
At the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC) of October 20, 1992, the AAC reviewed in detail the
options for an off-airport training site. At the present time these include Acme landfill and the
Praxis site. A video tape had been prepared by Airport staff showing the routes to and from the
area, as well as over the sites. Both Airport staff and the helicopter operators advised the AAC
that from an aeronautical and a technical standpoint either site is perfectly acceptable.
Continued on Attachment: x SIGNATURE:
_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
_UNANIMOUS (ABSENT
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
HEW:rs
c:3.t1.1
Orig Div: H. Wight (510) 646-5722
cc: County Administrator
Public Works Director
Public Works Accounting
Auditor/Controller
Aviation Advisory mmittee
Federal Aviati Administration
Helicopte dventures, Inc.
SUBJECT: Report Regarding Referral from Board of Supervisors to Aviation Advisory Committee and
Manager of Airports Relative to Helicopter Crash Near Buchanan Field Airport
November 3, 1992
Page 2
The AAC's specific recommendation is that the study include both Praxis and Acme sites in order
to expedite matters and further that the site selected for the off-airport training facilities should be
the one that is available first.
Airport staff advises that some level of consideration will have to be given to the costs. For
example, if any of the sites require exorbitant payments for the use of the property, the Enterprise
Fund would not be able to absorb these costs. The operators should not have to bear the costs and
probably could not bear the costs of large regular use payments since there is an existing public
facility (Buchanan Field Airport) that they legally can operate out of at the present time.
Additional costs for the off-airport site would be a form of economic discrimination on the
helicopters. There is no indication at the present time, however, that any costs beyond those
mentioned figured above in this Board Order are going to be incurred.
as
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AIRPORTS
Buchanan Field Airport Byron Airport
510 Sally Ride Drive 3000 Armstrong Road
Concord, CA 94520 Byron, CA 94514
Phone: (510) 646-5722 (510) 634-0147
FAX: (510) 646-5731
DATE: October 22, 1992
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Aviation Advisory Committee and Manager of Airports ,,,A I
SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors' Referral Regarding Recent Accidents
On September 2, 1992, a Piper Apache crashed just north of Buchanan Field Airport killing
two people on board. On September 30, 1992, a Robinson R-22 helicopter crashed west
southwest of the Airport killing the two people on board. On October 6, 1992, the Board
of Supervisors requested that the Manager of Airports and the Aviation Advisory Committee
(AAC) review all relevant information pertaining to the helicopter crash in Martinez on
September 30, 1992, and advise the Board of Supervisors. On October 13, 1992, Chairman
Schaefer convened a subcommittee of the AAC to 1) review the recommendations of the
Board of Supervisors, 2) examine available information regarding the two recent accidents,
and 3) develop a list of comments and recommendations for the full AAC on October 20.
The AAC to report to the Board of Supervisors as requested on November 3, 1992.
The subcommittee report was brought to the full AAC on October 20, 1992. The AAC
reviewed the work of the subcommittee, discussed the report in considerable detail and
recommended some changes to the final report. Also, at the same AAC meeting the Chair
entertained comments from members of the audience. These comments are included with
this report as Exhibit "I". This report is written primarily from the subcommittee's
perspective. Since there were only minor changes recommended by the full AAC, Airport
staff has elected not to rewrite the entire document. The AAC unanimously adopted the
subcommittee's report with minor modifications as presented. The subcommittee's report
therefore is the AAC report to the Board of Supervisors.
Two Board Orders were presented at the October 6, 1992, Board of Supervisors' meeting.
One of these was written by Supervisor McPeak (attached Exhibit "A") and the other one
was written by Supervisor Fanden (attached Exhibit "B").
The subcommittee, along with the support of the Airport staff, elected to examine the widest
possible range of concerns relating to the issue of safety of operations at the Airport. The
subcommittee's stated goals were to:
1. Identify and sort out the different issues involved.
2. Develop factual information wherever available.
3. Analyze all issues objectively.
4. Discuss with some reasonableness the impact of actions being considered.
5. Make specific comments and recommendations regarding the issues.
Background
Buchanan Field Airport is a publicly owned, public use facility. The Airport operates under
the sponsorship of Contra Costa County and clearly has the right to control certain activities
that occur on the Airport in a nondiscriminatory manner. On the other hand the County's
jurisdiction is foreclosed in certain types of decisions, primarily those relating to the
operation of aircraft in the air. These air rules lie with the Federal Aviation Administration.
The FAA regulations are riot a patchwork of rules promulgated regionally or locally, but
rather a network of rules that are standardized throughout the world.
The two most recent accidents are in the jurisdiction of the National Transportation Safety
Board. No final determination of cause has been made as of yet on either of these accidents
and it is inappropriate for the AAC or Airport staff to speculate on the cause of either of
these accidents. Preliminary information received from conversations with NTSB
investigators indicate that there are no airport safety issues in either accident.
Characteristics of Accidents
The subcommittee reviewed all accidents and incidents, including even the most minor ones
going back nearly 11 years that have occurred in the Air Traffic Area (approximately five
miles around the Airport). The subcommittee found that only six of the 59 incidents were
pilots having student licenses (during the study period the Airport had 2,704,385 operations).
Four of these had mechanical difficulties associated with the incident. Eight of the 59
incidents appeared to be clearly related to some level of training activity. Of these,however,
six apparently had mechanical malfunctions. In the approximately 11 years studied there
have been six accidents involving fatalities on or near Buchanan Field Airport (none
involving student pilots). During the study period there were 2,704,385 operations. Of all
of the fatalities only one (the 1985 Sun Valley Mall accident) involved any injuries other
than to persons in the aircraft. Two of the other fatal accidents caused minor property
damage off the Airport. An Apache that crashed recently did a small amount of damage
to a bypassing car and a Cheyenne that crashed into an auto dealer parking lot did some
minor damage to a storage container. Only one accident (September 30, 1992) had any
involvement with helicopters whatsoever.
Helicopters as a noise issue has been an ongoing one for the past four or five years. The
Airport gets a fairly large number of complaints regarding helicopters monthly. In the past
five years the Airport has received 1,153 individual complaints regarding helicopter
operations. From this number of complaints there were 295 different callers. Of the 1,153
complaints generated 564 were from only two callers. The subcommittee felt that the high
level of expressed concern regarding helicopter safety may more accurately reflect the
ongoing concern over helicopter noise. Statistically and factually the helicopter and the
2
training activities do not appear to have any more identifiable safety issues associated with
them than the fixed wing activities. They do, however, have a much higher level of noise
related concerns.
Independent of the subcommittee Ron Sorenson, on behalf of the Fixed Based Operators
(FBO's) at Buchanan Field Airport, collected and analyzed accident data from 1975 relative
to commercial flight training safety at and around Buchanan Field Airport. His letter is
attached to this report as Exhibit "C". His analysis is based partially upon a safety study
done for the Airport for Flight Safety Institute following the mall accident in 1986, and all
subsequent data.
DISCUSSION OF SUPERVISORS BOARD ORDERS
Supervisor Fanden's Board Order
It is the understanding of the subcommittee that this Board Order was not specifically
adopted by the Board. This Board Order recommended a moratorium on all helicopter
training flights from Buchanan Field Airport until the complete report on the crash was
received. The helicopter accident was not a training flight and there does not seem to be
any direct relationship between the request and the actual activity involved. In addition, this
Board Order only focused on helicopters. This would be considered discriminatory by the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and probably would not be allowed. Recently the
Nut Tree Airport attempted to prohibit helicopter training activities and they were quickly
advised by the FAA that they were not allowed to do this. Copies of correspondence are
attached as Exhibit "D". In addition, the subcommittee noted that every grant that the
County accepts includes a section on "Economic Nondiscrimination" (Exhibit "E").
Supervisor McPeak's Board Order
Supervisor McPeak's Board Order was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on October 6,
1992. The Board Order requested that the Manager of Airports and the Aviation Advisory
Committee review all relevant information pertaining to the helicopter crash and advise the
Board of Supervisors on several issues. These issues are itemized below with discussion
immediately following:
1. Additional safety measures, if any, that can be taken to prevent another helicopter
crash incident in the future.
Discussion:
The subcommittee is in full agreement with this recommendation. The subcommittee
feels, however, since its research did not show undo hazardous activity relating to
helicopter flights, that this recommendation should be expanded to include all
aircraft. The subcommittee has specific recommendations to enhance this particular
item later on in this document under major heading 'Recommendations."
2. Increasing the minimum ceiling for helicopters in Contra Costa County except for
those aircraft that have approval from the Manager of Airports to conduct public
purposes or specified business operations.
3
Discussion:
The Manager of Airports advised the subcommittee that Supervisor McPeak had
stated in the Board of Supervisors meeting that her terminology "minimum ceiling"
actually referred to a minimum altitude over all populated areas in Contra Costa
County. The subcommittee found that the Federal Aviation Administration has a
regulation that establishes minimum altitudes for aircraft in flight. FAR 91.119
states, "Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft
below the following altitudes.-
a)
ltitudes.a) Anywhere an altitude allowing if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without
undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
b) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air
assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within
a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
c) Over other than congested areas at an altitude of 500 feet above the surface
except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In that case, the aircraft may
not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.
d) Helicopters. Helicopters may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed
in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section if the operations is conducted without
hazards to persons or property on the surface."
Helicopters have unique operating characteristics, mainly their ability to pinpoint
emergency landings. Relating to the recent helicopter crash, the subcommittee
speculated on the possibility that once the pilot realized he was having problems he
spotted the open field as a suitable emergency landing site.
While it does not appear to be possible for the Board of Supervisors to legally
establish altitudes over Contra Costa County that are not the same as the Federal Air
Regulations, the subcommittee did feel that an educational program requesting a
minimum altitude over all populated parts of Contra Costa County would be entirely
appropriate. The subcommittee recommended that upon adoption of the recommen-
dations an extensive education program be established by Airport staff to all
helicopter operators in the Bay Area requesting that they maintain a minimum of
1,000 feet over all populated portions of the County outside the Air Traffic Area.
This would not only give an additional basis for safety, but would likely enhance our
noise abatement program.
The subcommittee did note, however, that within the Air Traffic Area (five miles
around the Airport) that the rules established for airport traffic patterns and altitudes
would have to prevail in the interest of safety. Because of the different operating
characteristics between fixed wing and helicopters, the Air Traffic Control Tower
requires a vertical separation between helicopters and fixed wing aircraft. Air Traffic
Control Tower advises that the appropriate altitude for helicopters is 600 feet in the
traffic pattern. Our fixed wing traffic pattern is either 1,000 or 1,500 feet depending
upon the size of aircraft.
4
3. Restricting all helicopter traffic (not just training flights) to nonresidential areas
and specified routes in and out of Buchanan Field Airport.
Discussion:
In 1983 the Airport staff developed preferred routes in and out of the Airport for
helicopters (Exhibit "F"). This was coordinated with the helicopter operators at that
time and with the Air Traffic Control Tower at the Airport. As is always the case,
the Air Traffic Control Tower reserves the right to manage the traffic in their area
of responsibility as they see appropriate in the best interest of safety. The
subcommittee recommends that the Airport staff analyze and revalidate these
previously agreed to helicopter routes with the Tower, as well as with the local
helicopter operators. Staff should then provide these routes in and out of the
Airport to all of the helicopter operators in the Bay Area. These routes would be
recommended and preferred only. Contra Costa County does not have a right to
establish regulations that are not in agreement with broader Federal Air Regulations.
It has been our experience, however, that operators of any commercial aviation
activity in the Bay Area are extremely cooperative when it comes to issues of this
safety and noise.
The restricting of all helicopter traffic to nonresidential areas would appear to be an
FAA air traffic issue and the Manager of Airports has written a letter to Fred Davis,
Tower Chief, asking him to examine this matter and provide us with a written
response (Exhibit "G").
4. Accelerating the process to acquire an off-site helicopter training pad site.
Discussion
The subcommittee, the Manager of Airports, and the helicopter operators at
Buchanan Field Airport strongly endorse this recommendation. The Airport staff has
done extensive studies in the past in an attempt to find acceptable sites. Numerous
sites were examined and most were rejected for a variety of reasons. There are sites
that appear to be acceptable from an air traffic standpoint and from a noise
standpoint on the Acme Landfill and on the Praxis site north of the Acme Landfill.
Preliminary environmental work has been started. A complete Initial Study is
required. Safety issues need to be examined by an independent consultant, as well
as certain environmental issues relating to habitat. This work can proceed upon
authorization by the Board of Supervisors.
In addition to the environmental work, there is still a requirement for licensing of the
helipads by the Division of Aeronautics, California Department of Transportation,
as well as a final airspace study by the Federal Aviation Administration. (A
preliminary aeronautical study has been done in cooperation with the local Air
Traffic Control Tower). A land use permit would be required from the County
Community Development Department. The actual construction of this site could be
done quickly. If authorized and directed by the Board of Supervisors, and if the issue
of the land availability were resolved, Airport staff feels that most of the issues could
be resolved in a matter of three or four months, unless a full Environmental Impact
Report is required. If a full EIR is required then it would be necessary to add
5
approximately one year to the process. Several of these matters could be pursued
simultaneously(proposed site attached as Exhibit "H"). Supervisor McPeak has asked
for specific recommendations on the sites. The AAC recommendation is specifically
included as a part of the Board Order with this report.
The subcommittee feels that this would create approximately a 70 to 80 percent
reduction of helicopter traffic in and out of Buchanan Field Airport. The primary
benefit would be that of a noise reduction, particularly near the mobile home parks.
This would be a major enhancement to our overall community relations and noise
abatement programs. From a safety standpoint the helicopters would not be flying
over residential areas. The subcommittee feels that this is a significant advantage
primarily by reducing the total number of operations at the Airport.
5. Establishing guidelines on the maximum amount of mix of training/non-training
flights (for both rotary and fixed wing craft) that are allowed at Buchanan Field
Airport.
Discussion
The subcommittee saw this as an interesting but somewhat complex issue. The
subcommittee had discussion on this at two levels. The first level was that of
determining a method whereby this could be implemented and yet be nondiscrimina-
tory for all types of aircraft. The second level of discussion was that of whether or
not it was strictly an air traffic.issue. The subcommittee feels that at this time, the
issue of whether this could be managed from an air traffic standpoint needs to be
resolved. The subcommittee asked that the Manager of Airports include that in his
letter to Fred Davis, Tower Chief, to respond from an air traffic standpoint. If air
traffic finds that this is a matter that can be pursued further, then the subcommittee
recommends that the Chairman of the AAC select one or more of the AAC members
to specifically address this issue with the Airport staff and operators of all categories
of aircraft on the Airport to establish a fair procedure whereby this could be pursued
further.
6. Moving all or a portion of the training flights to Byron Airport.
Discussion
The subcommittee considered a number of issues involved with this suggestion. The
Byron Airport in its current condition cannot accommodate any more activity than
exists now at that Airport. It is an extremely substandard Airport with a considerable
amount of very mixed activity. The subcommittee believes that no consideration of
any Byron Airport alternatives should be given until such time as the actual
construction of the new Airport is complete. This is anticipated to be late 1993, if
there are no further delays in schedules. Even at that, only the basic Airport will be
built by that time. More realistically, this could only be considered in the 1994 time
period.
At present the Byron Airport has a very exotic and unusual mix of aircraft activities.
It is uncertain whether this mix will continue, drop off, or increase after the new
6
Airport is built. The mix of activities will have to be examined closely if there is
further consideration of adding more helicopter traffic to the Byron mix. At present,
the Airport has regular fixed wing aircraft, sailplane aircraft, ultralights, skydivers,
and helicopters all operating in the same environment quite often at the same time.
This is occurring at an airport with no control tower. At present, Airport staff and
members of the Advisory Committee meet on a monthly basis with all the represent-
ed user groups at the Byron Airport. The air traffic mix is one of continuing
discussion and concern by all at the Byron.
As has been mentioned previously, the subcommittee believes that it is not possible
to specifically identify helicopters for relocation. The Board Order indicates,
however, the consideration is for the possibility of moving all training flights to Byron
Airport. The Airport staff indicates that there'may be some conflict with existing
leases since flight training appears to be a requirement of at least three of our major
Fixed Based Operators at Buchanan Field Airport. (This does not include Helicopter
Adventures, Inc. Helicopter Adventures has a License Agreement with the Airport,
whereas the other three major tenants have leases extending out 20 or more
additional years). Once again, the issue of Economic Nondiscrimination must be
examined.
Another economic issue is more directly related to the Airport. If, for example,
Helicopter Adventures was ultimately required to cease business at Buchanan Field
Airport, they may find a more satisfactory option to be that of relocating to a closer
airport such as Napa, Hayward, or Oakland. If this were to be the case, there would
be a substantial loss of revenues to both the Airport Enterprise Fund (which has
been badly stressed over the past several years), as well as, as to the County General
Fund from the loss of possessory interest and sales tax revenues. Helicopter
Adventures brings in a significant portion of its students from outside of area. It has
been estimated that in addition to the amount paid to Helicopter Adventures for
their training activities, each student can generate up to $20,000 into the local
economy for food, lodging, transportation and entertainment. About 90% of all of
HAI's students come from outside the Contra Costa area.
The subcommittee also notes that there are a number of residential units near the
Byron Airport. Many of these are somewhat noise sensitive. Even though there is
a fairly small number, because of its rural nature, the Byron Airport environment has
a fairly high sensitivity to noise occurrences. Much effort is already going into
minimizing the noise impact on the Byron residents. The Byron Airport is expected
to have approximately 200 aircraft based there within the next four to five years. At
present there are nearly 100 aircraft at Byron. That compares to approximately 600
aircraft at Buchanan Field Airport. There are two key differences between Byron
and Buchanan Field Airports. The first is that the mix of aircraft at Byron is
significantly more diverse than at Buchanan Field Airport. The other key difference
is that Byron has no control tower and therefore allows for somewhat greater latitude
on the part of pilots to provide their own interpretation of air traffic flow. The
Byron Airport is very clearly serving a need for the East County. Whether it is
appropriate to attempt to force additional traffic into this environment needs to be
studied further.
7
The AAC, as a whole, also identified another matter relating to training at Byron.
If the helicopter and fixed wing traffic were to remain at the Buchanan Field Airport
and travel to Byron for their training activities this would cause a very dramatic
increase in overflights of Concord and Clayton. Even now the Clayton area has a
fairly high level of noise sensitivity. The AAC at their October 20 meeting speculated
that this additional traffic could become totally unacceptable to the Concord and
Clayton area residents.
The subcommittee found, however, that a limited amount of traffic is currently being
directed to Byron for practice. The subcommittee feels that it would be entirely
appropriate to encourage training activities at the new Airport on a voluntary basis.
This, of course, would have to be monitored by the members of the Byron Users
Group to make certain that safety is not jeopardized at the Byron Airport because
of increased activity.
There are at least five organized flying clubs on Buchanan Field Airport ranging in
size from two airplanes to over 20 airplanes. These clubs have memberships ranging
from five up to several hundred. Since these are not commercial activities, it would
appear to be somewhat difficult to attempt to enforce certain training activities. The
flying clubs account for a fairly substantial amount of the training at the Airport.
The subcommittee noted that training flights can increase safety. Not all training
flights are conducted by student pilots. Many are made by fully licensed pilots
maintaining and improving their skills. They do this on a regular basis both
voluntarily and to comply with FAA regulations in order to be currently qualified to
fly.
7. Banning overflights of helicopters (or perhaps other aircraft) above all schools or
take off using established FAA rules/patterns.
Discussion
This also appears to fall into the realm of an FAA Air Traffic matter, and therefore
is included in our request to the FAA for evaluation. A pilot member of the
committee did mention that navigating through the maze of schools in the local area
might be a bit of a challenge. He also pointed out that a number of the schools are
not easily identifiable from the air. The subcommittee and the Airport staff,
however, make no recommendation on this matter until further review by the Federal
Aviation Administration.
Recommendations
The following recommendations were generated by the AAC subcommittee. They include
some of those from the Board of Supervisors. Of the 13 recommendations listed, the first
11 are relatively easy and inexpensive to implement. The last two require significant
investigation, outside cooperation, and expense.
• Review NTSB reports for safety enhancement recommendations.
8
• Increase safety awareness articles in the monthly Contra Costa County Pilot
Newsletter.
• Monitor the progress and implementation of any new safety enhancement programs.
• Encourage safety seminars for Certified Flight Instructors (CFI) on a regular basis.
• Encourage pilot safety seminars on an ongoing basis. It should be noted that these
pilot safety seminars are currently being conducted on an annual basis primarily
developed by the Airport staff and the Air Traffic Control Tower. These should be
continued.
• Bring in outside experts to discuss accident prevention to make presentations at the
above seminars.
• Develop and implement an education program regarding altitudes over Contra Costa
County.
• Analize and revalidate as appropriate helicopter routes in and through the area and
provide to all Bay Area helicopter operators.
• Include periodic reports to the AAC regarding safety programs for further review.
• Include information regarding other regional FAA safety seminars in our local pilot
newsletter.
• Upon receiving comments from Air Traffic Control regarding recommendations that
have an impact on the air traffic system, consider further safety related recommenda-
tions at that time.
• Make safety a regular topic for discussion on the AAC agenda encouraging public
input and committee consideration. Also make suggestions for further safety review.
• Investigate the idea of limiting the mix of training/non-training flights if the FAA has
no objections.
• Accellerate program for location for helicopters at or near the Acme landfill or the
Praxis sites. This will have both a noise reduction impact and a potential safety
enhancement.
HLW:rs
c:ss.t10
9
BOARD O..F.SUPERVISORS Co Itra
oM: Sunne Wright A1cPeak Cx)sta
.TE: October 6, 1992 • C 1
1eJECT1 Helicopter Crash in Martinez Last Wednesday
'kCIF)C REQUE-ST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(5) a 13ACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Request the Manager of Airports and the Aviation Advisory
Conu-iittee to review all relevant information pertaining to the
helicopter crash in Martinez on September 30, 1992, and advise
the .Board of Supervisors on whether or not to adopt the
following-
1. Additional safety measures, if any, that can be taken to
prevent another helicopter crash incident in the future.
2. Increasing the minimum ceiling for helicopters in Contra
Costa County except for those aircraft that have approval
from the Airports Manager to conduct -public purposes or
specified business operations.
3. Restricting all helicopter traffic (not just training
flights) to non-residential areas and specified routes in
and out of Buchanan Field Airport.
4. Accelerating the process to acquire an off-site helicopter
training pad site.
5. Establishing guidelines on the maximum amount and mix of.
training/non-training flights (for both rotary and fixed-
winged craft) that are allowed at Buchanan Field.
6. Moving all or a portion of the training flights to'Byron
Airport.
7. Banning overflights of helicopters (and perhaps other
aircraft) above all schools or take off using established
FAA rules/patterns.
Exhibit "A"
cot 14dED.ON ATTACHMENT4 YES
Rr-CO.64"tHDATION OF COUNTY ADPAIMSTRATOR
ArPROYE OTHER `
SIGNATURVS)
TO: BOARD 0r SUPLIWISORS
Contra
FROM Supervisor Nancy Fanden Costa
October 6, 1992 •
County
DATE:
HELICOPTER CRASH RESULTING IN DEATHS
SUBJECT:
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Supervisors put a moratorium on all
helicopter training flights from Buchanan Field Airport
until the Board has received a through and complete report
on the helicopter crash in Martinez on September 30, 1992.
Request that the Manager of Airports look into the immediate
relocation of all helicopter training facilities to the
Byron Airport, in the interest of public safety.-
BACKGROUND:
March 18, 1991, Acme Fill Corp. wrote to then Chair of the
Board,.Tom Powers and Members of the Board, to recommend
that they consider requesting the training to take place at
the Byron Air Field; it is more remote from industry and
residences. It is not prudent to allow these flights in a
more congested industrial area or near the residences of
Concord, Pacheco, Blum Road, and Vine Hill.
November 5, 1991, in response to the substantial public
concern expressed by numerous groups in the community,
I requested an E.I.R. on the proposed helicopter pad.
Furthermore, I once again, proposed Byron Air Field as a
viable alternate site in the interest of public safety.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -YES SIGNATURE.
-RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE -OTHER
SIGNATUAE(S)*
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED A$RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS 15 A TRUE
-UNANIMOUS(ASSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: -NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE 130AAD
ASSENT. ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: _._ATTESTED
Exhibit. "B" R
DEPUTY
362 (101861 1-
M
Ronald E. Sorenson/Charlene A. Sorenson
c/o NAVAJO AVIATION
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, California 94520
( 510 ) 685-1150 (business )
( 510 ) 825-4298 (residence).
October 19 , 1992
Virginia Schaefer, Chairperson
AVIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
c/o Buchanan Field Airport
510 Sally Ride Drive
Concord, California 94520
Re: Commercial Flight Training Safety at and around Buchanan
Field Airport
Dear Virginia:
We felt the following information should be in your possession
before the Aviation Advisory Committee Meeting Tuesday evening.
We have collected and analyzed accident data from 1975 through the
present time for all Fixed Base Operators on Buchanan Field.
This data includes accidents on the airport and accidents occur-
ring in the "Airport Area" (five ( 5 ) mile radius of the airport) .
During this nearly seventeen ( 17 ) year period, there have been
no air or ground fatalities or significant injuries to anyone
resulting from local FBO operations where commercial "training"
of any type was a factor.
The foregoing information covers both fixed and rotary wing oper-
ations for all of your FBO' s , and an estimated total of nearly
five million ( 5, 000 , 000 ) airport operations . FBO operation
statistics do not seem to be available separately, but we would
estimate them to be 50% to 80% of airport total operations .
We have no useful data on the flight training occurring within
the authorized "flying clubs" , but we would not expect their
safety record to be. significantly different.
Respectfully submitted,
W7 C�,�
Ron and Charlene Sorenson
cc : Manager of Airports
Exhibit T"
I
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT �pLA1�T0 JOHN SWIZER
AIRPORT DIVISION AIRPORT MANAGER
NUT TREE AIRPORT FAX # (707) 451-8529
301 COUNTY AIRPORT ROAD 1 r r
VACAVILLE,CALIFORNIA 95688
(707) 446-0322
� r
19,32
! r
. rlr�ir�r,.! Ails.! _j
le, filfi:�i '�1
September 2 , 1992
To : 'All Northern California and Rav ,area airport
`fanaaers
FiZOM: .John SwiZer ,, Airport M-ana _ _
SUBJECT: Helicopter Operations at the Nut Tree l_irport
The Vi.1t Tree Airport has experienced a significant pilmber of
daily helicopter operations at our faci l- i ty- duri nn recent
months . The ma-jori tv of these operati ons consist of tonch-
and-go landings . -
li fortunately, the increase in helicopter traffic at otlr
facility' has resulted in a corresponding increase in
complaints from local homeowners regarding the helicopter
operations . These complaints are received daily and
snecificallv address the continuous touch-and-go patterns
which are flown over the surrounding homes .
Therefore . a poli cy is now in effect at the Nlit 'Tree 3i rport.
that helicopter touch-and-ao operations are prohibited at
all times . This policy_ is effective as. of September 2 ,
1992.
T would ask your assi starnre i n distributing this information
to all helicopter operators at your airports or in ---otir
area . 3 NOTAM will also be issued to the Rancho Murieta
Flight Service Stationfor their information and
distribution.
Please contact me i f vnl,1 , or any helicopter operators . have
any additional questions or comments.
cc.• ,John Gray- - Transportation
Shar JON.7ce - County Ccmn.sel.
Sol ano County avi atio_n advisory Committee
Exhibit "D"
Exhibit "D"
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT �pLA
AIRPORT DIVISION
NUT TREE AIRPORT
301 COUNTY AIRPORT ROAD
VACAVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95688
007) 446-0322
C'OUN�� R`'C"'EI VED
MEMORANnr.'^1 .
October .8 , 1992
TO: all Northern California Airport 'tanagers
FROM: John Swizer•• Airport ManageEW4
SUBJECT: Recindina Prohibitions of Hel-iconte'r Touch_
And Go Operations at Nut Tree Airport
On September 14 , 1992 . I sent a letter to all airport
managers in the Northern California Area advising them that
touch-and-go operations by helicopters would be prohibited
at the Nut Tree Airport . I have since been advised by the
airports District Office of the FAA that this policy is not
permitted .
While it is our goal to provide quality airport services to
the public as well as to ensure that we are good neighbors
to the surrounding residents in our area . i ask that you
inform any helicopter operators in your areas that tol.)ch-
and-oro operations will continue . i would also ask that
operators voluntarily_ assist us b�- limiting the amount of
touch-and-go traffic that is crenerated.
I would be happy to work with any helicopter operator in
establishing a policy or procedure which will benefit both
the operator and the airport . I believe that it would be in
the best interests of all parties if a standard approach and
departure route be established, subject to approval of the
FAA, that would permit all of its to accomplish our
individual goals .
i apologize for any misunderstandings whJch may have
occurred from my September 14th letter and please contact me
if vote have any questions : Any helicopter operator who
would like to discuss routes to, from; and around the Nut
Tree Airport is welcome to contact me .
cc: John Gray Transportation
Shar .Joyce - Coit.nty Counsel
Fumi Wong - FAA Airports District Office
joseph Rodriquez - FAA Airport-s District Office
Camillus Byrne - Helicopter Adventures
Exhibit ►►E►►
In furtherance of this assurance, the sponsor will have in effect at
all times arrangements for—
(1) operating the airport's aeronautical facilities whenever
required;
(2) Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport
conditions, including temporary conditions; and
(3) Promptly notifying airmen of any condition affecting
aeronautical use of the airport.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the
airport be operated for aeronautical use during temporary periods
when snow, flood or other climatic conditions interefere with such
operation and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be
construed as requiring the maintenance, repair, restoration, or
replacement of any structure or facility which is substantially
damaged or destroyed due to an act of God or other condition or
circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor.
b. It will suitable operate and maintain noise program implementation
items that' it owns or controls upon which Federal funds have been
exaended.
20. Hazard Removal and Mitigation. It will take appropriate action to assure
that such terminal airspace as is required' to'protect instrument and
visual operations to the airport (including established minimum flight
altitudes) will be adequately cleared and protected by.removing,
lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise mitigating
existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation
of future airport hazards.
21. Compatible Land Use. It .will take appropriate action, including the
adoption of zoning laws, to the extent reasonable, to restrict the use of
land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activi-
ties and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including
landing and takeoff of aircraft. In addition, if the project is for
noise program implementation, it will not cause or permit any change in
land use, within its jurisdiction, that will reduce the compatibility,
with respect to. the airport, of .the noise compatibility program measures
upon which Federal funds have been expended.
22. Economic Nondiscrimination.
a. It Will make its airport available as an airport for public use on
fair and reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination, to all
types, kinds, and classes, of aeronautical uses.
b. In any agreement, contract, lease or other arrangement under which
a right or privilege at .the: airport. is granted to any person, firm,
or corporationto conduct or engage in any aeronautical activity for
furnishing services to the .public at the airport, the sponsor will
insert and- enforce provisions requiring the .contractor—
FIELD AIRppRT NE
I.ICdPTF"R TRAFFIC PATTERN
- gUCtiANAN
o —'r
a-"--P'or_t
3 mile—rad�usVe reas
Noy se .Sens t� 32_actl
'ye
RuY�. ---�'�Ig act
nwaiive
/ t
Runways
izvj
� 11 \%fit � ' � � •� 4 .� .y-•.-.^,'-';, _
,rr� w .:.,. -_ � .y,`` ..,s!.../,, �tia7�",...+• :r."::•vv. rte'
l! 'i `l rf% ;'% ;— ` ' ' j '`•` .,.. jrf�+�`'C�tlf..+ `fit
� ti I+vhf ti j 1 i1 `� / ��• ��► t..�':^i� Jr_t :r i:`�Cr",`_ M:."ef.C•r[
Imo. rl„ nr \ /� �- i, j � '♦ (31 JJ�j� +/: f t�• _ �— .
�,%% Mme`o -'/ .:� 'r`t t jr•^-C, d+�•"~^ .
^1�,.-'=�t = 1 }� _i._ _ c — ' r �'1�`• .c �. _! i•I�-�;::=:';;;,. , .•-��..ti;`.t int:;_":•:::•.:: ,;?..,�,
J.r:.t�.. _ .ice "'•-tt t rr; ,,
���,`..��''^?�•"�
r_•_`uT .�<.t_r. \,ice \t {J \: .i^•.c„� �+`. �I"jl1wi'-\:^i. `�...; ''iia 1L-�. 'jlt,Z1,j��:,/�ti�A� ••i+` ''' rG lYyr�`."� .:
•' -=^ l '���'�. ,�O'••"'•✓:,'\� � .. 't) ' ���iuf,.;, 1 J. '"�+".t_f,4 C,'••-,14-�r r
�' -._._l...,' i 1�y�"'+"`..�^ '' �:ii ,s._�%r�;,,-i ,c7i% 1;.:.,: 1 ��f�'f• •J�`,.�r%5 :+�'•••,ty� ��. .��% '� •✓i,
a+'I .•�'� ,/r �,
"`._;'.,..s`4i.. ..--:t "j C.=,c7r�'',e• :,,�'r+�- ,��",t 1,/..' ;t % j``�
�`=_-_"i...-=�;^.f�•�s`.. ♦ ` ..--, { �'t t'�r, t`. •i;, cv
Jl��/.f�,"C�-`!'.•int♦'•` t�-.^. ,,,, \�:F~`3,1�•^?+�..�,.�• .�=L1��� / tJ ���� a ` 'f+ ���~�•"� l t'� ,.. ��.,•'r' �
t•..r./t"='• � '; .�`r.•r�-•;f.��:r=-zr!'•,i^'�d,.-,.'•. '.+r t.. , `s.-qti } 1 ` It ♦v!'�
1 ':5..•- '-=^ter.•• .1'
----------------
�;''.�,,,,J 1 t. �f,-w �•• �' ��` t�� 1
�;ti�ii-�,t j�,•,y'�. �r���..�J" r, 'E,,,�•,��U f I ...s I �, �c-' i ,�\� t j r i� •`V"t 1 „r 1` � ' `t��'i' ;1'.
•---()mss.i :.:.- ..r�l ,v - r.rsE,� '�• e U ��\ S••, t1.,• t t '•'.. r' �__ IH•
J�` �'t:-*,,, i k.+. �r +".•r d �1�a�.•C"-�''.k � � �:`' '��t f � b, :✓,,* F•��.. J'��t �Y. } �. � �•�
rr '•.. f t+ �:� .J�l�� ' � 4 � 1� i� +'�`/`�•r i w ..••- ••�.'^f••z.�f �• ,G' S 't''1�1�i?�.�..
n ��{- �. +' �' �l .:�,,.- jp/.' 1 .j �"'.v� ' - /'j1\- l" r`''te '�y •' ��� ►'i`--...:f j r "t ',' G_`�
C'„ � •all '.�?:� \
. ✓ .� 07
Zvi + `t\
'Ll •L .-•. 151 •• •,x,.._.....--�-, t ► / '1,/}%L•- . •_7 ` � �• :.� sum _-- -
S, j.&j l': i� �' , Y ,Lys , . , :,< �i ��
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AIRPORTS
TELEPHONE: (510)646-5722 • FAX: (510)646-5731
Public Works 510 Sally Ride Drive • Concord, CA 94520-5550 Buchanan Airport
Department Byron Airport
J. Michael Watford Harold E Wight
Director October 16, 1992 Manager of Airports
Fred Davis, Tower Chief
Federal Aviation Administration Exhibit G"
Concord Control Tower
201 John Glenn Dr.
Concord, CA 94520
i
Dear Mr. Davis:
We have had two recent accidents where fatalities were involved. The most recent was the
crash of the helicopter on September 30, 1992. The Board of. Supervisors, on October 6,
1992, made a number of safety recommendations for evaluation by the Manager of Airports
and the Aviation Advisory Committee (complete copy of board order attached). In
reviewing these recommendations it became clear to us that some of the recommendations
appear to be in the realm of Air Traffic Control. We would specifically like you to review
the following recommendations from Supervisor McPeak's board order and provide us with
any information that you can regarding our ability to implement these recommendations at
any level.
3. Restricting all helicopter traffic (not just training flights) to non-residential areas and
specified routes in and out of Buchanan Field Airport.
5. Establishing guidelines on the maximum amount and mix of training/non-training
flights (for both rotary and fixed-winged craft) that are allowed at Buchanan Field
Airport.
7. Banning overflights of helicopters (and perhaps other aircraft) above all schools or
take off using established FAA rules/patterns.
We at the Manager of Airports' Office support Supervisor McPeak's efforts in attempting
to improve safety at Buchanan Field. We request that you review the above
recommendations and share your comments with us. Also, feel free to discuss any of the.,
other items listed on the attached board order if you feel that it is appropriate.. Thank you
very much for your assistance on this matter.
Sincerel ,
Zl/
Harold E. Wig ht
Manager of Airports
HEIV:rs
c:fd.t10
Enclosure
-'�--•�� � 6R as
82 01
`U `b AV C)N1
IN
Ao i 1 S{oG� a. i
w_niCR/IiOtit ^' _ -' ►ostoL r
'( an ` 't S i• r
. «ao
Maxt.x10
WAOCA(co
01
At
..r._/'�Jl..�./a/_/{/'��)({/"a/{. (�/��a./{'—f\•_ '/'/�j l(/"ay1)\/{\\y� 1 T'
• V /._a✓ \/.of • `' !•• (,� a t'lt~A• T 'u'T~AM A f-+Y �f\. I
.�' I
+1< 4 4 r
�tx '�'I t� tEJ o��'�`'•t" •r t s 4 � I t,
I
�� J�`a t trS•0 r 'r�^a.�•t_ 4� �(, �,}y.., S .-.�. � +-- _^'^"_� "`_ t�— --
,
1 C4 141'
�.rrti�.o;v 'Mttrt I `0 1 3200. L
o«too-
srr Q 0 tln wr srt�J�r
ltk'`L1° tt•aat•' ti I L
t'llt • S I iw,e�.
o
i °R '�" I
t�a C �' 1
[^1 t
5 S Y ti�t''r.c't�Doof.1.—_.�
ti` t i`'Mlwf tI/R 1.N4 vAt1 wC14 Oi
AI, Yu�1•/ v ,i�' A "ra t.N!Dii 4+4
I , �, `N
j' ,tC, %1�� a ; t...tt ;� t <��t{ �'Y,S� ��jt �(� •Ci 4'(p(t 1i r....«... .'� Q� ~ UCNANA t
�
A., 'K(• .�.'/. . t.,t• .•^S°a r ..asr __ t `t•a-.tet ��
V "•11•
rp,fa- K h t
04 �+
a' as
,
i.
•i ` ,. l ' A �.y1j R IR Gf♦ A 6 4 A ••t•; . �t4/
1,r1 ♦ y,,•,{ t,C r4r, g ..• .. 8 t ,1 _�t • C -,,. «• • tW �,
` �: `^: tt ...�_ � .a � •f of �,�.«.+• �%' `�a � /q�
'��i.r � � �• ,� � �-`01 �.ti��::SS` �«' ._^A�� ✓• • ` t tett xAi�fx w"• fj )
Of trp-Y�•c�ct 1 f ,�. ! • ` t` t// O
, 1 It" .t. _ {i o ei ,•,.�_t� fff//1 ,
.^ � �..-:^.. ,• t r1t:. t t <�_ �V g•~ t.t � tt� � � a• • S 4t/(S�,'��//ja}
t e.(t1�L�It �. ,1': t.. • .,.�. ^ �M 14 _ at � r`�`1h =A'�1.7 t� ,t t ..J�' t-�
.._-%�- ,�'.;V�.r�^{a `_' ' '/�X .� .� ^«tao•,. � . 4'':5 t< .r ?��j t v
.Exhibit ►H"
AAC Meeting October 20, 1992
Public Comments Received by AAC Relative to Aircraft Overflights
Chairman Schaefer advised the audience that this was not a formal public hearing. Only the
Board of Supervisors held or authorized public hearings. She did advise, however, that the
committee was interested in all comments. She asked that each person speaking be concise
so that all who wanted to speak would be able to, and further asked that each person
identify themselves.
Wally Wiggs
Mr. Wiggs stated that.R-22's were dangerous and that all of them should go to Byron. He
further stated that the Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council supports a moratorium on all
training flights until they can be moved to a safer location.
Mr. Tomlin
Mr. Tomlin advised that he was representing Concord Cascade and Sun Valley Mobile
Home Parks. His primary concern was helicopter noise. He felt that all helicopters should
be eliminated at Buchanan Field Airport.
Don Mount
Mr. Mount advised that he was representing People Over Planes. He said, the Robinson
R-22 is dangerous and that an anonymous person at the FAA Certification Division told him
that the Robinson R-22's were "under review." Mr. Mount stated that according to a recent
article in the Contra Costa Times 13% of those built have crashed. Mr. Mount further
stated that there was no chance for the training activities to be pursued at Acme Landfill.
John Jackson
Mr. Jackson stated that he was very familiar with the HAI operations and felt that HAI was
very conscientious and safe operator and had a strong commitment to safety.
Patrick Corr
Mr. Corr, one of the owners of HAI, stated that safety was their most important issue. He
felt that many people had seized on safety of helicopters as a solution to noise. Mr. Corr
also stated that the training at either the dump or Praxis would solve the mobile home parks'
noise problems. He also pointed out that it was interesting that the training activities were
being attack. Training is considered to be an extremely safe activity and most training is
actually conducted with very experienced pilots. Mr. Corr also stated that the article in a
Exhibit "I"
safety magazine referring to the R-22 as being dangerous by Mr. Mount and the Contra
Costa Times had been rescinded by that same magazine because of gross errors in the
original reporting.
Doug Davis
Mr. Davis stated that he has an office in his home in Pleasant Hill. He doesn't like touch-n-
go flights because of the noise levels. It is extremely noisy in his house. The repetitive
overflights are very disruptive to his activities. He felt that other runways could be utilized
when there is little or no wind.
Clint Ferber
Mr. Ferber expressed a great deal of concern regarding helicopter noise. He also quoted
the Contra Costa Times as stating the Robinson R-22 was a high risk aircraft. He also
stated that chlorine was stored at the Central Sanitary District and if a helicopter crashed
into a chlorine tank a release of chlorine gas could be extremely dangerous.
Warren Wilson
Mr. Wilson stated that the Airport had been here for approximately 45 years. He was
unclear why people would move adjacent to an airport if they objected to airplanes and
helicopters.
Andrea Wise
Ms. Wise asked why the helicopter that crashed was in the area where the accident occurred.
Patrick Corr and the Tower Chief, Fred Davis, explained the air traffic issues that caused
this to happen. Andrea Wise further asked whether this could be avoided in the future.
Fred Davis stated that probably not since Air Traffic Control is a dynamic matter which
must be addressed on an individual ongoing basis.
Donna Davidson
Ms. Davidson expressed concern about the dangerous Airport. She stated that the noise is
unbearable. The helicopters are too low. She says that she has to shut her doors to talk on
the telephone. She stated that lots of the mobile home residents are tired of the noise. She
stated that she wants all training stopped.
Frank Bell
Mr. Bell indicated that he felt that the efforts should be made towards the Acme or Praxis
sites to expedite the reduction of helicopter training. In questioning Patrick Corr, Mr. Corr
Exhibit "I"
estimated that 80 to 90% of the noise would be eliminated by doing the training at the
Acme or Praxis site.
Newspaper Reporter
A reporter in the audience stated that there appeared to be wetland problems at the Praxis
site and this would have to be investigated.
No further comments were received.
HEW:rs
c:pc.t10
October 21,1992
Exhibit "I"