Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03181986 - 2.1 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator C Ilra Anthony A Dehaesus, Director of Community Development C��WICt J. Michael Walford, Director of Public Works DATE: March 13, 1986 C(� SUBJECT: PSA Lease at Buchanan Field "`"� ��� I SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMIEMATION(_S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the independent results of the safety study and an environmental documentation on the proposed PSA Buchanan Field Lease, it is recommended that the following actions be taken: - Accept the reports entitled "Safety Study of Buchanan Field Airport (March 1986)" and "Documentation for Initial Study of the Proposed PSA Scheduled Air Service and Lease at Buchanan Field Airport". - Direct staff to hold community workshops to discuss the results of the report findings - these workshops should be widely noticed. FINANCIAL IMPACT The only known financial impact to the County will be staff time for conducting the workshops and the mailing costs to notify the public and interested agencies on the meetings. BACKGROUND/JUSTIFCATION On January 28, 1986, the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County directed that two studies be prepared dealing with environmental and safety issues raised over a proposal for scheduled air passenger service by Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) between Los Angeles and Buchanan Field Airport. In addition, on that date, the Board set February 4, 1986 at 4:00 p.m. as the time to receive public comments on the scope of the proposed studies. The final scope of work included the concerns raised at the February 4, 1986 meeting. The studies have been completed and are hereby submitted to the Board of Supervisors. The potential environmental effects of the PSA project are reviewed and analyzed in the report entitled "Documentation For Initial Study of the Proposed PSA Scheduled Air Service and Lease at Buchanan Field Airport". The related issues of Airport and airline safety are analyzed in the second report, prepared by the Flight Safety Institute of Sacramento, California entitled "Safety Study for Bucha an Field (March 1986)' . The findings and conclusions of the FlightJS fety Ins 'tute report are CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SI ATURE' RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REC ME DA ION O BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): lt�A Harry Bowes, Chamber of Commerce, Concord, also supported the PSA proposal and requested that provisions for additional parking be made along John Glenn Drive. Those speaking in opposition to the PSA proposal were: Dia McCulloch, representing Citizens for Responsible Use of Buchanan Field; and Paul C. Watt, representing the City of Pleasant Hill. Supervisor McPeak advised that she has reviewed the the reports and was ready to support the recommendations of the County Administrator. She further advised that the safety study provides the assurance that there is a good safety program at the Airport. , Supervisor Torlakson advised that he concurred with the recommendations, expressed empathy for those who had doubts with the PSA proposal, and suggested that staff make available the reports received today so that the public will have access to the infor- mation given to the Board this day. There being no further discussion, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the following actions are APPROVED: Accepted the reports entitled "Safety of Buchanan Field Airport" and "Documentation for Initial Study of the Proposed PSA Scheduled Air Service and Lease at Buchanan Field Airport" ; Directed staff to hold community workshops to discuss the results of the reported findings with the understanding that the workshops will be widely noticed; and Accepted the Negative Declaration for the proposed PSA scheduled service and lease, noting that public testimony and comment will be accepted for the next 30 days with -� April 22, 1986 fixed as the date for decision. I hereby certify that th13 is a true and c.orr^ct copy of an action taken and entered on ti o rninLites of t€le Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: 7X4-f� f 1, 1,R PHIL BATCHELOR, Cleric of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By SSC ,l'�c�v Deputy cc: Public Works Director Airport Manager PSA County Administrator County Counsel Acting Director, CDD i Board of Supervisors -2- March 13, 1986 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field separate from the other report but are mutually supporting in terms of their findings. The items to be considered in the studies were identified in the January 28, 1986 and February 4, 1986 Board orders on this subject. IAs a convenience to the Board, the issues raised in those Board orders are listed below, along with a summary of findings and conclusions on each item. A cross reference to where the item is discussed in the two reports is included. The question raised is first stated and the conclusions and location of a more definitive response is listed in subsequent paragraphs. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS A. The following issues were addressed in the report "Safety Study for Buchanan Field Airport (March 1986)". 1. A review of Buchanan Field's safety record A review of Buchanan Field Airport's safety record, as developed from National Transportation Safety Board (N.T.S.B. )/Federal Aviation Administration (F.A.A. ) records, does Inot disclose any basis for barring scheduled airline service at the airport. There has been an increase in the number of general aviation accidents in recent years, most of which are pilot-error .related. (See Safety Study, Section II) . 2. A comparison of Buchanan Field to other similar airports in terms of traffic and accidents. Buchanan Field was compared to other general aviation airports in the Bay Area regarding activity levels and reported accidents (see Safety Study, Section II) . 3. Review Buchanan Field Airport Traffic Volumes Operations at Buchanan Field have declined from a 1978 high of 353,926 aircraft movements to 235,731 operations in 1985. Actual aircraft operations for 1985 (235,731) are significantly less than forecast in the 1977 Master Plan Study (440,000) . There is sufficient aircraft parking at Buchanan Field to accommodate any relocation of aircraft resulting from airline service. (See Safety Study Section II) . 4. Review actions by Contra Costa County to insure safety at Buchanan Field. The Board of Supervisors has authorized and approved numerous airport improvements projects, to include grant agreements with the F.A.A. , which directly (purchase fire truck, acquire clear zone easements) and indirectly (repair failing taxiways) enhance safety at Buchanan Field. The Board of Supervisors has also directed the Airport Aviation Committee and Airport Management to review and up-date existing procedures and regulations for enforcing' airport safety matters. the Airport Manager has in effect several programs to promote safe operations. (See Safety Study, Section II) 5. Analyze safety factors in mixing general aviation and scheduled airline operations. Large aircraft operations (exceeding 12,500 lbs. ) require awareness of wake turbulence, engine exhaust and performance compatibiltiy when mixed with light aircraft traffic. Westair previously used large aircraft at Buchanan Field and PSA now proposes service with a large aircraft, the BAe-146. A review of traffic mixing issues indiciates that PSA's proposed service can be accommodated without diminishing siafety or disrupting traffic flows at Buchanan Field. (See Safety Study, Section III . ) Board of Supervisors -3- March 13, 1986 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field 6. Compare past commuter service at Buchanan Field with service proposed by PSA. Westair previously operated scheduled commuter airline service to/from Buchanan Field with both light and large multi-engine aircraft. PSA's BAe-146 is larger than any Westair aircraft. PSA proposes fewer aircraft operations (four landings per day) than Westair's prior scheduled (10 landings per day) . PSA operates pursuant to instrument flight rules (IFR) , whereas Westair frequently operated in accordance with visual flight rules (VFR) . (See Safety Study, Section II . ) . 7. Review and compare PSA's. safety record with prior commuter service. Neither PSA or Westair experienced any accidents between 1980-1985 as reported from N.T.S.B./F.A.A. data sources. Several "incidents" were reported for each carrier. There is no information in the N.T.S.B./F.A.A. incident reports that would support a safety related basis for questioning either carriers operating or managerial practices. (See Safety Study, Section III) . 8. Review measures at other airports to ensure safety with mixing general aviation and scheduled service aircraft. Many general aviation airports within California accommodate scheduled service with large aircraft. Sequencing of operations is generally on a first come-first serve basis with operational deviations as necessary. Separation criteria for wake turbulence avoidance is the primary procedure used when mixing light and large aircraft. Radar is used at some airports and where available, facilitates air traffic control of all aircraft on or near the airport. (See Safety Study, Section II) . 9. Review F.A.A. experience and data at other airports to determine whether there is any evidence that scheduled service significantly affects safety, either positively or negatively. F.A.A. management staff and ATC specialists offer no evidence that scheduled service has a negative impact on airport safety in any area. Conversely, scheduled air service was noted to promote airport safety through strengthened security, improved airport equipment and staffing, more frequent inspections and maintenance of IFR proficiency for air traffic controllers. (See Safety Study, Section II) . B. The following items are addressed in thel report entitled "Documentation For Initial Study of the Proposed PSA Scheduled Air Service and Lease at Buchanan Field Airport" (the MBA report) . 1. A review : of the environmental impacts, mitigation measures and land use considerations identified in the 1983 Buchanan Field EIR. Information concerning the proposed PSA project (project description) was incorporated into the report, including project nature and extent, land use implications, traffic and parking impacts, and air quality characteristics. The project description is discussed on pages 2-23 of the MBA report. Graphic illustrations showing the project location, site plan and construction drawing concepts are also included. Traffic and parking impacts are discussed on pages 14-17, 55-62, and 73. There would be no significant adversel environmental effects on parking or circulation associated with the proposed PSA project or lease agreement. Mitigation measures approved for other projects (including the Reynolds and Brown Airport Center Office Park) discussed in the 1983 Airport General Plan Amendment EIR, and currently being implemented, are more than sufficient to handle the small increment of traffic that could be generated i Board of Supervisors -4- March 13, 1986 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field by PSA (see MBA report pages 57-62) . The MBA report also indicates that PSA should be required to construct supplemental parking facilities (as discussed on page 56) to maximize the efficient use of existing airport roadways and parking areas. This would result- in more than adequate parking facilities to accommodate PSA demands, as well as those of other airport users, without placing an undue burden on remaining airport facilities or tenants. The air quality characteristics of the proposed PSA service were analyzed and compared to the previous Westair operation, and to County and regional air quality emissions. In the criticial areas of hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions (prime contributors) of ozone) , the PSA operation would be much cleaner than was Westair's. When compared to overall County and Bay Area region emissions neither PSA's aircraft or associated passenger traffic would have a significant effect on air quality. These factors are discussed on pages 28-29, 31-33, and 69' of the MBA report. 2. A review of the impact difference, if any, between this (the PSA) commuter service proposal and the previous Westair Airline Service to Buchanan Field. The previous Westair service and its impacts were compared to the proposed PSA service (see pages 26-29) . It was concluded that the PSA service could generate somewhat more traffic, vehicle trips, and vehicle miles traveled than the previous Westair service, but serve more passengers with fewer flights, result in less overall air 'pollution, and reduce the number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled by Contra Costa County passengers currently having to utilize Oakland International Airport to get to Los Angeles. 3. A review of the noise impacts based on the October 1985 Noise Studies. The consultant reviewed the October 1985 Mestre Greve Associates Report on the "Acoustical Analysis of the lIntroduction of Scheduled BAe-146 Operations" at Buchanan Field, as well Ias the February 3, 1986 "Review" by Wilson, Ihrig & Associates, Inc. submjitted by the City of Pleasant Hill . Data in the October 1985 Mestre Greve Associates report were updated by the inclusion of ambient noise levels and maximum sound level information as requested by the City of Pleasant Hill (see pages 22, 26-27, 33-53, 69-73, and Appendix A)-. Ambient noise level data tables and information, and maximum noise levels are discussed on pages 50-53 of the MBA report. Potential contributions to automobile noise are also discussed on page 53. The proposed PSA operation was determined not to have a significant impact on people or property near the airport: 4. An analysis of the fire protection and emergency response capabilities at the airport. Both the 'safety study and the MBA report cover this concern. The Flight Safety Institute have met with the County Medical Director and reviewed the County's emergency response plans and the County "Multi-Casulty Incident Plan". Chief Maxfield's response to the Board Order of February 4, 1986, was also reviewed. County emergency response capabilities are discussed on pages 66-69 of the MBA report. An information sheet prepared by the Consolidated Fire District on "Buchanan Field Crash/Fire/Rescue Operations" is included also as Appendix B to the MBA report. 5. A review of the relationship to regional air transportation plans. MBA reviewed the F.A.A. 's "National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS)" and the MTC/ABAG "Regional Airport Plan" for both air carrier and general aviation airports. This information is discussed on pages 64-66 of the MBA report. It was concluded that the proposed PSA service would not be in conflict with regional air transportation plans. I i Board' of Supervisors 5 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field C. Concerns Expressed by the City of Pleasant Hill l. The Airport Access Plan should include� provisions for the installation of a permanent noise monitoringt t Diablo Valley College and within the residential areas under the departure/ pproach pattern for Runway 19R/1L. The MBA report recommends that the installation of a permanent aircraft noise monitoring system be considerpd as part of the Airport Access . Plan/Noise Compatibility Study (page 73) . 2, The Plan should consider the impact o I n vehicular traffic patterns arising from the location of an airport terminal on the west side of the airport in conjuncion with commercial air carrier service. The development of an airport terminal on the airport's west side is not a part of the proposed project. See pages 2-5, and Figure 2 of the ftA report for a description of the locati nal aspects of the proposed project. 3, The Plan consider anticipated traffic and parking impacts on the east side of the airport. Traffic and parking impacts anticipated to be generated by the proposed PSA service would be minimal and confine mainly to the airport. The nature and extent of these impacts are discussed on pages 14-17, 55-64, and 73 of the MBA report. 4. The Planshould consider theimpact attributable to commercial air carrier service, i .e. , will the commercial carrier have landing priority, will there be problems with air turbulence necessitating an interruption in general aviation operations, or how will commercial air carrier service affect tie-down space for general aviation Planes are landed on a first come, first service basis. The proposed PSA air service would result in the rel6cation of approximately 16 general aviation aircraft from the tie-down arleas east of the, air traffic control tower to elsewhere on the aiport. This area would be used for automobile parking as is shown in Figure 3 in the MBA report. D. Other Issues Raised. I' The Board directed staff to includein, the special studies "The question of pOgSlb|e differences in F.A.A. requi I rementsfor commercial and general aviation, including the difference in space requirements". F.A.A. contll l different i aircraft when they follow either a heavy or large aircraft operations. Controllers also provide precautionar ' "wake turbulence" advisories to VFR� pi (See Safety Study, Section III) 2' The Board further ordered that "The � Protection District d h Man --_-- _ __ -- --. the _=_ � abilitydeal with fired Buchanan Field." Chief Maxfield responded to theddirective in his memo of February 27, 1986. information contai din this memo, information on Buchanan Field h/ m/ ithe County's Multi-Casualtv Incident Plan reviewed and incorporated into the McClintoch, Becker & Associates report /see pages 56-68 75, and Appendix 8\ ' The Fire District, Airport Manager, and CuUDtv Medical Director feel that the County is adequately prepared to deal with fire and emergencies at Buchanan Field. | 3. Concern was expressed over the "proper" scope of work of the three studies, and that the public be given an opportunity to comment on them. m Board of Supervisors -6- March 13, 1986 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field The scope of the environmental and safety studies were based on issues raised by various organizations, individuals, and local public agencies during the period of October 28, 1985 through February 4, 1986, which were incorporated into the Board Order setting forth the scope of the studies. The Board Order included issues raised at the February 4th hearing. The interested public, local agencies and others will have adequate opportunity to review and comment on the environmental and safety studies during the review period anticipated to be set by the Board of Supervisors at their March 18, 1986 meeting. 4. Concern was expressed over the October 1985 Mestre Greve Acoustical Analysis, and an analysis of this study was prepared by Wilson, Irhig & Associates. The October 1985 Mestre Greve acoustical study adequately addresses the potential impacts from the PSA lease application. The report demonstates that the project would comply with all Federal , State and local noise regulations. As shown by the flight demonstrations, the noise levels from the BAe-146 aircraft are less than the levels from many of the aircraft that presently operate at the airport. 5. Concern was expressed that "The first four items of the risk analysis threaten to overwhelm any substance it might have had", and that the safety study might be more concerned with past history than potential impacts of PSA's proposed operation. Safety study examines many safety issues at Buchanan Field to include comparison of airport with other general aviation facilities, analysis of airline-general aviation interaction, impact of limited air carrier operations, and analysis of airline safety records (see Safety Study, Sections II and III) . 6. It was recommended that "The studies should include quantified information on compliance with and enforcement of noise abatement procedures; broken down by type or aircraft". The County's existing noise abatement program is discussed on pages 69-73 of the MBA report. The report notes that a plan similar to those at other airports could be developed to limit the number and type of aircraft using Buchanan Field. 7. It was suggested that the "Studies address the adequacy of off-site emergency preparedness and services with respect to the likely consequences of an accident involving the BAe-146." The County's emergency response capabilities were reviewed and are discussed on pages 66-69, 75, and Appendix B of the MBA report. As with any major disaster (e.g. , earthquake, building fire or explosion, BART derailment, etc. ) , a BAe-146 accident would result in multiple casualties. The County maintains effective emergency response and multiple casualty plans. The effectiveness of these plans have been tested on at least two recent occassions (i .e. , the Sun Valley Mall and Wells Fargo Bank building incidents) . 8. It was suggested that "The studies and AAP include consideration of utilizing available airport capacity at Oakland Airport and/or prompt development of a new air carrier airport in Eastern Contra Costa County". It was further suggested that these alternatives "are recommended by the Regional Airport Plan as alternatives to PSA service to Buchanan Field." Both the air carrier and general aviation components of the MTC/ABAG "Regional Airport Plan" were reviewed. Neither plan recommends development Board of Supervisors -7- March 13, 1986 PSA Lease at Buchanan Field of a new air carrier airport in Eastern Contra Costa County or the utilization of excess capacity at Oakland International Airport as an alternative to PSA service to Buchanan Field. Moreover, PSA is an existing tenant at Oakland, and its decision to offer service to Buchanan Field will not significantly affect overall conditions at Oakland one way or another. 9. It was suggested that the relative costs and risks, both long and short term, of the proposed PSA service, the East Contra Costa County air carrier airport and utilization of excess capacity at Oakland be considered. There is no basis, factual or otherwise, upon which to consider an East Contra Costa County air carrier airport. It was not and is not a consideration of the MTC and ABAG in their "Regional Ariport Plan", or current planning process. PSA's decision to offer service to Buchanan Field was a business decision and not predicated on excess capacity or constraints at Oakland. The subject is moot. 10. Air quality and regional air transportation impacts of the proposed PSA service were requested to be addressed. The air quality impacts of the proposed PSA service were analyzed and compared to the previous Westair service (see pages 28-29 of the MBA report) , and were also compared to County and San Francisco Bay Region Air Quality and Emissions Data (see pages 31-33, and 69) . The relative contribution of the five daily BAe-146 flights and their associated automobile emissions to County and regional air quality would not be significant. Moreover, in the areas of hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions the BAe-146 is much cleaner than the aircraft previously used by Westair. PSA's service could also result in a decrease in vehicle miles traveled by air passengers currently utilizing Oakland International Airport, thereby reducing overall County and regional air pollution emissions. The relationship of the proposed PSA service to regional air transportation plans is discussed on pages 64-66 and 75 of the MBA report. The proposed service would have no significant impact or regional air transportation plans. PB/AAD/JMW:plp THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 18 , 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Fire Protection Services at Buchanan Airport In a February 27 , 1986, report to the Board, Fire Chief William F. Maxfield of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District provided information on crash, fire, and rescue opera- tions at Buchanan Field Airport . A copy of that report is attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein. IT I'S BY THE BOARD ORDERED that receipt of the report is ACKNOWLEDGED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is REQUESTED to transmit a copy of the report to the Mayors of the cities of Concord and Pleasant Hill . I 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. ATTESTED: !,?, /! _P PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board Of Supervisors and County Administrator By - �— Orig. Dept.: Cc: City of Concord City, of Pleasant Hill County Administrator Airport Manager Public Works Director Chief Maxfield i GO�TRA COST9 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT �S„L19. DIST4��, FIRE CHIEF BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS William F. Maxfield Albert J.Gray Edward B. Haynes 2010 Geary Road Donald J. Macintosh Pleasant Hill,California 94523-4694 February 27, 1986 B. Palmer Riedel TELEPHONE(415) 930-5500 Harold E. Wildes The Honorable Tom Powers, Chair Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County FRECEIVEDAdministration Building651 Pine StreetAMartinez, CA 94553 B a0 1386 SUBJECT: Buchanan Airport Fire Protection W&BATCHELOR lER t A 11"Rh CO5t VISORS RMLO Dear Supervisor Powers: A, In response to Board Order re: the P.S.A. service at Buchanan Field, be advised Federal Air Regulations Part 139 requirements- and certification approval include provisions for airport fire- fighting and rescue equipment and service. The airport must be able to at least provide airport firefighting and rescue equipment with the vehicle response time capability and trained personnel consistent with those regulations. The Fire District has no regulatory controls or authority relative to airport firefighting and rescue equipment service other than airport structures. It is our understanding the pending P.S.A. service forecasts provide for an average of four scheduled departures per day from Buchanan Airport. In order to be certified, the airport, as an applicant, must be able to show by demonstration that they meet the standards for equipment, response time and training. Given the information provided by Hal Wight, Airport Manager, in November of 1985, the airport plans to meet these requirements by acquiring additional specialized fire apparatus and personnel plus enhanced training. As in the past, the Fire District has augmented airport firefighting personnel and equipment. We do not foresee a change in that procedure or present emergency operation plans unless operations change dramatically. Find attached to this report a copy of a District Information Sheet (Buchanan Field Crash/Fire/Rescue Operations 11/85) , which includes references relative to our response procedures. The Fire District has upgraded emergency operations in the past few years by providing direct communications capability to the tower and airport crash and rescue vehicles. Additionally, a 1200 gallon foam tanker is also dispatched with the first alarm assignment of two fire engines, a ladder truck with rescue equipment, air cascade with foam, and a chief officer. Serving the communities of Clayton, Concord, Lafayette, Martinez Pleasant Hill Walnut Creek,and some unincorporated County areas The Honorable Tom Powers, Chair Board of Supervisors RE: Buchanan Airport Fire Protection February 27, 1986 Page 2 Implementation of the District 5-Year Plan will place emergency units and personnel closer to the airport, which will improve present coverage and response times. Airport management has also agreed to provide additional training material for the District' s use relative to the BAE 146 Aircraft and to upgrade the 1982 Buchanan Airport Operations Manual and Emergency Operating Plan. Sincerely, William F. Maxfield Fire Chief WFM:ps , Enclosure cc: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Hal Wight, Airport Manager Buchanan Field Airport DISTRIBUTION Board Members County Administrator Health Services Community Development Publio Works County Counsel CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT INFORMATION SHEET November 1985 TOPIC: Buchanan Field Crash/Fire/Rescue Operations INTRODUCTION• The primary objective of aircraft fire fighting and rescue is the extinguishing or control of fire to allow safe removal of the aircraft occupants . This may require the continual cooling of the f-uselage and the establ i shment of a rescue path whi le the f i re i s sti 1 1 out of control . Water which can be used for cooling-'and personnel protection is limited in its ability to extinguish large flammable liquid fires of the type usually encountered in aircraft accidents . It is therefore necessary to utilize specialized equipment and procedures adaptable for individual airport situations utilizing available manpower and equipment. INFORMATION 1 . Fire & Rescue Problem Buchanan Field ranks approximately 45th in the nation in activity out of over 12 , 000 airports . The field will average 22 , 000 aircraft movements each month. This amount of activity accounts for approximately eight aircraft crash alerts per month . The use of small jet aircraft carrying up to 15 people and 1800 gallons of fuel have increased the possible problems of fire and rescue. Occasional charter flights will carry 40-60 people when landing at Buchanan. Beginning January 1986, Pacific Southwest Airlines will begin scheduled service with an 85 passenger 4 engine jet with a fuel capacity of 2 , 500 gallons . Scheduled flights will occur between the hours of 0700 and 2200 hours daily. 2 . Responsibility The responsibility for aircraft fire fighting and rescue lies with the Airport . The Di'strict offers fire fighting assistance on a mutual aid basis . 3 . District Response The District will be required to respond to all incidents except those considered minor . The request of the Fire District and the determination of the seriousness of the emergency is done by the Airport. 4 . Notification Method Request for Fire District assistance will come from an Airport Mobile Unit or Control Tower to the Communications Center by Channel 7 Radio . The Control Tower will be advised whether units are to respond to the scene or to stand-by position . 1 5 ., Emergency Key Cabinet Key to open Gate #17 via John Glen Drive and keys for operating Airport Mobile units are located in the Emergency Key cabinet mounted on fence next to Gate #17. 6. Airport Apparatus Three fire fighting units of the light rescue type are available at t'he Airport . These units are designated "Crash/Fire/Rescue" vehicles and are available for Fire District use on the Airport. MAJOR EQUIPMENT Airport Mobile 291 50 gallons light water 450 lbs . dry chemical ( Purple K) (multi-purpose) 1 - 30 lb. dry chemical extinguisher 1 - 20 lb . dry chemical extinguisher 1 - 20 lb . CO-2 extinguisher 1 - 17 lb. Halon 1211 extinguisher 1 - Proximity Suit Airport Mobile 293 . 300 lbs . dry chemical (plus 50B) 1 - 30 lb. dry chemical extinguisher 1 - 20 lb . dry chemical extinguisher (multi -purpose) 1 - Proximity Suit Airport Mobile 294 400 gallons water 40 gallons AFFF concentrate 250 GPM turret All units have ' a usable extinguishment time of approximately 90 seconds . A new unit' has been ordered with anticipated delivery of September 30, 1986 . The unit is expected to have 500 gallons light water and 500 lbs. of dry chemical . 7 . Extinguishing Agents The primary extinguishing agent that will be used for aircraft fire will be a twin agent combination of potassium-bicarbonate dry chemical ( Purple K) and an Aqueous Film-forming Foam ( Light Water) . Light water is a foam and should not be confused with wet water. The dry chemical is used for quick knockdown and the application of the light water is to prevent re-ignition . The foam produced by light water (AFFF concentrate) is compatible .for use with dry chemical fire streams . Water applied to the foam will break up the foam film allowing oxygen to combine with the fuel vapors . Therefore, do not use water in areas where light water has been applied . 2 8.- Cofflmunication Crash/Fire/Rescue units have radio designations of Airport 291 , 293, and 294 . Each unit has 4 channel (F4, F5, F6, F7) capabilities for communication with Fire District units . Each Crash/Fire/Rescue units can communicate with the "Concord Tower" via aircraft radio channel . The "Concord Tower" has Channel F7 and can switch to Channel F5 . Tower will direct Fire District equipment to scene during their hours of operation (0600 to 2200 local time) . During other hours , contact "Airport 291 , 293, or 294 . " 9. Airport Personnel Manning of Crash/fire/Rescue will usually consist of only one man. Crash/Fire/Rescue and the Control Tower are manned from 0600 to 2200 hours each day. Between 2200 and 0600, Fire District units will not be controlled by the Tower . After Pacific Southwest Airlines begins service, the Airport will have two men on duty for all Pacific Southwest scheduled flights . 10 . Airport Response In the event of an aircraft accident, one Crash/Fire/Rescue unit will respond with one or more men depending on number of people on duty. During s-cheduled airline operations , the Airport will always respond with two or more men. Crash/Fire/Rescue equipment may also respond to aircraft accidents on public roads , airport leased areas , or beyond airport boundaries . This response is generally restricted to the immediate vicinity of the Airport. Airport Crash/Fire/Rescue units respond to structural fires occurring on the Airport pending arrival of Fire District units . 11 . Airport Lights a . Blue Lights and Yellow Striping -- Mark taxi strips , ramp and dispersal areas . Lights are spaced about 100 feet apart. b . White Lights and White Striping -- Mark runways , Lights are spaced ' 200 feet apart . c. Red Lights -- Used to mark obstructions such as buildings , etc . Do not use white lighted or striped runways to reach emergency scene unless absolutely necessary. 12 . Aircraft Engine Safety Personnel should stay at least 25 feet from the intake of an operating turbine engine to avoid suction and 150 feet from the rear to avoid 3 r bei-ng burned. On piston aircraft, the propellers should not be touched, even when at rest . 13 . Proximity Clothing When proximity suits are worn , adequate protective measures still should be taken to protect any rescued victims . Intermittent spraying of proximity suits with water could cause steam scalds under high heat exposure conditions . In situations where this occurs , eith.er accidentally or as a protective measure , water application should continue until those affected are clear of the high heat area . 14 . Rescue Operations Rescue operations should be accomplished through regular doors and hatches whenever possible but personnel must be prepared to utilize forcible entry procedures . Jet and turbo prop aircraft have heavier skin and structure than most older reciprocating engine aircraft . Due to this heavier construction , it is almost impossible to use hand tools to cut into the fuselage during a rescue operations . The only practical method of entry, other than using normal or emergency exits , is through the use of portable power tools . Emergency exits are usually marked clearly on the exterior of larger aircraft . 15 . Removal of Bodies Bodies of fatally injured victims are not to be removed from the wreckage except under the direction of a medical examiner , coroner or an authority having investigational jurisdiction . If body removal is necessary to prevent further incineration , the original location should be noted and the body so labeled. 16 . Disturbance of Wreckage The wreckage of any aircraft involved in an accident, including controls , should not be disturbed or removed until released for removal by the investigating authority having jurisdiction . Airport personnel normally will contact the proper authorities . 17 . Approaching the Emergency Fire apparatus should approach the emergency by the fastest route in order to reach the incident in the shortest possible time . When nearing the scene, be alert for aircraft occupants who may be dashing away from the aircraft or who may have been thrown clear and lying in the vicinity. 18. Fire Fighting Streams Except in unusual circumstances , water or chemical streams should not be directed toward the fuselage at right angles as this may tend to drive burning fuel toward the occupied areas of the aircraft . Normally, 4 extinguishing is directed along the fuselage (usually from nose or tail section) concentrating efforts on driving flames outward whi.le making a rescue path. These procedures, would not be required if the aircraft was unoccupied . 19 . Reference a . District SOP - Airport Response Procedures b . District SOP - Crossing Aircraft Movement Areas C . District SOP - Aircraft Fire Fighting and Rescue d . Aircraft Rescue & Fire Fighting Using Conventional Fire Apparatus , NFPA #406M e . SOP - Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting NFPA #402 f . Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Services at Airports,' NFPA #403 g . Aircraft Fire Protection and Rescue Procedures , International Fire Service Training Association SUBJECT : Buchanan Field Crash/Fire/Rescue Operations DATE : November 1985 (replaces January 1985 ) cccfd .cfr . infosheet.85 ( Dec. 17, 1985) 5 2.2a THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 18, 1986 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Consolidation of all Lighting County Service Areas The Board this day adopted a joint resolution No. 86/135 applying to the Local Agency Formation Commission to initiate proceedings for consolidation of all "L" lighting county service areas in the County. Supervisor Torlakson advised that the residents of Discovery Bay wished to be excluded from the consolidated district and he would recommend that they be excluded. As recommended by. Supervisor Torlakson, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that it agrees to exclude Discovery- Bay from the county-wide consolidated lighting service area. 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct cM of an action taken and entered on the minutes of tM Board of Supervisors on the data shown. ATTESTED: / /Z� ._-_ PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Adminlstrahw ey .D*PwY yv Orig. Dept.: Clerk CC: LAFCO County Administrator Public Works Director County Counsel 2. 1 a� THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 18, 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------- SUBJECT: PSA Lease at Buchanan Field In accordance with the Board' s instructions on January 28, 1986 , the County Administrator, Public Works Director, and Director of Community Development submitted a report dated March 13, 1986 , on two studies addressing environmental and safety issues raised over a proposal for scheduled air passenger service by Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) between Los Angeles and Buchanan Field Airport. (A copy of that report is attached hereto and by reference.. incorporated herein. ) Mr. Batchelor commented on the recommendations contained in the report and requested the Board to consider a third recommen- dation requiring acceptance of the Negative Declaration for the pro- posed PSA scheduled -service and lease and fixing April 22, 1986 for decision. Michael McClintock, representing the firm of McC1-intock, Becker and Associates of Foster City, , California, spoke on the scope of the report entitled "Documentation for Initial Study of Proposed PSA Scheduled Air- Service and Lease at Buchanan Field" prepared by his firm. He commented on various aspects of the study and concluded that the proposed PSA project and lease action by the County would not have a significant effect on the environment. Arthur Negretti , representing the Flight Safety Institute of Sacramento, California, spoke on the "Safety Study for Buchanan Field Airport" prepared by his firm. He described the procedures used in reviewing the safety records of carriers as they relate to Buchanan Field as well as the Airport' s safety record. He concluded that the proposed PSA scheduled service would not have a negative impact on airport safety in any area and that scheduled air service was noted to promote airport safety through strengthened security, improved airport equipment and staffing, more frequent inspection, and maintenance of IFR proficiency for air traffic controllers. Mr. Batchelor advised that staff will be holding workshops in the community to discuss the findings as set forth in the above referenced reports. Dennis O'Dell, Vice President and General Counsel, PSA, expressed the willingness of PSA staff to work closely with County staff and requested the Board to adopt the recommendations of the County Administrator. The following persons spoke in support of the PSA proposal: Tim Ellis, Manager, Hilton Hotel, Concord; Philip L. Corvinus, 5223 Myrtle Drive Concord; Jack Welch, Executive Vice President, Chamber of Commerce, Walnut Creek; Mel C. Eckerstrom, Chamber of Commerce, Pleasant Hill; Rick Vossekuil, Pioneer Title, Clayton; Ron Sorenson, representing Airport Businesses, Concord.