HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03021993 - IO.1 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE \ ' Costa
'<
4°
County
DATE: February 22, 1993
SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVES FOR SITING HELICOPTER TRAINING OPERATIONS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . Noise Ordinance:
A. Direct County Counsel, with appropriate input from the
Public Works Director and Manager of Airports, to prepare
an amendment to the existing Noise Ordinance which would
enact a performance-based noise standard, including a
standard for single event noise incidents, as well as the
CNEL contour specified in the Airport Master Plan.
B. Direct the Public Works Director to forward the draft
noise Ordinance to the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC)
for their comments, requesting any comments to be
forwarded to the County Administrator' s Office by Friday,
April 30, 1993 .
C. Request the County Administrator to schedule
consideration of the revised noise Ordinance and comments
from the AAC for the Internal Operations Committee on
Monday, May 10, 1993 at 10 : 00 A.M. Request the County
Administrator to notify all individuals who have attended
meetings of the Internal Operations Committee on this
subject of the May 10, 1993 meeting of our Committee.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ZYES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE HER
SIGNATURE(S): SUNNE WRIGHT�McPEAK J F SMITH
2, 1993
ACTION OF BOARD ON a C APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X
Approved recommendations relative to alternatives for siting helicopter training operations
as amended to include soilcit.ing the support. of Congressman Norman Y. Mineta; rev.ie< ing
potential legal problems associated with controlling helicopter flight patterns for
Helicopter Adventures, Inc. ; requesting the County Administrator to prepare a workplan
and budgeton aviation needs for Contra Costa County for submittal to the Finance Committee;
and requesting the County Administrator's office to notify members of the Byron Municipal
Advisory Council of meetings which may affect. the Byron Airport..
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED March 2, 1993
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: County Administrator
Public Works Director SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Manager of Airports
County Counsel
BY ,DEPUTY
2 . Flight Pattern Changes :
Direct the Public Works Director to meet with the owner of
Helicopter Adventures, Inc. , Mr. Patrick Corr, in an effort to
identify alternative flight patterns which involve takeoffs
from the north-east of Buchanan Field Airport, flying north to
the Carquinez Straits east of Tosco Refinery, flying west for
some distance and turning south while still east of I-680 for
a return to Buchanan Field Airport without the need to fly
over residential areas or industrial plants . A report on the
feasibility of such a change in flight patterns is to be made
to the Board of Supervisors by the Public Works Director on
March 9, 1993 . The Public Works Director should also consider
such other alternative flight patterns as, in his judgment,
seem appropriate and feasible and report on them as well on
March 9, 1993 .
3 . Contacts with Congressional Delegation:
Direct the Public Works Director to prepare letters to the
County' s Congressional delegation (Senator Dianne Feinstein,
Senator Barbara Boxer, Congressman George Miller III, and
Congressman William P. Baker) as well as Congressman Norman Y.
Mineta because of his leadership on the House Committee on
Public Works and Transportation, for the Chairman' s signature,
explaining the problems the County is having with the Federal
Aviation Agency' s (FAA) alleged preemption of any realistic
ability of the County to regulate the manner in which
helicopters operate in the skies of Contra Costa County and
asking the members of the County's Congressional delegation to
meet with appropriate FAA officials in an effort to assist in
resolving these issues .
4 . Review of PMAC Recommendation:
Direct the Public Works Director to write to each of those
individuals and organizations who have complained to the
County since March 1, 1992 regarding the operation of
helicopters at Buchanan Field Airport, forwarding the written
position of the Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council, and
requesting comments on that position. A report on these
comments should be submitted to the Internal Operations
Committee on May 10, 1993.
5 . Negotiations for a FBO Contract for Helicopter Adventures,
Inc.
Direct the Public Works Director to undertake negotiations
with Mr. Corr regarding the possibility of having the County
contract for Fixed Based Operator status with Helicopter
Adventures, Inc. (HAI) , in an effort to provide the County
with additional control over the operations of HAI and report
his conclusions and recommendations to the Internal Operations
Committee on Monday, May 10, 1993 at 10 : 00 A.M.
6 . Ordinance on Flight Patterns :
A. Direct County Counsel, with appropriate input from the
Public Works Director and Manager of Airports, to prepare
an Ordinance which would:
1) Allow the County to specify flight patterns for
HAI .
2) Prohibit helicopter flights over residential areas
or schools .
3) Specify minimum altitudes to be flown by HAI .
In conjunction with the drafting of the Ordinance, advise
the Board of Supervisors of any potential legal problems
the County may face in attempting to enforce the
ordinance.
-2-
B. Direct the Public Works Director to forward the draft
Ordinance on flight patterns to the Aviation Advisory
Committee (AAC) for their comments, requesting any
comments to be forwarded to the County Administrator' s
Office by Friday, April 30, 1993 .
C. Request the County Administrator to schedule
consideration of the Ordinance on flight patterns and
comments from the AAC on that Ordinance for the Internal
Operations Committee on Monday, May 10, 1993 at 10: 00
A.M. Request the County Administrator to notify all
individuals who have attended either meeting of the
Internal Operations Committee on this subject of the May
10, 1993 meeting of our Committee.
7 . Form for Multiple Complaints :
Direct the Public Works Director to prepare a form which can
be used by staff at Buchanan Field Airport to record multiple
complaints from the .same individual within the same day or
week, implement the use of this form as soon as possible and
forward a copy of the form to the members of the Board of
Supervisors prior to its implementation.
8 . Comprehensive Aviation Plan:
Request the County Administrator to prepare a workplan and
budget for the preparation of an overall , comprehensive plan
which identifies the aviation needs of Contra Costa County and
outlines a strategy for meeting those needs . Direct the
County Administrator to forward the workplan and budget to the
Finance Committee for its consideration, along with any
potential funding sources for the required budget.
9 . Notification:
In addition to notifying those who have been attending
meetings of the Internal Operations Committee on this subject,
request the County Administrator' s Office to notify the
members of the Byron Municipal Advisory Council of all meeting
at which this subject will be discussed so they can
participate in the discussions which may affect the Byron
Airport.
BACKGROUND:
On January 26 , 1993, the Board of Supervisors referred to the
Internal Operations Committee the issue of attempting to identify
alternative sites on which to locate helicopter training flights .
Our Committee was asked to report back to the Board of Supervisors
within 30 days .
Our Committee met with all interested citizens, organizations and
affected parties on February 8, 1993 and again on February 22,
1993 . The recommendations identified above have resulted from our
discussions, which have included more than three hours of testimony
and deliberation.
We are convinced that the County must enact a more stringent noise
ordinance, based on a single event, rather than an average for a
period of time, during which a significant single event can be
averaged in with prolonged periods of little or no noise. It is
necessary to have noise monitoring equipment in place and
operational for perhaps a year or more in order to develop a single
event noise standard which is legally defensible. However, while
we are in the process of having the necessary noise monitoring
equipment installed, it will not be in place for perhaps six
months . In the meantime, we still want to begin to review the type
of Ordinance which we might be able to enact once we have all of
the necessary data. We would specifically ask that the first site
for the portable noise monitoring equipment be located in the area
of 1000 Temple Drive in Pacheco since this appears to be a fairly
critical area.
-3-
We also believe that one possible solution to the noise complaints
is to alter the flight patterns used by HAI . Currently, HAI flies
a triangular pattern running north from Buchanan Field Airport to
Highway 4 , west along Highway 4 to Interstate 680, and back to
Buchanan Field Airport from Interstate 680 . We believe it may be
possible to alter the flight patterns with Mr. Corr' s cooperation
to fly a somewhat tighter pattern running north-east from Buchanan
Field Airport, north to the Carquinez Straits, west to just east of
Interstate 680 and then south again to Buchanan Field Airport,
without flying over residential areas, industrial areas and without
intruding on the fixed-wing flight approaches to Buchanan Field
Airport. We are asking that this be explored with HAI and reported
back to the Board of Supervisors on March 9, 1993 .
We have repeatedly been advised of the severe limitations on the
Board' s ability to regulate aircraft because of the federal
preemption by the FAA of any right to regulate aircraft in the air.
We are, therefore, asking that the Board involve our federal
legislators in meetings with the FAA to attempt to gain their
appreciation of the problems we face and the need for the federal
government to address the problems, particularly if they are going
to prohibit local governments from addressing the problem.
At our meeting on February 22, 1993, the Pacheco Municipal Advisory
Council (PMAC) and Pacheco Town Council agreed that the Board of
Supervisors should abandon further efforts to locate an alternative
site for helicopter training flights in central county.
Specifically, this position was voiced by PMAC as follows :
"We decided unanimously to terminate the search for any
alternate training site, do what we can to modify
training flight patterns and wait until all or some of
the training flights can be directed to the Byron
airport. "
We are asking that the Public Works Department forward this
statement to all individuals and organizations who have complained
to the airport about helicopter flights over the past year and ask
for comments on this position statement.
It has also been suggested that the County could gain additional
control over the flight patterns and operations of HAI if the
County were to offer HAI a fixed based operator (FBO) contract.
While an FBO contract would also probably provide the County with
increased revenue, our Committee is not as concerned with the
possible additional revenue stream as we are with the ability to
provide additional controls on HAI 's operations at Buchanan Field
Airport. We are, therefore, recommending that this possibility be
explored and reported back to our Committee.
In the meantime, we are asking that County Counsel be asked to
draft an Ordinance that would specify flight patterns for HAI ,
prohibit flights over residential areas and schools, and specify
minimum altitudes for flight. We have been advised that such an
Ordinance is not enforceable by the County because of federal
preemption. We are, despite this advice, asking that such an
Ordinance be prepared for consideration by our Committee and
eventually by the Board of Supervisors because of our compelling
need to do something about a problem which plagues our communities
and about which we are repeatedly told we can do nothing!
Finally, we are asking that a special form be prepared by the
Public Works Department for those individuals who call the Airport
numerous times a day or week so that we can record each of their
calls and identify their number and source.
Our Committee intends to report back to the Board of Supervisors on
May 18, 1993, following consideration of the items which we have
asked to be reported back to us on May 10, 1993 .
Attached for the Board' s information are several reports and pieces
of correspondence we have received on this subject.
-4-
Talking Paper on
Issues Associated with Helicopter Operations
at Buchanan Field Airport
Helicopter Activity History:
We have had helicopter training activities by based tenants at Buchanan Field Airport since
1981. Navajo Aviation (an FBO) started the formal, active helicopter training at that time.
Prior to 1981, there had been limited helicopter training but it was not advertised as such.
Navajo Aviation sold the helicopter training part of the business to Patrick Corr, operating
as Helicopter Adventures, Inc. (HAI) in February 1987. Mr. Corr operated as a subtenant
of Diablo Aviation until October 1988. At that time, he operated from General Air's facility
(which are now owned by Diablo Aviation) on Sally Ride Drive. HAI is not an airport
FBO. It operates pursuant to a License Agreement with the County.
Concerns about noise issues related to helicopter activities have been a high priority with
the airport for many years. The airport staff has worked out operating agreements with not
only the based helicopter operators,but also with most of the other helicopter operators that
work in the Bay Area. We have a Letter of Agreement between the operators, the airport,
and the Control Tower. The flight track utilized by the training helicopters is one that
proved quite satisfactory for a number of years when helicopter flight training was relatively
small.
By 1990, HAI reportedly flew more than four times the number of hours they flew during
the same period in 1989. Several months later HAI voluntarily abandoned the use of airport
training pattern during weekend and holidays. In addition, they began conducting unofficial
testing at several unapproved off-airport remote sites. The result of these efforts were that
complaints on weekends and holidays ceased. This apparent success indicated clearly that
if HAI had an approved official off-airport remote site to conduct training they would
significantly reduce complaints regarding their activities.
Legal Limitations for Restrictions of Helicopters:
Exhibit "A-1"
On November 2, 1992, the Board of Supervisors inquired about banning overflights of
helicopters (and perhaps other aircraft) above all schools or take off using established FAA
rules/patterns. Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) response was: "The Federal
Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, assigns the FAA exclusive and absolute authority concerning
use and management of the navigable airspace of the United States and air traffic control. State
and local authorities may not preempt that authority."
1
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 non-discriminatory manner. On the other hand, the County's
jurisdiction is foreclosed and certain types of decisions, primarily those relating to the
operation of aircraft in the air. These rules lie with the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA). FAA regulations are not a patchwork of rules promulgated regionally or locally,but
rather a network that is standardized throughout the world.
Exhibit "A-2"
On October 6, 1992, the Board asked County Counsel to provide a report at the November
3, 1992 meeting concerning the proposal to impose a moratorium on helicopter flight
training operations at Buchanan Field Airport and the possible legal impacts such action
might have on lease agreements at the airport. County Counsel reported that a moratorium
on helicopter flight training operations would appear to constitute a breach of the fixed
based operator (FBO) lease agreements at the airport and could subject the County to
monetary damages. In addition, such actions may be in violation of federal aviation law and
regulations.
Heliport Permit Application Process:
In order to construct or operate a heliport an application must be submitted to Caltrans
after the Board of Supervisors approves the facility. In addition to the Board of Supervisors'
approval, Caltrans requires that a "plan for construction" be approved by the Board of
Supervisors for the area that the heliport is to be located. The steps to a new heliport
would be for the "applicant", (County, helicopter operators, HAI or some combination of
these parties). The applicant would then contact the Division of Aeronautics for the
permitting package. We have a permitting package on file.
The steps are:
1) Contact the Division of Aeronautics for the permitting package. (Done)
2) Contact Caltrans' aviation consultant for preliminary site consultation.
3) Submit the plans to the Caltrans' aviation consultant.
4) Apply to the FAA for airspace determination.
5) Contact Community Development for a CEQA zoning or use permit.
6) Board of Supervisors' approval.
7) Contact the Airport Land Use Commission for action.
2
8) Return the completed permit application packet to the Division of Aeronautics.
After the above steps are taken, the Division of Aeronautics would contact us to inform us
that the package has been received and would issue a site approval permit. After the site
approval permit has been issued, we could then construct the facility and contact Caltrans'
aviation consultant for their final inspection. After Caltrans has given this final inspection,
the Division of Aeronautics will then inspect the facility and issue the permit. Then we
would encourage all helicopter users to use the new facility for helicopter flight training
operations. It is important to recognize that there would still be a limited amount of'other"
helicopters still using the existing recognized entry/departure to/from airport.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The following paragraph contains the information for complying with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in order to obtain .a heliport permit. Before the
California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics can issue a State heliport
permit,we must comply with CEQA requirements. The required process for complying with
CEQA, is either a Negative Declaration (ND) or Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Then, a State-wide review period is held for a minimum of 30 days for an ND and 45 days
for a draft EIR. We have already begun an Initial Study, which meets most of the
requirements for either. During this period, the Division of Aeronautics must be given the
opportunity to review and comment on the ND or EIR. After the review period, if the
County determines that the project should be carried out, we must submit copies of the
Notice of Determination to the County Clerk and then it is sent to the Division of
Aeronautics.
Helipad Surface:
If the Acme Landfill site is selected as the site for the helicopter landing pad, we have a
resource in mind to obtain the helipad surface. Staff has contacted a company called Soil
Stabilization Products out of Merced, California. We informed them of our desire to place
a helipad at a closed landfill, and asked them what type of surface would create a firm
surface with positive traction. They recommended a product called Geoblock. Geoblock
is a PVC type of material. This material would be put into place and covered with top soil
and a hardy drought resistant, low maintenance, low growth grass be planted. Each pad
would be approximately 40' x 40'. According to Soil Stabilization Products, the Geoblock
controls dust and allows for a permanent solution to dust concerns regarding the helicopters.
Potential Ott-Airport Training Sites:
Exhibit "B"
In early 1991,several potential remote off-airport training sites were evaluated at the request
of Supervisor McPeak. The sites (listed below) are addressed primarily from the perspective
3
from the helicopter operators point of view. All of the sites were initially considered
suitable from a aeronautical point of view, and followed by noise, safety, and environmental
issues. None of them are located close to residential areas. The original 13 sites were on
the Praxis Development, Martinez Auto Dismantlers, two sites at Tosco Refinery, four sites
at Port Chicago, two sites at General Chemical, one site at Roe Island, one site at Ryder
Island and Acme Landfill.
The Praxis Development east of the Benicia bridge is a large, unobstructed area graded and
zoned for commercial development and is considered a wetland. There are endangered
species and strong opposition was voiced. Regarding the Auto Dismantlers site at
Waterfront, if a section of the Dismantlers yard could be cleared, it would make a suitable
site, but has possible environmental problems. Tosco site #1, south of Waterfront Road,
east of Solono Way consists of a number of unused evaporation ponds. Tosco site #2, north
of Waterfront Road and east of the Walnut Creek channel, is less suitable than the other
Tosco site because it is smaller and there were some power lines. County staff/airport had
several meetings with Tosco. Their environmental people were leery of BCDC and
anticipate that BCDC would highly scrutinize them if they allowed helicopters on either of
these sites and would rather not subject themselves to such scrutiny. Tosco indicated that
there were other areas on the property that they may be willing to consider, but these areas
were less appealing to the County. Port Chicago #.1 site between Clyde and Port Chicago,
on the east side where the highway turns, is a large rectangular field currently used for
grazing. Port Chicago site #2, located south of Port Chicago Highway just east of the turn
for the Coast Guard Station; site #3, north of Port Chicago Highway, east of the Coast
Guard Station and Port Chicago #4, south of Port Chicago, southwest of the entries to
General Chemical Company. These appeared suitable, but were eliminated as they would
conflict with the approach to runway 19. As for the Acme Landfill, since the landfill site
cannot be put to any practical use for a number of years it would seem the ideal choice.
Concerns of Interested Parties:
Letters expressing support, as well as those expressing opposition were received (copies are
available) relating to the issue of helicopters. These included a letter dated November 13,
1992, from Bonnie Allen, Risk Manager, for Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. The
letter was regarding increased air traffic, particularly helicopter overflights over the Central
Contra Costa Sanitary District headquarter's office and treatment plant facilities. Airport
staff prepared a response which informed the Sanitary District that because they are located
less than a 1/z nautical mile from the Airport that area is subject to frequent aircraft
overflights. Patrick Corr of Helicopter Adventures met with Mr. Dolan from the Sanitary
District to discuss their concerns further and agreed to make some changes that would
reduce the number of helicopter overflights over their facility. We feel that this has been
resolved.
On Monday, March 18, 1992, the greater Concord Chamber of Commerce Executive Board
voted to reconfirm the Chamber's support of the airport management and the Board of
4
Supervisorsefforts to seek an off-airport site for helicopter practice exercises. The
Executive Committee also urged the Board of Supervisors to continue its support of airport
management to seek an alternative practice site.
At the July 15, 1992, Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council Board meeting the subject of
supporting the efforts of Supervisor McPeak to relocate the helicopter training operations
from Buchanan Field Airport was discussed. Following this discussion a vote was taken and
a motion was unanimously approved that the Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council supports
Supervisor McPeak's efforts to have the training operation moved. Letters of support
regarding this subject were also sent to the Acme Landfill Corporation, the Contra Costa
County Board of Supervisors, the CAO's office and Public Works.
Long Term Lease Agreements:
Exhibit "C"
The County, as airport proprietor, has entered into leases with three fixed based operators
who operate at four different lease sites at Buchanan Field Airport. These do not include
Helicopter Adventures, Inc. (HAI). HAI operates pursuant to a license agreement with the
County, however, prior to entering into the license agreement HAI was a subtenant of one
of the FBO's. The FBO leases are 30 to 50 years in duration with the last to expire in the
year 2032. All four leases contain a use clause which permits flight training and schooling.
A County imposed moratorium of any kind of flight training at Buchanan Field Airport,
including helicopter training operations, would appear to violate the FBO lease agreements.
In response to such a violation, we are cautioned by County Counsel, that the FBO's could
sue and probably recover monetary damages from the County for the County's breach of
their lease agreements.
Each of the four FBO leases contain language referencing the use of the premises for flight
training. The language is very similar for each lease and clearly allows for the use of the
premises for flight training. Each of the four leases has a termination clause. Each of the
leases has an unlawful use, a default and cancellation clause, but none of these clauses were
found to say anything about the use of the premises for training flights. Nor was any
language found in any of the leases or in the HAI license that would prevent training flights.
Grant Assurances:
Exhibit "D"
On December 10, 1991, the Board of Supervisors inquired on banning helicopter training
from Buchanan Field Airport. This action would be challenged as discriminatory. With
each FAA grant accepted by the Board of Supervisors on behalf of Buchanan Field, the
County agrees to language regarding economic nondiscrimination. The Agreement states
that the County will make the Airport available for public use on fair and reasonable terms
5
and without discrimination, to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical uses. Helicopters
are considered a class of aircraft. The only way to legally ban helicopter training, without
unjust discrimination, would be to ban all flight training at Buchanan .Field. The act of
banning all flight training at Buchanan Field would result in a violation of lease agreements
with the Airport's commercial tenants (FBOs) and would severely weaken the economic
health of the Airport. For these reasons, staff believes that a prohibition on helicopter
training at Buchanan Field is not feasible. The Board does have some operational control
in terms of establishing curfews on hours that training may be conducted, and on the
location and number of helicopter landing pads.
Public Perception:
The County has been reviewing the potential for off-airport helicopter sites since early 1989
at the urging of Supervisor McPeak. It is with great disappointment that despite all the
efforts over the last several years we still do not have an off-airport site. Unfortunately, the
general public perceives the lack of progress to be the result of an unwillingness on the part
of HAI to cooperate with the County. This is not the case. It is understandable, however,
that to the uninformed onlooker it seems incredible that with thousands of uninhabited acres
to the north of the Airport we have been unable to find a small area for a heliport. We
believe that the establishment of an off-airport site would not only be beneficial to the
County but could serve as a model for other airports and communities. Helicopter
Adventures, Inc. has made it clear to airport staff that they are willing to abandon the
airport training pattern and move to another off-airport site immediately, once an adequate
training site is approved. HAI needs the assistance of County staff and the Board of
Supervisors to overcome various obstacles which are making this impossible.
Noise Monitoring Testing:
Exhibit "E"
On March 16, 1991, we organized a noise monitoring test for the Acme* Landfill site.
Commissioner, Donald Anthony of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and Joseph
Campbell, Chairman of the Airport Land Use Commission, conducted noise monitoring in
the area of Vine Hill, between 10 and 11 a.m. They stood at 737 Central Avenue (the home
of Dorothy Sakazaki). The testing site was within 1/z mile of the proposed helicopter training
route between Buchanan Field Airport and Acme Landfill. Their measurements indicated
the ambient noise level to be 63 dBA. They measured noise impacts of helicopters, fixed
wing aircraft, and other noise generating activity in the vicinity. Helicopter noise was not
measurable. The loudest noise impacts were associated with motorcycle and other
neighborhood activities.
Virginia Schaefer, Chairman of the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC) participated in the
same test in the Blum Road area near Pacheco. She was equipped with sophisticated hand-
held noise monitor and a two-way radio plus her amateur radio installed in her car. She
6
spent the first forty minutes at the end of Allen Way. This street was selected because it
is an area where noise complaints were fairly common from the existing patterns. This
neighborhood is also the closest to the flight path for departing or incoming helicopters to
Buchanan Field Airport on their way to and from the potential training site at Acme. She
also monitored at a site at the end of Blum Road which afforded a better range of visibility.
At both of the sites the test helicopter was very unobtrusive, barely audible, and registered
no sounds either audibly or on the monitoring equipment. Barking dogs and motorcycles
registered over 100 dBA. The helicopter made no impact on the neighborhood. In fact, she
did not even know that the helicopter had returned to the airport until Supervisor McPeak
had stopped by to see for herself the monitoring, and informed Virginia that the test was
over. Therefore, according to Virginia she felt assured that this flight path was perfectly
compatible with the Blum Road residential area.
During the testing period mentioned above, no complaints were received at the Manager of
Airports' office concerning the helicopter overflights associated with the test helicopters.
Acme Landfill Initial Study:
P & D Aviation, along with Community Development Department began an Initial Study
at the direction of the Board of Supervisors to address safety and environmental aspects of
the proposed aircraft operations at the Acme Landfill. The study addressed various aspects
of the proposal that relate to the movement of helicopters from Buchanan Field Airport to
the Acme site, as well as with operations at the site. A map of the proposed departure and
arrival route from the airport is attached. The route should be interpreted as a corridor in
which the operations would occur rather than as a specific line or flight. The routes were
designed to avoid the overflight of noise sensitive areas, as well as hazardous materials areas.
While there could be up to 5 or 6 touch-down pads on the site, there would only be one
arrival and departure stream to and from the landfill. Helicopters are not planned to
approach or depart simultaneously, although such operations could be coordinated with air
traffic control and radios. Regarding obstructions, the proposed location is situated on top
of the Acme Landfill and as such the elevation of the practice pads will be higher than most
power lines in the vicinity. There are a number of gas recovery system devices protruding
above the landfill cap, that are approximately eight to ten feet. It is believed that sufficient
room is available to site the touch-down pads so that the devices would not pose hazards to
helicopter operations. The route to the landfill has been designed to avoid overflight of
hazardous areas. It is important to note here the unique performance characteristics of
helicopters, such as vertical take-off and landings and the ability to hover. Additionally,
helicopters can autorotate and conduct a safe landing in the event of engine failure. In
these instances the main rotor continues to rotate and the helicopter can be controlled to
permit a safe let-down without power. Thus, even if the refinery facilities are of concern,
and were overflown, and engine failure occurred, aircraft would be at sufficient altitude to
autorotate, conduct an emergency landing and avoid the tanks. It has been concluded that
the proposed operations and proximity of pipelines and storage tanks would not create risk
7
any greater than current operations at the airport. No refinery overflights, however, are
likely to occur any more than they occur now.
Complaint Activity:
Average No: Statistical
Calendar Year Total Complaints Individual Callers of Calls Aberrations
1992 478 46 3 277 & 57•
1991 293 73 1 - 2 144 & 34
1990 249 63 3 - 4 13
1989 149 58 1 - 2 32 & 24
One individual caller, i.e., 277 calls from one person; 57 calls from one person, etc.
The above relates to complaints on helicopter activity. Approximately 90% of these
complaints relate to training operations. The remaining 10% are a combination of public
safety activity (CHP, EBRD, etc.); Media (traffic watch, news, etc.) and itinerant traffic
(departures and/or arrivals).
To put these complaints in perspective, less attention should be given to the total number
of complaints, because while the total number of complaints appear to have increased over
the years, the number of individual people filing complaints average 1 - 3 complaints per
year. Those identified as statistical aberrations skew the totals thereby taking the totals out
of perspective.
Staff would recommend that more emphasis should be placed on the number of individual
callers instead. During this four year reporting period, there were four callers referred to
as statistical aberrations.
TW:rs
ctdi.tl
February 3,1993
8
t
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
Date: November 2, 1992
To: Board of Supervisors
From: Victor J. Westman, County Coun
a366L__J
By: Sharon L. Anderson, Deputy County Counsel
Se: RESTRICTION OF HELICOPTER TRAINING AT BUCHANAN FIELD
SUMMARY
On October 6, 1992, the Board asked County Counsel to provide
a report at the November 3, 1992 meeting concerning the proposal to
impose a moratorium on helicopter flight training operations at
Buchanan Field Airport and the possible legal impacts such action
might have on the lease agreements at the airport.
A moratorium on helicopter flight training operations would
appear to constitute a breach of the Fixed Base Operator (FBO) lease
agreements at the airport and could subject the County to monetary
damages. In addition, such action may be in violation of federal
(FAA) law and regulations. We understand that the Airport Manager
has asked for a report from the Tower Chief at Buchanan Field on
various issues of potential concern to the Federal Aviation
Administration, but has not yet received a response.
DISCUSSION
The Airport Manager's Office indicates that the County, as
airport proprietor, has entered into leases with three Fixed Base
Operators who operate at four different lease sites at Buchanan Field
Airport.' The leases are thirty to fifty years in duration, with the
last to expire in the year 2032 . All four leases contain a use
clause which permits flight training and schooling.
A County-imposed moratorium on any kind of flight training at
Buchanan Field Airport, including helicopter training operations,
1Helicopter Adventures Inc. is not an airport FBO. It
operates pursuant to a license agreement with the County.
However, we have been advised that, prior to entering into this
agreement, Helicopter Adventures was a subtenant of one of the
airport FBOs .
Exhibit "A-1"
Board of Supervisors 2 November 2, 1992
would appear to violate the FBO lease agreements . In response to
such a violation, the FBOs could sue and probably recover monetary
damages from the County for the County's breach of their lease
agreements.
A moratorium on helicopter training flights would probably
also violate of federal laws and regulations . The federal government
has preempted the field of "airspace management. " City of Burbank v.
Lockheed Air Terminal Inc. (1973) 411 U.S. 624, 627, 93 S.Ct. 1854,
36 L.Ed. 2d 547. The responsibility and liability for telling pilots
how to fly their aircraft rests with the FAA. Airport proprietors
and local public entities are prohibited from regulating aircraft in
flight. Greater Winchester Homeowners Assn. v. City of Los Angeles
(1979) 26 Cal. 3d 86 , 94 . An attempt by the County to ban flight
training operations (i.e. , to regulate how or why pilots may fly
their aircraft) would appear to violate the federal preemption of
this area.
Airport proprietors retain responsibility for the proper
construction, operation and maintenance of ground facilities . See
Griggs v. Allegheny County (1962) 369 U.S. 84; Baker v. Burbank-
Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority (1985) 39 Cal. 3d 862, 876;
Government Code section 50474 (f) . As such, they do have some ability
to impose airport use restrictions, but only to the extent that they
are reasonable, nondiscriminatory and ;do not interfere with
interstate commerce. Andrews v. County of Orange (1982 ) 130
Cal.App. 3d 944 , 963 . As the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC)
report of October 22, 1992 indicates, a moratorium on helicopters or
helicopter training activities would almost certainly be deemed
discriminatory by the FAA.2
As the AAC also notes , any action of the County found by the
FAA to be discriminatory would violate the County's grant agreements
with the FAA. Such a violation could result in the termination
and/or rescission of federal aid at both the Buchanan Field and Byron
airports . We are advised that airport projects, including the
development of the Byron airport, are funded primarily with FAA
monies.
As we indicated above, the Airport Manager is awaiting a
response from the FAA on a number of the issues presented by the
2The AAC attached to its report correspondence indicating
that, effective September 2, 1992, the Nut Tree Airport imposed a
policy prohibiting helicopter touch-and-go operations . The
policy was immediately withdrawn, on October 8, 1992, after the
airport was informed by the FAA that the policy was not
permitted, presumably because it constituted unjust
discrimination.
Board of Supervisors 3 November 2, 1992
proposed moratorium on helicopter training activities at Buchanan
Field. We intend to review the FAA' s report and will be available to
provide the Board with whatever further evaluation or clarification
of these issues you require.
SLA:la
cc. J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director
Attn: Harold E. Wight, Manager of Airports
sl&4\a i\opirLiczs\haIicop.imam
650.02
ft
US.
US.Department „-Pacific Region P.O.Box 92007
of Transportation Los
Worfdwoy Postal Center
Los Angeles,CA 90009
Federal Aviation
Administration �,u � t--L J��,,�
E
i two )
� � t
Mr. Harold E. Wight
?`�'• �^}-:rl:l�iisti� �'� ::,�'� tit
Manager of Airports
Contra Costa County Airports
510 Sally Ride Drive
Concord, California 94520-5550
Dear Mr. Wight:
This letter is in response to your October 16, 1992,
correspondence to Mr. Fred Davis, Air Traffic Manager, Concord
Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) regarding three questions
pertaining to operational recommendations.
I will list each of your questions followed by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) response.
Question 3 .
Restricting all helicopter traffic (not just training
flights ) to non-residential areas and specified routes in
and out of Buchanan Field Airport.
FAA Response.
Aircraft routes are developed by the FAA to ensure the safe
and efficient movement of air traffic. Routes for
helicopters are often developed as a result of the
cooperative efforts of the airport proprietor, user groups,
and the FAA. While we do not prohibit overflight of
residential areas, cooperative efforts in the design of
routes will often minimize such overflight.
Question 5 .
Establishing guidelines on the maximum amount and mix of
training/non-training flights (for both rotary and fixed-
wing craft) that are allowed at Buchanan Field Airport.
FAA response.
Establishment of restrictions against legitimate users of
the National Airspace System are not permitted if such
restrictions unjustly discriminate against any user., impede
Exhibit "A-2”
2
the federal interest in safety and management of the air
navigation system, or unreasonably interfere with interstate or
foreign commerce. Restrictions may not be contrary to Grant
Assurances required by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of
1982 , as amended.
Question 7 .
Banning overflights of helicopters (and perhaps other
aircraft) above all schools or take off using established
FAA rules/patterns.
FAA response.
The Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, assigns the
FAA exclusive and absolute authority concerning use and
management of the navigable airspace of the United States
and air traffic control. State and local authorities may
not preempt that authority.
If you have further questions or comments, please contact Mr. Joe
Davies, System Management Specialist, AWP-532.6, at (310 ) 297-
0697 .
Sincerely,
Obert G. Brekke
Acting Manager, System Management Branch
Air Traffic Division
•O OD V O• l/i F W N 1 O
W N O m -h
Ft
S
m
M
O
O
A A O O •V 'O •D L --1 -•i
`< O (D (D O O O O O O 'lot
-/ D j•
(D (D 7 7 -7 -1 -7 '7 N N -7 CD 3 (p
'7 m m rt rt rt rt a a rt X m
-1 -� o o
N m m C') r) 0 0 r 7• 0
r- r- r- S S S S .-• m (D
m N O (p
7� as(pp ryr(p nOi Dai D1i Dai D <
a 3 3 O O CO O rcf O m
_ O O
S� O
� m
rt
A
N o�
3
m
7
m
m
z z m (D z r Cl) t z N t £ m r 0
O O m 0 O m 0 O O 0 O O S m m
z m O O m m O 70
rt It N C 7 C I rt rt C rt n
rt rt rt rt m rt rt 0) aL 7 m a m
a) m - s -1s
-( c
O m ^ S M (D rt -h -h O rt
O 0 -h m O 0 m a 0 7 O 0 -7 -7 -h O
-h �• N -h -h CD -h -h O O Z C)
rt It m 0 (n x C) -) 7 7 W .m•-
m v s s -o v 0 0 m s
0 0 m o ((pp 0 0 m e (o m m m g
m -7 � 3 '1 a N rt S d 7c rt rt A 7D
rt 0 rt rt rt S L m m m O O a•
m rt a m n -1
N 0 7 s m n 0 0 o `< m T -h
S m m r- S S C M m -3 rt
m I m L 7 0 O
7 (1 0 (7 0 0 -1 T S 7 7 7 � O
d w _ p3 Ep ( d O -) O ^rt rt -h
O CI (D 'p O O 0 K m -3 70 70 <
s m It rt O 0
(p 7 2 x m Cl) It Q/ m•
r1 S S Cf O_ E
`< K m S
m 3 7 m A m m
13 3 G N O S O rNt 7
a
It It x E m
L O •mC 7 °. -h O
It m -h -h
S N rt rt rt V)
a. mm It 0 C C T S O (rtp
( It
: C -h (m/rtl m N m O 3
m m m D) ,' m X m m
m
s y � a ° m 0 z
°
rt O rt
0) a
m m -h fp r
rr rt a 0
O' a T
T
N
w
m A
N r r r O V) N -i -( -� Q y •-• L S-i z rt .
m m m >• s K d -•• -h 0 m S 0 0
CLa
N
rt 7. (D O. rt rt rt m N (D o (=D raT �a tD' j z
rt
rtm rt m m •
N N O dm
N m m m 7 mm 7 (D rt
' • m- ry
D O rt rt M co(O N 0) O
m m m c
N
y y (T m w
L N 3k 4k a rt rNt ^C r- rt O S S a f�r1
O• (D CD V) N S -1 0) -1 N
• N_ () m m rt N
m S m # O 7 m
-41 (N CO rt• d S S It
:3
'O L m V m 7 -h-i 0 3 'D m (Dm 7' 7 D) 7 m CD �pC m -)
N S 4k W -1. 7 =m O rt O m my'
It 0-O O -h m O O �•�•rt N ^•N rt
m
Q N
CD
pp
m O _S C N
Q' rt a fNp m d rt
(D m N S N a N O a O(pOf
7 rt N O m S. m C_
ID
O O rt (D m N m m S O
(O rt rt N O• K (acr N•y. d
m
(D _ S K rt p7 m 0 f0) '0 �
O 7• N N m O S m p• �O ((0p 0 .
C O ? $ N N _
p� (D CD(D C
a O S O m N 0 -h rt `< p m
M
7 y. m 0 O Ort ' m
m
O K N m m C = ap3 n
m
m (D (O• 01
-41
m (0 �v 7:
t G j
O r (D
N m (O (D
77It 0
0ry � ^.
7' 2 m• S O. i' N m (OD .••
(n m
L 3 rt X N ry N
m C m C V) m 0 C
N d m N , rt I j.
M
• ,p N 7 rt j•r7t O
<
M o -i a r; m
Q m n 0) - N
N 7'
m
C• <
7 m
N
Z2-
TO:
2-TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 28, 1989
SUBJECT: LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH HELICOPTER ADVENTURES, INC.
Specific Request(s) or Recommendation(s) & Background &
Justification
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE License Agreement with Helicopter Adventures, Inc . and
AUTHORIZE Public Works Director to sign Agreement.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Airport will receive one percent (1%) of the gross monthly income.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND:
Helicopter Adventures, Inc. (HAI) has been a subtenant at Buchanan
Field Airport since February 1987 . Approximately six months ago,
the Manager of Airports began negotiating with various subtenants
on the Airport to enter into direct agreements with the County
where those agreements would be mutually advantageous . This
included Helicopter Adventures, Inc. (HAI) among others .
Cont'd on attachment: yes Signature:
Recommendation of County Administrator
Recommendation of Board Committee
Approve Other:
Signature(s) :
Action of Board on: NOV 2 8 1989
Approved as Recommended X Other
Vote of Supervisors: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS
A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
Unanimous (Absent ) ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
Ayes: Noes: IV MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
Absent: Abstain: SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN.
Orig.Di.v.-A:Lrports Attested N O V 2 8 1989
cc: County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the
Public Works Director Board of Supervisors
Public Works Accounting and County Administrator
Aviation Advisory Com. �/�
Heli. Adventures, Inc. By �� ,�
L.I.--(
Deputy Clerk
HEW:dg
hai.bo
Exhibit "C"
• eMTg Aus gs guemeaTnbea butgaodaa 8 ,e9sUeOTq
agg puaurs ao/pus asTnaa og ggbta agq sanaasea Aqunoo ag1 .S
• sgaodag TsnuuV pus ATgguOW
s,aasuaOTZ agq To AOsan3OV 9q4 9uTura94ep oq spaooaa pus
sXooq 8 ,9esuaOTZ agg gOadSUT og ggbTa agq sanaasaa Aqunoo .a
• senTgs4u9s9ad9a
pazTaoggnp ATnp s ,Aqunoo Aq UOTgoadsuT ao; uado
aq s9MT4 aTgpuospea TTp qp TTpgs spaooaa pus sXooq ATPS
• sapaA xpg euioouT snOTnaad (£) aeagg pup guesead aqg ao;
gaodaTv agq gs auroOUT Tpnuue s,99su9DTZ MOgs ATagpanOOP
TTpgs gatgM spaooaa pup sXooq ;o gas agaTduroo pup
TTn; p uTpquTpur pup daaX 'SOMTq TTE gp 'TTpgs 99su9DTZ
• (gaodag . TpnuuV) gaodaa GMOOUT Tpnuup up 'Agunoz) Oq
gTurgns TTpgs aasueOTZ 'av9A appuaTPO gDP9 go pug agq W •D
• ( %T) quaoaad auo Aq gaodeg ATgguOX agg uo pagaodaa
9MODUT ATgquour ssoab aqg buTATdTgTnur Aq gquour Aa9A9 pup
gOsa PagpTnOTsO eq TTpgs 99J uOTss9DuOD egg go qunourp agy •g
•AupdMoO s,aasuaO.TZ
go aaOT;;o up ao aasuaOTZ Aq sgaodaTti To aebpu-ex
agq og uoTssTurgns ao; 409aa00 sp p9noadds pus peubTs
'pagpp aq TTpgs gaodag AT74.4UOX 9741 •gu9ur98abV sT744 aapun
PaPTnoad S90Tna9s s,99su8OTq 9q4 uroaT BUT-4Tnsea aoanos
auroouT gOsa ao; sTsgog TpnpTATPUT aqg pup 9urOOuT ssoab
TV404 agq gsTT TTTM gaodag ATg4uOW 9q1 •4u9MAsd gOsa
ggTM paggTurgns eq TTTM (gaodag ATgguOX) gaodaa 9MOOUT
ATuguour ssoab K •gu9M99abV stgg uroa; buTgTnsaa gaodaT�
aqq uo pegonpuoo sT sseuTsnq gguour gopa go uOTgaTdmOO
agg buTMOTTO; gguour gOve go App ggOT aqq usgq aagsT qou
sgaodaTV go aebpupW aqq oq s4u9mAud 9Xsur TTsgs aasuODTZ •v
:sMOTT09 sp epum pup pauTuraagop eq TTpgs aa; ATgquour ags
°S2ioauiv agaij NKNFlHoflg Oq
OTgpApd appur eq pTnogs sXOagO TTy •gaodaTV aqq gp guauraaabV
stgg go gno buTsTap OmOOuT go saOanos TTp moa; panTaap 9MOOUT
ssoab s ,aasuaOTZ go gueoaed (%T) queoaed auo eq TTpgs aa; aqq
;o qunourp eg1 -Aqunoo aqq oq eaT UOTssODUOD ATgguOM s Apd oq
saaabp 99su9DTZ 'quoureeabv sTgq aoj uotgpaapTsuOO 9V
•UOTgpuTuraaq TTqun
buTnuTquoo pup �6T = - no uo buTouaunuoo 'gquour
oq gquour uroa; aq TTpgs guauraaabV sTgq go uraag 9g1 :Mal • Z
•gaodaTV agq gs
buTUTsaq pus S90TAZ99 aegasgo aegdoOTT9q ;o esodand aqq ao;
gaodaTV egg oquo aagua og 9suaOTT anTsnTOxa-uou p '9esu8OTZ
oq squpab Aqeaeq Aqunoo ' „gUgMqeabv„ 4u8ura9abV asuaaTZ
sTgq ;o SUOT4TPUOO pus suraeq agq oq goe�gnS :HSNaoIZ ao S,Nvuo ' T
:sMOTTOg su 99abs 89T4apd eqq 'eaojeaegq 'Mom •gaodaTv aqq uo
buTuTpag pup saaTnaas aegapgo ae4doOTTa74 apTnoad oq gaodaTv agq oq
sseDOP uTpggo oq saaTsep 9a9u9DTZ • „gaodaTg„ paTTVO aag;puTaaag
'PTuaO;TTpo 'Agunoo pgsoo paguoo uT p94POOT gaodaTv PTeT3
ususgOns ss PagpubTsap pup uMouX Agaedoad Tpaa egg go aauMO aqg sT
Agunoo • „aasu90TZ„ paTTpO aaq;puTaaaq ' •oui IsaanguanpV aagdOOTTaH
pup „A4unO3„ paTTPD a94JPuT9aeg Aqunoo pgsoo EaquoD ueaMgaq pup Aq
'-U6T ' 9nT409;;O sT 4u9me9abV asueOTZ sTgq
OZ5ti6 NfO `PaoouoO
anlaQ GPla 4II13S OZ5
•oul `soinjuGAPV JeldoolIGH
1N3W33aJd 3SN3O1'
2 1 .f
4 . DELINQUENT FEES: In the event that Licensee shall become
delinquent in paying to County any payments due under
paragraph 3 . FEES for a period of thirty ( 30) days or more
after written notice, Licensee shall pay to County interest
on said unpaid balance at a rate of two percent ( 2% ) per
month, from the date said unpaid balance was due and payable
until paid.
5 . LICENSED RIGHTS: Subject to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, Licensee is granted the right to Sublease operating
space from Pacific States Aviation as a primary site for
providing services on the Airport. Licensee shall at all
times keep the subleased premises in a clean and orderly
condition.
6 . MAINTENANCE OF AIRCRAFT: As long as Licensee is a tenant of
an existing airport fixed base operator, Licensee may only do
that maintenance on Licensee's aircraft which will be
permitted by the fixed base operator housing the Licensee's
aircraft.
Mechanics hired by Licensee may perform only work on
Licensee' s aircraft allowed by the Fixed Base Operator housing
Licensee' s aircraft. The Airport does not permit or allow any
activities on other tenant's leased premises which are not
additionally authorized by said tenant. Licensee is not
eligible to use Buchanan Field Airport' s Owner Maintenance
Hangar.
7 . AIRPORT ACCESS: Manager of Airports shall designate the route
and method of ingress and egress to and from Airport.
8 . SIGNAGE: Manager of Airports shall designate a location and
provide Licensee with a sign criteria for the purpose - of
advertising the Licensee' s services . Licensee shall submit,
for approval by the Manager of Airports a suitable sign to be
installed in an area designated by the Manager of Airports .
Manager of Airports reserves the right to reject or have the
sign modified until it is deemed suitable for installation.
9 . PERMITS -AND APPROVALS: Licensee shall be responsible for
obtaining any permits or approvals from any agency having
jurisdiction. This Agreement does not constitute governmental
approval for this use.
10 . INSTRUMENT OF TRANSFER AND NON-DISCRIMINATION COVENANTS:
Conditions :
A. Instrument of Transfer: This Agreement shall be
subordinate and subject to the provisions and
requirements of the Instrument of Transfer by and between
the United States and County dated the 9th day of
October, 1947, and recorded in Book 1137 , at page 114 of
Official Records of Contra Costa County, California.
This Agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions and
requirements of any future agreement between the County
and the United States, relative to the development,
operations , and/or maintenance of the Airport.
B. Non-Discrimination:
( 1 ) The Licensee assures that it will undertake an
affirmative action program as required by 14 CFR
Part 152, Subpart E, to insure that no person shall
on the grounds of race, creed, color, national
origin, or sex be excluded from participating in any
employment activities covered in 14 CFR Part 152,
Subpart E. The Licensee assures that no person
shall be excluded on these grounds from
participating in or receiving the services or
benefits of any program or activity covered by this
•uopaaq quenbasgns Aup To uosvea Aq Aquno0 o4 quauraaa5V
sTuq Aq ao MPT Aq bu-rnaoop seTpaurea ao s-.tjbTa yup go
aanTpM P paureep aq ao equaedo TTeus 'Toaaatj suotsTnoad
8114 aaaoTua AT40Ta4s oq dquno0 etlq To gapd 6tl'4 uo
APTap Kup aou aasuaoTZ Kq tloeaaq Aup aeggv Fxquno0 aqq Kq
queurApd To eoupgdaoop eqq aou quatueeabu STX14 To suraa-4 'at{q
TTP aoaO;ua AT4OTa4s oq AqunoO To eanTTPT auk. a8u4T9N •0
'43paoaTp
04 papzPq P 9-.nqT-4suoo ao gaoda-rV au-4 go ssauTnjasn
8141 409j;p pTnoM '.IK4uno0 a-qq go uoTuTdo aqq uT lgoTgm
gaodaTv eqq uo eangonags aeggo ao buTPTTnq AuP pa-.oaaa
aq oq buT44T=9d ao buT409a8 Wag aasuaoTZ 4u9n9ad off.
-4tj6Ta au-4 ugTM eat;-4abo-4 'uoTgona-4sgo gsuTPbp -4aodaTV at;,
go segopoaddP TPTaaP eqq goegoad oq Aapsseoeu saapTsuoo
4T uOT-40P AAP aXP4 o-4 -.t(bTa etl- sanaasaa Aqunoo etls •g
•aouPapuTq ao
aoueaegaaquT gnOgITM PUP aasuaoTZ 9u4 90 MaTA ao aaTsap
9144 ;o ssaTpapbaa '4T3 seas qT sp gaodaTv auq anoadurT
ao dOTanep aetjqan; o-. -4t{bTa at.[4 saAaasaa Aquno0 at.[s •v
:SNOI S IAOUd `-VU9NH J ' T T
•gaodaTV
auk uo oTTgnd auk oq saTps Pup ' saTTddns ' saoTnaas
aepuea oq uoTgpaodaoo ao =TJ 'uosaad Aut oq
abeTTATad ao ggbTa P squpab aasuaoTZ t[oTuM Aq •049
'quaurubTssp 'govaquoo 'quemeeabP Aup uT sgdpabpapd
anoj anoqu auq 4a9suT TTugs 4T 4ug4 saaabP aasuaoTZ (S)
•uoTgoas
sTgq go ( £ ) pup (Z ) sgdeabPapd go suoTsTAoad
au-4 aoaogua ATTeTo-rpn� oq gtlbTa auk. anpt.[ TTPtls
9quaurua9no0 pTPs tl'4oq ao a9tl4T9 s941P4S pe-4Tun au4 ao
Xqunoo aqq go uoTgoata 9TAq -4P ao aao;eaagq AgTTTgPTT
4nOg4TM pagPaao Agaaau aqp-4sa . put? 4uaure9abV sTtlq
9-.PuTuUe4 o-4 -4ubTa at;q eAPtl TTPus Aquno0 'eouPTTduroo
-uou lions ;o quana 9qq uT 'PUP quau109a6V sTuq ;o
4Tnp;ep P pup JoaaOg4 g0vaaq TPTa94PUI P agngTqsuoo
TTPus eAOgP ( £) gdpabpapd u4TM aouPTTduroo-uON ( � )
• suoT4PTnbag uOT�pTAV
Tua9p93 aTgPoTTddP Aq pa�TgTuoad uoTgPuTurTaosTp
'oq pagTurTT qou qnq 'buTpnTouT 'aeuueur AuP uT
abP aO xas 'uTbTao TPuOT4Pu 'aOToa 'sopa To spunoab
eq- uo suosaad go dnoab ao uosaad Aup 4su-rpbP
uoT4PuTmTaosTp -4Turaed aou equuTurraos-rp eau-4Tau TTPtjs
aasuaoTZ etlq 'aao=eggan3 • saas egoand aurnTOA oq
suoT40npea aoTad go sad.Kj aPTTwTs a9g4O ao 'sa4Pg9a
' squnoosTp AaO4vUTUrTaosTp-uou pup aTgpuoseea eXpur
04 pamOTTP aq Amu aasuaoTZ 41et{4 'papTAoad 'aoTAaas
ao saTps 9:0 4TUn uoPa ao; saoTad Aao-4Pu7urTaosTp
-uou pile IeTgpuospe..a 'aTp; abaptlo o-4 pup
';09a9g4 saasn TTP 04 sTspq AaogvuTurTaosTp-uou pup
'TPnbe 'aTP; p uo aoTAaas gsTuan; oq saaabP aasuaoTZ ( £ )
•panssT ao appur uaaq aanau pPq quauraaabV
pTps TT SP 4uau199abV sTg4 94PUTura04 04 4gbTa
V44 9Apu TTpus A-4uno0 's*.ueuenoo uoT-.euTurTaosTp
-uou anogp auk. To Aup To gopeaq xo quana auq UI ( Z )
•goe;ja
aures etlq off. IS gapdgnS 'ZST gaud HaO tT Aq PaaTnbea
SP 'suoTgpzTupbaogns aTaul uroaT saouPanssu aaTnbea
TTTM A9g4 4euq pup uiPaboad UOT40P 8ATgeuz7T;3p
up aXugaapun TTTM ATapTTurTs Aag4 4ptl4 aasuaoTZ aq4
oq saoupanssp apTnoad suoT4PzTupbaogns paaanoo s4T
gpuq eaTnbea TTTM -4T seanssp aasuaoTZ ails •qapdgns
• r �,L N
D. In the event that any provisions herein contained is held
to be invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the
invalidity of any such provisions does not materially
prejudice either the County or Licensee in its respective
rights and obligations contained in the valid provisions
of this Agreement.
E. It is understood, that the rights provided for under this
Agreement at Airport are non-exclusive. The County
retains the right to enter into . other agreements which
might authorize similar use of the Airport and airport
facilities , and such authorization shall be at the sole
discretion of the County.
F. Subject to provisions as to assignment, the covenants
and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind
the heirs, successors, executors , administrators and
assigns of all parties hereto.
G. Time is of the essence for each provision in this
Agreement.
12 . INSURANCE: Licensee agrees at no cost to the County, to
obtain and maintain during the entire duration of this
Agreement a comprehensive liability insurance policy with a
minimum combined single-limit coverage of One Million and
no/100 dollars ( $1,000,000 . 00) for all claims and losses due
to bodily injury, or death to any person, or damage to
property, including loss of use thereof arising out of each
accident or occurrence, and name Contra Costa County, its
officers , agents , and employees as additional insured
thereunder. Said coverage shall provide for a thirty ( 30 )
day written notice to County of cancellation or lapse.
Evidence of such coverage shall be furnished to County prior
to the start of this agreement.
13 . DEPOSIT: Prior to the start date of this Agreement, Licensee
shall deposit the amount of One Hundred and no/100 dollars
( $100 . 00 ) with the Manager of Airports as a security deposit.
Said security deposit will be returned to Licensee within
thirty ( 30 ) days of the end of the term of . this Agreement
minus any outstanding amount due to the County.
14 . HOLD HARMLESS: Licensee shall defend, indemnify, save, and
keep harmless County its officers, agents, and employees
against all liabilities, judgments, costs, and expenses which
may in any way accrue against County as a consequence of the
granting of this license, save and except claims or litigation
arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct
of County.
15 . ASSIGNMENT-SUBLETTING: Licensee shall not assign or sublet
Licensee's right under this Agreement .
16 . ALTERATION OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The County reserves the
right to alter, amend, and/or change the terms and conditions
of this Agreement upon thirty ( 30 ) days prior written notice
to Licensee.
X68/TT )
OTT • TPu
atuabpupw aspa
IV
Ag
aabpupx qao y
AEJ3
rIVAoxaaTr xo3 aSQ Sr 002[u
saan4U9APV aagdOOTTag
aaOO XOTagPas `o TTgago aogoaa-.r
�g y g
SNSOI'I C XLMO0 VIS00 VUIN00
• ogaaaq saTgaud ggoq Aq paubTs pup buTgTam uT appm ssaTun
bu-rpu-rq ao pTTpA aq TTPt{s 4Uatu99abV s-M-4 TO suoT419TaPA ao
suOT-.Paa4TP ON •paumssP uT9a9q suoTIPbTTgo aqq pup paquPab
uTaaat{ sqt{bTa aqq 04 buT.4PTaa saTgapd at{q uaaMgaq quamaaabp
aaT-.ua at{-. suTP-4uoO -4uaMn:Z4SuT sTt{s :ZNSKHa'd V allIINS * 8T
•aasuaoTZ 04 9OT40u u944TaM
buTATb Aq uTaaat{ suOTgTpuoo 90 suoT4TpuoO pup stua94 8t{4
To -4apd s ,aasuaoTZ UO UOT4PTOTA P To 4uaA9 Gq4 uT SMT4 KUP 4P
4uatuaaaBV s Tu4 94PUTUL79 �Ptu Xquno0 :SSaV3 Wa NOIIVNIKEal ' L T
0ZGt6 V3 'P.70ouOO
aATaa aPTE ATTPS OZS
• Oui ' saanjuanpV aaldOOTTag
: ST aasuaoTZ at{q go ssaappp aqq PUP
0ZSt6 'd0 'PaOOUOO
aATaa aPTd ATTPS OTS
-4aodaTV PTaTa uPUPuong
sgaodaTV To aabpupX o/o
AgUnO0 P4soO PagUOO
: ST JTpuaq
s4T uO uOT4POTunmmOO aO TPAOaddP Iquasuoo lgsanbaa 'saoTgou
gOns AAP OATaOaa oq Agapd aadoad aqq pup Aquno0 at{q To ssaappp
aq-4 'ogaaat{ saTgapd at{q Aq bUT4TaM UT pap-FAoad 9sTMa97440
ssaTun ' Toaaagq sasodand at{q aOa •;Mvs 8q4 To bUTTTPM
814q 30 94Pp 9qq MOaT 9AT409T39aq TTPgs PUP TTPM ssPTO-4saTJ
pTpdaad Xq quas ao 4TTpuosaad paAaas aat14Ta PUP buT4TaM UT aq
TTPgs 'astm:reggo ao quamaaabv sTt{q aapun �gxed aat{-4o aq-4 o-4
aATb 01 paaTnbaa ST aO saaTsap �gavd a9t{4T9 lPg4 UOT4POTunMMOO
ao TPAoaddp lquasuoo 'gsanbea ' s9OT4Ou TTP PUP AUV :SSOIION - LT
food, beverages or cigarettes on the demised premises ; excludinc dis-
pensing of any alcoholic beverages of whatsoever kind or nature; the
operation of facilities for the preparation or processing of in--flight
meals for Lessee ' s and United States Government passengers; the train-
ing of flight and ground personnel and students; vehicular parking for
Lessee, its employees, patrons , guests, vendors and service contractors
and their agents; maintaining gasoline, oil or other fuel storage
facilities and pipe lines or- other facilities to or from said storage
facilities, and the providing of maintenance or other services to air-
craft of others . The uses and operation set forth herein shall not.. be
exclusive, but shall be considered as inclusive, and Lessee shall be.
privileged to conduct retail sales and services and any other opera-
_ _..
tion consistent with a fixed base operation including retail sales of
incidental merchandise related to flying operations, pilots, passen-
gers, etc. ..- Lessee shall further belprivileged to �conduct_insurance
sales relating to aircraft insurance of all kinds and nature . The
......_..._. .
provisions of this section shall not be construed to authorize Lessee
to conduct a separate business at the Airport, but shall relate only
to Lesseets aviation operations and activities and uses and purposes
in connection therewith or incidental or related thereto. The demised
premises shall not be used primarily for .the storage of aircraft.
Lessee shall have the right of access to and use of facilities
at Airport designed for common use, such as landing area, aprons,
taxiways, flood lights, landing lights, beacons, (navigational aids) ,
tower communication, public address system, and other common use
facilities supplied by Lessor for convenience and accommodation in.
operation, landings, and takeoff of aircraft. The rights herein ex-
tended to Lessee shall be inclusive of the rights to land, takeoff,
tow, load or unload aircraft.
FIFTH: IMPROV EMI-M REQUIRE?%!RN^1S• The Lessee .will be required to
construct and operate on said property an integrated fixed base operation
building containing a floor area of not less than 12, 000 square feet unde
one roof. Minimum cost of construction shall be one hundred thousand
� I
•ljeaoaL2 jo bULlsal pue uoLloadsuL 146LLjaad • b
PUP ` saLedau pue sluaulsnCpe 1jea0aLe JOUL14 •£
!XLuo sJaLeap pazLao4lne Xq 1jea:)aLe jo 6uLLanj •Z
: •o.1a `buLLoo40s pue 6uLuceal 146LLI
'Jaia2g3 aseaL `ales `a62aols pue u:•.op-all 112uouLe s2 gons ` sasiu
-a-id pas2aL lua0eCP2 a41 uo uoLleuaro ase; paxLj s1L 41L:A UoL1
-aauuoo UL aLgLsuodsaa SL 33SS31 4oL4.'-, uoj pue 33SS31 jo kpoisno
Ui 112JDJLP jo u:Aop-aL; pu? 6uL�aed 6utpnLOuL '` 6UL:iaed ljeaoaLV • L
: sasod
-.ind 5ULf-%olloI a'41 a01 ,(Luo pasn aq LLe4s 28-1V 6uL-1-'ed ljeaoaLV a41„
-joaaagl pua aql le s4dea6eaed 6uL;•%OLLOS aql 61JLppe
,Cq aaglanj papuawe Sgaaaq SL `papuawe se ` (S3SIt13bd j0 3Sfi) H1XIS uoLlaaS '3
, ' pled LL1un algeifed pue anp sem luaw,'ed pLes alep aq1 woaj
`gluow aad (%Z/L L) 4ua0a@a jL24-auo pue auO jo @1Pa e 42 aoueLeq pLedun
pLes uo ls@a@lUL tlOSS31 01 Sed LLP4s 33SS31 `aaow ao SSPp (CL) U@311Lj
jo pOLaad P aoj @seal sL44 aapun anp slu@Wed /(UP 8OSS31 04 6ULXed UL
luanbuLL@p awo0aq Llegs 33SS31 1241 lU@n@ agl uI :SiNNAVd 1Vlh3b 31V1 (d) .,
(@aj @62140Lj `luaa @6e4ua0aad ` •b•a) @seal sLgl U aoj papLnoaa
@aP se sLeluaa aaylo LLe of lo@Cgns osLP aJe PaaV 6UL�aPd 1jea0aLV aql
uo palonpuoo sUOLleaad0 pue sasn LLP PUP SUP 1241 poolsaapun aag4an4 SL
1L ` (w) gdeauPaedgns of luensand L21u@a punoab aseq a41 01 UoLlLppe ul (o) „
, Xgaaagl paleaaua6 awODUL leLlua"lod a41 uo
paseq 6uLaq @nLen 1@�aew aLej s1L pue asn lseq pue 1sag614 aql 6ucaq
asn paIDLals@a s1L uodn paseq ` •01a `a6ea0ls pue ur•%op-@L1 1jea0aLe
aoj `kLaweu :UL@aag p@pualui se asn Led Lou Lad @41 aoj XLaleaedas lnq
`as2@L LeUL6Lao @41 UL ea.ie a41 apnLOUL p p om gOLgm ` s@sLwaad paseaL
aLOWA @gl jo 1-ted e se panLenaa aq lou LLegs ULaaaq eaaV 6uLyaed
1jea0aLV aql jo Leluaa punoao aseq aql ;P41poolsJapun aaglanj SL 1I,,-
•uLaaa4 eaaV 6uLyaPd 14ea0aLV a41
JOS Le1U@a punoa6 aseq aql 01 XLddz lou LL2gs uoL;24LWLL ffSZ aql '01
6uLULe4aad (q) uoLloasgns pLes UL gdea6eaed 1saLj a41 So a0U@4U@s 1SeL
aql 1241 papLnoad pue `luawpuawV sLgl 10 Waal a41 6uLanp ( (q) anLj
SO pealsuL) SaPaX (Z) oml XJ@A@ 10 pua a41 le aq LLe4s eaaV 6uLV2d
1jea0aLV a41 aoj poLaad uoLlenLenaa agl 1e41 ldaoxa `Knino3 uoL43aS
sLgl jo (q) uo poasgns jo suoLsLnoad aql of loaCgns aq LLe4s eaaV
6UL�aed 112JDJLV aq1 aoj Leluaa punoa6 aseq a44 1241 poolsaapun SL 1I (u) .,
A.a
1 for water and sewage to premises leased by Lessee without any
2 charge to Lessee; provided, however, any charge incurred by
3 Lessor for connection to Lessee 's premises shall be a charge to
4 Lessee. Lessor further agrees to install and provide the water
5 and sewage main lines on or before April 1, 1962 .
6 SIXTHz USE OF PREMISES . The demised premises shall
7 be used for the operation of management, administration,
8 accounting, and supervisory offices and facilities ; parking,
9 turning, taxiing, loading, unloading, maintaining, servicing,
10 fueling, conditioning, repairing, assembling, fabricating,
11 modifying, constructing, housing aircraft, washing, storing,
12 air conditioning, test of aircraft and related equipment,
13 mechanisms, devices, appliances , supplies , parts and accessories
14 of all kinds, including mobile ground vehicles and other ground
15 equipment used or useful in Lessee `s aviation business; the
16 receiving, storing, loading, unloading and delivery of passengers ,
17 personal property, cargo and mail; the operation of vending
18 machines for dispensing food, beverages or cigarettes on the
19 demised premises ; excluding dispensing of any alcoholic
20 beverages of whatsoever kind or nature; the operation o-
21 facilities for the preparation or pzocessing of in—flight meals
22 for Lessee 's and United States Government passengers ; the
23 training of flight and ground personnel and students; vehicular
24 parking for Lessee, its employees , patrons , guests , vendors
25i and service contractors and their agents ; maintaining gasoline,
2611oil or other fuel
i
storage facilities and pipe lines or other
27 ,
i; facilities to or from said storage facilities , and the providing
28 ' of maintenance or other services to aircraft of others . The
r
29 I '': Cs c?: o-ara1ion Ss-'.: fO::th herein shall not, be. exclu.'. v-.,
30 ;, but shall be considered as inclusive, and Lessee shall be
31 if privileged to conduct retail sales and services and any other
32loperation consist t with a fixed base operation including
_9_
l. CAAA[M70 1�, Gwlir, '
1
•IIeaaaL2 10 but lsal pue uoLlDads ut 146LL}aad 'b
pue :satedaa pup sluawlsnCpe ljeaaaLe aoULL4 •E
tXLuo saaLeap paZLao4lne ,Cq }0 6uLLan3 •Z
: -ala `buLLoo4as pue 6ULULeal 146LLJ
`aalazya aseaL •aLes `a6za01s pue u:,op-aLl l;eaaale se vans ` sasLJ 1
-aid Fas29L lua3?CP2 a41 uo uotl2aac0 asza Pac13
SI
ylL:A u0L1
-aauuaa UL aLglsuodsaa SL 33SS31 g3LgV, aoJ PUe 33SS31 jo ,Cpolsna
UL 1}eaoJLe }o u:Aop-aL; pue 6UL:1aed 6ULpnLOUL ` 6UL :1aed 1}eaoaLy • L _
:sasod
-and 6UL�-,oLLO' a141 AOl kLuo pasn aq LLe4s eOJV 6u1:1aed 11 ea:)aLy ayl,.
}oaaayl pua ayl le s4oea6eaed 6UL.-,0LL0 ' ay1 6ULppe
kq aaylanI papuawe A'gaaa4 S ` papuawe se ` ( 33SIvl3dd 30 3 S n HIXIS uoLlOas '0
„ 'pled LL1un a N efied pup anp sem luawi�ed pies alep a41 woaJ
`gluow aad (;aZ/L L) luaoaad 3Ley-auo Pup auo 10 alea e 1e aoueLeq pLedun
pLes u0 lsaaalUL KSS31 01 A'ed LLe4s 33SS31 `a.aow ao sA'ep (51) uaa111J
10 poLaad e aoJ aseaL sL41 aapun anp sluawSed RU2 NMI 01 6ULA'ed UL
?uanbuLLap awooaq LLe4s 33SS31 1e41 Juana a41 uI :SiN3WAVd 1y1N3d 3141 (d).
• (aal a6emOLJ pup lua,A abeluaoaad •6'a) aseaL sL41 UL JOI papinoad
a.ae se sLeluaa aa410 LLe 01 loaCgns osLe a.ae eaay OUL�.Aed lje.ao.aLy a41
uo palonpuoo suoLleaado Nue sasn LL2 {pue XuP leyl poolsaapun aaggtnI SL
IL ° (w) yde.A6e.aedgns of luensand Leluaa punoa6 aseq a41 01 UOLllppe uj (0)„
Ayaaayl paleaaua6 awooUL L2Llualod ayl uo
paseq 6uLaq anLen la:{aew ale1 SIL pup asn lsaq pup lsa46L4 a41 6uLaq
asn paloLalsaa slL uodn paseq ' 'Ola °ade.auls pue U:•%Op-aLl lle-10ULe
ao} `A'Laweu :ULaaa4 papualuL se asn LedLOULad ayl aoJ XLaleaedas lnq
`aseaL LeUL6Lao a41 UL eaae a41 apnLOUL PLno:•% 4oLym `sasLWaad paseaL
aLOgt,% ayl to lied e se panLenaa aq 101J LLe4s ULaaay eaay 6ULy.aed
11eaoaLy ayl JO Leluaa punoa6 aseq a41 1241 poolsaapun Aaulan� SL lI„
•ULaaa4 eaay 6ULyaed 112JDJLV a41
aoI Leluaa punoa6 aseq a41 01 A'Lddz lou LLeys UOL121LWLL ASZ ayl 01
6ULULelaad (q) uoLloasgns pLes UL 4dea6e_ted lsaLI ayl 10 a0ualuas 1SeL
a41 1241 papinoad pup `luawpuawy sLyl. Jo Waal ayl 6ULanp ( (5) anLI
o ealsul saeaA om X.A@Aa o , ua a le a e s ea-AV 6ul a2 /
� P ) (Z) 1 � P 41 q LL 4 � �I d �
1leaaaLy a41 aoJ polaad UOLlenLenaa a41 4e44 ldaoxa `H12if103 uo14oaS
styl 10 (q) uolloasgns jo suolsLnoad a41 of loaCgns aq LLe45 eaay
6UL�aed ;JeaaaLy a41 aoJ Leluaa punoa6 aseq a41 -1e41 poolsaapun sl 11 (u) „
,j J
and fill on Lessor ' s airport property to be transported by Lessee
at Lessee's expense for such fill purposes and as may be required.
It is further agreed that Lessee shall pay for all water, gas,
heat, light, power, telephone service and all other services supplied
to the said premises by Lessor, including installation and connection
of such services from the main source thereof, excluding, however,
any extensions of main lines from the perimeter boundaries of the
demised premises as may be required to be extended at the time of
installation.
Lessor agrees to provide the main lines and extensions for water
and sewage to premises leased by Lessee without any charge to Lessee;
provided, however, any charge incurred by Lessor for connection to
Lessee' s premises shall be a charge to Lessee. Lessor further agrees
to install and provide the water and sewage main lines on or before
June 1, 1963.
FOURTH: USE OF PREMISES. The demised premises shall be used for
the operation of management, administration, accounting, and super-
visory offices and facilities; parking, turning, taxiing, loading,
unloading, maintaining, servicing, fueling, conditioning, repairing,
assembling, fabricating, modifying, constructing, housing aircraft,
washing, storing, air conditioning, test of aircraft and related equip-
ment, mechanisms, devices, appliances, supplies, parts and accessories
of all kinds, including mobile ground vehicles and other ground equip-
ment used or useful in Lessee ' s aviation business; the receiving,
storing, loading, unloading and delivery of passengers, personal prop-
erty, cargo and mail; the operation of vending machines for dispensing
food, beverages or cigarettes on the demised premises; excluding dis-
pensing of any alcoholic beverages of whatsoever kind or nature; the
operation of facilities for the preparation or processing of in-flight
meals for Lessee 's and United States Government passengers; the train-
ing of,fl3ight and ground personnel and students; vehicular parking for
-L-
usTuanJ Oq SGGJS8 aassaz `40ua OO uOT40nagsuoo auq jo pap.ciE uodn
•aassaq jo Toaquoo puoLaq sgou Line Lq pasnuo
azo pouoTsp000 uaaq spq uoTqaldmoo pup uoTgonagsuoo uT Kulep gstgq
JOssa7 04 JOOJd SuTgsTuanJ aass.- j uodn papuagxa aq Lpul poTjad gquou
(g) xTs eons `aanallou `papTnoad •aspa2 sTgq Jo UOlgnOaxa jo agep
auk ,To suquoui (9) xTs uTugTft pagejdmoo eq Illus BuTpTTnq pTsS ' qaa j
e,ranbs (000`ZI ) pupsnouq- anla.aq jo peap aoolj uznuliuTw -a T4gTa 2uTplTnq
suoTgpjedo up gonagsuoo oq seejBp aasseq 'SjM3NH11o?j j j :IL LjIq
• qjuaoal-E? puolun ao ppol `Moi.
`JJOGa jsq `pint oq SggBTa auq jO anTSnlOuT eq IIpLIs aassa7 oq pepuaq
-xa uTaaau sqLrBTJ aLU ' gjpa0ajU jo vvoaxp-4 pup SSUTPuel `uoTquaado
uT uoTqupou,nTj000p pup aouaTuanuoo aoj aosso2 Lq paTTddns SaTgTITOPJ
asn uouwoo aeggo pup `uzagsLs ssaappv oTlgnd `uo-cquoTun=oo jenoq
`spTP OTPL:,j `sTpUSTS `suoo-eaq `s44STI BuTpuET `sW2TT pooTJ `sl pMTxpq
`suoadp `sGa-e SuTpupT s8 lions `asn uowwoo jo j peu-2Tsap gjodaTV qu
saTgTTTOL-3 So asn pup off. ssaOOP JO quBTz au-. ani TIUTqs. Gass--j
• 04Ga 4 pa4ulGa ao Tu4uapT0uT JO u4Tl-laJauq uOT40G=00 uT
sasodand pup sasn pine saTgTnT40P pine SuoT�val-vdo uOT'4uTne s , aassa7 Oq
Lluo aqplaa Ileus qnq `gaodaTV G-qq qs ssauisnq aquipdes u gonpuoo oq
easso7 azTaoLlgnu oq penagsuoo eq qou ITeus uoigoas sTgq jo suOTsTnoad
aLU •Gangsu pup spuTx IIs jo aOuednsuT 4Jua0aTP 04 SuT4plaJ sGI ps
sOu-eansuT gOnpuoO o4 paSalTnTid aq iaTgganj II'eus aossaq • oqa `saaS
-uassud `s4OTTd `suOTgpaedo SuTL jj oq PG4PIGa asTpupuOdGw Ip4uapT0uT
ao saTVs TTp4GJ guTpnTouT uoTgpaGdo aspq paxTi u ugTM que4slsuoo uOTq
-paedo ae-ggo Lup pup SaOTAJas pus sales TTugea gonpuoo o4 paBaTTnTad
aq TTsus eessa2 pup `anTsnlouT sp PeJapTsuO0 aq TTeus qnq `anTsnloxa
aq qou TTsus uTeaau uquoj 4Gs uOTgpaedo pup sasn GT-U • saeggo jo gjPao
-aTp 04 saOTAJGS aau40 azo a0upua4uTsuz JO 9utpTnOad auq pup `saTgTTTOVJ
@Spa04s pTUS 'UOaJ aO off. saTgTITO'GJ JGLIgO aO sauTl edTd pup saT4TTT0pJ
GBpaogs Tang aGLI40 aO ITO `auTIOsPO SuTuTp4uTsuz :s4u@Bv aTN4 pup GaO4
--VaWOO aOTAaGS pup saopuan `s4san2 `suoaglRd `saaLolduua s4T `aassaZ
In) It is understood that the base ground rental for the Aircraft Parking
Area shall be subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of this
Section SECOND, except that the revaluation period for the Aircraft
Parking Area shall be at the end of every two (2) years (instead of
five (5) ) during the term of this Amendment, and provided that the
last sentence of the first paragraph in said subsection (b) pertaining
to the 25% limitation shall not apply to the base ground rental for
the Aircraft Parking Area herein.
"It is further understood that the base around rental of the Aircraft
Parkino Area herein shall not be revalued as a part of -the whole
leased premises , which would include the area in the original lease,
but separately for the principal use as intended herein: namely, for
aircraft tie-down and storage, etc. , based upon its restricted use
being the highest and best use and its fair market value being based
on the potential income generated thereby.
"(o) It is further understood that in addition to the base ground rental ,
any and all uses and operations conducted on the Aircraft Parking Area
are subject to all other rentals as are provided for in this lease
(e.a. , percentage rent, flowage fee) .
" (p) LATE RENTAL PA MEN-S: In the event that LESSEE shall become delin-
quent in paying to LESSOR any payments due herein for a period of
fifteen (15) days or more, LESSEE shall pay to LESSOR interest on said
unpaid balance at a rate of one and one-half percent (1 1/2`•:) per
month, from the date said payment was due and payable until paid. "
D. Section FOURTH (USE OF PP.EIMISES ) , as amended , is hereby amended further by
add the folloti•ring paraoraphs at the end thereof.
he Aircraft Parking Area shall be used only for the following pur-
poses : ,
1 . Aircraft parking , including parking and tie-down of aircraft in
do` custody of LESSEE and for �•rhich LESSEE is responsible in connec-
tion with its Fixed Base Operation on the adjacent leased pre-
mises , such as aircraft tie-do:rn and storage, sale , lease charter,
flight training and schoolinq , etc . ;
2. Fuelinn of aircraft by authorized dealers only;
3. Minor aircraft adjustments and repairs; and
4 . Prefliqht inspection and testing of aircraft.
of► tom, Part V - Assurances
.`�'°.',.-C."wla".°,"
Airport and Planning Agency Sponsors
Approved:OM8 No. 2120-0065
A- General.
1. These assurances shall be complied with in the performance of the following grant agreements:
a. Airport development, airport planning, and noise program implementation grants to airport sponsors.
b. Integrated airport system planning grants to planning agencies.
2. These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the project application by sponsors requesting funds under the provisions
of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 or the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979.As used herein,the term
-public agency sponsor"means a public agency with control of a public-use airport,the term-private sponsor"means a private owner
of a public-use airport, and the term"sponsor"includes public agency sponsors and private sponsors.
3. These assurances also are required to be submitted as part of the project application by a sponsor which is both a public agency and
a planning agency requesting 'funds for integrated airport system planning under the provisions of the Airport and Airway
Improvement Act of 1982.
4. Upon acceptance of the grant offer by the sponsor,these assurances are incorporated in and become part of the grant agreement.
B. Duration and Applicability.
1. Airport Development or Noise Program Implementation Projects Undertaken by a Public Agency Sponsor. The terms•
conditions and assurances of the grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect throughout the useful life of the facilities
developed or equipment acquired.for an airport development or noise program implementation project,or throughout the useful life
of the project items installed within a facility under a noise program implementation project,but in any event not to exceed twenty(20)
years from the date of acceptahce of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project.However,there shall be no limit on the duration of
the assurance against exclusive rights or the terms,conditions,and assurances with respect to real property acquired with Federal
funds. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil Rights assurance shall be as specified in the assurance.
2. Airport Development or Noise Program Implementation Projects Undertaken by a Private Sponsor.The preceding paragraph
1 also apples to a private sponsor except that the useful life of project items installed within a facility or the useful life of facilities
developed or equipment acquired under an airport development or noise program implementation proiect shall be no less than 10
years from the date of the acceptance of Federal aid for the project.
3. Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor.Unless otherwise specified in the grant agreement,only Assurances 1,2.3.5,6, 13.
18,and 30 in Section C apply to planning projects.The terms•conditions and assurances of the grant agreement shall remain in full
force and effect during the life of the project.
C. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this grant that:
1. General Federal Requirements. It will comply with all applicable Federal laws,regulations,executive orders•policies,guidelines
and requirements as they relate to the application,acceptance and use of Federal funds for this project including but not limited to the
following:
Federal Leglslatlon
a. Federal Aviation Act of 1958-49 U.S.C. 1301, of seq.
b. Davis-Bacon Act-40 U.S.C.276(a), of seq.'
C. Federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938-29 U.S.C.201,at seq.
d. Hatch Act- 5 U.S.C. 1501, of seq.'
h
e. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970-42 U.S.C. 4601, of seq
f. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966- Section 106- 16 U.S.C. 470 (f).1
g. Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974- 16 U.S.C.469,through 469C.'
h. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973- Section 102(a)-42 U.S.C. 4012a'
i. Rehabilitation Act of 1973- 29 U.S.C. 794.
J. Civil flights Act of 1964-Title VI -42 U.S.C.2000d through d-4.
k. Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979,49 U.S.C. 2101,of seq.
1. Age Discrimination Act of 1975-42 U.S.C.6101,et'seq.
M. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968-42 U.S.C.4151,of seq.'
n. Airport and Airway improvement Act of 1982-49 U.S.C.2201,et seq.
0. Powerpfant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978-Section 403-42 U.S.C.8373.'
p. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act-40 U.S.C. 327, of seq.'
q.- Copeland Antikickback Act- 18 U.S.C. 674.'
r. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969-42 U.S.C.4321,et seq.' �X�lbl� "j�fr<J"
s. Endangered Species Act of 1973- 16 U.S.C. 668(a),at seq.'
t. Single Audit Act of 1984-31 U.S_.C. 7501, of seq.2
' These laws do not apply to planning projects.
? These taws do not apply to private sponsors.
Q
Executive Orders i
Executive Order 12372, Inlergovernmental Review of Federal Programs. ,
Federal Regulations `
a. 49 CFR Part 21 -Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation-
Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
b. 49 CFA Part 23-Participation by Minority Business Enterprise in Department of Transportation Programs.
C. 49 CFR Part 25-Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition.tor Federal and Federally-Assisted
Programs.
d. 29 CFR Part 1 -Procedures for Predetermination of Wage Rates.
e. 29 CFR Part 3-Contractors or Subcontractors on Public Buildings or Public Works Financed in Whole or Part by
Loans or Grants from U.S.
f. 29 CFR Part 5- Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted
Construction.
g. 49 CFR Part 27-Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting
from Federal Financial Assistance.
h. 41 CFR Part 60-Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department
of Labor (Federal and Federally-Assisted Contracting Requirements).
i. 14 CFR Part 150-Airport Noise Compatibility Planning.
j. Reserved.
Office of Management and Budget Circulars
a. A-87 - Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments.'
b. A-102 - Uniform Requirements for Assistance to State and Local Governments.'
c. A-128-Audits of State and Local Governments.
OMB Circulars A-87 and A-102 contain requirements for state and local governments receiving Federal assistance. Any
requirement levied upon state and local governments by these two circulars shall also be applicable to private sponsors
receiving Federal assistance under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982.
Specific assurances required to be included in grant agreements by any of the above laws,regulations or circulars are incorporated
by reference in the grant agreement.
2. Responsibility and Authority of the Sponsor.
a. Public Agency Sponsor: 11 has legal authority to apply for the grant,and to finance and carry out the proposed project;that a
resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body
authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and
authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to
provide such additional information as may be required.
b. Private Sponsor:It has legalauthorityto apply for the grant and to finance and carryout the proposed project and comply with all
terms,condit+ons,and assurances of this grant agreement. It shall designate an official representative,and shall in r:riting direct
and authorize that person to file this application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein: to act in
connection with the application: and to provide such additional information as may be required.
3. Sponsor Fund Availability. It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which are not to be paid by the
United States. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and maintenance of items funded under the grant agreement
which it will own or control.
4. Good Title. It holds good tale,satisfactory to the Secretary.to the landing area of the airport or site thereof,or will give assurance
satisfactory to the Secretary that good title will be acquired.
For noise program implementation projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds good title satisfac:cry to the
Secretary to that porton of the property upon which Federal funds will be expended or will give assurance to the Secretary that good
tale will be obtained.
5. Preserving Rights and Powers.
a. It will not take or permit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or a!:
01 the terms, conditions, and assurances in the grant agreement without the written approval o1 the Secretary, and will act
promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such
performance by the sponsor. This shall be done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary.
b. It will not sell, lease,encumber or otherwise transfer or dispose of any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on
Exhibit A to this application or,for a noise program implementation project,that portion of the property upon which Federal funds
have been expended,for the duration of the terms,conditions,and assurances in the grant agreement without approval by the
Secretary. If the transferee is found by the Secretary to be eligible under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 to
assume the obligations of the grant agreement and to have the power, authority, and financial resources to carry out aft such
obligations, the sponsor shall insert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponosr's interest, and make
binding upon the transferee, all of the terms, condi!ions, and assurances contained in this grant agreement.
FAA Form 51 OG-100 c7-ssl Page 2 of/
c..For all noise program rmplemenl4ho,,n projects which are to be,Carned out by another --lit of local government or are on property
owned by a unit of local governr; jy other than the sponsor, it will enter into ar a ment with that government. Except as
otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall 66frgate that government to.the same terms, conditions, and
assurances that would be applicable to it if it applied directly to the FAA for a grant to undertake the noise program implementation
project That agreement and changes thereto must be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement
against the local government it there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement.
d For noise program implementation projects to be carried out on privately owned property,it will enter into an agreement with the
owner of that property which includes provisions specified by the Secretary.It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the
property owner whenever there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement.
e. It the sponsor is a private sponsor,it will take steps satisfactory to the Secretary to ensure that the airport will continue to function
as a public-use airport in accordance with these assurances for the duration of those assurances
1. If an arrangement is made for management and operation of the airport by any agency or person other than the sponsor or an
employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to insure that the airport will be operated and
maintained in accordance with the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, the regulations and the terms,conditions and
assurances in the grant agreement and shall insure that such arrangement also requires compliance therewith.
6. Consistency with Local Plans. The project is reasonably consistent with plans (existing at the time of submission of this
application)of public agencies that are authorized by the State in which the project is located to plan for the development of the area
surrounding the airport. For noise program implementation projects,other than land acquisition,to be carried out on property not
owned by the airport and over which property another public agency has land use control or authority,the sponsor shad obtain from
each such agency a wrrnen declaration that such agency supports the project and the project is reasonably consistent with the
agen y*s plans regarding the property.
7. Consideration of Local Interest. It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near which the project may Ce
located
8. Consultation with Users. In making a decision to undertake any airport development project under the Airport and Airway
Improvement Act of 19512,it has undertaken reasonable consultations with affected parties using the airport at which the projects
proposed
S. Public Hearings. In projects involving the location of an airport,an airport runway,or a major runway extension,it has afforded the
opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the economic,social,and environmental eHecls of the airport or runway
location and its consistency with the goats and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community.It shalt,when
requested by the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to the Secretary.
10. Air and Water Quality Standards. In projects involving airport location,a major runway extension,or runway location it will provide
to! the Governor of the state in which the project is located to certify in writing to the Secretary that the project will be located,
designed, construCled, and operated so as to comply with applicable air and water quality standards. In any case where such
standards have not been approved and where applicable air and water quality standards have been promulgated by the Administra-
tor of the Environmental Protection Agency,certification shall be obtained from such Administrator.Notice of certification or refusal to
certrty shall be provided within sixty days after the project application has been received by the Secretary.
11. Local Approval. In projects involving the construction or extension of any runway at any general aviation airport located astride a
line separating two counties within a single state, it has received approval for the project from the governing body of all villages
incorporated under ;he laws of that state which are located entirely within five miles of the ne"rest boundary of the airport.
t2. Terminal Development Prerequisites. For projects which include terminal development at a public airport, it has,on the date of
submetal of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required for certification of such airport under section 612 of the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958 and all the secunty equipment required by rule or regulation, and has provided for access to the
passenger enplaning and deplaning area of such airport to passengers enplaning or deplaning from aircraft other than air tamer
arrcrah.
13. Accounting System, Audit, and Recordkeeping Requirements.
I!shall keep all project accounts and records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds of the
grant,the total cost of the project in connection with which the grant is given or used,and the amount and nature of that portion of
the cost of the project supplied by other sources. and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The accounts and
records shall be kept in accordance with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit in accordance with the U.S.
General Accounting Office pubfrcatron entitled Guidelines for Financial and Compliance Audits of Federally Assisted Programs.
b ff shall make available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authonzed
representatives,for the purpose of audit and examination,any books,documents,papers,and records of the recipient that are
pertinent to the grant The Secretary may require that an appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient. In any case in which an
independent audit is made of the accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the
AA Form 51DO-100 Page 3 olV
project in connection with which the grant was given or used,it shall file a certified copy.:such audit with the Comptroller General .
of the United States not later than 6 months following the close of the fiscal year for which the audit was made.
14. Minimum Wage Rates. If shall include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects funded under the grant
agreement which involve labor,provisions establishing minimum rates of wages,to be predetermined by the Secretary of Labor,in
accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act,as amended(40 U.S.C.276a—276a-5),which contractors shall pay to skilled and unskilled
labor, and such minimum rates shall be stated in the invitation for bids and shall be included in proposals or bids for the work.
15.Veterans Preference. It shall include,in all contracts for work on any projects funded under the grant agreement which involve
labor, such provisions as are necessary to insure that, in the employment of labor (except in executive, administrative, and
supervisory positions), preference shall be given to veterans of the Vietnam era and disabled veterans as defined in Section
515(c)(1)and(2)of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982.However,this preference shall apply only where the individuals
are available and qualified to perform the work to which the employment relates.
16.Conformity to Plans and Specifications. It will execute the project subject to plans,specifications,and schedules approved by
the Secretary. Such plans, specifications, and schedules shall be submitted to the Secretary prior to commencement of site
preparation, construction, or other performance under this grant agreement, and, upon approval by the Secretary, shall be
incorporated into this grant agreement.Any modifications to the approved plans,specifications,and schedules shall also be subject
to approval by the Secretary and incorporation into the grant agreement.
17.Construction Inspection and Approval. It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at the construction site
throughout the project to assure that the work conforms with the plans,specifications,and schedules approved by the Secretary for
the project. It shall subject the construction work on any project contained.in an approved project application to inspection and
approval by the Secretary and such work shall be in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary.Such
regulations and*procedures shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsots of such project as the
Secretary shall deem necessary.
18. Planning Projects. In carrying out planning projects:
a. It will execute the project in accordance with the approved program narrative contained in the project application or with
modifications similarly approved.
b. it will furnish the Secretary with such periodic reports as required pertaining to the planning project and planning work activities.
c. It will include in all published material prepared in connection with the planning project a notice that the material was prepared
under a grant provided by the United States.
d. It will make such material available for examination by the public, and agrees that no material prepared with funds under this
project shall be subject to copyright in the United States or any other country.
e. it will give the Secretary unrestricted authority to publish,disclose.distribute,and otherwise use any of the material prepared in
connection with this grant.
f. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the sponsor's employment of specific consultants and their subcontractors to do
all or any part of this project as well Ls the right to disapprove the proposed scope and cost of professional services.
g. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the use of the sponsor's employees to do all or any part of the project.
h. It understands and agrees that the Secretary's approval of this project grant or the Secretary's approval of any planning material
developed as part of this grant does not constitute or imply any assurance or commitment on the part of the Secretary to approve
any pending or future application for a Federal airport grant.
19. Operation and Maintenance.
a. It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected therewith,with due regard to climatic and
flood conditions.The airport and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport,other than facilities
owned or controlled by the United States,shalt be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with
the minimum standards as may be required or prescribed by applicable Federal,state and local agencies for maintenance and
operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes.
In furtherance of this assurance,the sponsor will have in effect at all times arrangements for—
(i)- 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 interfere 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 oche condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor.
FAA Form Stoo-loo t7-apt Fage 4 olfi/
,b. It wilf`suitably operate and maintain ncl'' rogram implementation items that it owns or r—.,rols upon which Federal funds have
'.been expended. !
.0. Hazard Removal and Mitigation. It will adequately clear and protect the aerial approaches to the airport by removing, towering,
relocating,marking,or lighting or otherwise mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of
future airport hazards.
1.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 activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations,
including landing and takeotl of aircraft.In addition.it 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 compatiWity
program measures upon which Federal funds have been expended.
2.fcoiiomice•Noridis—&imination., +.
a It will,make-its arrport'available-as an airport form.public:use on•fair and reasonable.lerms.and without.unjust discrimination to all
:types, kinds; and-classes'"of,.aeronaUticaf°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 corporation to conduct or engage in any aeronautical activity for fumishing services to the public at the airport,the sponsor will
insert and enforce provisions requiring the contractor—
(1)?to furnish said services on a fair, equal, and not unjustly discriminatory basis to all users thereof, and
(2) to charge fair,reasonable,and not unjustly discriminatory prices for each unit or service,provided,that the contractor maybe
allowed to,make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts,rebates,or other similar types of price reductions to volume
purchasers. -+
c Each fixed-based operator at any airport owned by the sponsor shall be subject to the same rates,lees,rentals,and other charges
as are uniformly applicable to all other fixed-based operators making the same or similar uses of such airport and utilizing the
same or similar facilities.
d Each air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based operator that is authorized or
permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport.
e Each air carver using such airport(whether as a tenant,nontenant,or subtenant of another air carrier tenant)shall be subject to
such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rules,regulations,conditions,rates,fees,rentals,and other charges as are
applicable to all such air carriers which make similar use of such airport and which utilize similar facilites,subject to reasonable
classifications such as tenants or nontenants, and combined passenger and cargo flights or all cargo flights. Classification or
status as tenant shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations substantially similar
.to those already imposed on tenant air carriers.
1. It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person,firm,or corporation operating aircraft on the
airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own employees(including,but not limited to maintenance,repair,
and fueling) that it may choose to perform.
g. In the event that the sponsor itself exercises any of the rights and privileges referred to in this assurance,the services involved will
be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of such services by contractors or concessionaires of the
sponsor under these provisions.
h The sponsor may establish such fair,equal,and not unjustly discriminatory conditions to be met by all users of the airport as may,:.
be necessary.-for,the safe...and efficienf b*adon of ihOlikociut:'"
.i. --The sponsor may prohibit or limit aity'9iven typei.kind,or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is necessary for the
safe operation of-the", irport or necessary to serve the civil.avration needs of the public.
3. Exclusive Rights. It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any persons providing, or intending to provide,
aeronautical services to the public. For purposes of this paragraph,the providing of services at an airport by a single fixed-based
operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the following apply: (1) tt would be unreasonably costly,
burdensome,or impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services,and (2) If allowing more than one
fixed-based operator to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to an existing agreement
between such single fixed-based operator and such airport.
It further agrees that it will not,either directly or indirectly,grant or permit any person,firm or corporation the exclusive right at the
airport,or at any other airport now owned or controlled by 4,to conduct any aeronautical activities,including,but not limited to charter
Nghts. pilot training, aircraft rental and sightseeing, aerial photography,crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying,air canner
operations. aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in conjunction with other
aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft,sale of aircraft parts,and any other activities which because of their direct
relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity,and that it will terminate any exclusive right to
;AA Form Stoo-loo(rns) Page 5 of wg
conduct an aeronautical activity now ea ng at such an airport before the grant of any i fiance under the Airport and Airway
improvement Act of 1982.
24. Fee and Rental Structure. it will maintain a fee and rental structure consistent with Assurance 22 and 23, for the facilities and
services being provided the airport users which will make the airport as sett-sustaining as possible under the circumstances existing
at that particular airport, taking into account such factors as the volume of traffic and economy of collection.No part of the Federal
share of an airport development,airport planning or noise program implementation project for which a grant is made under the Airport
and Airway Improvement Act of 1982,the Federal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 shall be included in
the rate base in establishing fees, rates, and charges for users of that airport.
25.Airport Revenue. 1f the airport is under the control of a public agency,all revenues generated by the airport will be expended by it for
the capital or operating costs of the airport,the local airport system,or other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner
or operator of the airport and directly related to the actual transportation of passengers or property. Provided, however, that if
covenants or assurances in debt obligations previously issued by the owner or operator of the airport,or provisions in governing
statutes controlling the owner or operator's financing,provide for the use of the revenues from any of the airport owner or operator's
facilities,including the airport,to support not only the airport but also the airport owner or operator's general debt obligations or other
facilities, then this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the airport shall not apply.
26.Reports and Inspections. It will submit to the Secretary such annual or special financial and operations reports as the Secretary
may reasonably request. For airport development projects, it will also make the airport and all airport records and documents
affecting the airport, including deeds, leases, operation and use agreements, regulations and other instruments, available for
inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request.For noise program implementation projects,it will
also make records and documents relating to the project and continued compliance with the terms,conditions,and assurances of the
grant agreement including deeds, teases, agreements, regulations, and other instruments, available for it►spection by any duly
authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request.
27.Use of Government Aircraft. It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and
all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at
all times without charge, except, it the use by Government aircraft is substantial, charge may be made for a reasonable share,
proportional to such use.for the cost of operating and maintaining the facilities used.Unless otherwise determined by the Secretary,
or otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and the using agency,substantial use of an airport by government aircraft will be considered to
exist when operations of such aircraft are in excess of those which,in the opinion of the Secretary,woulc 6nduly interfere with use of
the landing areas by other authorized aircraft, or during any calendar month that—
a. Five (5) or more government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on land adjacent thereto; or
b. The total number of movements (counting each landing as a movement) of government aircraft is 300 or more, or the gross
accumulative weight of government aircraft using the airport (the total movements of government aircraft multiplied by gross
weights of such aircraft) is in excess of five million pounds.
28. Land for Federal Facilities. It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in connection with any air traffic control or
air navigation activities,or weather-reporting and communication activities related to air traffic control,any areas of land or water,or
estate therein,or right in buildings of the sponsor as the Secretary considers necessary or desirable for construction,operation,and
maintenance at Federal expense of space or facilities for such purposes.Such areas or any portion thereof will be made available as
provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary.
29. Airport Layout Plan. It will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the airport showing(1)boundaries of the airport and
all proposed additions thereto, together with the boundaries of all offsite areas owned or controlled by the sponsor for airport
purposes and proposed additions thereto;(2) the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport facilities and structures
(such as runways, taxiways, aprons,terminal buildings, hangars and roads), including all proposed extensions and reductions of
existing airport facilities:and(3)the location of all existing and proposed nonavialion areas and of all existing improvements thereon.
Such airport layout plan and each amendment, revision,or modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary
which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary on the face of the airport
layout plan. The sponsor will not make or permit any changes or alterations in the airport or in any of its facilities other than in
conformity with the airport layout plan as so approved by the Secretary if such changes or alterations might adversely affect the
safety, utility, or efficiency of the airport.
30. Civil Rights. It will comply with such rules as are promulgated to assure that no person shall,on the grounds of race,creed,color,
national origin,sex,age,or handicap be excluded from participating in any activity conducted with or benefiting from funds received
from this grant.This assurance obligates the sponsor for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to the
program,except where the Federal financial assistance is to provide,or is in the form of personal property or real properly or interest
therein or structures or improvements thereon,in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor or any transferee for the longer of
the fo'lowing periods: (1) the period during which the property is used for a purpose for which Federal financial assistance is
extended,or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits or(2)the period during which the sponsor
retains ownership or possession of the property.
,1
Revised June 5, 1987
ASSURANCE 31
Policies, standards, and Specifications._ It will carry out the project in
accordance with policies, standards and specifications approved by the
Secretary including but not limited to the advisory circulars listed below,
and in accordance with applicable state policies, standards, and specfica-
tions approved by the Secretary.
Number Subject
70/7460-1G Obstruction Marking and Lighting
150/5100-14A Architectural, Engineering and Planning Consultant
Services for Airport Grant Projects
150/5200-23A Airport Snow and Ice Control
150/5210-5B Painting, Marking, and Lighting of Vehicles Used on
an Airport
150/5210-7B Aircraft Fire and Rescue Communications
150/5210-10 Airport Fire and Rescue Equipment Building Guide
150/5210-14 Airport Fire and Rescue Personnel Protective Clothing
150/5220-4A Water Supply Systems for Aircraft Fire and Rescue
Protection
150/5220-10 Guide Specification for Water/Foam Type Aircraft Fire,,...-
and
ire, -and Rescue Trucks
150/5220-11 Airport Snowblower Specification Guide
150/5220-12 Airport Snows-weeper Specification Gide
150/5220-13A Runway Surface Condition Sensor--Specification Guide
150/5220-14A Airport Fire and Rescue Vehicle Specification Gide
150/5220-15 Buildings For Storage and Maintenance of Airport
Snow Removal and Ice Control Equipment: A Gide
150/5220-16 Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) for
Non-Federal Applications
150/5300/2D Airport Design Standards—Site Requirements for
Terminal Navigation Facilities
150/5300-4B Utility Airports--Air Access to National Transportation
150/5300-9A Predesign, Prebid, and Preconstruction Conferences
for Airport Grant Projects
150/5300-12 Airport Design Standards—Transport Airports
150/5320-5B Airport Drainage
150/5320-6C Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation
150/5320-12A Methods for the Design, Construction, and Maintenance
of Skid Resistant Airport Pavement Surfaces
150/5320-14 Airport Landscaping for Noise Control Purposes
150/5325-4 Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design
150/5340-1E Marking of Paved Areas on Airports
150/5340-4C Installation Details for Runway Centerline
Touchdown Zone Lighting Systems
150/5340-5B Segmented Circle Airport Marker System
150/5340-14B Economy Approach Lighting Aids
150/5340-17A Standby Power for Non-FAA Airport Lighting Systems
150/5340-18B Standards for Airport Sign Systems
Page 7 of 8
Number Subject
150/5340-19 Taxiway Centerline Lighting System
150/5340-21 Airport Miscellaneous Lighting Visual Aids
150/5340-23A Supplemental Wind Cones
150/5340-24 Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System
150/5340-27A Air-to-Ground Radio Control of Airport Lighting
Systems
150/5345-3C Specification for L-821 Panels for Remote Control
of Airport Lighting
150/5345-5A Circuit Selector Switch
150/5345-7D Specification for L-824 Underground Electrical
Cable for Airport Lighting Circuits
150/5345-10E Specification for Constant Current Regulators and
Regulator Monitors
150/5345-12C Specification for Airport and Heliport Beacon
150/5345-13 Specification for L-841 Auxiliary Relay Cabinet
Assembly for Pilot Control of Airport Lighting
Circuits
150/5345-26B Specifications for L-823 Plug and Receptacle, Cable
Connectors
150/5345-27C Specification for Wind Cone Assemblies
150/5345-28D Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems
150/5345-39B FAA Specification L-853, Runway and Taixway Center-
line Retroreflective Markers
150/5345-42B FAA Specification L-857, Airport Light Bases,
Transformer Houses, and Junction Boxes
150/5345-43C Specification for Obstruction Lighting Equipment
150/5345-44D Specification for Taxiway and Runway Signs
150/5345-45 Lightweight Approach Light Structure
150/5345-46A Specification for Runway and Taxiway Light Fixtures
150/5345-47 Isolation Transformers for Airport Lighting Systems
150/5345-48 Specification for Runway and Taxiway Edge Lights
150/5345-49 Specification L-854, Radio Control Equipment
150/5345-50 Specification for Portable Runway Lights
150/5345-51 Specification for Discharge-Type Flasher
Equipment
150/5370-6A Construction Progress and Inspection
Report—Federal-Aid Airport Program
150/5370-10 Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports
150/5370-11 Use of Nondestructive Testing Devices in
the Evaluation of Airport Pavements
150/5370-12 Quality Control of Construction for Airport Grant
Projects
150/5390-1B Heliport Design Guide
Page 8 of 8
STANDARD DOT TITLE VI ASSURANCES
The County of Contra Costa (hereinafter referred to as the "Sponsor") hereby
agrees that as a condition to receiving Federal financial assistance from the
Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as "DOT") , it will com-
ply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.)
(hereinafter referred to as "Act") and all requirements imposed by 49 CFR Part
21. Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of
Transportation -- Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations") to the end that no person in
the United States shall . on the ground of race, color. or national origin, be
excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of. or be otherwise
subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the appli-
cant received Federal financial assistance and will immediately take any mea-
sures necessary to effectuate this agreement.
Without limiting the above general assurance, the Sponsor agrees concerning
Project No. 3-06-0050-05 (hereinafter referred to as the "Project") that:
1. Each "program" and each "facility". as defined in Sections 21.23(e)
and 21 .23(b) , will be conducted or operated in compliance with all require-
ments of the Regulations.
2. It will insert the following notification in all solicitations for
bids issued in connection with the Project and in adapted form in all pro-
posals for negotiated agreements:
The County of Contra Costa, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d to 2000d et seq.) and 49 CFR Part 21, Non-
discrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Transpor-
tation, hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively assure that
minority business enterprises are afforded full opportunity to submit bids in
response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the
grounds of race. color, or national origin in consideration for an award.
3. It will insert the clauses of Attachment 1 of this assurance in every
contract subject to the Act and the Regulations.
4. Where Federal financial assistance is received to construct a facil-
ity, or part of a facility, the assurance shall extend to the entire facility
and facilities operated in connection therewith.
5. Where Federal financial assistance is in the form of or for the acqui-
sition of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance shall
extend to rights to space on, over, or under such property.
6. It will include the appropriate clauses set forth in Attachment 2 of
this assurance, as a covenant running with the land, in any future deeds,
leases, permits, licenses, and similar agreements entered into by the Sponsor
with other parties: (a) for the subsequent transfer of real property acquired
or improved with Federal financial assistance under this Project and (b) for
the construction or use of or access to space on. over, or under real property
acquired or improved with Federal financial assistance under this Project.
TITLE VI (8/85) Page 1 of 2
7. This assurance obligates the Sponsor for the period during which Fed-
eral financial assistance is extended to the program. except where the Federal
financial assistance is to provide. or is in the form of personal property or
real property or interest therein or structures or improvements thereon, in
which case the assurance obligates the Sponsor or any transferee for the
longer of the following periods: (a) the period during which the property is
used for a purpose for which Federal financial assistance is extended, or for
another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits. or
(b) the period during which the Sponsor retains ownership or possession of the
property.
8. It will provide for such methods of administration for the program as
are found by the Secretary of Transportation or the official to whom he/she
delegates specific authority to give reasonable guarantee that it, other spon-
sors, subgrantees, contractors. subcontractors, transferees, successors in in-
terest, and other participants of Federal financial assistance under such pro-
gram will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to the Act. the
Regulations, and this assurance.
9. It agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial enforce-
ment with regard to any matter arising under the Act, the Regulations. and
this assurance.
THIS ASSURANCE is given in consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining
Federal financial assistance for this Project and is binding on its contrac-
tors, the Sponsor, subcontractors, transferees, successors in interest and
other participants in the Project. The person or persons whose signatures
appear below are authorized to sign this assurance on behalf of the Sponsor.
Date July 20, 1987 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
Y
Har'o1d E. Wight. nager of Airports
TITLE VI (8/85) Page 2 of 2
CONTRACTOR CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself., its as-
signees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor"
agrees as follows:
1. Compliance wit R=ulations. The contractor shall comply with the
Regulations relative to nondiscrimination in federally assisted pro-
grams of the Department of Transportation (hereinafter, "DOT") Title
49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from
time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are
herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract.
2. Nondiscrimination. The contractor, with regard to the work performed
by it during the contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of
race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub-
contractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equip-
ment.
quip-
ment. The contractor shall not participate either directly or indi-
rectly in the discrimination prohibited by section 21.5 of the Regula-
tions, including employment practices when the contract covers a .pro-
gram set forth in appendix B of the Regulations.
3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of MalQrJ als and
Equipment. In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or nego-
tiation
ego-
tiation made by the contractor for work to be performed under a subcon-
tract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor
of the contractor's obligations under this contract and the Regulations
relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or nation-
al ori gi n.
s 4. nformation and Reports. The contractor shall provide all information
and reports required by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant
thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other
sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the
sponsor or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be pertinent to
ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders, and instructions.
Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive pos-
session of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information,
the contractor shall so certify to the sponsor or the FAA, as appro-
priate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the in-
formation.
5. -Sanctions for Noncomuliance. In the event of the contractor' s noncom-
pliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the
sponsor shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the FAA may de-
termine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to--
a. withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until
the contractor complies, and/or
b. cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract, in whole
or in part.
TITLE VI (8/85) ATTACHMENT 1
Page 1 of 2
CONTRA TOR CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its as-
signees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor"
agrees as follows:
1. Complianc2 with Regulations. The contractor shall comply with the
Regulations relative to nondiscrimination in federally assisted pro-
grams of the Department of Transportation (hereinafter, "DOT") Title
49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from
time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are
herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract.
2.. Nondiscrimination. The contractor, with regard to the work performed
by it during the contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of
race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub-
contractors, including procurements of materials and leases .of equip-
ment.
quip-
ment. The contractor shall not participate either directly or indi-
rectly in the discrimination prohibited by section 21.5 of the Regula-
tions, including employment practices when the contract covers a .pro-
gram set forth in appendix B of the Regulations.
3. .Solicilations for_�ubQon:tracts, Including Procurements of Materials and
E4u i en In all -solicitations either by competitive bidding or nego-
tiation made by the contractor for work to be performed under a subcon-
tract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each
potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor
of the contractor's obligations under this contract and the Regulations
relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or nation-
al origin.
4. -Infgrmation and RQpQrts. The contractor shall provide all information
and reports required by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant
thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other
sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the
sponsor or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be pertinent to
ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders, and instructions.
Where any information required of a contractor is In the exclusive pos-
session of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information,
the contractor shall so certify to the sponsor or the FAA, as appro-
priate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the in-
formation. n-
formation.
5. Sanctions for Noncompliance. In the event of the contractor' s noncom-
pliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the
sponsor shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the FAA may de-
termine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to--
a. withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until
the contractor complies, and/or
b. cancellation, termination, or suspension 'of the contract, in whole
or in part.
TITLE VI (8/85) ATTACHMENT 1
Page 1 of 2
6. Incorporation of Provisions. The contractor shall include the provi-
sions of paragraphs 1 through 5 in every subcontract, including pro-
curements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the
Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor
shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement
as the sponsor or the FAA may direct as a means of enforcing such Pro-
v isi ons i ncl udi ng sancti ons for noncompl iance. Provided, however, that
in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with,
1 iti gati on with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such di rec-
tion, the contractor may request the sponsor to enter into such litiga-
tion
itiga-
tion to protect the interests of the sponsor and, in addition, the con-
tractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to
protect the interests of the United States.
TITLE VI (8/85) ATTACHMENT 1
Page 2 of 2
AUSES FOR DEEDS, LICENSU, LEASES, PERMITS OR SIMILARINSTRUMENTS
ATTACHMENT 2
The following clauses shall be included in all deeds, licenses, leases, per-
mits, or similar instruments entered into by the Sponsor pursuant to the provi-
sions of Assurances 6(a) and 6 (b) .
1. The (grantee, licensee, lessee, permitee, etc. , as appropriate for himself,
-his heirs, personal representatives, successors in interest, and assigns,
as a part of the consideration hereof, does hereby covenant and agree (in
the case of deeds and leases add "as a ,covenant running with the land")
that in the event facilities are constructed, maintained, or otherwise op-
erated on the said property described in this (deed, license, lease, per-
mit, etc. ) for a purpose for which a DOT program or activity is extended or
for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or bene-
fits, the (grantee, licensee, lessee, permitee, etc. ) shall maintain and
operate such facilities and services in compliance with all other require-
ments imposed pursuant to 49 CFR Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally
Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation, and as said Regula-
tions
egula-
tions may be amended.
2. The (grantee, licensee, lessee, permitee, etc., as appropriate for himself,
his personal representatives, successors in interested, and assigns, as a
part of the consideration hereof, does hereby covenant and agree (in the
case of deeds and leases add "as a covenant running with the land") that:
(1) no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin shall be
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise
subjected to discrimination in the use of s aid facilities, (2) that in the
construction of any improvements on, over, or under such land and the fur-
nishing
ur-
nishing of services thereon, no person on the grounds of race, color, or
national origin shall be excluded from participation in, denied the bene-
fits of, or` otherwise be subjected to discrimination, (3)' that the (gran-
tee, licensee, lessee, permitee, etc. ) shall use the premises in compliance
with all other requirements imposed by or pursuant to 49 CFR Part 21, Non-
discrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Trans-
portation, and as said Regulations may be amended.
TITLE VI (8/85) ATTACHMENT 2
Ic
3 2 "1 1 i
'^ o
gat f��t i� Aacy��o No
oo AVON]
Ao e s�a��y itis ,� tt�
t j" rtirco. t t
200a01 `� on ` a
44 A�73
l,�-J; �. _ t. Cj1" -a-._ ^t� t ✓ • .e� e•rttleG!cc
Y. C� ��• - ` tlG` � 1.00 .v ! �-M a l
3 200.07 : •� •« 1 20a
.a>� ;•' `r' r�C�6J o,'ra�t, 0 0 to t e � � I\
e.• t ' a+t tt J, tIt'ta
.,... a 'j,
♦.•• .• � ,�t4 • .lam •SIM t« ' !'J1 i/''�i i/''�i f)1 ••* •'
,c tryt wt o 41 r a' �—�• � .t_V 1J. .L 1
t" A_ ec t m C• F t
}• •• .a,a--,a.a, Vc•�1 `c <t 4 t f,tat•••-e.a � l
O
1 �-�C , l �'�"+1 rr itro R �.. •sem«.c.«a ct ♦'�_
�. G 2
i t"+c'+•tt't't'
� V (�� ('`}_ ,1,:aa-+.ca �... •-.� �,y, T-.. ._�. ttaOnit tt
u ;, .1 f: r :17 1. e1 V.�!r .lJ t �X' ^a •, T14
i..r. 1.a.•a•w �.
n tyaa V•(1•rttn
a•Nt 011•+O QI
;t ;7—� ..t• t'' lla L .� __ • ab it a 9C\( .r.�.
,C f�A V\ t± !wwtt !�•L' t • 11�1�� 'J'""•"30« ��,. i 1....... ,..,• J �,
ecr �j 1 ........ ., p. UCHANA c
fICL D
� \ `�. ( O ..i- 1•' .1::j:...' - tcaa- - � •,*\O+-. � � IAr+Ot _!'/r�� rta.t'+• J'\ .
.si• tiq �•�-•va c— I f 6'� ' j7� 3• ��k �.f'^_ .�. ' t,c�a• .-..�a
,.r .j " 1 apt' t.. ��� a,+•P ft,\
r
-
t.'y l•�•t r rrc Ort f` C} S f a j t d 4"C O ♦ •,N`o f. ,.Owl eaj ,�r�\'
Su
PAC
(•. , t+� _i/ a «, t 1':\ s at "_`t
w
'O a at '�l�.o.ra t�"�c'�' •'� 4 J1 ` .
:..y.:�' ( �• f�i Imo:'.:Y�i ,•J._ 1 .l1 tV ( !U rM '�'1+ • v
�r � T' ...1••�I: •t �+^.7.a� O� 1 tte-�,r a�Cc +, ! .at/a f T l'0 ,• �, fjJ����,J�
.� 1./� . t G.: � � f' t n•• •i♦ rt
�i V ..,t � •/\.'..�i.:..;R':�a,('t,''� ! O •aT � 4` � t 74 � ft��•7 ttt t`<�a, � .�
�.----•� /� <.r.•,� 1 �`• 1.. t � " ice' +v t S /I/��+jJ �)
� r-hP, � 1�_�~ -� w •t � r•i...15 d�•�.7 \ thr.t f1 a _^Lx'" N.
,lt rF. .J~t ~O M. Q Y :?r.,"',. �_ A4 L- b�R� f'(11�r�-1 �1^•-n• r
J! f1 «V
Exhibit "Ell
PACMECO TOWN COUNCIL
45 Ru theA4 okd'Lane
Pacheco, CA 94553
TOWN
oou" 510-370-0880
DATE: February 20, 1993
TO: Supervisors Sunne McPeak and Jeff Smith - Internal Operations
FROM: Joyce Jones, President, Pacheco Town Council .
SUBJECT: Helicopters - IOC Meeting February 22, 1993
The helicopter crash near Hidden Valley Elementary School September 30,
1992-brought the previously simmering concerns of the community of Pacheco
regarding air traffic from Buchanan Field to the boiling point and ,
culminated in a large public meeting on October 5 wherein the community
called for, at the very minimum, a cessation of the increasingly menacing
helicopter training flights over Pacheco.
Numerous community members attended the Board of Supervisors meeting of
October 6 to voice these concerns and support Supervisor Fanden in her call
for a moratorium on all training flights until they could be moved to
Byron Airport. This position was unanimously reiterated by members in
attendance at the October 14 Pacheco Town Council General Meeting.
In the many months since, proposals for various off-site locations for
helicopter training have continued to be bandied about, as they have been
for years. It appears we are still no closer to banishing this nuisance
from our community.
Enough time has been wasted and more than enough excuses offered. I have
visited Byron Airport and it appears to be grossly underused considering
the space avaiable. Skydiving and other activities at Byron have been
offered as one reason for not pursuing this as an off-site training
location; however, I found that these activities primarily take place on
weekends.
The time has come to stop compromising our community's peace and safety and
discontinue exploring options that will never prove suitable. The Pacheco
Town Council agrees with the P-MAC and their position that the County
should pursue Byron as the only practical off-site location for helicopter
training flights.
yce Jones, Pr idem
Pacheco Town Council
• February 21 , 1993
Internal Operations Committee
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Dear Members of the Board :
On Wednesday February 17 , 1993 at 7 p .m. PMAC had its first off-
icial meeting since October 14 , 1992 . After that date PMAC meet-
ings were consumed by Redevelopment speeches. The first year term:.
of four members ended November 30 , 1992 , and the new members were
not selected until February 1993 .
The three original PMAC members met with the four newly selected
members at the airport conference room . After we became acquainted,
We elected our officials , and then we discussed at lengh : the
PMAC ' a position regarding training helicopter flights.
We decided unanimously to terminate the search for any alternate
training site , do what we can to modify training flight patterns
and wait until all or some of the training flights can be directed
to the Byron airport .
IN ANSWER TO YOUR LETTER DATED 10-28-92
My letter was given to the Board Clerk 10-16-92. I don ' t know
why you did not receive it until 10-27-92 . On that date each
Supervisor was not only provided with my letter , but was also
provided with a map indicating where i believed the copters should
fly . A copy of that map:..is included with this letter .
When PMAC voted for a moratorium, we requested that the training
helicopters be moved to a SAFER LOCATION such as the route
indicated on the map near Acme Dump .
Byron had not even been selected as a site , so there was no reason
for PMAC to visit the Byron Airport and to discuss the issue
with the Byron Municipal Advisory Council .
-2-
I had hoped the training copters would be relocated to the pos-
ition ;shown on the map near the Acme Dump . However , before I was
able to speak to the Board , I conversed with Dorothy Sakazaki .
She convinced me that such a location was a great hazard to all
people concerned .
When I was speaking to the Board , you asked me where I would I
prefer to relocate the copters . I told you my original choice
was Martinez , but since it was such a hazardous location, I felt
the training copters should remain near Pacheco until they could
be moved to Byron .
PMAC did not make any recommendation:::regar.ding fixed wing air-
craft because I stated in my letter , "This letter refers speci-
fically to the Robinson 22 helicopter .'
When PMAC recommended the moritorium they were not aware that the
county could not make a distiction between helicopters and other
aircraft . This fact was not mentioned in the chambers when Super-
visor Faden requested a moratorium at an earlier date.
Although the copter crash in late September WAS NOT a training
flight , the R22 which crashed belonged to HAI . According to
Scott Erickson , an investigator with the National Transportation
Safety Board , "There is a feeling this was an introductory type
of flight . " He added , "Authorities believe Lacy was giving Pol
a 30-minute trip to .see if he liked copters and that the pair had
just left the airport after being cleared for a takeoff. "
According to the latest information , Helicopters Adventure Inc .
is not a Fixed Base Operator so perhaps the county would not
be exposed to legal financial damages if it tried to relocate HAI?
After all of the negative publicity regarding training helicopters ,
if there is another crash , the county will certainly be exposed
to great financial damages .
Sincerely ,
Wally Wiggs , President , PMAC
, • 1. sy
• F_:EC c' `r�7
=.0,-
October 16 , 1992
CLERK 6•..-•nD ;,VpaP.VISORS
C,)NT ,rrlg�/,CO.
Sunne McPeak, Chair of the Board
Members of the Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Members of the Board:
At the October 14 , 1992 Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council Meet-
ing the subject of supporting a moratorium on helicopter training
flights from Buchanan Airport Field was discussed. This letter
refers specifically to the Robinson R22 helicopter.
Following the discussion, a vote was taken and a motion was made
and unanimously approved that PMAC supports a moratorium on all
training flights from November 3, 1992 until they can be moved to
a safer location.
Copies of this letter will be sent to the Public Works Director
and Airport Manager .
Sincerely,
Wally Wiggs, President , PMAC.
CC : Mike Walford , Director
Hal Wight , Airport Manage.
cc: Q�b Ire Worts ���.
ROUTE TO OFF AIRPORT SITE
% .1r;I
I � i rra
ORIGINAL PATTERN ( 1
+
PATTERN �..
�. ERN #2 ANTRA „�o COS 1,4 t
. 3� sod i � .
c 3150 1
3 2 CSO 1
�0 Hld E E I C 0 P T E
- -- ._.... ° AVON
SHOUL-D'—F--. F
-weTEFIPONT —t 1��� ^r— �-— +
+ 3200 01 I 0 . 4`
•=�...-�I- _ `fit' I
rNtlluc�ro
.A ---._... "'�-- ) D`` rN i
3200.O1� AN C11 2001
I
O I•,I jf?� •7•e r � A �� 1
t` i' I `�D•�b��l• J ■ LLV
tLtr 7rr +
a '-
i .�rr.�j� 7x( • I wT �p•G.i'+•;%°�, 1� sl�'p Ul I 3200,
�(
•i 37�'Or. 4 1.7 KfrrT,y J 3 2 00• 2
1' �•e� • �pw�7e JKQt7 `
I.ntl,.•.e^ v " frr�n7 fY•
Jf Its. "Lool Cf
I , \
SSJ 12i o r �\ .• •r'�• I YTY/.Il ivu All
i o e.vq Iro Ouv:
- Y�fS' i`,. Q , g ""u ;c r ,• F,1N�"', t7fr1 �'S•wz�iow`�•4_ �r...�,.r, '
' t Na `,M C'e �' .` •CI �•` a\C� �rJ� i^rr �(1O O T � 1 M.I./.I II , EL� •,1 f
1 I' �'••�, \ � �L Z 999b �tCIrI •I((\]\ • M• 1 C�
r\�/\ •.-I
O /1� �� .i��.w •.,t . •'�•' I � MIR � r�•� Lai A� 1\
.�4yr+�r � 7+• vr• �1s�.e•• 1 f C���i�•Oe.�Iru.. O 1'.
/,lr♦
i�' �` r�w•••'�,� Tri CT �[ ��:. � � 1 ■n�_ • •.Ge• Y0/.1 Y O
{, .,• r•T + . ' it `--- 1 , .'/ TO•`ai I y" •• 'I„LL' i r,
^ v •,r1 rad e r ;
•.i Dell
EXHIBIT E'A
�,�, ¢ '•� ...�,,.�.'. .••� -i� .. rr ,ET •',
�
..�
r D /
- -
15
u�l rrnpTFS R ,,.FLY HERE •
Friday, October 2, 1992 Contra Costa Time"A
Judge weighs use of DNA evidence
In a case that may have a wide-ranging impact on criminal court cases, a
Contra Costa Superior Court judge is considering whether to allow DNA
evidence in the upcoming sexual assault trial of a Martinez man. —7A
Ictions after c
"If that helicopter had crashed on the County air traffic is valuable training.
Juvenile Hall facility, the county would "To make it easier for their economic
have been wiped out financially ... or if it viability, we're the ones who suffer," Fah-
had hit the elementary school or gone into den said.
a home." Since opening five years ago, the heli-
It was still unclear Thursday who exact- copter flight school's fleet has grown from
ly sponsored the fatal flight. The victims one helicopter to 20 and draws students
were flying in a Robinson R22 helicopter from around the world for its six-month
belonging to P.J. MacLellan Ltd. and shay- training program.
ing hangar space at Buchanan Field with Some helicopter training already occurs
Helicopter Adventures Inc., according to a at Byron,where two to three copters prac-
news release from Helicopter Adventures. rice every weekday.
The statement said Helicopter Adven- Scott Erickson, an investigator with the
tures believed the aircraft was on a shorl National Transportation Safety Board,said
sightseeing trip.They declined any further details of Wednesday's ill-fated flight still
comment Wednesday and Thursday. were unknown.
But on Thursday, Buchanan Field's Wil- "There is a feeling that this was an in-
liams said the craft had been operated by troductory type of flight," he said, adding
Helicopter Adventures. that authorities believed Lacy was giving
"It is leased back to Helicopter Adven- Pol a 30-minute trip to see if he liked heli-
tures. ... that's where it was operating out copters and that the pair had just left the
of," Williams said. airport after being cleared for takeoff.
Helicopter school owners have resisted It could be six months before cause of
efforts to move to Byron, contending there the crash is officially determined, Erickson
is inadequate housing and restaurants for said. Witnesses said the craft's rotor
students, and that flying in.heavier Central seemed to malfunction.
SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK Contra Board of Supervisors
Supervisor, District Four
• 2301 Stanwell Drive Costa
Concord, California 94520 County
(510)646-5763
(510)646-5767 (FAX)
October 28, 1992
Mr. Wally Wiggs
187 Freda Drive
Pacheco, CA 94553,,�� DD DD
Dear Mr. iggs:ow
We received the enclosed letter on October 27, 1992, and will
consider it in conjunction with a report from the Aviation
Advisory Committee on November 3 .
When President Wiggs appeared before the Board of Supervisors on
October 27, we asked him three questions which we would like to
pass on to the full Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC) .
Those questions are:
1. Did PMAC make any recommendations regarding fixed-wing
aircraft training flights?
2. When the PMAC made the recommendation contained in your
letter, were the members aware that FAA restrictions
prohibit the county from making a distinction between
helicopters and other types of aircraft?
3 . Has PMAC visited Byron Airport or met with the Byron
Municipal Advisory Committee to discuss the feasibility of
moving some or all of the training flights from Buchanan
Field to Byron Airport?
The Board of Supervisors respectfully requests the PMAC to
address these questions and advise us on what course of action
you recommend since (a) we cannot legally treat helicopters
differently from other aircraft; and (b) the helicopter crash in
late September was not a training flight so we need to deal with
helicopter safety issues apart from problems associated with
training flights. Further, County Counsel has warned the Board
of Supervisors that declaring a moratorium on all training
flights from Buchanan Field (we would have to halt all training
flights, not just helicopters, in order to not violate FAA
regulations) is likely to be in conflict with the fixed-based
operators' (FBO' s) leases and agreements and expose the county to
legal financial damages. Although I voted against granting an
FBO lease to Helicopter Adventures and argued that it was
irresponsible to enter into an FBO lease with the helicopter
Mr. Wally Wiggs
October 28, 1992
Page Two
training lease until we had worked out restrictions on noise and
identified an alternative site for training, the Board voted 4-1
to enter into the agreement. Therefore, the county has a real
dilemma as to how to best act to relieve the impacts on Pacheco
from helicopter training flights and to ensure maximum safety
from all helicopter operations, while at the same time not
violating the FAA rules and incurring lawsuits. That is why I
have actively tried to locate an interim training site off
Buchanan Field. The Board of Supervisors would greatly
appreciate hearing your views on this matter and would entertain
any alternative site proposals you may have.
Thank you for your assistance and attention to this important
matter.
Sincerely,
ASunne Wright McPeak
SWM:vlb
Enclosure > >>
.d
`�8ac' `s's' •=sed;. ;; .: :�i<:;:,^;.•�::,<. k'.. ,,.
3
...titian. .. .:��bk:•.:j•°�.i:^s':w:
.:.e::"s..:::.2'.•'i• .San...... .... .. .. .. ss
°Fi:F.L:.... ... .:... '.:..: ...:.......,.bn..... .:' .. fix•
.. :...,.,:n
Ow
Associated Press
A FIREFIGHTER covers one of the victims of a collision Friday near Atlanta.
4 dead in crash over runway
Helicopter on certification flight collides with small plane
Associated Press facility just west of Atlanta. see only the controls and instru-
ATLANTA— A helicopter flown The student pilot of the plane ments in front of him, Sasser said.
by a student pilot who may have was identified as Dan Dunn, 36, of Sasser declined to speculate on
been wearing blinders collided with Alpharetta,and the flight instructor, whether the vision restriction con-
a plane over an airport runway Fri- William A.Meagher,25,of Newnan. tributed to the crash.
day, crashing in flames and killing Prestige Helicopters of Chamb- The helicopter had dual controls
all four people aboard.The other pi- lee, which trains pilots, identified and it would have been up to the ex-
lot also was a student. the dead in its leased helicopter as aminer to spot the plane, Sasser
"The helicopter appeared to fly Dr. Ronald Lorber, an Atlanta orth- said. Hull was an independent ex-
into the bottom of the Cessna"at an odontist, and Richard Hull, an FAA aminer who tested pilots and report-
altitude of about 100 feet, said wit- examiner. ed the results to the FAA.
ness Dan Harbison. "They both fell . Prestige owner Ron Carroll said The aircraft were coming in over
in separate balls of flame and went Lorber was a licensed helicopter pi-
down about 20 feet apart." lot who was taking the test neces- parallel runways, but the helicopter
The two aircraft, a Robinson R- sary to certify him to fly by instru- took a climbing left turn away from
22 its runway to practice a"missed ap-
Ces nah152,werha etpr ctter cingtlanding .meThe
nts alpilot one l was uwearingheither proach," or aborted landing, Sasser
approaches at Fulton County Air- blinders or special glasses designed
said.
port-Brown Field when they collid- to simulate flying in heavy fog, said Carroll said the helicopter was a
ed, Federal Aviation Administration Roff H. Sasser, an air safety investi- 1991 Robinson R-22 Alpha owned
spokeswoman Christy Williams gator with the National Transporta- by Rotor Leasing Corp, of Norcross.
said. tion Safety Board. The plane was owned by Peachtree-
The airport is a non-commercial Lorber would have been able to DeKalb Flight Academy.
sow MJFF
PEOPLE OVER PLANES, INC.
February 3, 1993
TO: SUPERVISORS JEFF SMITH AND SUNNE McPEAK
FROM: DON MOUNT, P.O.P.
RE: HELICOPTERS—IOC MEETING
There are other issues surrounding helicopter training we feel could be
addressed at the 2/8/93 IOC meeting.
1. Noise Complaint System
People calling B.F. about helicopter noise are often encouraged
to call the FAA or HAI in lieu of filing a complaint. We feel this approach
not only distorts the impact of helicopter training on the community, but is
also an attempt to frustrate the callers into "giving up." If the purpose of
complaint statistics is to gauge impacts on the community, we request that
airport staff be directed to process those complaints instead of attempting to
frustrate the public by directing them to a federal agency or to HAI.
Some callers who file complaints do not receive written
response, which leads us to believe that a number of complaints are "lost."
Through the years, we have received consistent reports regard-
ing this situation. We feel this policy not only frustrates the public, but also
greatly distorts the situation.
2. The enclosed material illuminates training activity that occurs
in rural areas as well. We have had conversations with employees at Black
Diamond Mines Regional Park, as well as a property owner on Morgan
P.O. Box 2336 9 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 • (415) 689-5652
Supervisor Jeff Smith -2- February 3, 1993
Territory Road, who have witnessed landings on park lands, state and
regional, as well as on private property.
We have received the FAA data run on R22 accidents referred
to in our newsletter.
On 1/27/83 in Zapata, Texas, an R22 landed in dry grass 18-28
inches tall which came in contact with the exhaust system, causing a fire.
"When the R22 throttle is rolled on, the accelerator pump
injects fuel in the carburetor and unused fuel is then pumped overboard."
This occurred when the pilot attempted to fly out of the fire; the results were
obvious. The craft was destroyed. In this case, the fire was extinguished;
however, given the severe fire potential in the areas around Mt. Diablo, there
is potential disaster.
3. We have never heard night training discussed. Does this occur?
I have consistently seen the R22 in areas of Walnut Creek and Alamo,
as well as Marsh Creek Road. While there may be no legal obligation to
notify these communities, there exists an ethical imperative. There may be
legal questions regarding unauthorized landings on public or private
property.
Fire protection is an issue in this.
One purpose in raising these issues is not to confuse or complicate the
1/8/93 meeting. Our position is that this is an opportunity to look at the
entire situation as it exists today and to deal with it as a whole.
Thank you,
Don Mount
President, P.O.P.
r
■
PEOPLE OVER PLANES,INC.
February 18, 1993
TO: SUPERVISORS JEFF SMITH AND SUNNE McPEAK
FROM: DON MOUNT, P.O.P.
RE: HELICOPTERS—IOC MEETING
After a four-year search for remote off-airport sites to conduct heli-
copter training—which produced no viable location—it must be assumed by
everyone that no such site exists.
Those close to the issue knew this from the beginning. Why would
anyone take seriously proposed sites containing endangered species? Does
anyone believe that proposed wetland sites were anything but a delaying
tactic? Pipelines, tank cars, refineries, airsplace conflicts with flight paths in
and out of B.F., etc.: we were all in a position of waiting for the county to
grind it out, and to regain consciousness. That time has arrived.
This is the moment where everyone should realize that there is only
one alternative left; and, fortunately, it has been the best one all along—for
everyone. Its component parts are as follows:
1. That HAI remain based at B.F.;
2. That the county and HAI agree on an FBO contract;
3. That no training operations occur over people's homes;
4. That all training occur in the vicinity of Byron Airport;
P.O. Box 2336 • Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 • (415) 689-5652
Supervisors Jeff Smith and
Sunne McPeak -2- February 18, 1993
5. That HAI follow Route 4 at a minimum of 1,000 feet from B.F.
to Byron, unless other routes over unpopulated areas exist. (Marsh Creek
Road is not an option.)
6. That HAI respect parkland airspace and acquire agreements
with property owners for their "rugged terrain" training and landings.
Response to Arguments in Opposition to the Byron Scenario
1. In consideration of HAI's operating costs, and in response to a
statement by a pilot and AAC member (made at last Tuesday's AAC meeting
[2-16-93]) that it takes 40 minutes to fly from B.F. to Byron, we ask the
question: why would anyone with basic math skills believe that it takes 40
minutes to fly 35 miles (by road) in a craft with a cruising speed well in
excess of 90 mph?
Given that the actual mileage would be less because overflights
of unpopulated areas to Byron could be achieved, we believe the actual
flight time to be closer to 15 minutes. That flight time, and the return trip,
could easily be incorporated towards certification and so there would be vir-
tually no "dead time."
A conversation we had with the FAA supports this position.
2. Many of us have visited the Byron Airport. Wide-open spaces.
Most skydiving, glider flights and ultralite activity occurs on the weekends,
according to FBO's at the field. Even if it were busy 7 days a week, there is
plenty of room for everyone.
3. We had an extensive conversation with Mr. Gargas in the Cal
Trans Aviation Department regarding permitting of portable pads. Simply
put, since Byron is an existing airport, there are no permitting requirements
for portable pads on Byron Airport. In fact, we were informed that many
airports create landing pads by simply painting the required markings on
existing apron areas.
1
r
Supervisors Jeff Smith and
Sunne McPeak -3- February 18, 1993
Mr. Gargas represents Cal Trans in our area and has been
involved with, and is aware of, our situation. He could give us no reason
why Byron would not work.
4. In reference to legal questions of discriminating between rotary
and fixed wing craft, we concur that there are no legal grounds by which the
county can force HAI to Byron. We believe the county may have some
leverage in requiring an FBO contract given the large number of operations
HAI performs in proportion to the total number of operations at B.F. Since
HAI is currently a subtenant, and it appears there are no available buildings
for them to lease as sole proprietor, an FBO lease agreement is not feasible
at this time.
What all parties need to understand is that the current situation
is unacceptable to P.O.P. and the affected neighborhoods, and that none of
us are going to give up on this.
We will not grow tired; we will not go away; we will be relent-
less and thorough. More importantly, we are right.
It is likely that HAI, because it operates without an FBO con-
tract and is a subtenant, has been paying fewer dollars to the county than an
operation of this size might pay under normal circumstances. They are cer-
tainly aware that B.F. needs their revenues badly, and we speculate that this
sweetheart deal is a result of those dynamics.
While it is arguable that the county has been remiss in achiev-
ing market rates from HAI, this oversight has turned into a positive in that
HAI and the county are now in a position to improve their standing in the
community by hammering out an agreement that protects the community and
ensures HAI's viability as a business.
We would suggest that at critical stages of these anticipated
contract negotiations with HAI, this issue be reconvened before the IOC so
that the public can review the contract and offer input.
Supervisors Jeff Smith and
Sunne McPeak -4- February 18, 1993
This is a critical point. Given the history and dubious efforts by
the county in resolving this issue, we have little or no trust left.
A creative approach is imperative. HAI needs latitude regarding the
duration of the contract. The county needs to perceive itself and proceed as
a representative of the neighborhoods first, which should be an achievable
leap.
This process is a grand opportunity for the county and HAI to regain
some credibility with the community.
The writing has been on the walls for some time now; the string has
run out.
There is no other move to be made that would resemble a solution.
P.O.P. wants to help; we are here for the duration.
Don Mount, President
PEOPLE OVER PLANES
J
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: February 17, 1993
TO: Internal Operations mmittee�
FROM: J.'Michael Walford, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Alternative Helicopter Training Sites
On Monday, February 8, 1993, a meeting of the Internal Operations Committee was held
to receive a report on alternative helicopter training sites from the Public Works Director
and the Manager of .Airports. The purpose was to review what had been done thus far in
an effort to address the issue of helicopter training operations and to determine what
additional actions the Board could take to resolve this matter. Several issues requiring
further investigation were discussed. The following is a summary and preliminary response
to these issues.
Issue: What authority does the County have to enact and enforce a performance-based
Ordinance which allows the County to establish and enforce a noise standard based on a single,
actual event, rather than an average of all events over a period of time?
Response: Several airport operators (cities, counties, etc.) have enacted performance based
ordinances for their airports. These airports include Santa Monica, Hayward, Torrence,
Long Beach and John Wayne. Copies of these ordinances have been requested and staff
will review them to determine their effectiveness and usefulness to Contra Costa County.
Staff has been advised to be cautious before attempting to implement a performance based
noise ordinance without at least one year worth of data from our noise monitoring system.
Noise consultants and other leaders in the industry do not recommend that airports change
their existing ordinances without a minimum of one to two years of data to measure noise
effects under different weather conditions and seasonal changes.
Issue: What is the pattern of complaints which have been filed in terms of the time of day that
the complaints is filed?
Response:
1992 HELICOPTER COMPLAINT ANALYSIS
Total Helicopter Complaints for 1992 were 201'
Day of Week 'notal Complaints that may have
1992 Complaints been training related
Monday 43 38
Tuesday 41 41
Wednesday 30 30
Thursday 43 38
Friday 28 24
Saturday 9 9
Sunday 7 2
Total 201 182
Time of the Day Complaints which may have Complaints not associated
been training related with H.A.I. z
8:00 am - 10:00 am 24 5
10:00 am - 12:00 pm 45 9
12:00 pm - 2:00 pm 46 12
2:00 pm - 4:00 pm 39 13
4:00 pm - 6:00 pm 24 6
Sub-Total 178 45
Complaints between the hours 23
of 6:00 pm & 8:OOam
Total 201
' This total does not include one caller who made over 1,000 complaints relating to
helicopter training activities. This caller averaged rive complaints almost daily in 1992.
z There are at least six other helicopter operators based at Buchanan Field Airport in
addition, transient helicopter operators include CHP, media and East Bay Regional Park
District.
2
Issue: Can we prohibit helicopter and/or fixed wing training flights during the hours between
6:00 p.m. or 7.-00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.?
Section 3. of the Amendments to Airport Ordinance 88-82 states:
"Practice landings and takeoffs, training and/or proficiency operations, including but not
limited to touch-n-go operations, ,shall not be conducted between the hours of 10:00 p.m.
and 7:00 a.m. local time. This time shall be 10.00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. on weekends and
all holidays observed by Contra Costa County."
The Board of Supervisors does have the authority to place further restrictions on touch-n-go
operations, provided any new restrictions are implemented in compliance with the Airport
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA). This matter of will be referred to the Aviation
Advisory Committee (AAC) for a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
Issue. What system can be devised for logging complaint calls which acknowledges callers who
make large numbers of calls in a particular day by stating the number of calls a caller has made
in the acknowledgment letter to the caller, a copy of which is supplied to Board members who
wish to receive copies all such letters.
Response: Such callers can be identified separately and copies of the response letters can
be. made available.
Issue: Is it feasible to monitor the helicopter training flights for both violations of minimum
altitudes and deviations from approved flight paths and impose penalties for violations of these
requirements?
Response: FAR 91.79 prescribes the minimum safe altitude for aircraft. For fixed wing
airplanes, the minimum safe altitude is 1.,000 feet over congested areas, 500 feet over
sparsely populated areas. Helicopters are allowed to be operated less than these minimums.
The Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, assigns the FAA exclusive and absolute
authority concerning use and management of the navigable airspace of the United States and
air traffic control. State and local authorities may not preempt that authority.
Issue: What would be involved in negotiating and approving a Fixed Base Operator contract
with Helicopter Adventures in an effort to gain additional control of the manner in which flights
are made and increase revenue to the Airport Enterprise Fund?
Response: Staff met with the helicopter operator to determine if they would be interested
in building an FBO on the site and review some possible patterns. HAI indicated that they
would be open to resume negotiations with the County on this subject. Staff will pursue this
provided training patterns north of Highway 4 are feasible.
Issue: Is it possible to reach agreement with Mr. Corr that he will voluntarily move all or a
portion of his training flights to the Byron Airport when it is operation?
Don Mount surmised that HAI could remain based at Concord, fly for approximately 10 to
15 minutes over to the Byron Airport at 90 kts., do their training, take a box lunch, and
return to Concord thereby avoiding the Pacheco area. He further surmised that this should
3
not place a financial strain on the helicopter operators. He felt that the 10 minute flight
from Concord to Byron and return would add up to the number of hours necessary for a
pilot to receive his rating. By commuting from Concord to Byron, this would negate the
need for housing accommodations in the area and that by packing a lunch they would not
need to visit restaurants in the area. Staff responded that they would contact the helicopter
operators to respond to that.
Response: The response from HAI was that this would not be a viable alternative for
several reasons which included the following: 1) The commute to Byron Airport from
Concord Airport would have the effect of stringing the complaints over Concord, Clayton
and Byron. Complaints associated with the existing helicopter traffic pattern and noise is
localized. HAI recognizes that the existing pattern is not perfect but it is the best that we
have. 2) Regarding the speed of an R-22; training activities are normally conducted a 60-65
knots. 3) The commute time to Byron is approximately 20 minutes by helicopter. A typical
helicopter flight lesson is approximately one hour and twenty minutes. Any time longer than
one hour and twenty minutes is at best a waste of time, as the student becomes fatigued and
learning ceases to be effective. Adding a commute time of 40 minutes round trip to Byron
would cost approximately $100 extra to the student per lesson (The operating cost of an R-
22 is $155 per hour) leaving only 40 minutes for a actual training. 4) Public perception
appears to be that all students in the pattern are first time beginners. According to HAI,
over 90% of all HAI's training in the pattern is flight instructor training - not first time
students. TRainee flight instructors are licensed pilots and are not required to build any
additional flight time. They would not benefit from the 40 minute flight to Byron. HAI
would undoubtedly lose these customers. 5) Students need a minimum of 40 airtime hours
to get their pilots license. Any number of hours in excess of what is necessary is costly and
unnecessary. If HAI were to move to Byron Airport, commute, take a lunch, etc., they
would have to raise the rates at least $100 per lesson and the reduction of actual training
time from 80 minutes to 40 minutes per lesson would double the number of needed lessons.
HAI feels it is unlikely that their business could survive in such a remote location as Byron
Airport.
Issue: Gathering various noise ordinances, particularly the one from Burbank which has been
tested and upheld in court, as examples of a noise Ordinance Contra Costa County might wish
to adopt. The Internal Operations Committee would like to have a summary of the principal
features of each such Ordinance.
Response: See attached Exhibits.
Issue: Can either temporary or permanent noise monitoring equipment be located on Temple
Drive in Pacheco? What is the cost of installing either temporary or permanent equipment?
Response: A portable noise monitor can be located on Temple Drive in Pacheco at no
additional cost other than power. If it is determined to be necessary or desirable to add
additional permanent noise monitoring sites to our system, hardware and installation for
each additional noise monitor will cost approximately $10,000. This cost does not include
land purchases, power, or telephone service, or any necessary trenching. Depending on the
selected site, these charges could be in excess of $1.3,000.
4
i
0?1IB/$3 16.09 V510 783 4556 HA1 WAKU A l KVUKl �c qatl�
Public Works DepartmOt
-rl
FAX : #1 (510) 783 4556
TO: p
COMPANY:
FAX NO: —`�. 1
------ _ _. UAG>vNT: {mark} �.
DATE. . TIME: ISR1E
—.
PAGES TRANSMITTED: (Inclutling this p.aige)
COMMENTS:
20.91 SkywT'st 17rive,ft�ctr,�41..1..1 K}_itl- 6cn 9 (Ai)Lf?-9(i':J-..FAN(Eli)-lii.-iiii • TDD N15)53--77W
tcirn:d.��r,r�.�'}ikd ilei .• .' .- - ., - ,
16:10 Ir' I O 783 4556. HAYWARD AIRPORT
MecdVe
F , 1992 .
0RbnwCE so.
AW oRI:1nw= -REPEALING. gEc=GNS Z-^ :04 `
MMOITCH 2' 6.02 Ab'rE7 25..1:7.3 .,OF CHAPTER: 21
;,A►RT1CLE: ;. AKNDIr C SECrtOUS 1-1'4 a a:(30
06(a). (6) .OF c2ukpm -1,. ARTICLE 3; AND
ADDINGSECTIONS 2-6.113 THROUGH 2-5.128 To'
CI3AE''L'ER 2, ARTICLE '6 AND 'ARTICL2' 11 TO'.
CBMP 2 OF THE HAYWARD ' IiCZPAL :CO1)
PERIZA,aN1NG.'1O THE. REGULA'I.'TO ANI?' CONTROL OF.
A -CRAM KOISE At' RA.YWAPJ3 AIR 222e(INAL
HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA, '-
WHEREAS,
A IFORNIA.WHERE As, the City Ctouncll at .the. City .of Hayw'atd hereby
finds and declares that.
(1) The 'City of Hayward- is .the,-proptietor 'and operator. 'ate
the Hayward Aix- Termi n4l located within:its .
Corporate limits;
(2) subj4ct .to, any zegulatforts ar .resti:i,ct ons whzc2i'm2ey be
imposed by state crfederzil. lav, the .City. as the ai"Po_-t
proprietor has the authority tri- adopt reasonable rules
-regulating the. use of the AA.Lrport;.-includi.ng the pager t0' .
restrict or deny the use 6t the A=pgrt to aircraft .generating
excessive noise levels;
(3) The control of airport. noise is.-inherently .a .matr- aE
local concern and: there is a detonstxated need for=noise:
r6gulation at the.Airport;
(4) It is in .the public interest that. aircraft ,noise,be
reduced to ensure- the peace an4':traix4uility of'.resident`al
reigt borhoods without i mpairing the ability orf .tha Airport t .
serve the general aviation needs. of the coi(muni.ty and:the,
national air tat ion, sys' eu;
(5) It is the policy of the City Coiinci:l of."the .City Cf =
Hayward to make a reasonable ,+af.fert. Iro -reduce".noise tram.
aircraft operations at,the-- Al*—port; . '
(6) in art effort to gat)ier &'II available.information,,
record citizens* complaints,,. and analyze. -and rico mend. saZut3.oris.
to the noise problem., the Airport. staff:has'cchduct�ad a public'
survey and a"series of public i4drkshbps ail all aspects: o.f the
airport nol-se problem.;
(7) The City CouriC it has analyzed the:.results .o f the polo l i6.-
workslacps as well a5 the noise mo�nitoririq and other. data .
regarding aircraft operations at the Airport: and finds tliat:the•
noisiest airoxaft utilizing. the Airport produce annoyances: and
C complaints ,far in. excess o :their prr portion_.of total
percentage of operation; .
02/16/93 16.11 V510 783 4556 HAYWAW A1KPOK:1
(s) The city Council has considered.the aconami_G impact and .:
the costs and benefitA Of this 'ordinance as-well-as alternative-.
noise restrictions and noise measures:
(9) One of the purposes of nai.se enforce=ent standards
under this ordinance is to a11".all -===ant operators Ofnoisy
aircraft the _ 'Iexi]Ality to modify:.their aircraft or vt1servrise
bring their activities into compliance; and
(10) A draft of this ordinance has been ci z7ctilated and
public meetzngs held to recaive camments from interested parti6s
on its provisions_
NOW, TH-EREFop_-, THZ CXTY COUNCI: OF CITY OF HAYWAPD GOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS
�,ecCion S.�ct.ian 2-6,119 oQ Chapter 7., Article S cf the
Hayward Municipal Code is hereby repealed.
Section 2 . Sections 2-5.119 through 2-5.127. of C4aptez 2
A.r-ticle 6 of the Hayward municipal code are hereby added to read
in full as follows:
"8.Z'R TERM_-LNAL PlUTY,S AND REC-,-_rATTflNS. ATR�RA_r Noisa
RESTRT_C IONS. .
'MSEC. 2-5.119 QEFLN-TT01f . The follewirg texas are def inge i.
as follows unless it is apparent from their con4ert that a ,
different 'meaning is intended:
" (a) Single Event Naise Excasure .Level (SERE:L) . The single
event noise exposure level, in decibels, is the naisa
exposure level of a single event, such as-an aircraft ..
flyhy, measured over- the'time interval between: the '
initial and final- times for which the noise level of -a
single event exceeds a given threshold noise bevel.;
rr (ij) p-we;chted NQ_ise 'Level (NL) The A-weighted noise
:level, in decibels, is the sound- pressure level-
measured using the slow: dynamzc characteristics to
type 1 or type 2 sound level meters specified in. the
Amer!iean National Standard Specifications .for' Sdund
Level Meters, ANSI 51.4-1971 (or latest revfsxon
thereat) _ The A-weighting characteristics modi`y the
frequency resporsa of tje medsux-ing instrument .to
account approxi*nately for the frequency charactex"tics.
of the hLuaan ear;
"(c) Fe 'eral Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory -rirculax '
36-3F (FAA advisory Circular 36-_3F_) . Federal Aviation .
.Administration publication entitled I*Esti.mated Noise
Levels in. A-weighted Decibels," which lists .taka-dff
and approach noise levels for all fixed-wing aircraft
16jy3 16 11 V610 '783 4556 HAYWAKO,AIKVUK�
• �vwi
i n the U.S. Fleet ,(except^'for ei xp4rimeiritil itfi4 o_
aircraft) a: .-uiBasureij mt`21;'325 feet•.•(6,500 metaks).:
from begizsufng .cf take-off•.=gI]. fcr'ta3ce�-off'ri�iisr�.aid
+6,452 ,fee;t-:(2,000 'meters) f3 c= the landing-threshold:
for approach noise- The phrases.- "FAa AdV-Izory'Ci'r6.1lar
36-3FTM shall. refoar to 'tha Fadaral. A�'f atzatz'
+A�di¢?nT 9'i��tj.Citl A��►'I5�j•,C7.rGs2l.ar 3�"i-3F�,�.21C�11dLTN� $�,Z -
rav7.sions thereaf,: or. the version of that.document..' .
currently, in effect; and.
TM(d) Xr for�camant „Qjticer.' The Airport`Director aad `tni P
+ether City employees as, are 4Asigixated by 'the, Airpart
Director with the approval'.of 'the _PubLi:c Obkks Director
and the.city Ma iagar all• aactl ng under the direction. ani .
control of the City MU ager, shall have the .duty acid
authority tc: enforce the ;pravisiCsrts of tate 3tircraft
Noise Restticti6n5, .pursuant. to. section. 836.•5 of th4-'
Calikorn'i.,a State Final. code_,
"SES 2-6.12t! '•AlLi •pg rpt M-
TM(a) No.aircraft may. 'take off.,, l,aj!fd or -otherwise opereta:•at,
',the Airport:k�etween the•..hours of. T:Q.O:a.z. .a1td A;1-00
.m- .if it. gAnOrates a single Evem..'Xb' -;Exposure:
Level. (Sr'`N.EL). which etxcaeds- the follooiing ualues
measured:•at any ove_:oil-the' t
Airpor '.$ ••four. '(4) .Noisa
Monitoring Tor#AAls (NMT) ;
wj
MT I 98 N�� tr1 98
NMT #2 9$ NiSS`1' m� 98
NXT 1#3 g8 r3 �QO
MMT x4 98 . NMT ,4 99
"(b) No aircraft may take off, land, or othdrsise.ape:rate
the Aixport 'at. nzght between the .hours cif.
and 6:59 a.m- if -it.genez-Ates a Single E�en't :Noise
Exposure LeVel. (SFNEL) -which exceeds•the.following'-'
values as measured at azy aiie of the •Airptartt.s: four (4)
Noise MonLt6ring,Terminals' (NMT3 :
uriwars �$�/. $$ R n�i ways_.3,OAr"10I::
N= #2 95'
NMT #2 98 NMT. 2• 95
NMT #3 95 N14T 43 97
NM .474 95 NMT. .J4 96
J.
n5EC- 2-6 121 ..gRE9CFMPT Q O A.>R. MFT MQ3;SE VTO=i6N,
(a) Between thg hours ,ar .!:-00: 3.1¢: and i3:o 0 P-m=r' any
r
aircraft which exceeds '77 Oft -the.' OBA scale on: taki*--�off
y -
4fGi16 3 . 16.1L M10 '133. 4556 f{AYk@Aftt7 AI.izFat)k'f'
- — - !00
As listad in the. M Advise' y: 36-t3r, .shall be • . "
ttaise`levelsestablished sietfcta 2-+5:3� 'ahro�r�:::' .
(b) Between the hours of .11 0i" g.m. and :,d:59 �i,oso P"gag'
aircraft which..eseceedst '7T.-on"the dBA Scale`on tAks-off.
as listed in the. FAA Adv'is+o�ry' C:f.=ula.- "�all..be . .`
prescaated to be in. violation, of the:.mAX1=116 `gti.ngle :I!sVnot .
noise levels .established i2t section 2-4.I 'o aIaave.
^(c) Ai.rczaftC es a=d models which are not listed_in.
Advisory culax 3.6-3F will. be,alloved' tooperate .at";
the Eayward, A-ir T4iD f l* only-:if:' _
"(i) The Federal Aviation. AdMinistration dettern iIhes'
that tho speciits.c aircraft type and model wotl7 a "
meet -the FAA Advisor-j. C:i.rcUlar: 3G.-3F .noise limLts
stdt*d above it. it.-were tested •according to.
Federal. Aviation Adsin.istratica procedures; "and
"(ii)- The operator.perfo.zms a flight test• to :the`
reasonable satisfaction'.of the Airport Di.rec'tcir
using operating p'rodedums Fhidh .indicates :ark
ability to Comply with.-the maXisunz noise .Levens
establ.ishAd in section 2-6.120,:
"SEC. 2-15.2.22 Rte.-8=TAL Q F' 3�14E5 CSN OF- CRA_F`it+OU .
V 01AT Ott. rs�ii}Z '�
' (a) Aircraft owner4 -or, operators of aircraft .presumed to .be
unable-. to, meet the maximum noise limits `es tab2 ished i ri
section 2.w-6.120 aboVe_•shall: be .entitled to .rebut ;t =
presumption" to the reasonable satisfaction of the. .
Airport f]irector by:.
"(1) Furnishing,evidence crhich 'establisher. that the
aircraft type and model" wou3.4 meet the FAA .
Advisory Circt3?ar 35-3F 'levels set in .sactitiii.
;2-6.122; .ingludin'g, but .not. lin a- ted -to, changes ih
operating .procedures,: retrofitting measures; and. .
Granges in engjne_;:. and
"(2) Demonstrating' an 'ability"to comply with the
Maxi.z =� S£NEL noisy limits" established i.n .sectivri
2-&.120 br perforati.ng a flight testusing safe
operating procedures;.
'(b). The Airport Director's :aaproval shall. not :lie
: tuireasonably. w.ithhielct;
" (c) If the ahave conditions are met; the specified aircraft
owner or operator. shall. .be.entitled to operate the
r :
:
-4—
.
02-/16/93 16:13 %Y510 783 4556 NAYWAK1} AIRPORTWj
tit k7t1b
_ _.
approved aircraft 'at.-the•-Atzpartn as.long as'-the
specified operat-.aq cond:itiotza idantifieA, in--the _flj,g t
test acme_ followed dujrixt�:sitbseguet�t oparattic�tt�
a(d) Failure to comply* .with .tete' specifb9d .'opertinS : `,;•.
conditions Sha" constil;uta a.viola.tion .of-these
Aircraft Noise Restrictions: .trych the second, vtalitien '
of the Aircraft Iroise ,Rastrictions,, the. airCitft shall.-.
be excludod from the Admport.for a. .period of it Ieast 6
mcnths. before operating,privileges for that airo�ft
can be, requested agzUn,
"SF,c_ 26.123 ExEffillr?•oNA The bf.
aircraft shall be exempt friam the, provisions ..of .sa icri 2=6.12.4.
above:
"(a) All`'aircraft classified as Stage 3 ;iircxaft. by the
.]Federal', Aviation Adm.inistratian;
"(b) Aircraft operated by the :Unit*' d States at .AieriGa :or
the State of CaZ -forn3.ai .
,•(c) Law enforcement; e=. rgency, . fire, -or to cue aircraft
operated by .any--county;. city,. subd.iv%si.on 'or.special,-
distric�cs- of thin Atate.when. thoise aircraft are
operating in, emergency. zituation's including emergepc:y .
aircraft flights. or,iaedigal purposes,-
" (d) 'Aircraft used. for emergency purposes .during 'an
emergency wh;ch has been officially proclaimed.: by'
competent .authorit'. pursuant. to' tie laws .-of ',the Uxilted
Status, the State of California, .Alameda County, or-the
city cf.Hai ard;
"(a) Civil Air Patrol. aircraft .when engaged ,in7 actaal sea,cr
and' rezcue-missions;
" (f) Aircraft which ars being operated under. a :deGl.a-ed
..
in-flight emergency:•
" (g) Aircraft` operating. as 'a declared air:ambulance_.
emergency flight far hsdica purposes-pursuant to
FUbl is Utilities Cade. section 2,1662.4,'. and
�•(h) Aircraft engaged in takeofts .or landings-while
conducting tests .tender the.. irectl6n of •the Air
teport
Director, in an attempt,'.ta rebut- the- presumption. of
aircraft noise viclaa'tLom parsu*nt -to the provisions of.
sections.2-6'.31,21 aAd '2-6.1:22 .above.:
"Evidence of exemption status 'wilder subsections (f) Arial (g)
above must be provided to -the Airport`within.se�ren' (7.)- days af,
the flight.
4>1r18^�3 16=19 $510 '183 4556 nAlWAKU Alrwuxi
'"SRG -5, 24 CCJI;P& IZTTYOff' ,�NSTRUCTf7R PTFAT. Zri tU,6 "
case of any training flight in.which:bath an 1nstrsxctor pilot.
and .a strident pilot are .la the aircraft which. "is- flovu-.in
violation of any of the A,iicraft Noise Restrictions; txze
i.nstzuctor pilot shall be rebuttably presumed.,to. have causedthat
violatiaoct. - - •
"Stq. 2 5 I25 �PABILIAIRCIRAFT-OMM., For purposes
of the Aircraft Noise Restrictjonr�, if the-pilot of an .airci�aft.-
ca.nnot be othervrise identified; the owner of ari "am craft shall
be presumed to be .the pilot or th4 airc=aft with authority- to`
control the aircraft's opetatio,n, •'or presumed-to have authorized
or assisted in the a-irgraft's'apgzatiorz. The gx�estumtion .may be. .
rebutted only if the '.owner .or lessee identi.fi.es the p�rsoti whs�
in fact was the pilot at the. time of the asserted violation.
FOPC ;^'ENT PRgVT_Sj�ry,t�_ - Any P8rSQM .Who'
operates an ai.rcralt in violation.of- the Aircraft Ndisa
Restrictions shall. be.cluilty of-=.=. infraction.- ,' -Upon -conviction . .
of an infraction, a person- shall--be subject to paYMent of a
fine, riot to -exceed the limits set forth. -in California
Government Code section 36900. In addition, the Airport'
Director may issue orders imposing civil penalties for - '.
violations of the Aircraft; Noise. Restrictions.- The following.
standards and procedures 'shall apply to the enforcement'- of. these'
provision.:`
"(a) Upon the "first violation of any provision of the '
Aircraft Noise Restricti.orrs, a ciliation. 'shall-be- issue
to the violator ands no. GiVil penalty .shall .1�e impaseci;
" (b) Upon the second violation of 'any provision of the
Aircraft Noise Re8trictions.,twithin a three year. erind,
a second citation shall be issued and the vial atcr -
shall be Subject' to an, order :mposi"ng a civil:pebal:ty-
whieh may be a fine .cif up to $300.00, a suspension- or-
airport privi.2egesor permits. for UD to -one year; or
both.;
(c) Upon the.-t:. ird viciation .df. any prdvision of the-
Ai.rcraft Noise 'Re-strLctioris within .a three year period,
a third .citation shall be is5ued and .the.Violator. shall
be subject to an order mposing a civil perdl.ty'whic#
may be a fin ' of up to $300,00, a suspens.,on of alrport
privileges or permits for up, to three bears, Pr bath;
"(d) The Airport Di.ractor may also restrict, access tQ and.
operating privil:egas "at.the air ort subject to
coi pl.iance Grlth .certain-operating conditions -.ir1_.ord e'r.
to ensure future compliance-with. the Aircraft Noise
Rest1r ir"t.ions i
4ilriEi 3 t6.15 U510 '183 4.5'x6 MYWAKO AIKNUKI'
(a) TBefore issuing an.order for a'violat osis. c+f the'.Ai;.r-_
Didis+a Rc3strictians,.• ih :lixport- thine for 'S I. .Vor ider
all.- relavant tactcrrsc..fn'each. case ihCinainq':tIxe
wil`fu-Iness, severity and aat=&- of�the Vialatiaxi, the
,stiance and use o' x'a.fe noir& .abatement 60e atinq
prooadures appropriata to the aircraft, .instvcticus
issued by"FAA 'air traffic control.. tos+rer pe=so=.el :tcir
air traf:eic safety-pi rpo9es, and extraneoX= factors
beyond the pilots control such a8. loss Of power,
�euvei s .to avQ Id. other aircraft o� ut�.usual weather
condiai.ans i - - . -
"(f) Any parson may appeal `ars ardes of the Airport Di=*ctcr.
imposing a civil penalty. by -filing. ,awritten appeal
with the Public Works Director crithin-.seven (7y days of.
t le 'data of the Airport Director's ,cider.* If .the
seventh.day falls' art a x4eeken'd Qac. Iegal he liday,
observed 'by the' City, :thea the appe4,1• may "he filed cn
the next work day.
"(q) An order of the Public, Warks Director shall be final
except for judicial review and shall itot be.. appealable
to trLe City Councii;
(h) A wii ai- vi6nition of,'a lawful, order of -either the.
Airport ft7eecto' r or the Public works. O.rector shall.
constitute. a sepzrate. .and di'stcint violation of thew,
Aircra Et Noise Restrictions";
" (i) Any person wh6 fa;-Is to. pay .a civil penalty within .30
.
days after the i5suance 'of an..crder"to do so'shall pay
a separate charge a£. .an. perceant (101) of the unpaid
amount -of the civil penalty. " The Airport Director =aly
also exclude succi-person from the Airport until the `,
penalty and any. late charges are paid: .arid :
"(7) The remedies establis4ed Hera-in am supplementary,to
any legal or equitable remedies available, to'the. City
.in .its municipal and proprietary capacitie4, including
but not Limited -to i.ts..right `ta' sate -nuisances and'
hazards.
'■tSUC 2-G.127. EXC USIOlVdF As, CRArT M.rUj AIRPORT. . -,,In.,the . .
event any aircraft has .bean operated in. violation,.- of any of the
A rcraft Noise Restrictions. or any_ ether lairs,- _ru].'ss or :
regulations of the'+city an three of more occasions witliin a
three year period, thataircraft ;bay •be .denied the _right ta. i¢.
down, be based at, land .or take-off from the .Airport for .a
period of three years except in emergenpi,es _for the preservation,
of life or property as reasohablry determined by the;Airpart .
Director.
_ _7_
02/16/93 1.6:15 %P510 78 4.556 RAYWAKI.) AIKVUKi LWJt+vy
Secta'tOns 2_$.
114 t3t�Ci5nt
2-6:12'7 of t*lh i.s Artfcle shaal.l not be-enforced,until sib ���
months 'after their adoption. .:. This- tX-j=iticn .period is,provided,
to permit education q.t .the aviation community about.tim
existence of these_ noise restrictions 'as well as .a.ltaxnativft.
noise restrictions which were considered andrejected, to.,
provide .raasonalzl.e natifidation to the owners :pad operatc�i's ,r5t
aircraft, which are pre.sump ttvely, incapable. of ccMplgiiig'Witli
such noise restricti*aspermit compliance- with the 'noise
res~tri.ctians by allow nq a reasonable .time for trtamsition to
quieter zodel.s of ai rc A:Et or,modification .cf' existing
egxif pment
jar.tj�jj 3 sections 26-00 through 2=6.02 "of Chapter 2.,
Article 6 of tha Sayward X=icipal .Code are hereby: repealed.
Suction 4. Chapter .Z of'.the Hayward flunicipa2 Code is
hereby amended to add Article ii to read in full &4..10116WS:
-LIBEMY DE;PA Tt= =, A Iil T 0N5
"SFC 2 11 44 ?,IB My RVLES ANBE_GU IONS. Rules and
regulations far the. administration and operation of the 'Libra.ry
c f the City of Hayward not incoha istent herewith shall bo made ,
by the City Manager,. provided, -hcwe.ver, the City COur_c 1. -Z&Y
direct the City Manager to estabLi:sh, rescind, cr. modify. :such .
rules and regulations not-inc+ansistent.herewith a-; 'tt dowis ,
proper.
"Copies of all rules and regulations pertaining to use. 'of
the Library by the public shall he,Jk6pt' in. theLibrary_ and
available to inspection .by the- public-
"SEC. -ll..fll PTtIVI"G,EE or USE. Any .pe:san may. use "Libzary
materials and facilities within the Library in accordance. with
rules aid regulations. No person shall remove from the Library ..
any Library materials, unless -such. parson .is .a member 6f the ;
Library as hereinafter defined, :,and thea only in accarda0ce. with.
Library rules and regulatians. .
2-11 .'d2_I�B.ARY 1. 5'Hl 4 . hpplicatiari for
membership in the.Library..shall be made .upon a form to lie'
furnished by the Library,'' i-AYtd the .Library shall issue to .the
applicant an official membership certificate atter racceipt t�f.
the membership fee,, ' if appropriate,: All'nemberships .ate .su_bl ect -
to such rules and .r'egulations -tor operation .and use of the
Library as may be made hereuinde,r,;
02/16/93 1b:16 7UbJta lbs '7bbb rIATHA u AIrrtinI !rix.ir+
Section 5_ Section i=3.00 subdivision (b} 'l,) •of tZpter 2., '
Article: 3 of the Rmyvard Municipal Code is hereby :iM4 tded .to
read in Lull aS ,foiloWS
'*(1) Chapter 2Gave�=atent a� �iistratiQzi
{I.} Ait cl.e! 6. :Hayward Xi_r Ter�L Coa3. n
Section 6. Section Z-3.06Subdi- VIsidn.. (a)*(.6,) of Chapter I
Article 3 of •tha '�jayvard Municipal Mdem is.her4by amended:`to
read in full as follows:.
"(S) Airport Dlrecta=' aid Chapter 2, Azticle 6
Pub I is Warks Diref,:t6t -
9L!2_cr.is ft 7. In aGccardance with the provisions ceSec-t=ir�n 620
of the Ci Ly Charter, this ordinance shall:. become -effective .-3-0. .
days from ana after the :date of its:'adoption,
INTRODUCED at a rQgular meeting vE the City Council. of- the-
City of Hayward, heli. 'the a .day: of. . S TY* ;99-1' by
ADO
Catitncilmemtier .f'•ir-•koi; - -
AJc3D Ott ',a regu a.r meetincl OZ the City Counc.f i 'of .the, -
Cit' of Hayward, held the 3rd. day: of. July ,Z.ggl'' Say
tae following vpte�; of -tembers.of said City Council:
A�Y-T5: {':)L:�lCI?,-M!8 Cann:teT�,� . -C6=er.:JiAienez;. Ezand�ll, 'tkxLr i=ez we-rd
No S: NDNE
A.B S ENT: NONE
APPROVED:
.
iyar/of e . a f -Ha yward
DATS
A=S T: '
cit 3. ,mak o£ t2le City of 9etY-Wa
PtSrd.
APROVED � Ta Sora;
City Attorney of thd CI. enf Flayv2tzd
ARTICLE 3. NOISE
GENERAL AVIATION NOISE ORDINANCE
Sec.2-1-30.1. Policy. (1) No aircraft may engage in commercial operations at John Wayne Airport
(a) As proprietor of John Wayne Airport,the County of Orange,by its at night.
Board of Supervisors,is empowered to restrict or deny the use of its Airport (2) For purposes of this section,general aviation aircraft operations at night
based upon noise considerations and finds it is in the public interest to shall mean takeoffs between the hours of 10:00 p.m.and 7:00 a.m.(8:00
minimize any risk of potential liability to the County of Orange for claims of on Sundays);and landings between the hours of 11:00 p.m.and 7:00 a.m.
damage caused by noise associated with aircraft operations at John Wayne (8:00 a.m.on Sundays).
Airport.This article reflects the intent of the Board of Supervisors of Orange (c) Scheduled departure time prohibition.No commercial airline aircraft
County to enact a reasonable regulatory scheme, using the legislative pro-
shall be permitted to operate with a scheduled departure time after 9:30 p.m.
cess,to minimize noise and any potential for damage liability,which does not or before 6:45 a.m.Monday through Saturday or before 7:45 a.m.on Sunday.
unjustly discriminate between types,kinds or classes of aeronautical uses. For purposes of this subsection,"scheduled departure time"shall mean the
(b) Any aircraft operator or person desiring to use John Wayne Airport for departure time listed or posted in published schedules or advertised to the
the purpose of commercial airline or general aviation operations shall be public, or listed in the Official Airline Guide "OAG," as the planned
authorized,pursuant to this article,to engage in such use provided that all departure time from the terminal gate.
aircraft operations are in compliance with noise standards as set forth in this (d) in addition to the enforcement remedies provided for in section 2-1-
article.Consistent with tate noise standards as enumerated in this article,the 30,14,violation of the noise or operating limitations of this section shall be
Board of Supervisors of Orange County does hereby grant a revocable license cause for termination of the passenger airline lease or operatin_agreement by
to use John Waync Airport by commercial airline and general aviation the County of Orange against such operator and shall be subject to the
aircraft as such are defined in this article. penalties and/or fines set forth in Section 8 of the JWA Phase 2 Commercial
Sec.2-1-30.2. Remedies for violation. Airline Access Plan and Regulation.
(a) It shall be unlawful to operate,pilot or authorize to pilot an aircraft in Sec.2-1-30.5. General aviation operations.
violation of sections 2-1-30.4 or 2-1-30.5 of this article. Violation of said (a) No aircraft may engage in general aviation operations at John Wayne
sections shall be a misdemeanor as provided in section 2-1-30.14. Airport if it generates SENEL levels, as measured at John Wayne Airport
(b) No aircraft shall be operated at John Wayne Airport in violation of Noise Monitoring Stations, Ml, M2 and M3, which :are greater than the
sections 2-1-30.7,2-1-30.8,2-1-30.9 or 2-1-30.10.The County Counsel shall SENEL values:
be authorized to commence in the Orange County Superior Court civil M 1 100.8 dB
actions,including but not limited to actions for injunctive relief,to enforce M2 100.9 dB
and/or prevent any violation of said sections. M3 98.5(iB
Sec.2-1-30.3. Definitions. '.'
(b) Curfew.
(a) Sound exposure level shall mean the level of sound accumulation (1) No person shall operate any general aviation aircraft at night if it
during a given event,with reference to a duration of one(I)second. More generates SENEL levels at any monitoring station,either on takeoff or
specifically, sound exposure level, in decibels, is the level of the time- landing,greater than 86.0 dB SENEL,with the exception of John Wayne
integrated A-weighted squared sound pressure for a stated time interval or Airport Noise Monitoring Stations M I and M2 which shall be 86.8 dB
event, based on the reference pressure of twenty (20) micronewtons per and 86.9 dB SENEL respectively.
square meter and reference duration of one(1)second. (2) For purposes of this section,general aviation aircraft operations at night
(b) The single event noise exposure level("SENEL").in decibels,shall shall mean take-offs between the hours of 10:00 p.m.and 7:00 a.m.(8:00
mean the sound CxPoctur level of a single event.such as an aircraft fly-by, a.m.on Sundays):and landings between the hours of 11:00 P.M.and 7:00
measured over the time interval between the initial and final times for which a.m.(8:00 a.m.on Sundays).
the sound level of a single event exceeds the threshold Sound level. For Sec.2-1-30.6. General exemption.
implementation of this section.the threshold noise level shall be at least(20)
decibels below the numerical value of the sinele event noise exposure level The following categories of aircraft shall be exempt from the provisions of
limits specified in section 2-1-30.4(a).2-1-30.5 or 2-1-10.6.as the case may sections 2-1-30.4 and 2-1-30.5:
be.Specific SENEL limitations,for purposes of this article.shall be deter- (a) Aircraft operated by the United States of America or the State of
mined at each ntongorinlo station without"trade-offs' between monitoring California;
stations. (b) Law enforcement, emergency, fire or rescue aircraft operated by any
(c) Take o.f shall mean the flight of an aircraft from the time it county or city of said state;
com-
mences its departure on the runway until it has attained an altitude of one (c) Aircraft used for emergency purposes during an emergency which as
Thousand(1.0(10)fel(above ground level. been officially proclaimed by competent authority pursuant to the laws
(d) Landing shall mean the flight of an aircraft from the time it descends of the United States,said State or the County:
below one thousand (1,000) feet above ground level for its land approach (d) Civil Air Patrol aircraft when engaged in actual search and rescue
until it is taxied front the runway.
IttItiSlOnS;
(e) Commercial airline aircraft, for the purposes of this article, shall
mean those aircraft operated as a federally certificated air carrier at John (e) Aircraft engaged in landing(s) or tanager i while conducting tests
Wayne Airport under a current Certificated Passenger Airline Lease or under the direction ra the Airport Manager u nt attempt to rebut the
Operating Agreement ranted b y the Orange count Board of Supervisors. Presumption of aircraft noise violation pursuant to the provisions of
P' g ) g Y P sections 2-1-30.7 or 2-I-30.9;
(f) Quarterly period for purposes of this article, shall mean successive
three-month periods occurring at regular intervals four(4)times a year,the (f) Emergency aircraft flights for medical Purposes by persons who provide
first quarter of any given year beginning on the first day of April,the last emergency flights for medical purposes, Provided written information
ending oil the thirty-first of March. concerning the emergency is submitted to the Airport Manager for all
bemergency aircraft flights within 72 hours prior to or subsequent to the
(g) General aviation aircra/t,for Purposes of this article,shall Incalt all departure or arrival of the aircraft. It is intended that the exemption
other aircraft operated at John Wayne Airport, except those as defined in provided for in this subparagraph shall have the same meaning and be
section 2-1-30.3(e)or exempted under section 2-1-30.7. interpreted consistent with, and to the same extent as Public Utilities
°�t.Sec.2-1-30.4. Commercial airline operations. Code Section 21662.4 as enacted or as it may be amended.
(a) No commercial airline operator, using commercial airline aircraft, Sec.2-1-30.7. Presumption of aircraft noise violation.
may engage in commercial airline operations at John Wayne Airport if such (a) In the event that the Airport Manager determines to his reasonable
aircraft generate SPNEL levels averaged over each quarterly period, as satisfaction that available published noise measurements or historical
measured at John Wayne.Airport Noise Monitoring Stations,MI, M2 and noise data gathered and maintained by John Wayne Airport, for a particu-
M3,which are greater than the SENEL values: lar type or class of aircraft, indicate that it cannot meet the noise levels set
M 1 100.8 dB forth in sections 2-1-30.4 or 2-1-30.5, it shall be presumed that operation
M2 100.9 dB of such aircraft will result in a continued violation of the provisions of
M3 98.5 dB sections 2-1.30.4 or 2-1-30.5, and any aircraft of such particular type or
(b) Curfew. class will not be permitted to land on, tie down on,or be based at or take
CITY OF TORRANCE _..__. _....__.
ARTICLE 8 - AIRPORT NOISE LIMITS {
FEB
(Added by 0-2784)
SECTION 46.8.1. VIOLATIONS UNLAWFUL
It shall be unlawful for any person to pilot or operate or permit
to be piloted or operated an aircraft in violation of the
provisions of Sections 46.8.8. , 46.8.9. or 46.8.14.
SECTION 46.8.2. EXTENDED AIRPORT BOUNDARIES DEFINED
For the purposes of this Article, the term extended airport
boundaries. shall mean the area enclosed by Lomita Boulevard on
.the north, Crenshaw Boulevard on the east, Pacific Coast Highway
on the south and Hawthorne Boulevard on the west.
SECTION 46.8.3. TAKE-OFF DEFINED
(Amended by 0-3270)
For the purposes of this Article, takeoff shall mean the flight of
an aircraft departing Torrance Airport from the time it commences
on its departure on the runway.
SECTION 46.8.4. LANDING DEFINED
(Amended by 0-3270)
For the purposes of this Article, .landing shall mean the flight of
an aircraft from the time it begins its landing approach until it
is taxied from the runway.
SECTION 46.8.5. SOUND EXPOSURE LEVEL
For the purposes of this Article, the sound exposure level is the
level of sound accumulated during a given event, with reference to
a duration of one second. More specifically, sound exposure level,
in decibels, is the level of the time-integrated A-weighted squared
sound pressure for a stated time interval or event, based on the
reference pressure of 20 micronewtons per square meter and reference
duration of one second.
SECTION 46.8.6. SENEL
For the purposes of this Article, the single event noise exposure
level (SENEL) , in decibels, is the sound exposure level of a single
event, such as an aircraft fly-by, measured over the time interval
between the initial and final times for which the sound level of a
single event exceeds the threshold sound level. For implementation
of the provisions of this Article, the threshold noise level shall
be at least 20 decibels below the numerical value of the single
event noise exposure level limits specified in Sections 46.8.8. or
46.8.9. as the case may be.
-2-
SECTION 46.8.7. MAXIMUM SOUND LEVEL DEFINED
For the purposes of this Article, the maximum sound level, in
decibels, is the highest sound level reached at any instant of
time during the time interval used in measuring the sound exposure
level of a single event.
SECTION 46.8.8. AIRCRAFT NOISE LIMIT
Except as provided in Section 46.8.10. , no aircraft taking off
from or landing on the Torrance Municipal Airport may exceed a
single event noise exposure level (SENEL) of 88dB(A) or a maximum
sound level of 82dB(A) measured at ground level outside the
extended Airport boundaries.
SECTION 46.8.9. AIRCRAFT NOISE LIMIT AT NIGHT
(Amended by 0-3284)
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 46.8.8. , except as
provided in Section 46.8.10. , no aircraft taking off from or
landing on the Torrance Municipal Airport between the hours of
10:00 p.m. of any day and 7:00 a.m. of the following morning on
any Monday through Friday inclusive, nor between the hours of
10:00 p.m. each night and 8:00 a.m. of the following morning on
any Saturday or Sunday inclusive, nor on any of the following
holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day,
Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day; provided, however,
that if any such holiday falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the
observance of which is then moved to the preceding Friday, or
the following Monday, then such Friday or Monday shall be
considered to be a holiday for purposes of this section, may
exceed a single event noise exposure level (SENEL) of 82dB(A) or
a maximum sound level of 76dB(A) measured at ground level
outside the extended Airport boundaries.
SECTION 46.8.10. AIRCRAFT NOISE EXEMPTION
The following categories of aircraft shall be exempt from the
provisions of Sections 46.8.8. and 46.8.9. :
1) Aircraft operated by the United States of America or the
State of California.
2) Law enforcement, emergency, fire or rescue aircraft operated
by any county or city of said state.
3) Aircraft used for emergency purposes during an emergency
which has been. officially proclaimed by competent authority
pursuant to the laws of the United States, said State or
the City.
4) Civil Air Patrol aircraft when engaged in actual search and
rescue missions.
5) Aircraft engaged in landings or takeoffs while conducting
tests under the direction of the Airport Manager in an attempt
to rebut the presumption of aircraft noise violation pursuant
to the provisions of Section 46.8.13.
• -3-
SECTION 46.8.11. CULPABILITY OF INSTRUCTOR PILOT
In the case of any training flight in which both an instructor
pilot and a student pilot are in the aircraft which is flown in
violation of any of the provisions of this Article, the instructor
pilot shall be rebuttably presumed to have caused such violation.
SECTION 46.8.12. CULPABILITY OF AIRCRAFT OWNER OR LESSEE
For purposes of this Article, the beneficial owner of an aircraft
shall be presumed to be the pilot of the aircraft with authority
to control the aircraft's operations, except that where the
aircraft is leased, the lessee shall be presumed to be the pilot.
Such presumption may be rebutted only if the owner or lessee
. identifies the person who in fact was the pilot at the time of the
asserted violation.
SECTION 46.8.13. DENIAL OF USE OF AIRPORT
(See Section 51.7.2. et seq. concerning denial of the use of the
Airport for repeated violations of this Article)
SECTION 46.8.14. PRESUMPTION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE VIOLATION
In the event that the Airport Manager determines to his reasonable
satisfaction that available published noise measurements for a
particular type or class of aircraft indicate that it cannot meet
the noise levels set forth in Sections 46.8.8. and 46.8.9. , it
shall be presumed that operation of such aircraft will result in
violation of the provisions of Sections 46.8.8. and 46.8.9. and
such aircraft will not be permitted to land on, tie down on, be
based at or take off from the Torrance Municipal Airport, except
in emergencies as set forth in Section 51.4.2.: provided, however,
that the owner or operator of such aircraft shall be entitled to
rebut such presumption to the reasonable satisfaction of .the
Airport Manager by furnishing evidence to the contrary.
SECTION 46.8.15. DESIGNATED ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL
The Director of Building and Safety, the Administrator of
Environmental Quality, the Environmental Quality Officers and such
other City employees as are designated by the Director of Building
and Safety with the approval of the City Manager, all acting under
the direction and control of the City Manager, shall have the duty
and authority to enforce the provisions of this Article, pursuant
to the provisions of Section 836.5. of the State Penal Code.
-4-
ARTICLE 4 - NIGHT DEPARTURES
(Added by 0-2784)
SECTION 51.4.1. NIGHT DEPARTURES
(Amended by 0-3284)
Except as provided in Sections 51.4.2. to 51.4.4. inclusive, no
aircraft shall depart (takeoff) from the Airport between the hours
of 10:00 p.m. each night and 7:00 a.m. of the following morning on
any Monday through Friday inclusive, nor between the hours of
10:00 p.m. each night and 8:00 a.m. of the following morning on
any Saturday or Sunday inclusive, nor on any of the following
holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence. Day,
Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day; provided, however,
that if any such holiday falls on a Saturday or Sunday, the
observance of which is then moved to the preceding Friday, or the
following Monday, then such Friday or Monday shall be considered
to be a holiday for purposes of this section.
SECTION 51.4.2. CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT AIRCRAFT
(Amended by 0-3256) _
The following categories of aircraft shall be exempt from the
provisions of Section 51.4.1. :
1) Aircraft operated by the United States of America or the
State of California.
2) Law enforcement, emergency, fire or rescue aircraft operated
by any County or City of said State.
3) Aircraft used for emergency purposes during an emergency
which has been officially proclaimed by competent authority
pursuant to the laws of the United States, said State or the
City.
4) Civil Air Patrol aircraft when engaged in actual search and
rescue missions.
5) Aircraft engaged in landings or takeoffs while conducting
tests under the direction of the City Manager or his
designee(s) in an attempt to rebut the presumption of aircraft
noise violation pursuant to the provisions of Section 46.8.13.
SECTION 51.4.3. BUSINESS EXEMPTION
(Amended by (0-3256)
a) An aircraft shall be exempt from the provisions of Section 51.4.1.
if it meets both of the following criteria:
1) In the reasonable opinion of the City Manager or his
designee(s) , the aircraft is performing a vital economic
function that cannot reasonably be performed unless a takeoff
during the prohibited hours is permitted; and
2) In the reasonable opinion of the City Manager or his
designee(s) , as determined by previous testing, the aircraft
probably will not exceed the noise levels set forth in
Section 46.8.9.
b) Such aircraft in its departure shall not exceed the noise levels
set forth in Section 46.8.9.
SECTION 51.4.4. EMERGENCY EXEMPTION
(Amended by 0-3256)
An aircraft shall be exempt from the provisions of
Section 51.4.1. if, in the reasonable opinion of the City Manager
or his designee(s) , a bona fide emergency exists which requires a
night departure for the preservation of life or property; provided,
however, that such aircraft in its departure shall not exceed the
noise levels set forth in Section 46.8.9.
• -6-
ARTICLE 5 - TOUCH AND GO, STOP AND GO, FULL STOP-TAXI BACK
AND IOW APPROACHES
SECTION 51.5.1. TOUCH AND GO DEFINED
For purposes of this Article, a touch and go operations shall
mean an action by an aircraft consisting of a landing and departure
departure on a runway without stopping or exiting the runway.
SECTION 51.5.2. STOP AND GO DEFINED
For purposes of this Article, a stop and go operation shall mean
an action by an aircraft consisting of a landing followed by a
complete stop on the runway and takeoff from that point.
SECTION 51.5.3. FULL STOP-TAXI BACK DEFINED
For purposes of this Article, a full stop-taxi back operation shall
mean an action by an aircraft consisting of a landing on any runway
followed by exiting the runway, with or without a complete stop,
and returning directly to the approach end of any runway for a
subsequent takeoff.
SECTION 51.5.4. LOW APPROACH DEFINED
For purposes of this Article, a low approach shall mean an action
by an aircraft consisting of an approach over the Airport for a
landing where the pilot intentionally does not make contact with
the runway.
SECTION 51.5.5. PROHIBITED OPERATIONS ON WEEKDAYS
No touch and go operation, stop and go operation or low approach
shall be permitted on the Airport between 8:00 p.m. of one day
and 8:00 a.m. of the following day, Monday through Friday inclusive.
SECTION 51.5.6. PROHIBITED OPERATION ON SATURDAYS
No touch and go operation, stop and go operation, or low approach
shall be permitted on the Airport between 8:00 p.m. Friday and
10:00 a.m. Saturday, and no full stop and taxi back shall be
permitted between 10:00 p.m. Friday and 10:00 a.m. Saturday, and
none of these operations shall be permitted between 5:00 p.m.
Saturday and 8:00 a.m. of the following Monday, except as may be
further limited by Section 51.5.7. below.
SECTION 51.5.7. PROHIBITED OPERATIONS ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS
No touch and go operation, stop and go operation, full stop-taxi
back operation, or low approach shall be permitted on the Airport
on Sundays, nor on any of the following holidays: New Year's Day,
Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and
Christmas Day; provided, however, that if any such holiday falls
on a Saturday or Sunday, the observance of which is then .moved to
the preceding Friday, or the following Monday, then such Friday or
Monday shall be considered to be a holiday for purposes of this
section.
-7-
ARTICLE 6 - AIRPORT NOISE LIMITS
(Added by (0-2784)
SECTION 51.6.1. REFERENCE TO NOISE ORDINANCE
For Airport noise limits on landing and takeoff, see Article 8,
Chapter 6, Division 4 . of this Code (the Noise Ordinance) , commencing
with Section 46.8. 1.
-8-
ARTICLE 7 - ENFORCEMENT
SECTION 51.7.1. DESIGNATED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
(Amended by 0-3248)
a) The City Manager or his designee(s) acting under the direction and
control of the City Manager shall have the duty and authority to
enforce the provisions of this Division 5 and all other laws, rules
and regulations pertaining to the use of the Airport pursuant to
the provisions of Section 836.5. of the State Penal Code.
b) Acting under the direction and control of the City Manager, airport
security officers who are peace officers shall also have the duty
and authority to enforce the provisions of this Division 5 and all
other laws, rules and regulations pertaining to the use of the
Airport.
SECTION 51.7.2. DENIAL OF USE OF AIRPORT
a) In the event that any person has been convicted of three (3) or
more cumulative violations of the provisions of this Chapter 1,
or of Sections 46.8.8. or 46.8.9. or of any other laws, rules or
regulations of the City, State or the United States of America
pertaining to the use of the Airport (including forfeiture of bail
after being arrested or charged by citation or complaint with any
such violation) within a three (3) year period, then for a period
of three (3) years thereafter, such person shall be denied the
right to land or takeoff from the Airport, except in bona fide
emergencies for the preservation of life or property as reasonably
determined by the Airport Manager. and shall be denied the right to
lease, rent or use space for aircraft (including tie-down) at the
Airport insofar as the City has the right to deny such use of said
Airport) .
b) For the purposes of this Section, a determination of guilty by the
Administrative Hearing Board in accordance with the provisions of
Section 51.7.4 . shall have the same effect as a conviction by a
court.
-9-
SECTION 51.7.3. EXCLUSION OF VIOLATION-PRONE AIRCRAFT
In the event that any aircraft has been found to be the cause
of three (3) or more violations of Section 46.8.8. or 46.8.9.
within a three (3) year period, regardless whether the operator or
operators of said aircraft have been convicted of any criminal act
or have been found to be in violation of said sections by the
Administrative Hearing Board as provided for in Section 51.7 .4. ,
then it shall be presumed that operation of such aircraft will
result in continued violation of the provisions of Sections 46.8.8.
and 46.8.9. , and such aircraft will not be permitted to tie down or
be based at Torrance Airport; nor shall such aircraft be permitted
to land at or take off from the Airport except in emergencies for
the preservation of life or property as reasonably determined by
the Airport Manager; provided, however, that the owner or. operator
of such aircraft shall be entitled to rebut such presumption to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Airport Manager by furnishing
evidence to the contrary, including but not limited to, changes in
operating personnel, retrofitting measures, changes in engine or
maintenance.
SECTION 51.7.4. ENFORCEMENT
(Amended by 0-3117)
a) In the event that any person is charged with piloting or operating
or otherwise causing an aircraft to exceed the single event noise
exposure levels (SENEL) or maximum sound exposure levels set forth
in Section 46.8.8. or 46.8.9. , the guilt or innocence of such
person shall be determined by the Administrative Hearing Board
after a hearing thereon.
b) The charge may be made by citation in the same manner as provided
for misdemeanor citations by Section 836.5 of the State Penal Code.
Otherwise, it shall be made by complaint served on the defendant in
the manner of complaints in civil cases in the Superior Court.
C) The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements
of due process of law. Persons accused shall have the right to be
represented by counsel, to be apprised of the nature of the charges,
to offer evidence and to examine witnesses. The Administrative
Hearing Board shall adopt rules of procedure for such purpose.
d) The decision of the Administrative Hearing Board may be appealed to
the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Article 5 of
Chapter 1, Division 1 of the Code.
SECTION 51.7.5. UNLAWFUL TO USE AIRPORT AFTER USE DENIED
(Amended by 0-3117)
Except as provided otherwise in Sections 51.7.2. and 51.7.3 .
a) It shall be unlawful and a misdemeanor for any person to land an
aircraft on or takeoff an aircraft from the Airport after he or
she has been denied the use of the Airport in accordance with
the provisions of Section 51.7.2. ; or
b) It shall be unlawful and a misdemeanor for any person to land an
aircraft on or takeoff any aircraft from the Airport after such
aircraft has .been excluded from the Airport pursuant to the
provisions of Section 51.7. 3.
d -10-
SECTION 51.7.6. CULPABILITY OF INSTRUCTOR PILOTS
In the case of any training flight in which both an
instructor pilot and a student pilot are in the aircraft which is
flown in violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter, the
instructor pilot shall be presumed to have caused such violation.
SECTION 51.7.7. CULPABILITY OF AIRCRAFT OWNER OR LESSEE .
(Amended by 0-2878; 0-2879)
For purposes of this Chapter, if the pilot of an aircraft
cannot be otherwise identified, the beneficial owner of an
aircraft shall be presumed to be the pilot of the aircraft with
authority to control the aircraft's operation, except that where
the aircraft is leased, the lessee shall be presumed to be the
pilot. Such presumption may be rebutted only if the owner or
lessee identifies the person who in fact was the pilot at the
time of the asserted violation.
SECTION 51.7.8. REGISTRATION OF AIRCRAFT
a) The Airport Manager shall keep a register of aircraft based at
the Airport. The names, addresses. and other reasonable
identification, as determined by the Airport Manager, of the
legal and beneficial owners, the lessee (if any) , the operators
and the authorized pilots of each such aircraft shall be entered
in the register.
b) For purposes of this Section, an aircraft which remains at the
Airport for a period longer than twenty-four (24) consecutive
hours' or for a cumulative time of more than seventy-two (72) hours
in any thirty (30) day period shall be deemed to be based at the
Airport.
C) It shall be unlawful for any owner, lessee, operator or pilot of
any aircraft based at the Airport to fail to register such
aircraft with the Airport Manager.
SECTION 51.7.9. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING BOARD
(Added by 0-3117; Amended by 0-3120) .
The Administrative Hearing Board, which shall hear aircraft
related matters including alleged violations of Sections 46.8.8.
and 46.8.9. , shall be comprised of three (3) members. The members
of the Board shall be appointed by the City Manager as specified
in Section 12.2. 1. of the Municipal Code.
Chapter 16.43
AIRPORT NOISE MITIGATION
Sections:
16.43.010 Definitions.
16.43.020 Permitted alrerah.
16.43.030. Maximum SENM
16.43.040 SENEL enforcement.
16.43.050 Alternsdve enforcement+
16.43.060 TmhtWg operations.
16.43.070 Endue runupa.
16.43.084 Formation takeoffs and landings
prohlblteL
16.43.090 Urse of runways 25R and 7L
16.43.100 Intersection takeoft
16.43.110 4Zeneral exemptions.
16.43.120 Prosumpdons for violation
responsibilhy.
16.43.130 Relation to other ordinances.
16.43.140 Severability.
16.43.010 Definitions.
"Air ruder" meant a sclWukd carrier, cer.
tificated under FAR Part 121 or 135, operation
aircraft having a certificated maximum takeoff
weight of over seventy-five thousand pounds or
equipped to carry seventy-five or more pas-
sengers, transporting passettert or ergo.
"California Noise Standards" means the
Noise Standards for California Airports, as set
forth in 21 California Administrative Codes Sec-
tion 5000, et seq. Unless otherwise stated, the
terms used in this chapter shall have the same
meanings as set forth in the Noise Standards.
"Charter operuion" means a nonscbedukd
revenue producing takeoffor landingby an air-
craft having a certificated maximum takeoff'
weight of more than seventy-five thousand
pounds or equipped to tarry seventy-five or
more passengers, for which no sales are con-
ducted less thaw twelve hours before departure.
"Commuter carrier" means a scheduled car-
rier, certificated under FAR Part 121 or 135,
transporting passengers with aircraft that have
659 long Qaacn I 1491
maximum passenger payload capacities of eight shall be with equipment either(1)certificated to
thousand pounds or less and that have been cer• comply with the noise limits set forth in FAR Part
tificated under FAR Part 36 Stage III or have 36 Stage III for aircraft:or(2)demonstrated to be
been certificated to operate at noise levels com• capable of operating at noise levels equal to or
parable to or quieter than the commuter aircraft lower than the noise levels of Stage III certified
currently in use at the airport. aircraft of comparable gross weights in use at the
"Engine runups" means the operation of an airl o unless operated as a result of an emer.
aircraft engine while stationary for the purpose of gency or to obtain maiamnanee or repair work
testing(other than preflight),servicing or repair. from a manufacturing fa+alty looted at the air.
ing such engine. port(Ord. C-6618§ 1 (part), 1989).
"General aviation" means aviation activity
other than scheduled flights by air carriers,nights 16.43.030 Mz)d®um SENEL
by industrial operators, flights by charter oper. A. All nongovernment operations shall meet
atoll and flights by public aircraft, the SENEL limits set out in Table 16.43.030
"Industrial night" means one takeoff and one Maximum SENEL(A).
landing of an aircraft over seventy-five thousand S. Air carrier and commuter operators shall
Pounds maximum certificated gross takeoff be deemed to meet these requirements if at least
weight for purposes of production, testing or eighty punt of their total annual departures
delivery by or under the control of a manufac• and arrivals (determined as of July Ist of each
curer based at the Long Beach Airport This defy. yew)are in compliance with the applicable limits
nition does not include flights into or out of Long and the remaining twenty percent of departures
Beach for purposes of maintenance, retrofit or do not exceed the limits by 2 dB or more. No
repair. operations may exceed the designated limits by
"Low approach" means an action by an air. more than 2 dB.
craft consisting of an approach to or over the .C. Exceeding the SENEL limits at the airport
airport fora landing where the pilot intentionally in effect between ten p.m. and seven a.m. shall
does not make contact with the runway. only by permitted in the cox of air carriers aced
"Operation" means a takeoff or a landing of commuters which encounter unanticipated
an aircraft at the Long Beach Airport, delays beyond their reasonable control; indud-
"Public aircraft"means an aircraft defined in ing Sys caused by mechanical, weather or air
49 U.S.C. 1301 (36). traffic control conditions.(Ord.C-6618§I(pan),
"Stop and go operation" means an action by 1989).
an aircraft consisting of a landing followed by a
complete stop on the runway and a takeoff from 16A3A40 SENEL enforcemaat.
that point. A. The owner of any aircraft operated at an
"Touch and to operation"means an action by SENEL above any of the maximums set forth in.
an aircraft consisting of a landing and departure Section 16.43.030A,subject to the terms of Sea
on a runway without stopping or exiting the run. don 16.43.030B, shall be advised by the airport
way, manager in writing that said aircraft shall not be
"Training operation" mens touch and go, operated at the Long Beach Airport unless action
stop and go or low approach operation,or any of is taken to insure compliance with all maximum
them. (Ord.C-6618 § I (part), 1989). permissible SENWs.
B. Within ten days after notice of a second
16.43.020 Permitted aircraft. violation, the operator shall prepare a written
All nongovernment operations at the airport
e iav� 660
i
Table 16.43.030 j
i
Maximum SENEL(A)
From 7.00 aj& From 10 p.m.
to 100 p.na. to 7:00 a.m. Monitor
Runway (Dep/Arr) (Dep/M) (Dep/Arr)
30 102.5/101.3 79/79 9/10
12 102.5/101.5 79/19 10/9
25R 92/88 •/ 6/1
25L 92/88 '/ 5/2
7R 88/92 '/ 2/5
7L 88/92 '/ 1/6
'Except in case of emergency or air traffic control direction. all aircraft operations between
the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. are limited to Runways 30 and 12.
noise compliance program for its operations at without a reasonable basis (derived from cer.
Long Beach Airport,which shall be submitted to tification or noise monitoring data for the spe.
the city for review and approval and shall be cific aircraft type at Long Beach Municipal
implemented by the operator within thirty days Airport) for believing that the aircraft employed
after such approval by the dty. would comply with the applicable SENEL limit.
C. A surcharge of one hundred dollars shall be (Ord.C-6618§ 1 (part), 1989).
paid by every person or entity who operates or
owns any aircraft operated in violation of the 16.43.060 Tmhdag operadom.
provisions in Section 16.43.030 atter service of A. No touch and go operation, stop and go
notice required by subsection B above. operation or low approach shall be permitted on
D. A surcharge of three hundred dollars shall the airport on weekdays except between seven
be paid by every person or entity who operates or a.m. and seven p.m.
owns an aircraft operated mote than three times B. No touch and go operation. stop and go
in violation of the provisions of Section operations or low approach shall be permitted on
16.43.030. Such surcharge shill be paid for all the airport on Saturdays and Sundays except
operations exceeding the specified SENEL levels between eight a.m.and three p.m.
until the operator shall have operated for two C. No touch and go operation, stop and go
consecutive quarters with no violations.The first operation or low approach shall be permitted on
violation after such period shall be treated pur• the airport on New Year's Day, Memorial Day,
suant to subsection C above. (Ord. C-6618 § 1 Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving
(part), 1989). Day and Christmas Day except between eight
a.m. and three p.m.; provided, however, that if
16.43.050 Alternative enforcement. any such holiday falls on Saturday or Sunday
It is a misdemeanor for any nonscheduled and. as a result a holiday is observed on the
aircraft to exceed any established SENEL limit preceding Friday or succeeding Monday, then
660"1 1long Bcsce I 14*,
such Friday or Monday,as the use may be,shill 16.43.110 General exemptions.
be considered to be a holiday for purposes of this The following categories of aircraft shall be
section. exempt from the provisions of this chapter.
D. Training operation as defined in this sec- A. Public aircraft, including military aircraft;
tion may be conducted only on Runways 25R! B. Law enforcement, emergency, fire or res.
07L and 25L/07R, unless weather conditions cue aircraft operated by any county or city of the
require FAA to direct such operations to Run- state;
ways 34L/16R and 34R/16L. (Ord. C-6618 I t C. Aircraft used for emergency purposes dur-
(part). 1989). ing an emergency which has been officially pro-
claimed by competent authority pursuant to the
16.43" Engine runaps. taws of the United States,the state or the city,
A. Engine runups shall be permitted only D. Civil Air Patrol aircraft when engaged in
between the lows of seven A.M.and nine p.m.on actual seam and rescue missions;
weekdays and nine a.m.and nine p.m.on week- E. Aircraft engaged in landings or takeoffs
ends and holidays. while conducting tests pursuant to written
B. Engine runups may be conducted only at authorization of the airport manager,
locations designated for such purpose in duly F. Aircraft experiencing an in-flight emer-
adopted airport rules and regulations Nothing in gene);provided,however,that the aircraft oper-
this section shall be deemed to require relocation ator or pilot in command shall, within five days
of existing runup facilities for which appropriate after a written request from the city,file with the
noise buffering devices have been constructed. airport manager an affidavit documenting the
(Ord. C-6618 11 (part), 1989). precise emergency conditions) which necessi-
tated the operation. (Ord. C-6618 § 1 (part),
16.43-M Formation takeoffs and IwWinp 1989).
prohibited.
Formation takeoffs and landings are prohib- 16.43.120 Presamptions for violation
ited at Long Beach Municipal Airport. (Ord responsibility.
C-6618 § 1 (part), 1989).. A. In the case of any training Mot in which
both an instructor Not and a student pilot are in
the aiz Y which is flown in violation of any of
the provisions of this chapter,the instructor pilot
shall be presumed to have caused such violation.
B. For purposes of this section, the beneficial
owner of an airraft shill be presumed to be the
pilot of the aircraft with the authority to control
the aircraft's operation,except where the aircraft
is leased, in which cue the lessee shall be We-
16A3.100 Intersection takeoffs. sumed to be the pilot with authority to control
the aircraft's operation.Such presumptions may
be rebutted only if the owner or kssee kkntifxs
the person who in fad was the Pilot in command
at the time of the asserted violation.
B. No intersection takeoffs shall be permitted C. In any event, where the actual owner or
between ten p.m:and seven am.(Ord.C-6618§1 operator of an aircraft can be determined such an
(part), 1989). operator shall be responsible for compliance with
the terms of this chapter.(Ord.C-6618§ 1 (part),
1989).
Moet beach 114191 660-2
16.43.130 Relatioa to other ordinances.
A. In case of any conflict between any provi-
sion of this chapter and Chapters 8.84, 15.45 or
16.46, the terms of this chapter shall govern.
B. This chapter shall remain in effect pending
further court order or action of the city council.
C. In the event of a judicial determination
upholding Chapter 16.43, this chapter shall be
automatically repealed. (Ord. C-6618 § I (part),
1989).
16.43.140 Severability.
If any section, subsection. sentence, clause,
phrase or portion fo this chapter is declared or
held to be unlawful or ineffective, or is enjoined
or restrained by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction,it is the determination of
the city council that the remainder of this chapter
shall continue to be effective and shall be
enforced, except to the extent any remaining
section is inseverable from a part enjoined or
restrained or declared or held to be unlawful or
ineffective. (Ord. C-6618 § 1 (part), 1989).
660.3 -Long kao .4Q.
Or,
$-4
' C
L'
C G rr.
C 34
-,4 c
LJ LJ ...r
G 3 •.+ •
W u G <
G C ^v
O
$. 3 3 w' c
a
91.a; C) � '< �
WODe
s �
s
� cr
I
f', --
.-. .. w o-
O O /off `s o �'
r
. G x x
z Ai
.1 __ 1� _ /• g t r-4
0 �� �••'^lam � �. O Z G Qr C �
�tLAKIWOOO DLYD :y• N V i J O rr r-d
to
a Cn CC 4J
c 1. .._ d A C r S. cti
C- CL
G v
Z 14-4
R �i • < a o
>,Cl)(n
o
_
_30 4c ¢ G G
cna �
ct
CY e < •
� F
/ •
�
• > o � a
J h A • • • r. • • O
.i
v
�N Y�
r ?'.. a. X.
,77
:t-: •.w,si?�!'+;.K'rx•- �;��`r!D!�:-*.+lr.<�^7r'�,°'!'{!t „:A`' �:� �'? .nh. .:M;r:Jn��':�',r'4'�{;t, '�>;�
{.a.� R,. ..Via., ���h.. °C '�_ y• _
..�Gl� .ti-_,��..i:,.rit�':e', _'=.:,�'';',iC: '.;'r., ::4t-aTc�,••:s i .d�:' .µ:ms: ,tA'St•A 4-�•,u:::w...: :.;'�,...
�!'� u�>r "a e%'k „,°..rw .:4�,... i "',Y .� :1'.'t•:H.::� .�J\�..i. .}7`'�c#.�•4. yt�r
r.,,r .Ya.0 �,�r. -�.,; .%f:w, .ttl`.:. ,✓.�Y�y� :r.. y i!f .di.r.�'t• :!
Jv. llt. a:,�'..";,-[,•�".' :M.Y•'i y!'t wfl,t Y= i4F, � .i',.� e,(.. .,P::.:rK: y ,t-' t{,��.
'Sr' -.'j`�•7,'.=f::'r.'�.•Sn...�.:S,!..S;.J.,, �L. 1'y �t t�. ,..�i.?.y;. �j. SY•�. � -,•J. �'' .#'2.
•.,Y,,. [1�."E�'• .•4i' °a .Y3...,!rYs.;iY.Y r.:�[�}+v�P` .:,L:'�.:. :a•� .:::t::. .i �_ .Cfud#_
..'r' - 'is:'r;.4 "{Y!�' pp{{ !'„(.. 1. �.-'y' 1.l'` ♦ ',{i ,c::.F . u•�.r'."�.
��'y.^t' .t.se,:+t n n:� tr!'' :sf'�.!"kt;:'tr T '"f "'.; :t.., '�k u:=: -.`i�{•.Ma::
c•: „, ,r4,.J•a:.n:, ,":!. �;v4�'i�> '1,'" .r,,_�:!F'::ta:��� :z: °� ��e:�s... +�". �::..,t,,...�;'�:•r'..7�,. z,r.:� ;
:.: �N.. .:'fir � a..+ �r. .:j, :..._ .��• .�•.. c
::i.•.;��;'�. ..x••:..':. �,-r ii. # ..�!:. .�•': .;4i-", }'y.,�d-� y;,,.�,g :.� ��.:�.r. •:.�,6i"'.;!S. +�- ! .•t4. �,•i,¢.
i:'' ',1:�''� ^) _l;:h. ._x/,r�•::@.�{ ..�:'J, r'd}.-�k•��:F�'t.S�a gg•.%.i,`J.�: �J:' ",�� ,.E:,'�.. ) ki .�::_ {:' �, .�.1'.
a` .c •« "'3`..�.iF aa. ae'+tk.i .! t• 'l.�ix'•5;....a.�.. .:�• �, :: §, `ii�{�'t1,.1`' �,J.�t+rai'%3
ti'.� �xk:: �►�, i"''off �m ��'� p--YQ o,�mc 10�''-'�z, �,° ,�C•' m� v s' ��r Z•s
�..�' O� �.� �; � � � €�•° H fib' � ,.
4ti 9 n
t. Z'' GG6• GCz•e p: !; O CC�. O Nor. y. N C 4r.. :
�_,.d',r�F ;ri t�;�� '� ��Q Q� �' � `,�•m� C� � ��.�y6'�F ,cc��'�.'g'O D 8` d c i7.Or!2�
tJt c•.i :r�{ k5lrO�d �l�mV .. "'il� �i O m�� V' O W
k
OM
CYQ
^r:: _.t!!• =:l itfrl p Oya; � Y-_•49' •::{�'.:i�-F�:_.�`�. .Z3,�.: .g 't,�.•' m H°y
QQ
050--• d�OC. x.
!_t`i j;' g�i s r$j�' 'VaAy-, Q .•r ':':.-• ,Qe `flj, OLuw
F"• ;x
' �: ;. to .�, v:- 5•c' , N �. .. r- O°u s F.,.
X; 3 >
••y;,i;r :�i��. OL,Ee_ .• i.q.VeapirkN•.'C: !.. V.: '•'O..p_ "�'cQ'.�:Y ;:,0 •� tiL$� O� y •\, ,r
f t N�p, , ,y. m.' O: +�'N7'O' �,. �F .- :; �Q'` ' ZZ '•z' .;k��`M1r
�'; ama. -O• s 4 iW '—.1I.X.O':'T� O �j',O: W'
�.`• �,.t.a,) :S :Ct O`O•• pr0: r.v. !�'.•; •"' -� �, -� a W.,
C :`
": ;fit.; ,;�.:0N.'O-�£'O' ' .£ 4y�'gi'x, Q. ed, •-3 +r xvr•' '• ^!':.:.
4. t tQ' r L�. {•: Z.: �' { ., stv f_-Z r'
t.'. x�N� 0� '�.:i.�:��:,.Ci tTJ. ;.... t t y' ". �ql Qii a t �G+�°F0.
�-,:,r G i•;�.Zi� .m:i ,••"pl;$ ::RE�-- .:ro''` m:. •;;(:. ;1 to •�+,C f •�`
a
:Msp ::.N''C.:•- r:W OC m :e::'. ,u. kiy
P. Ali
v:'a.. N•; a .>'v�O•..
iC::�g>:'�vx; 'C''•r�n J.4' /� K� "f8'AN +c2•,�v,•r
4 ..• ,)C nk m, _; W« .�• 41,V !8. �t \/.A^ i' ��
* _ �S.' fir:. :. a::
O c �-� �;. ;:o,:p°rn:<.=ter; r,$y:; `-+ �:. w:� a ��9�ro � m:;•
� ar<�;(fi(n/��t'' �' � ��-�:t�p'Q.=o •:a:�, .�...
%.Tt'� '.t:.: �.IV•.'���r 'i..� lrp U>:�!t�!'.�.,,,` e•' ,`'.C1
s.;. '.� Z...,:. , 3:..3°'!.�:::u:� Y=:cn:•'n.t .�aJzC�:O Z. �.•.-.�.�;{s. '.�m if;
1r
^I i
.
f:
•t.• .<li'<'r.
i -t-
4
7 t
Y
1 .,t..
T
.v' .:.r..�'�,-..i:•,J- .r.-'.•, JM•.•., ....: ..1:4.:.: ;G.: kiT_;yµN' �\!.:� _ '�I..lv
�3
re l R•
a :c
.V ,,,✓d`'*n,x l,.:;., ',:�(P�ai�+;�•:� to
1'A:� '•vl `f!t: 'x!F °r• :;°.vG� Tj.,.., -ie':'\� Np .a: %',L3 (•:
::.eY. ..+,�'• t��:',::`A, J:w'.t<";..;.y �n p(�# ti: �''�' 7• .!'i•. � '-3::wir':,,,�
l �,y�:�}'•"-' 3�rr.'•yl `C S F'r.c.�• i ';*:•3'iJrJ' -g-.'.�I ..� J••
,.'{rr• r�•�. �;�?::i4".:;. !,: Yw.�i•:i'k!�':`•ro°r,.1F
'_»....yrv;�:' ".N,. � ° �m mt m•,N m,m"m :N: ��� � .m r;
fit Y •::. ;t/f �ia:�,; i amsxLrnr�{. my • .>_
3''. .:ia. :"6 �.,'" $ ��; `.�.'�.�. �• '�£. i�• ._ �;—�� •r.�3 .k4{ks,'�: �9C ,c�8��' r���.� � '�� �g:
Zp
• '�:L ,�. P ,��� .,Q. P •r• d�;:m:*k.C:tC; !.O �� � O '•�O��O.Os-. �Y' �� ��
:, r+ _ m C Lim Qg m
�,IC'Q-AE: ;;�+�yR� �'�df "�:m'm 4'' C ��m $:T n'p Qt {:��•� d +•�
�' •3 j' A�•'•�-� �' t7Lm a•,�I. �{j■r�. E ' �••• 4
±? ~r•�. ��: r �m��,r �Gi TF'�.'E� a���''" W'a„���� � C'�g1 OilO�.l� •��T —� �(� t
I '��y ? mxE �
. :.m mi:c 'B8
f.f'fit ��►; � y Cf. iN_-t • k ap �,�,!O �.._�rm=; C
! OI .N . ` gym' C:.�S' a"C°y {'C �,}{ 30+,pp 8'�:`x 'T�
:a"�'7 3:C� C> 'T y�Rill ''r+ `''{ �'iF � �O. �•t+3tm, : xV!'. .�r tmio
'�n "' r•Q��Y,� .�0; •�y�y�.'�• •C � t'^ � S�y T �mm' �hN,xm3�(���,�L7,}��� f.
r���, �`°��y �A�AQf, ea;�� :x��o, L-+�€�`� Q m g'rm. �,�5 •� -�t�(�e�` :;� .3,�>iv,Rn�eo m�
e: ✓:� .-.- .` iiJR m�,C Li '�.' `�'rQ' W.y.4f.P�V Sq� 7y "1 .' �: V�rl+' 'I�:D.v.: Qy.O C •Q 4C. 1-
rd
,r • ,�! C �:�1:< r�.' �C•s _;C;rO.� Ok � *� N:• + 70� 0.:.,�C.; ` St�`�j,.
ic
igap
N rE?9� ':: rQ+' y t+4m `' Y ;.;1�gy
;�. :.•9'�0 '3rin.>: o.;c:�_,�.�,�lX��o``,c� cs � •� ,�c�•� °•c .�• �� ,�� ��Am o.3.._:
w+'i•'�CE'.C,.,� ;3. fY M�m �m .m mx, { '.s:..: Eyo O•p O
r.V)g � :L��f�`L: mr tE'. fn,.. :O �� O C••Q. :..xm•. m L: �CaN ;�
►-,�.._� U, c aC 2 m � ? b m'-N0 o E°L.
m'm: L�;m'.m: •e0.��..{{ m,. m�is;'Nr m 8 ti IOxm � {' d 60 C dm:
Os 1 k �'a` `� X00<° m t E!'•N: w' lc;• A ,
nn.pp 3
�'p rt:tn..ao.o.o: TaZ i�., N m.' m�Zt .. ca m:o m.E&� E's_'� o o$m un ci
"� ' Q'::N�OQ".O`7;G�, r�'«�r.`� rL+ E•QE O �kO Q'O"mi: 'r•C+ B;.T� LL � L..i��3'N Cf
r'". '`;!`-�, ;..:, ':t", ,cls vq{ 'al.'4ti;: $y, -`.W1yr." :;,�4::".•+; -'+a1;; ��LL '3.�.�',,,:',.rt tb.• ;.t,i-:,•,a ,< r
.�Ii .<4 :.('ry'.6Y•`..Y x-..,TW.,.r. �- .�%FY4L'n,•,i .TA.4':p`?J. ?:F+rJ'h.:�'A'",v fir• '•
h'4>,
1
•
1!
�k-
."'! qtr': ..}': •.,.
, vii"
;e':�'i :.,;: �_,:. - '�:. ';F: a '$''r''. ..j'kl:`; t,- •;.[: :..I.":•x.,t- .;rte.,,
,'x'".: .:,:":'`,y"%, ;}:-. '<?.:«i%: Y'�� t:rl. '��... -!r:.�,`:r.Lr, } '•k`.;,:__ n, s.'�� ':rr.':��[,.:<^.x.r,t•-5;;:•.
i'
f- - ;: 'i
;,{, t s
1 ;rW.:
}.,.,
Y
r
;.
r, C
'�i
v`t. r`
y t-
.rx� �lM1;,r
:-
r.
'G. - SMIR Lk:r, .1
�. :;.
^'
` r / Q 1. yf r:% f�. J • +�.�. m"N,-k ;�Y t_.3, I •:c:.
�tl z.": '1O C.r I.A. I a '.!, c' :1, :� O` 1. ?i'i >.<:al;I-,'~'Or A .w� 3,, aOs f• i .I
i;[• '4 ]-i3' "�; �` , :` �iF^' f.0:�'(' Cf®", '�};3. ).^" r, .tQ OT:y.�,.p�i1 ,
,»'. t m: '.Off. 3}„ �S�` r N''�}O[ 1, ,-9.3;, C 7., - ;.,` „ .•, ,:..'
,, #'-a t:,'�' E' ' ; ".`'r;:r 4rp'ai3, ;.m.� i •.mr Y -, im/.v!}.Of:. �,- ,:' En' s;S
Ira r 3Y`Y yQT,i:.� ( s .,,,:ti. .'.`• � •. 1,- 3 -. N ;� ' (: C t t.0.'7` ^I LyOyn'1'tr*.� '.. ;:r;irJ (;. ,0 �•! _
;vl. ,. 1btm� -:r _ 't I= f' .�: t 3. -+.' r t j _
F3`' �vm`! i�,�l-. 'i__. ��•':1 (' F ( ,:.r 13•Vsr,:��.(471: 'i a:QI t .C'(. ;:�' '.' �1, ...`r' lo,'�,. �y:.:.�; y,, 't{p
}SS-,,--:!,.�1• r-;.77.= ^'.'3k'-Ze ^..A a� _ ?'e,e• '>h. a N- .c [ VI m r� ..\Ol��. 1 [• 1 �•"(7R ��i.Q� `! �.:d�.:i�.•.:;`�'.r-
p <:f ^r.� �.. 1 C �,, :1 mi m', Qt-• " /,''7., n m' ;:0 �' m.;�'r, r"- 7
.u::t;t.:•2 rOr .p4�. e?i: . 7: �' _ (LJi: l.',..;i0'! .y,... 9 � �$A (�: �t:: 1 :.•3:
[ F:s:. 6`- .��Q" 4.'F'•.:' .t :,`�" r.r: -:31 ��ii'.*-le 'C,.Q�,.m:3 sQ� }- -eOD, at:' i; y;;.ICi,. I_,_.,. 4
7: .:. W: O,r �- L`. �':�:(��{t .7:•''<t3.? ♦f O .ra! ,. O,•r.r. t
i :3:: aK:. r p :r 3,'.r. u•• r <� I:EO'1Q1 m! Q Nr,.
y';: MM .,.', ;$ d '• :4 'S, Y t� n{.i.z } q �f.G7 A..'.. , i::a1
'r,4. :`i tt I•C. !..�[, -nc ,J•:..'Oi,. 2:; _ '' `; .Y_•N•!rgY' i ,N 4 .OI.- - . .�;, ;Z _ •s"i,..r,ua`.:` ,, - }} .y'% .;1'
(� `y_;. i
?`,:�. � d .. (,,i ,: S �! Oi: !Gf 1. r, ,;, '. (,.0 if.:" f 'm�;
' 02'✓_IBJ•'93 16:46 Srib N1k1-'Uk1 I-H.,1u 1
• 1 1
,' O I
1
ON
A'
lot-
O u a Oji
N I
Santa Monica Airport 4 0" ! 13223 Donald Douglas Loop South
Santa Monica,CA 90405-3279
Business office I j (stn)458•8591
I
1
FAX COMER SHEET OUR FAX (31 0) 391-9996
TO; I David � � ;URGENT
COMPANY: Concord 'Airport ROUTINE
UATI' : February B. 1993.
FAX NO: (510) 5465731 . 1
SUBJECT-
f
NO. OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 9
4
FROM: Tim Walsh !
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
COMMENTS:
3
� f
--- - - --
44
..__��. . _� _.�-�. ..__...�...... .... ..... ..,..-� .-_...tom .-.��-. .... ��. .�.-... 4,.. ►..fw r�w. rt a� �
IG:ft9 SNU Alf-POR-1 Fi4XII 2,1.�-S�1-_ty,
r
?
10.04.02-UIO
f
Chapter 10.04 to protect the snu telpai environmcnt from the effecm of
aircraft noise. (P :or rAda 4 10000, added by Ord, No.
MUNIWALAI1;Xt.1fLT 13Z6CCS.adoptc
S=00= 10.04.02.030 Authority for rtguletfons.
Tho Airport de r; adopted pursuant to the Cjty's
Subcbapter 10.002 General Provisions power as owner, peratpr,and proprietor of the Airport
�+0.4d.t12.D10 Name,Purpose,and stupe_ to rerAte the ciao of rhe,Airport,consistent with the powc.
10.44.02.020 Authority for regWWioss. of the United Stat s Qoycrnment to control air traffic and
1 .04.0Z(F30 Powm of Airport Director. aircraft piety. ' Code also constitutes an excrtisa of
the Gnus polioe r 0cr ground operations,motor vehi-
Sg6cbapter 10.04.04 Aircraft Noise Abstttment Code cies,and outer m LM dot pm=prcd by State or Fcdond
11P.04.OQA1Q Name,purpose and scope. law. (Prior coda 10001; added by Ord.No. 1326CCS,
1&64ACOZ0 Authority for regulations. adopted 02185)
*.04.04.030 BaAc psineipies.
It0.04.04.040 Enforcement and appeaL 10.14.02.0.30 Pa+ err of Airport Director.
�
W.04A50 Responsibility for compliance. The Airport I ecte;r shall have the right,power,and
0.04.04.060 Maximum noise ill L authority toersfor this.Codeand otherlaws,regulations,
0.04.04.070 ftforuraace based noise limit. and orders rei8tin to th' cue of the Airport.These powers
.04.04.080 Roars of operation, include the foil g speriiic powers and duties
0.0404.040 fiestxietionz an sircra0t operations. (a) Geaeral chanty_777 Airport Director is iarvested
OD4.04.100 Helicopter operations. with all rights, wer 4 d authority of the City to issue
orchis and enf ord=,laws and regulations partaking
lli
Subchapter 10.0446 Alliott Field Regulations to tiro use of the Airpgr-
0. CK010 Name,purpose and scope (b) Delay ofnd*
Operations.The Airport Director
0.04.06.020 Commercia!operAduad. mapdetla torres ccairtxsR operation subj=t.to any
0.04.06.030 Opemlfons permit. liatttatiaas imnpotate orFederal law and in actor-
0A406,040 Arempdoas& dance with the f owing stacdards:
A446450 Plight tustruciions. (1)'Disere ' tray�only be ctareLoed where there is
10.0406.060 Aircraft maintenance and repair_ reason to bclieves that a person or aircraft will violate or
f OA4Ab.070 Indemnity. has violated the op:'4cary rights of the City,that a viola-
10.14.06.080 Insurance. tion of this(rode it ,inent,or that its exercise is neves-
�0.14.06.090 Aircraft de-dwis and hangar nary for the pro ctioA of the public health,safety, or
rwftL welfare.
10.04.06.100 Lauding hes, (2) -fba A#016 Dir*=may L%=an other iLnpoundb7g
,10,04.06.110 Technical codes. any aircraft until61argss for storage,supplies,or service
0.04 06,120 We regutatt?om rendered to it b the citysha11 have been paid.
0.04.06.130 Aircraft ground operations. (3) mooring' rt.rs Section shall authorize the Airport
0.04.06.140 Fueling operations. Director to deny,access to the Airport to employees of
044.06.150 1lltrallght aircraft. the l:ederalTulln'c
mdnt or to other persons in case of
0414.06.160 Mawr•ehlcles, as 0.04.06.170 Pedestrians. {c) Susof 'lights.lire Airport Director,by
.04.04.06.180 Experimental ftighta. appropriate w4y restrict or suspend all flights or
406.190 Damage reports and responsibility. flying when rbyimtiitary neer.emergency,or other
{I.04.05.ZQo llvtion pictures acrd comnterdai Spetiai cirsus.'
photography- (d) Regtubtio Aupcn Director,with the approval
40.04.06.210 Penalty. of the City Atto ey, y adopt rules and regulations to
carry out the pa oses Of this Chapter.The Airport Direc-
Bubchapter 10.04.06 Glossary of'Technical Terms tar snail pubiisl such'rules and regulations once in a
`10.04.08,010 Definition of terms, newspaper of Se cral dircuiation within the Cary of Santa
Monica Within err(IQ)days of the date of publication
Subchapter 10.04.02 General Provisions of such ru(es an regulations,any interested person may
fife a request wi h theAirport Director that the Airport
I6 4.02,010 Name,purpose,and scope- Commixsion revi the tides and regulations so published.
j'fiis Chapter shall be called the Sasha Monica Airport The rules and atipns shall be final at the expiration
Cuda.rt governs the use and operation of the Santa Monica of the period for equeting review in the event no request
Municipal Airport("the Airport").The Airport Code is for review is file ,or in the event of the fling of request
intended to prpvtde for raasonablc,safe,and efficient use for review, whe the++rules and regulations have-bee n
of;the Airport as a public transportation facility acid as approved by the rpo� Commission.(Priorcade 4 I0W4
a base for avizdon and aviation-related aperations dad added by Ord.l o. 136 CS,adopted 112MS)
SB3 f �
10.04.(14,010
Stilachupter 10.04.04 Aircrutt Molse Abatement Code with reguilations, and she rcOrd violations and take
appropriate action in accmd uxe 4ith Section 10.04-04,040.
10.04.04.,O10 Name, purpose and'sco04_, (Prior code§IMZ;added I q. Ord No.1326CCS,adopted
This Su6c xaptqr of the Airport.God;may W called 14M)
the"AUwat NOW Abawmnt Code or"Kopec Coda."
U is genvrOj intended to ancourage all pilots tiring the 10.04.04.040 94fan Imen(and appeal.
Airport
rt to Us consistent The Akport Director 0 all i �reorders irnpOSitig Civil
sir aircraft as quietly u posd Lur
n
th aviation safety.It is also Intended to set tsicimuca and aministrative remcd-s for violations of the Noise
limits an p n ie aircraft noise and to tegulate night Code.The following standa-ds and procedures shall apply,
and rwMeped operations as well u hoUcopter operatiortL (a) All violadonsofthe loise�bdoshall beremcciiablc
tr
The Noise C do governs all tah-offs from,landings at, by order of the Airport Dim tor.Sfwions may be imposed
and odder doM AVM the AfrporL(Prior code 4 10050; for repeat or wilful violations.
added by tOrNe. I326CCS,adopted IMS) (b) An order of the A;x Da Ohrector may impose,far
each separate violation,a6•1petyofuptofive hundred
10.04.04.020 Authority for regulations. dollars_(S500.00), a susp4 -5ion f airporT privileges or
'no Nols;ClCode is enacted under the power of the City, permits for up to one year,-.r both.The Airport Director
as prapdetorA the Airport,to make ressonaUe regulations shall notify the'Federal Av ation Administration prior to
Intended to p.-otccc persons exposed to aft-cyoft noise from ordering the suspension ol airport pri-viltges or permits
noise polhitic n.in accordance with the judgm=tin Santa under this Subscction.
Monica Airport Associationv.Ckyof Santa Manica.479 (c) TheMkiportDirc rrna�iilso require the abate-
F.SUPP, 927(C.D.CAI. 1979).aWd 659 F.2d 106(9th ruenc of violations and cam,&aac,with conditions related
'c
c
'I
M. 1981). tosibatrmentoffiaThervi)Iatio
The Noise Code is also enacted in furtherance of the! (d) "ilia Airport shall c insid r all rclvv�ant factors in
Agreement el recaed January 31,IM,bats tilt:Qty each case.including the wil Wn .. severity and frequency
and the Fed4ral Aviation Administration ("the AL-pon of violations,and the exists ca ana use of safe noise abate-
Agre=ent")and the Noise Mitigadoil Program of the trent operating proadur � app' mate to the aircraft.
City*s Alrpo4 Plan,both adopted by Resolution Number With respect to 11 M
pilots who cp=cdly ape-rate an aircraft
6814(0 S), (Prior code j 10051; added by Ord. No. in violation of the noise Ii 'toRQon10.1J4.G4,060,tfte
1326CCSI-z4opted 112'JYSS) Airport Dimctor,may,after inv4stigarion to assure that
t
a violation was not related to tmiraricous factors beyond
MOCLOCM! BASIC principles. the pilars control such as =3 or power,avoiding other
Tho No'v Code shall be interpreted and enforced to aircraft,or unusual we:ich-,r conditions,impose sanctions
achieve abate ttftt of airtntft noise to the extent todoologi- under this Scction-
cally pracd= -Ie and cc monan t with air safety and to pro- (c) Any person aggric-4cd b.vLn order of the Airport.
mom o0oper don.Communication.and complitirift with Dimcxar may appeal to the ay'sRearinjExaminer pursu-
law.The follo ving basic rules shaft apply to the Noise CAxle: =t to the time limits and pi Dcadukes of prior code Scafon
(a) The Airport Director shall cooperate with pilots 6126 of the Murtic; at Cod�.The!dccision of the Hearing
p The!
decision
other ah users and with the Federal Governownt Examiner shall be Linal c=it foejudicial r--%icw and shall
in order to p ornote voluntary compliance w"the provi- not be appealable to rhe City C�undil.
sionms and p asax of the Noise Code and (f) A wilful violation of orArof the Airport
courn==Land ducata regarding ways to improve the noise shall be a misdemeanor pun�I=W under Section 10.03.0 10
perfartriancyf all aircraft using the Airport. of the Municipal Code.
(b) No mn shall operate an air=ftnt the Airport (g) A person who fail to p Civil penalty within
i Y
in violation f any provision of the Noisy Code or in thirty(30) days after the sucin.10'of an order to do so
V1011610tal of applicable Federal or Stare law or req L
Y .Wa- shall pay a separate c1mrg of te, percent of the unpaid
tion or ordc-of the Airport Director.The tem-at the amount of the civil penalty.The Airport Director may also
Airport"inc udes operations while an 2ir=(L is on the exclude such person from he Airpdrt until such time as
ground.as v cll as landing at, taking oft from,or other the penaln,and any laic pxymcqt charge are paid.Such
operations a: or from the Airport, an order shall be final and shall i'ot be appealable to the
(c) All p avileget, licenses, permits,and contractual Hearing, Examiner.
rights perTni ting a 0enort Gir aircraft to use-or be bated (h) The remedies as-s forth in this Section arc sup-
at the Akpoi t art;conditioned on adherence to the Noise plementary to any fegal oi cqui(pble remedies available
Code and of ter applicable lawi,and maybe revoked for to the City in its go%,cmnic!cat=4 proprietary capacities,
multiple viol itions after a hearing pursuant to the proce- including but nor Ilmiced(;the�seh(to abate nal'Onces
duces of this :InAter.This remedy shall be supplementary and hazards. (Prior code § 10033; added by Ord. No.
to the rights of the City under contract. 1326CCS,adopted
(d) The Inform all persons tering
the Airport C f appilobla noisy abatement regulzitions and
recognized s,i6-noise ubsierritnt oparadnS procedures for
each rTd of 21mr1ift,shall counsel pilots an compliance
584
..,._ Lit;' ._ 1=•--31 ;_I'NJ H11:I�U1•:I 1-li.'.11 �l�'��i �� .
l� 10.04.04.050
t
1QX .04.050 Rasponsibilfty for cotapllance. alent level. (Prio cod, $ 10055: added by Ord. No.
order of the Airport DtrecEor may be directed to 1326CCS.adoptc
a pix,owner of an air=aft.or aircraft as the circulmstm=
of tla case may require,.in accordalice with the following 10.04.04.070 Per unwance based noise limit.
Stolt lards. (a) SY rcgula on ad Iptcd its accordance with Section
( ) Where a particular aircraft is oporated in exem I0.04.02.030(d),C art Director shall provide for a
of n ire limits.that sire.aft raay be excluded fr=the Air- Performnnco Base Nlirut by airczaft type No aircraft
port in accordance with the following standards: shall exceed the S iNE4 limit established by tate Airport
( ) The Airport Dirt:ctor shalt maintain a list of airtaaft Director as Elie lowest SENEL limit d-.at can be fact by
that arc estimated to be unabie to meet the magmum die type of ainnaft ce ed consistent with safe operating
noir limit of Scc;ion 10.04.04.060 under any conditions procedures.
ago rating procedures.This list shall be based on actual (b) The Perfo ane Based Noise Limit shall be for
ttt�emextt of aircraft ape tions.if there ate in,�dent a two(2)year erim mai period commencing an the
at ed fliShts of a particular type,the Airport Director date of its adoptio and shall be dcvclopcd in cotunitation
shat Etat upon the best available information. inatuding with the Federal viEed
` Administration in accordance
Feta Aviation Administration estimates.These"Listed with the Airport grant.
Ai�fi"may,after one violation of the maximtim noise (t:) Perform Noise Limits shalt be based
limit be excluded from the Airport. on actual measure ant of aircraft operations.If there arc
(:) An aircraft other than a Listed Aircraft may be insufficientd)?f is of a particular type.the Airport
excl ed from the Airport after repeated violations of noise Director shall set limit d ort the best available infor-
ifthe Airport Dirz=r dGminines that the"Permittad motion.
Aim aW is likely to violate noise limits even if flown (d) Pending plet on of this experimental program,
g to tacotamended sift operaring ptnoedures under no pilot who viota n the Pcrfotmance Based Noise Limit
as weal ic.condidorts. but docs not viola the r6a4murn noise limit of ninety-five
( ) if a pilot operates an aircraft in violation of the (95)dB may be fin A or a xciuded frau the Airport.(Prior
Noir Code and the err umsta=4 indicate that the viola- code § 10056: cd by Orti. No. 1336CCS, adopted
tion within the control of this pilot andwas not related 1/27185)
W neons factors beyond dna pilot's Control,sanctions
may bd imposed on,the pilot of the aircraft for repeal 10.04.04.080 I3ou`r3 of operation.
viol ons.Pilots shall not be subject to sanctions unless Mw Airport sha I be Cogen for public use u all rcasanabk
they individually eotnmft multiple violations, hours of the day and ni t,subject to the following rc-
( If an aircraft'is operated in violation of the Noise st&dons:
Co by a persort other Turf the owner of the aircraft, (a) 11ic Aicpo Dir c may close the Airport because
the 'of and nor the owner of the air=ft shall be subject of condidons of th Iand�ng arca.ncccssaty niaintrrutnct,
to 30�c ions,except as follows: the presentation of spedial events, and similar Causes.
( ) -rite owner of a Listed Aircraft Shall be subject to (b) Nv aitzzufr�shall 6e started run-up,or depart the
civd enalty or exciusion with resoect to the aircraft in Airport taetwcen I 1t; hojtrs of 11:00 p.nl. and 7:00 axm
vicine'on. Mondays through rida4 nor beaveen 11:00 p.m.and 8:00
( The owner of a permitted aircraft based at the am,Saturdays an Sune ays,except in cast of bona fide
Airportshttll be subject to sanctions if theAirpon Director medical or publicafety emergency,with the conscnz.of
deter amines that the owner failed to advise the pilot of the the Airport Direct ifor,in his or her absence,the Watch
appbdity of the Noise Code to the air=ft or rceognUcd Commander of the Poncen
'Dcpamcnc(Prior code§100.57;
sa.,e prlacedures to achieve compliance. added by Ord. 1Y . t324CCS,adopted 1123185)
( ) 11ia owner of an akczaft errluded from tha Airport
shallbe subject to sanctions or prosecution for knowingly 10.04.04.090 Rmirictions on aircraft operations.
or fully violating an order of the AIMort Director Tho tallowalg 1 egula¢ons apply to operations at the
im liti;such exclusion. Airport:
( ) For purposes of this Section,die term"owner of (a) Touch anc Cao and Stop and Go operations are
an ai ft"includes the registered owner and a fixcd.base prohibited on Satu day3,Sundays,and holidays,and during
oper tor who allows a third party to use the aircraft putsu- weekdays betweenone-h`If(Yz)houraftcr sunset and 7.00
ant t a"lease-baric"agreement with the registered owner. a.m.of the follow ng m raing.This restriction shall not
(Priv code§10051;added by Ord.No.1326=,adopted apply in twergenci while necessitated by safetyconsider-
o6ons,or when mc uircd(ry the Fcderai Aviation Adminss-
tration. '
10.0 04.060 '.Maximum noise limit. (b) Touch and Cho 01 Crations shall be pormitied only
Mp flirt-aft shall exesad a Single Event Noise Exposure artier die pilot of dt airm aft has received pctntission from
L (SENEL)or ninety-five(95)decibels as measured clic air traffic con roller-in the control tower and in no
2ttWAltport.toiselta:asuringSiatianseadstingonJanuary evcritshallbarnadd unlgthe aircrafthas initintcdtalscoff
1.19 .Ifadduional starfons are established,rhe=xirnutit poor to rescf»n§t c touch and go limit lints painted on
SEN M shall be cart for each measuring point at an equiv- the runway.
585
16:53
SI'lIJ i f,l kF t_tc I t H..t+ Gl-J-J71-7770 ,�
. i1{j ktEt{-
10.04.04.0901 .
I
(c) Simu ated tooted landings shall not be permitted responsibility,and spccafv cs lsf service to ba provided
until the aim ft maches pattern altitude and in no uveas acid types and number of afrcr3't proposed to he used.
shall be mad a Opposite to the direWon of take-off. (b) no airport Dircc,ors ht>�ll.by regulation.provide
(d) For urposes of rWs Section,holiday shall mean form expedited permit pr)=du a forcommorcial opten-
Naw Year's ay,Mermorial Day,bxtopnttdtsttce Day.Labor tions not requiring a fixed se aat the Airport.The Airport
Day. Thank4givmg Day and CMUtma¢ Day, provided, Director may grant expo ted p. im upon registration
however, th c If any such holiday fails on Saturday'or of the applicant and proof oom lianc a with the following:
Sunday,andIAs a result such hot" is observed on the (1) The applicant shall dcmutistratc that he or sbd has
prc=ding Fr 4ay or suaxeding Monday,then such Friday valid and current eertrUlm ion 4m the Federal Aviation
or Monday,I is the case may ba.shall be amsidemd to be Administration as requir d for khe performance of the
a holiday ury ter this Section.(Prior code§10038;added applicant's services.
by Ord. No. 1326CCS,adopted 1122185) . (2) The applicant shaft agree io be bound by the pro�-i-
1 cions of Section 10.04.06. 70 providing for indemnity of
10.44.04.200 Helicopter eperndvaa& the City.
The follov ing provisions apply to the use of helicopters (3) 1 to applicant shall cgistarty motor vehicles used
at ilio ttitpo in the course of his or her L usinetwich the Airport Dircc-
(a) Until be completion of the atudyofhelicopter wise tor. furnish proof of pubi it: lis-ility insurance for such
authorized b the Airport Agreement,n0 person shall be vehicles,and aomplywith v con.itions the Airport Disec-
granted a pe t or lease to use the Airport as a base for, for deems accessaryto pr mote#afety and maintain adc-
any operatic involving the substantial use of helicopters., quate access to the Airpo f
(b) Heli pt�er Eight training operations at the Airport (4) The applicatst slant pay ouch praccssing fees and
are prohi ' d at all times.(Prior code g 10059; added furnish proof of such ins raace as assay be rcquircd by
by Oral.No..1326CCS,adopied 1=15) Resolution of the City C until.-
l (5) 'Mite Aitpon Dir ec r mai,based ort the scope and
Sub*npter 10.04.06 Airport Field Regulations nature of the services pro oscd to be provided, require
that the applicant obtain n op4rations permit from the
X0.174.06.010 Name, purpose and scope. Cay ManaSer purstaant to i=rep:far pmccduzw and stan-
Mw SubcUppter of the Airport Code maybe called the dards of Section 14.04.06 30.
'till
iel }'.egulatiotts"ar",FeidRegulations"These (r) An aparstiotrs p it skall identify rite location
reguiationa generally intended to maintain the safety of the base and the specic use permitted.The permit
and e=mno viability of the Airport through enfotccmcat soar.he amended to perm t add tonal Iocadosts or tuts.
of unifornx 8 daras and permit procedures-The Field Applications for amendme nc only contain infom:ation
Regulationsormallactivityofporsons,motor vehldcs, rcau-relative to the additional Ions or uses sought and
and aircraft a.the ground of the Airport.They shall not Identificadon of any titan d co 'tions since the issuance
derogate Sit O 11prions Imposed by present or;future of the original operations pewit#-
contracts be green the City and Fixed-Base Operators or (d) Applications for a r ca cr service shall idcaLlfy
other users of the Airport. (Prior coda 1 10100; added and assess the effects of th cervi-c on community aircraft
by Ord. No.11326CCS,adopted 1/220) noise exposure, automobt tr4c,and ocher significant
envirorunental impacts and pro appropriate mitigation
10.04.06.1201 Commercial operations. measures.Environmental ntshall be in accordance
No perso shall use the Airport as a base for any cam- with State and City laws a d p adures.As used in this
merciai actt+rtty without an operations permit issued by Section,"air carrier"servi a includes commuter soviet.
the City Man ger.The term--commercial activity"includes air charter and air taxi opt: donnt�,freight,cargo,txpress.
the carrying r hire of passengers,fralght,exprt:as or mail, and mail service,and othe comr tcrcial flight operations
the sale of Wei and related products or services,the sate czrtificatcd br the Fede Aviaiion Administration.
or lease of a w or used aircraft,the sale of air=ft parts (e) The rcguiremcut o an op mxitins permit is supple-
and suppliesl flight or ground schools requiring a fixed mentary to aI mcnQLeviews,business licenses
base, sircraf{ repair and maintenance, the sate of food and other Cees and approva as tnly be required by applica-
and re>hshmLwts,or any other w0dry for which a businaw bic law.The leasing by t Ci�of a parcel of Iand for
license ttom!the City is required. (Prior code g 10101; fiaad•basc aviadan opera['Dw does not rciicvc the icsscc,
added by Olid. No. 1326CCS,adopted 1fZMS) or any other pc:son occupyg lhccpaLcci,from the rcquirc-
awnt of obtaining or amen iing o0cratiom permits unless
10.04.06.0301 Operations permit. the lease so speer acs.
The foliov ing standards and procr-duces appiv w opera- (f) 'rite Cityfvfanoger v dcjt-v,grant unconditionally,
tionspCmt(4• orgmsitanoperationspc itsu ecttoconditiomrcason-
(a) Appli12doshall be prt�enttad to rite Airport!dice- ably related to the promo ion of
ns the safety or economic
for on an aproved form and considered by the Airport viability of Elie Airport,co li wiLlt the Airport Ague.
Commission issuance ofa permit by the Clty Man- mcnt or Airport Pian, or the as atcment of community
ager.Applie tions shall,at a minimum,idenclfy rhe appll- czposurc to aircraft noise o othc : nvironme-t tal concc.;�s.
cants and Its principals,do-ciment the oppliieanes financial A deeisio:s of the City lata i3ger shall be final,subject to
F �
5S5
U21 08-:33 16:;5.1 .SSU HiH; 'Uh:1 1-H.-Iii ..l J71 =•�v ��1
10.04.06.030
judJ�cisl review, -Ibe Airport Director may establish by Administration.and.cx utipt for employees of holders of
r •on standard conditions to be pats of all operations eouunc:c 1 opere ns unity,obtain #opeatfpnS permit
punless spedfieally deleted, under Sccdon 10 .06X)30(b).
E=ept n provided in Subsecdon(h),an operations (b) All peso insittcting or checking out pilots in
P: shall be deemed granted s*e 4 only to atlndard flying at the rts 1 fully inform the pilots of the
con#itioas if it is not dfsapprowd or oonddortally approver! Noise Code and o er r8ulations in effect 9t the Airpots
by Pe City Manager within sixty(60)days of the Bung and shall be m .sibla for the dtnduct of such student
of completed application unless etxtpaded by tate(sty p4lots under their hstru4ion.(Prior code i;11)104;added
M ager in writing for an additional ptieud not to exceed by Ord No. 1325 CS.` opted U7'J$5)
(60)days.
1t) No operations permit shall be granted unless and 10.04.06.460 Al ft maintenance and repair.
un the applicant or aurho&xd mprescmative has obtained No pevwn shat hold himself or hctscif out as an aircraft
U their governmental approvals applicable to the project, mcchawk or m ' tain ` repair the aircraft of another
G t that a building permit taffy not be granted without person for conal ratio except in compliance with the
an Aerations permit. following require crits
i} The Airport Director may issue an order directing (a) the saeett ' sh rcgutcr with dee Airport Direc-
a In derof an operations permit to comply with applicable tor,demonstrate Lhac fee or she has a valid and current
la or conditions of permits. The City Manager may certification from the Vcdcral Aviation Administration,
suspend or revoke an opemtions.permit forwiWA violation and except for em loyccas or holdets of commctsial opera-
of such an order.Any sueptusion or revocation may be tions permits,obtj tin artioperations permit under Section
a 1 aled to the City's Hearing-Examiner pursuant to the 10.44.iy6.030(b).
titat�Lu
and procedures of prior code Section 6126 of (b) Repairs of in designated ticdown or stomgc
thepal Code.The effect of sunt st>Ispet>siAn or rove- areas shall be Gln'ted to•maittttenance:and repairs that do
cati?n shall be stayed pending timely appeal to the Hearing ncnlmpedethefldwof oand traffic in the arca or inmr-
T".'�RBtttil, fere with access t air aft or aircraft movement.
The City Council by Resolution maycstabllsh and (c) Aircraft its. tools, or supplies shall not be
fro time to liana amend fees for the ptoctnssing of applica- permitted to a rstulatp in designated aircraft,parldng
do foroperations permits and f ze"ase opermnr icases. or uomgc awfams.P rsorag.condutxing maintenance or repair
whip shalt not tetceed the sessonabfe cost of sucta process- acrMcies shall be spar�sible for the prompt dean-up of
ing.:(Prior code 110102; added by Ord. No. 1326CCS, sttch areas and rc a1 any aocuntulated axw=ial.(Prior
at!6�ted lIY?1d5) code § 10105; ed by Ord. No. 1326CCS, adopted
• 1I�5)
,1q ,4.05.040 Exemptions. j
ofrradon ppcezmits shall not be required if the pravlslom 10.04.06.0:0 Indicmni ty.
nyof the followittg Subsectfopa are melt: The pnvilages f usit(g the Airport and its facilities arc
Flying dubs shall be mmpted from obtaining an condirioned on tF asstitnpcion of Full responsibility and
Ope�atioRS pet7itit upon the issuance of a pe:ruit from the risk by the user Lt creofi and the user shall release, hold
Abe ort Director.FkAng dubs are defined as non-proflt harmless. and indemnify. the City, members of the City
me bership organizations formed to allow for the multiple Council and Btu I aad Commissions.and officers and
aw #ship of aircraft.tssuarnce of the permit shalt be based employees of the ity f rn any liability or loss resulting
sol�yon axarninationof tha dub by-laws and verifications from such use.
of on-profit status.The permit may be revoked by the Nothing in this tap er shall be deemed to impose any
Direc(of If the club engages in commercial acdvicies liability upon the Icy off Santa Monica or its officers or
as scribed in Section 10.04.06.020. employees,or to rate tiny private rights of action in any
1b) A person may sell his or her personal aircraft person,or to rdi ve arcy pcmon using the airport from
wit out obtaining an operations petntit.provided that no any duty or st2ndt rd of Care imposed by taw,(Prior code
,cit may engage:in two(2)such sales within any twelve $ 10106:added b Ord.No. 1326CCS,adopted 1122/85)
(12 rttnath period without an operations permit.A person
rtra.lease his or her petzonal aircraft to holders of comma- 10.04.06.080 lrisjrance.
cial operariorns permits without obtaining an operations A!1 akrz aft tars a0d operators shall be coveredat
p it.(Prior code§10103;added by Ord.No.1326CCS, theircxpense by p blit liability insurance in such amounts
adopted V-72135) and arms as estabi ishcd Resolution of the City Council.
i Such insurance sh ill ria4ic the City,members of the City
10,44-46-450 Flight instructions. Council and Boat J3 anq Commissions,and ofFtcrrrs and
1?l0 person shall hold himself or herself out as a flight employe=of the Gicy as ddidonal named insurods.(Prior
inst�uetor or give flight instruction except'in compliance code § 10107; added §y Ord. No. 1326CCS. adopted
with the following requirements: t11S5)
lm) The instructor strait register with the Airport er
Dir -
tor,edemonstrate that he or she has a valid Ind current
flight instructoc's ccrtifecation from the Federal Aviation '
I
- i
,
10.04.06,090
I
i
10.04.06.090 i A1rtmfl:tic-down and fsmp r (e) No cylinder oraask of cot aprrssed flammabte gas
I retrtsL shall be kept or stwcd t at such a place as may Ise
The owneF or operator of aircraft using the Airport dcsignattsi by the Fire D artm -,M
shall pay the rental rate.The do-down dr parldng (d) 'Ile cleaning of en;ines Qr other parts of aircraft
rate shall be d ars the length of the wiag-span in fear. shall not be.carried on in any h ngar except with non-
the waight of a aircraft,tho number of etgg nos.or similar flammable substaacas.If tn=ble liquids shall be am-
mtasure, an shalt be charged by the tntmth, day, or ployed for this purpose,th op - 'oa shall be yarned on
half-hour rental rate for hangar parking shall be a in the open air and a safe dicta cc from other aircraft.
single manth. sum. All such rates shall be established (e) During business its gar entrances shall be
by Resolutio of the City Council.(Prior code§ 10108; kept clear at all times to per th
Wt dy access to e building
added by Or� No. 1325CCS,adoptpd 1f2.91>35) to combat fires.
(f) floors of buildings shall ybe kept clean and free
10.04.06.100 landing fees. of ori,and no rolatila or fl-rnmable solvcrtt:kali be used
Ownamor.{opemtotsofaircraftoperntedfor commzrcW for cie-aningffocts. 3
putzbases sho pay s landing fee its the Wowing amounts- lg) No boxes, crates. bbi q.paper, crnpty cans or
bottim,or other Jitter sha be ptrnitted to accumulate
AIRCRAFr ROSS M5 PER in or about any hanger. ( rior code § 10111; added by
WXTOIRT LANDING Ord. No. 1326CCS,adopt !d 1aWS)
Less than 2, 0 lbs. $ 2,00 10.04.06.130 Aircra groYnd operations.
2,000 to 4,00P lbs. S 3.00 'rbc following regulad sh til govern the operation
4,000 to 6,OOp lbs. $ 4.00 of aircraft while on the gr and t the Airport;
6,000 to 10,OPO lbs. S 5.00 (a) No aircraft engine all bF started on any aircraft
10,000 to 20,900 lbs. S 7.50 not equipped with adequa a brakes fully set,unless the
2OA00 to 30,000 N. S10.00 wheels havo beer,cbocke with blocks.No aircraft shall
30,000 to 50,000 lbs. $15.00 be started or runup unim wu3pe ant operator is at the
50,000 to 90.000 lbs. $20.00 controls of the aircraflt at l t' es.No aircraft Shall be
Over 70,000 0s. S25X0 left unattended on the ' n emacs is is in a hangar com-
pletely enclosed with the oor locked securely or such
L=diag f may be established and Pram time to time aictraft is locked in such a arty crithat it cr`nnot be entered
amended by asolutfon of the City Council.Landing fees or started without the use o a proper key.All unhangared
shall not appt to the use or operation of aircraft by persons aircraft shall ba parked in a spices designated for that
holding a talid operadons permit under. Sac tion purpose and locked as zb4 va.
10,74.06,020.!(Prior code § I0109;.added by Ord No. (b) The prcZ&run-u of er oes shall be conducted
1326CCS,adpMd I=85) only at points designated by tho Airport Director. No
aircraft shall be operated ab WJp power oftun-up unless
10.04.06.110. Technical.codes. It Is In such position that ire prbpellcr or turbine blast
All stru=x w at the Airport charI comply with applicable will dear all buildings,all a reraft3tnaneuvcringarea:,and
panisions of,Chapter 8.04 of Amide 8 of the Municipal all people'Iu the observati a ardas.
Code rclatin j to Technical and CAnstrucuoa Codes.(Prior (c) No person shalf takc any.,aircraft on,to or from
code § 1011p; added by Ord. No. 1326CCS, adopted the Airport,or operate an)such&rcraft,whdr.under the
11 85) influence of or while uvng,any,nto electing liquor or drug.
(d) Wrecked or darns cd aii'.craft shall promptly be
LOA4.06.12011! Fre regulations. removed from r�oways or Hays by the aircraft owner
In addidots to any other requirement imposed by law, or operawrsubjca to dre di recuott of elle Airport Director
ail persons a the Airport shall comply with the following and appropriate of chits of the Upitcd States of America.
specfie fire 1plations applicable to all persons using the (Priorcode 1101 a2:added iv Ordt.No. 1326CCS,adopted
Airport: t1Z13S)
(a) Every,person using the r4iryorc or its facilities in
any way chain use thb utrnost caution to prevent firs and Io.d4.06.130 F uelin opca ldous_
shall not�suse to exist any condition constituting a fire aircraft fueling opc=tiv shall be conducted consistent
Jtaxnrd. I with safety standardsconta'ied in state,Federal,and local
(b) No at raft shall be fueled or drained while Its cn- fire law.T4c fol:owing ad itiottil provisions shall apply
gime Is ntnnin or while in a hangar or other enclosed place. to the fueling of aircrtft I the A! irport:
Fueling shall a done in such manner and with such equip- (a) The right of a pilot to fuel his or her own aircraft
ment that adt nuate connections for the grounding of static pursuant to Federal law s all bi respected.
elactricity sh Jibe maiatsined continuously during fueling (b) The City Council r tay by Resolution, establish a
operations.IN o smoking shall be permitted witrirnfii' r(b0) furl flowage fes w be pail I to tri Ciey by all persons or
felt of the po nt where iVel is removed from or discharged companles supplying s"olil vo or tails to be used,dispensed,
into anv circ ft.
i
i 539
1721"'00 5 16:56 L&L-1 rH•;n ._i�•-��1-_•-�: �.,
10.04.06:140
F
of d at the Airport by persons Other than the City.(Prior violadons of the MOEO vehicfa operating and parking
C
ad § 10113; added by Ord. No. 1326=, adopted regulations of thi Cha Mr.
l�dg5) 0) The , D' for shall have authority to tow
or otherwise mo tztocor vclricfcs which are parked in
10.d.4.06.150 Ultrai4*t WxcmtL violation of this( aptgr in aoeordanco with applicable
beardingvertcadonbythoFads:*A urian �- law.(Prior coda I011i5;added by Ord.No. 1326CCS,
do and the City that utttalfght afx=j t can operata at adopted IIS"J85}
4npoti�vidtaut compsomi;t4ag svtatfort salary,iso person
Shall operate an ultraliSht aircraft,as de finad by Federal 10.04.06.170 PedFsOUrts,
k;4on Regulations t'ar't 103,at or from the Airport. No pcdastri shall,be upon any taxiway or landing
(Pni rcode 110114;added try turd.No.1326CCS,adopted arca ut the Aizpn with ut first obtaining a signed permit
from the Airport kcrtpr,c=pting mechanics who arc
by necessity rrqui ed to'bc tm a ixdway or landing area
10.04.06.160 Motor vehicles. co tersuve darnag d air .(Prior code 4 10116;added
( ) No person shall operate a motor vehicle at the by Ord.No. 1326 CS, ado, 112JS5)
Ak"rt cxccot in aoLordance with this Section. Aa used
in " Section, the tt na `motor4ohicle" includes any 10.04.06.180 Exp�rimentat Plights.
veh to other than an aircraft,lncludin§bicycles. No experitnen certification test flights or ground
( ) Motor vehicles shalt be paftd in designated paddog demonstrations sh ill be 4vnductcd on or as.the by Airport
without the wrist p tsston of the Airport Director.
( ) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on,upon, (Prior code§tail ;add d by Ord.No.1326CCS,adopted
ora oss any portion of tho Airport except along or upon 1J`''w.l85) ,}},
zea. ya designated for travel by motor vehictea or those -
p .Ons of the Airoort set aside by the Airport Director 10.0406.14daw==
arlage reports and responsibility_
for utomobile parking purposes. Any pn any light or ftxtuce by means of
(�) No paten shall operate.duffer or propel.any motor contact w . or surface vehicle shall report
vele at a speed of greater thaw twenty-ftva(25)miles such.damto *ct Director immediately and shall
per!tour at rhe Airport. be fully rrlany costs required to repair or
(b) The Airport Director may place on the Airport replace thairy.(Ptior code 110113;added
strep stop signs andparking rapdatitm signts as he or she by Ord.N , .dopted U2'J85)
La ;dtseru ner wary.No parson shall park any vehicle
con#r"ary to the directions an aq parking sign or enter 10.04.06.'.00 Mot on pictures and tomrdercial
any!intersection posted with a stop sign without first Pao graphy.
britt ing his or her vehicle to a full stop'within six(6)feet No person aft it tttk stili. notion, video or sound
of such intersection. pictures for com;rciai Ourposos on rhe Airport without
( No person shalt operate,drive,orpropef any motor a use permit appy ved by chs Airport Director,The use
vehicle on any landing area of the Airport_ pctrrrir shall ba int iidng and shail six forth any conditions
( ) Police or fire vehicles driven on tete Airport in pertaining to use is the kirport Director shall dererminc
reMnse to itmar'gencicsshall not be subject to Subsections and the fcc or chdr2c Eq be paid for such use.The fees
(e)4nd(f).Vehicles driven on die Airport for the purpose and charges for c'c usd.of the Airport for comms rcial
of Oinking repairs and improvements to the Airport or photography shalt a cmc blishcd by Resolution of the City
for reckage removai and governmental vehicles driven Council and shaldrrni
c poi prior to tate issuarca of the use
on the Airport on official business shall not be subject to permit.Any violns n o the tertor conditions of such
Su*cxions(d)and(e),�provfding that the Operators obtain permit snail be a anor_(Prior code 0 10119;added
a permit to enter the landing area from the Airport Dirac- by Ord. No. 1326 CS.adopted ll?'18S)
tor,� tspicuously display an approvad orange and white
safety flag on the vehicles,and enter and leave the Airport 10.04.06.:10 lsen}
�lty.
at eblished gateways. The violation o any provision of this Subchapter shall
( ) All vehicles hauling trash shall be towered.No vein- be a misdemean c pul#habit by a fine of up to rive
cte geed for hauling trash,dirt,or any other ttiatariats shall hundred dollars.( 3150.10), a jail term of up to six (6)
beemoted on the airport unless such vehicle is construct- months.or bosh.( rlor node$ 10120;added by Ord.No. .
ed sb as to prevent its contents from dropping,sifting,karts• 1326CCS, adopte 112J35)
in$,br udtcrwise escaping.Any person who spills any dirt I
or y other materials from vehicles operved at the Aicpm Subchapter 10 4.08�lossary of Technic al Terms
shall imcredfaccty clean up the spilled material.
(�) Violation,of the provisions of this Section shall be 10.04.03.010 Defilritfon of terms.
punishable by tine putattant to Secrion x.16.290 of the Mu- The following ords dr phrases as used in this Chapter
nicipai Code."l.l c procedures of Semlons 3-12.1070 and shall have the roll ing meanings;
3.171080 of the Ntunidpat Code shall be appllcnbfe to (a) TrafficPatt rn., 6 approximately rectangular flight
track dcsi�ncd to rovi a for as organized flow of Idem
5S4
i
+ i.;�:'l'i2=�'::•_• lb:'_ii :_.t`i_i li ti:t"iJ:.i t't-s.'.:t .... _. .",_'." ___... .,_
•.a ... i
10.t14.Ql1_QIQ E
- 3
traffic aratittc�the Airport in which the runway c4atthfine 10.08.070 laxpa4ion.
farms one of IIn8 of the!onager lags of tlrC rectangle. 10.08.080 Ce:til tea rnspectfoa
The traffic pottcrn shall be established by the Federal 1'!1.08.090 Fre inspc tfon.
Aviation Adgainistration in cooperation with the City. 10.08,100 Regni eais.
(b) Sttttat Ptas5ttta fl,'Thc sound pressure level I0.08.1iU Moatf g fceS�--Cttxonued
of a sound is my(20)tunas the logaritlhm to the baso moor!
sen(10)of tl a rano of the mcnasnhtt:ti toot meso aquas 10.08.150 Llan f na1a8#d mooring lees.
(RMS)value of the sound pressure to a ref=rice sound 10.08.130 lien f vuaid fees for hue of
pressure. Measurement units are decibels (413 he, City a�or
• "! "O.
reftrenct pr(ssure is twenty(20)micro pascalL 10.08.1.40 Enfw tmeni of liens.
10.x,150 M'oaai g mni*em.
(SPL 20 L.bg„(P measured divided by P reference)} 10-00.160 Aixho ing Yossets.
10,04.170 'Piste _.L !
(c) A-W iShted Sound Pressure Level. The sound 10A8.180 Aatcho ng fde.
presstua 1 1 which has been Mtered or weighted to 10.4$.190 Islac t esign'ted.
qu=titadvel reduce the affect of tow ircquency noise. 10-08.200 Untaut orixeli mooring—Pubik
It Wass 4csigcto sopn- mate the response of the hurnnan and p 'Yate jaoor(ngs.
car to sound.-weighted sound pressure level is mtasured 10.08.210 Maori g and docking--
int decalacis with a standard sound level mater which coruains Rtatri ions:
the"A"welAting!network.A-weighted decibels areabbrt• 14.06.220 Vessel lying�twharf
viatetl dE A fteiemnt standards arc defined by the Ameri- 14.08.230 Aban ed (nooring.
tuna National Standards Institute Spcciiiearian for Sound 10.08.7AO Order to change mcwring
LeM Ma (SL4-1971). 10.08.,.50 Order to ch$ngc mooring---
(d) Sin§4 Event Noise Exposure Level.SEVEL is the Reaps afbti(ties.
tam-itrtJWh1q=tift
weiglttedsa>mdlsrtssuralevel tasitiglc 10.0825f1 Aacfr lights_
aircrftft (which weeds a threshold tuaisa level) 10.08.270 g h�at{uiretnents.
which isby the leve!of an cgtrfrelent oteascccynd 10.08,330 Datsun to l}roger;y_
d�t tionsigrtsl The d t Sbold level at the Akpots- I0.48.290 Opera vessel in unsafe
shall be -five(65)dBA.SQL providos a mann .
measure the effetz of duration and magxni- 1008.300 Muftl
tutltc#flr tt sltt a overt{measured above a specifed'thtesh- 1108.310 0 tick--Prob ibited—
oid.SE-3vTEl. cacti red by California Division ofAcronau- Ilcres L
t1ck"Noise S dsrdt for California Airports.*California 10.08.320 Obs chinas--t�rc�;iag.
Admiinistrati a Code Chapter 9,Title 4(Register 70,No. 10.08330 Stray tud .
48,Noretii[ r 28, 1970). . 10.08-W Waste matetiais.
(e) Corn unity Mise Equivalent L.cveL The C74EL 10.08.350 Swim crs.
is the annual erage(on an energy basis)noise level roes- 10.03360 Rolts regulations.
sured In A• 'ghted sound pressure level fora twenty-four 10.03.370 E
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
Date: February 16 , 1993
To: Board of Supervisors
Attn: Internal Operations Committee
From: Victor J. Westman, County Coun
By: Sharon L. Anderson, Deputy Uounty Counsel
Re: RESTRICTION OF HELICOPTER OPERATIONS AT BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT
SU101ARY
This office was asked to evaluate whether a "noise study"
could be conducted which would allow the County to remove helicopter
training operations from Buchanan Field Airport or whether the County
could enact a more stringent noise ordinance to accomplish this
purpose .
The Airport Manager' s Office advises us that the R-22
helicopter (the type used by Helicopter Adventures ) may be considered
by the FAA to be a "Stage 3" aircraft. Under the Airport Noise and
Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) , noise or access restrictions cannot be
imposed on Stage 3 aircraft unless every aircraft operator at the
airport agrees to the restriction or the restriction is approved by
the FAA. It is unlikely that the operator of a helicopter would
agree to such a restriction. '
The FAA will require extensive studies before it will approve
any noise or access restriction on Stage 3 operations . It seems
likely that the FAA would deem a ban on helicopters or helicopter
training operations discriminatory and would refuse to approve it .
The FAA will also give close scrutiny to any regulatory act by the
County which would have the effect of imposing restrictions on Stage
3 aircraft, including strengthening the noise ordinance, imposing
extended curfew hours or otherwise regulating training flights .
'Even if the helicopters were determined by the FAA to be Stage 2 aircraft, the County would still be required to
deal with ANCA, which prohibits an airport proprietor from restricting Stage 2 aircraft operations unless the proprietor has:
(a) published the proposed noise or access restriction; and (b) prepared or made available for public comment at least 180
days before the effective date of the restriction a mandatory analysis and description which includes (i) a cost/benefit
analysis of the proposed restrictions; (ii) a description of alternative restrictions; (iii) a description of alternative measures
which do not involve aircraft restrictions; and (iv) a cost/benefit comparison of the alternative measures to the proposed
restrictions. 49 U.S.C. section 2153(c); 14 CFR Part 161, sections 161.201-161.213. However, even a restriction on Stage 2
aircraft must be nondiscriminatory. See Andrews v. County of Orange (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 944, 963.
Board of Supervisors 2 February 16 , 1993
DISCUSSION
In 1990 Congress adopted the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of
1990 ( "ANCA" - Pub. L. 101-508, 49 U.S .C. 2151 et seq. ) . The purpose
of the legislation was to formulate a national aviation noise policy.
In enacting the legislation, Congress made the following findings :
"The Congress finds that-
" ( 1 ) aviation noise management is crucial to
the continued increase in airport capacity;
" ( 2 ) community noise concerns have led to
uncoordinated and inconsistent restrictions
on aviation which could impede the national
air transportation system;
11 ( 3 ) a noise policy must be implemented at
the national level;
" (4 ) local interest in noise management shall
be considered in determining the national
interest;
11 ( 5 ) community concerns can be alleviated
through the use of new technology aircraft,
combined with the use of revenues, including
those available from passenger facility
charges for noise management. . . . " 49 U.S .0
2151 .
As a result of ANCA, federal authorities will now play a
substantially greater and more overt role in the final structure of
any future restrictions on airport use based on noise considerations .
A noise or access restriction on the operation of Stage 3 aircraft is
defined in the statute to include each of the following types of
restrictions :
11 ( 1 ) a restriction as to noise levels
generated on either a single event or
cumulative basis;
" ( 2 ) a limit, direct or indirect, on the
total number of Stage 3 aircraft operations ;
11 ( 3 ) a noise budget or noise allocation
program which would include Stage 3 aircraft;
" (4 ) a restriction imposing limits on hours
of operations;
Board of Supervisors 3 February 16 , 1993
11 (5 ) any other limit on Stage 3 aircraft. "
49 U.S .C . 2153 (b) .
Under the provisions of ANCA, unless an airport noise or
access restriction on operations of Stage 3 aircraft was effective on
or before October 1, 1990, no such restriction shall be effective
unless (i) "all aircraft operators" agree to the restriction; (ii)
the airport proprietor has submitted to, and received approval of the
restriction from the FAA; or (iii) the restriction falls within one
of six "specific exemptions , " none of which are applicable here. 49
U.S .C. section 2153 .2
The term "aircraft" is defined by Part 1, Section 1 . 1 of Title
14 of the Code of Federal Regulations to mean "a device that is used
or intended to be used for flight in the air. " This definition would
include helicopters . The term "aircraft operator" is defined by 14
CFR Part 161, Section 161 . 5, part of the regulations implementing
ANCA, as : "any owner of an aircraft that operates the aircraft,
i .e. , uses, causes to use, or authorizes the use of the aircraft; or
in the case of a leased aircraft, any lessee that operates the
aircraft pursuant to a lease. " It is doubtful that the owner or
lessee of a helicopter at the airport would agree to a ban on
helicopters or a restriction on touch-and-go operations .
The alternative of presenting the proposed restriction on
helicopter operations to the FAA seems equally unlikely to succeed.
Section 161 . 305 of 14 CFR Part 161 requires that a detailed analysis
of any proposed noise or access restriction be submitted to the FAA
before it will approve any restriction enacted after October 1, 1990 .
A copy of Section 161 . 305, which contains five pages of requirements,
is attached. The same analysis would be required if the County were
to attempt to include new restrictions in its existing noise
ordinance or to add curfew or training restrictions to the airport
ordinance.
As we advised you in our previous memorandum on this issue,3
on September 2 , 1992, the Nut Tree Airport imposed a policy
prohibiting helicopter touch-and-go operations . The policy was
immediately withdrawn on October 8, 1992, after the airport was
informed by the FAA that the policy was not permitted, presumably
because it constituted unjust discrimination. As the Aviation
2A you may recall, during our negotiations with the City of Pleasant Hill it was determined that because the
County did not implement any restrictions on helicopters at the airport prior to October 1990, we were unable to include
any language in our "Initial Agreement" with the City which would limit the number of helicopter pads. Such an agreement
was considered to be a noise or access restriction which would violate the provisions of ANCA.
3The memorandum was dated November 2, 1992.
Board of Supervisors 4 February 16 , 1993
Advisory Committee advised the Board in its report of October 22,
1992, a ban on helicopters or helicopter training activities would
almost certainly be deemed discriminatory by the FAA.
The principal penalty of concern to this County for an airport
proprietor' s failure to comply with the limitations and requirements
of ANCA in respect of local use restrictions is that the proprietor
imposing such restriction will not be eligible to receive grants
authorized by Section 505 of the Airport Airway Improvement Act of
1982 ( "AIP" grants ) . 49 U.S .C . section 2153 (e) .4 The Airport
Manager' s office informs us that they have been advised by the FAA
that such a violation could result in the termination and/or
rescission of federal aid at both the Buchanan Field and Byron
airports and that this would effectively preclude the County from
completing the Byron airport project.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, unless the County can provide the FAA with the
overwhelming evidence necessary to prove that the proposed ban on
helicopters or helicopter training operations is reasonable,
nonarbitrary and nondiscriminatory, it is unlikely that such a ban
would be approved. In addition, before the County can insert new
restrictions affecting Stage 3 aircraft into the County' s existing
noise ordinance, the County will be required to provide the FAA with
the analysis and documentation required by Section 161 . 305 of 14 CFR
Part 161 (attached) . Failure to comply with the FAA' s requirements
could result in the termination and rescission of all federal
financial assistance at both Buchanan Field and Byron airports .
Please advise if we can provide the Board with further
clarification of or information concerning any of these issues .
SLA:la
CC . J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director
Attn: Harold E. Wight, Manager of Airports
s1a3\a:\anca
4 A the AAC noted in its October 22, 1992 report, any action of the County found by the FAA to be
discriminatory would also violate the County's grant agreements with the FAA. Such a violation could result in a similar
penalty.
(9) The address for submitting comments to the airport operator or
aircraft operator proposing the restriction, including identification of a
contact person.
(d) Applicants may propose alternative restrictions, including partial
implementation of any proposal, and indicate an order of preference. if
alternative restriction proposals are submitted, the requirements listed in
paragraphs (c) (2) through (c) (6) above should address the alternative
proposals where appropriate.
§ 161. 305 Required analysis and conditions for approval of proposed
restrictions.
Each applicant proposing a noise or access restriction on Stage 3
operations shall prepare and make available for public comment an analysis
that supports, by substantial evidence, that the six statutory conditions for
approval have been met for each restriction and any alternatives submitted.
The statutory conditions are set forth in 49 U.S.C. App. 2153(d) (2) and
paragraph (e) below. Any proposed restriction (including alternatives) on
Stage 3 aircraft operations that also affects the operation of Stage 2
aircraft must include analysis of the proposals in a manner that permits the
proposal to be understood in its entirety. (Nothing in this section is
intended to add a requirement for the issuance of restrictions on Stage 2
aircraft to those of Subpart C of this part.) The applicant shall provide:
(a) The complete text of the proposed restriction and any submitted
alternatives, including the proposed wording in a city ordinance, airport
rule, lease, or other document, and any sanctions for noncompliance;
(b) Maps denoting the airport geographic boundary, and the geographic
boundaries and names of each jurisdiction that controls land use within the
airport noise study area;
(c) An adequate environmental assessment of the proposed restriction or
adequate information supporting a categorical exclusion in accordance with FAA
orders and procedures regarding compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) ;
(d) A summary of the evidence in the submission supporting the six
statutory conditions for approval; and
(e) An analysis of the restriction, demonstrating by substantial
evidence that the statutory conditions are met. The analysis must:
(1) - Be -sufficiently detailed to allow the FAA to evaluate the merits of
the proposed restriction; and
(2) Contain the following essential elements needed to provide
substantial evidence supporting each condition for approval:
(i) Condition 1: The restriction is reasonable, nonarbitraly. and
nondiscriminatory.
(A) Essential information needed to demonstrate this condition includes
the following:
(.1) Evidence that a current or projected noise or access problem exists,
and that the proposed action(s) could relieve the problem, including:
(i) A detailed description of the problem precipitating the proposed
restriction with relevant background information on factors contributing to
the proposal and any court-ordered action or estimated liability concerns; a
description of any noise agreements or noise or access restrictions currently
in effect at the airport; and measures taken to achieve land-use
compatibility, such as controls or restrictions on land use in the vicinity of
171
the airport and measures carried out in response to 14 CFR part 150; and
actions taken to comply with grant assurances requiring that:
(0) Airport development projects be reasonably consistent with plans of
public agencies that are authorized to plan for the development of the area
around the airport; and
(1) The sponsor give fair consideration to the interests of communities
in or near where the project may be located; take appropriate action,
including the adoption of zoning laws, to the extent reasonable, to restrict
the use of land near the airport to activities and purposes compatible with
normal airport operations; and not cause or permit any change in land use,
within its jurisdiction, that will reduce the compatibility (with respect to
the airport) of any noise compatibility program measures upon which federal
funds have been expended.
(IJ) An analysis of the estimated noise impact of aircraft operations
with and without the proposed restriction for the year the restriction is
expected to be implemented, for a forecast timeframe after implementation, and
for any other years critical to understanding the noise impact of the proposed
restriction. The analysis of noise impact with and without the proposed
restriction including:
(,&) Haps of the airport noise study area overlaid with noise contours as
specified in H 161.9 and 161.11 of this part;
(1) The number of people and the noncompatible land uses within the
airport noise study area with and without the proposed restriction for each
year the noise restriction is analyzed;
(Q) Technical data supporting the noise impact analysis, including the
classes of aircraft, fleet mix, runway use percentage, and day/night breakout
of operations; and
Q) Data on current and projected airport activity that would exist in
the absence of the proposed restriction.
(.Z) Evidence that other available remedies are infeasible or would be
less cost-effective, including descriptions of any alternative aircraft
restrictions that have been considered and rejected, and the reasons for the
rejection; and of any land use or other nonaireraft controls or restrictions
that have been considered and rejected, including those proposed under 14 CFR
part 150 and not implemented, and the reasons for the rejection or failure to
implement.
Q) .Evidence that the--noise- or access standards are the same for all
aviation user classes or that the differences are justified, such as:
(1) A description of the relationship of the effect of the proposed
restriction on airport users (by aviation user class) ; and
(11) The noise attributable to these users in the absence of the
proposed restriction.
(B) At the applicant's discretion, information may also. be submitted as
follows:
(1) Evidence not submitted under para-graph (e)(2) (ii)(A) of this section
(Condition 2) that there is a reasonable chance that expected benefits will
equal or exceed expected cost; for example, comparative economic analyses of
the costs and benefits of the proposed restriction and aircraft and
nonaircraft alternative measures. For detailed elements of analysis, see
paragraph (e)(2) (ii)(A) of this section.
(.Z) Evidence not submitted under paragraph (e)(2)(ii) (A) of this section
that the level of any noise-based fees that may be imposed reflects the cost
172
of mitigating noise impacts produced by the aircraft, or that the fees are
reasonably related to the intended level of noise impact mitigation.
(ii) Condition 2: The restriction does not create an undue burden on
interstate or foreign commerce.
(A) Essential information needed to demonstrate this statutory condition
includes:
(1) Evidence, based on a cost-benefit analysis, that the estimated
potential benefits of the restriction have a reasonable chance to exceed the
estimated potential cost of the adverse effects on interstate and foreign
commerce. In preparing the economic analysis required by this section, the
applicant shall use currently accepted economic methodology, specify the
methods used and assumptions underlying the analysis, and consider:
(1) The effect of, the proposed restriction on operations of aircraft by i
aviation user class (and for air carriers, the number of operations of
aircraft by carrier) , and on the volume of passengers and cargo for the year
the restriction is expected to be implemented and for the forecast timeframe.
( ) The estimated costs of the proposed restriction and alternative
nonaircraft- restrictions including the following, as ,appropriate:'
(9) Any additional cost of continuing aircraft operations under the
restriction, including reasonably available information concerning any net
capital costs of acquiring or retrofitting aircraft (net of salvage value and
operating efficiencies) by aviation user class; and any incremental recurring
costs;
(.a) Costs associated with altered or discontinued aircraft operations,
such as reasonably available information concerning loss to carriers of
operating profits; decreases in passenger and shipper consumer surplus by
aviation user class; loss in profits associated with other airport services or
other entities; and/or any significant economic effect on parties other than
aviation users.
(C) Costs associated with implementing nonaircraft restrictions or
nonaircraft components of restrictions, such as reasonably available
information concerning estimates of capital costs for real property, including
redevelopment, soundproofing, noise easements, and purchase of property
interests; and estimates of associated incremental recurring costs; or an
explanation of the legal or other impediments to implementing such
restrictions.
(D) 'Estimated benefits of the proposed restriction and alternative
restrictions that consider, as appropriate, anticipated increase in real
estate values and future construction cost (such as sound insulation) savings;
anticipated increase in airport revenues; quantification of the noise
benefits, such as number of people removed from noise contours and improved
work force and/or educational productivity, if any; valuation of positive
safety effects, if any; and/or other qualitative benefits, including
improvements in quality of life.
(B) At the applicant's discretion, information may also be submitted as
follows:
(1) Evidence that the affected carriers have a reasonable chance to
continue service at the airport or at other points in the national airport
system.
(2L) Evidence that other air carriers are able to provide adequate
service to the airport and other points in the system without diminishing
competition.
173
6
( ) Evidence that comparable services or facilities are available at
iunother airport controlled by the airport operator in the market area,
including services available at other airports.
(4) Evidence that alternative transportation service can be attained
through other means of transportation.
(J) Information on the absence of adverse evidence or adverse comments
with respect to undue burden in the notice process required in § 161.303, or
alternatively in § 161.321, of this part as evidence that there is no undue
burden.
(iii) Condition 3: The or000sed_ restriction maintains safe and
efficient use of the navigable airspace. Essential information needed to
demonstrate this statutory condition includes evidence that the proposed
restriction maintains safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace based
upon:
(A) Identification of airspace and obstacles to navigation in the
vicinity of the airport; and
e
174
(B) An analysis of the effects of the proposed restriction with respect
to use of airspace in the vicinity of the airport, substantiating that the
restriction maintains or enhances safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. The analysis shall include a description of the methods and data
used.
(iv) Condition 4: The proposed restriction does not conflict with any
existing Federal statute or regulation. Essential information needed to
demonstrate this condition includes evidence demonstrating that no conflict is
presented between the proposed restriction and any existing Federal statute or
regulation, including those governing:
(A) Exclusive rights;
(B) Control of aircraft operations; and
(C) Existing Federal grant agreements.
(v) Condition 5: The applicant has provided adequate opportunity for
public comment on the proposed restriction. Essential information needed to
demonstrate this condition includes evidence that there has been adequate
opportunity for public comment on the restriction as specified in § 161.303 or
§ 161. 321 of this part.
(vi) Condition 6 The proposed restriction does not create an undue
burden on the national aviation system. Essential information needed to
demonstrate this condition includes evidence that the proposed restriction
does not create an undue burden on the national aviation system such as:
(A) An analysis demonstrating that the proposed restriction does not
have a substantial adverse effect on existing or planned airport system
capacity, on observed or forecast airport system congestion and aircraft
delay, and on airspace system capacity or workload;
(B) An analysis demonstrating that nonaircraft alternative measures to
achieve the same goals as the proposed subject restrictions are inappropriate;
(C) The absence of comments with respect to imposition of an undue
burden on the national aviation system in response to the notice required in
§§ 161. 303 or 161.321.
§ 161. 307 Comment by interested parties.
(a) Each applicant proposing a restriction shall establish a public
docket or similar method for receiving and considering comments, and shall
make' comments available for inspection by' interested parties upon request.*
Comments must be retained as long as the restriction is in effect.
(b) Each applicant shall submit to the FAA a summary of any comments
received. Upon request by the FAA, the applicant shall submit copies of the
comments.
§ 161.309 Requirements for proposal changes.
(a) Each applicant shall promptly advise interested parties of any
changes to a proposed restriction or alternative restriction that -are not
encompassed in the proposals submitted, including changes that affect
noncompatible land uses or that take place before the effective date of the
restriction, and make available these changes to the proposed restriction and
its analysis. For the purpose of this paragraph, interested parties include
those who received direct notice under § 161.303(b) of this part, or those who
were required to be consulted in accordance with the procedures in § 161. 321
of this part, and those who commented on the proposed restriction.
175
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT C/ )
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: LJ44 PHONE: 3 72
ADDRESS: Z /K �U�Gc.��S �t l/Y� CITY: ��A'��J�i•► c.
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: NAME OF ORCA!V lNTION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to-speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
r
ZS- &a,,f Cl c
SPEAKERS
1. Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse side) in the box next to the speakers'
microphone before your item is to be considered.
2. You will be called to make your presentation. Please speak into the microphone.
3. Begin by stating your name and address; whether.you are speaking for yourself or as a
representative of an organization.
4. Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or support documentation, if available.
5. Please limit your presentation to three minutes. Avoid repeating comments made by previous
speakers. (The Chair may limit length of presentations so all persons may be heard.)
DATE: Z r
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) ''j/
Complete this form and place it in the box near the. speakers' rostrum before
addressoard.
'
NAME: � PHONE:
ADDRESS: CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
(NAME OF ORCANIIaTION)
Check one:
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 169
My comments will be: generaT"-, ,
-7'(
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
SPEAKERS
1. Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse side) in the box next to the speakers'
microphone before your item is to be considered.
2. You will be called to make your presentation. Please speak into the microphone.
3. Begin by stating your name and address; whether,you are speaking for yourself or as a
representative of an organization.
4. Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or support documentation, if available.
5. Please limit your presentation to three minutes. Avoid repeating comments made by previous
speakers. (The Chair may limit length of presentations so all persons may be heard.)
RECEIVED
February 21 , 1993
Internal Operations Committee
Members of the Board of Supervisors FEB L 2 1993
Dear Members of the Board: ..ERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS'
:...... _.iTRA COSTA CO.
On Wednesday February 17 , 1993 at 7 p.m. PMAC had its first off-
icial meeting since October 14 , 1992. After that date PMAC meet-
ings were consumed by Redevelopment spep,--hes. The first year term.
of four members ended November 30 , 1992 , and the new members were
not selected until February 1993 .
The three original PMAC members met with th.e four newly selected
members at the airport conference room. After we became acquainted,
We elected our officials , and then we discussed at lengh the
PMAC ' a position regarding training helicopter flights.
We decided unanimously to terminate the search for any alternate
training site , do what we can to modify training flight patterns
and wait until all or some of the training flights can be directed
to the Byron airport .
IN ANSWER TO YOUR LETTER DATED 10-28-92
My letter was given to the Board Clerk 10-16-92. I don ' t know
why you did not receive it until 10-27-92 . On that date each
Supervisor was not only provided with my letter , but was also
provided with a map indicating where I believed the copters should
fly . A copy of that map.. is included with this letter .
When PMAC voted for a moratorium, we requested that the training
helicopters be moved to a SAFER LOCATION such as the route
indicated on the map near Acme Dump .
Byron had not even been selected as a site , so there was no reason
for PMAC to visit the Byron Airport and to discuss the issue
with the Byron Municipal Advisory Council .
��2 jq 3
-2-
I had hoped the training copters would be relocated to the pos-
ition ;shown on the map near the Acme Dump . However , before I was
able to speak to the Board , I conversed with Dorothy Sakazaki .
She convinced me that such a location was a great hazard to all
people concerned.
When I was speaking to the Board , you asked me where I would I
prefer to relocate the copters . I told you my original choice
was Martinez , but since it was such a hazardous location, I felt
the training coptets should remain near Pacheco until they could
be moved to Byron .
PMAC did not make any recommendation,--regarding fixed wing air-
craft because I stated in my letter , "This letter refers speci-
fically to the Robinson 22 helicopter .
When PMAC recommended the moritorium they were not aware that the
county could not make a distiction between helicopters and other
aircraft . This fact was not mentioned in the chambers when Super-
visor Faden requested a moritorium at an earlier date .
Although the copter crash in late September WAS NOT a training
flight , the R22 which crashed belonged to HAI . According to
Scott Erickson , an investigator with the National Transportation
Safety Board , "There is a feeling this was an introductory type
of flight . " He added , "Authorities believe Lacy was giving Pol
a 30-minute trip to see if he liked copters and that the pair had
just left the airport after being cleared for a takeoff. "
According to the latest information , Helicopters Adventure Inc .
is not a Fixed Base Operator so perhaps the county woOld not
be exposed to legal financial damages if it tried to relocate HAI?
After all of the negative publicity regarding training helicopters ,
if there is another crash , the county will certainly be exposed
to great financial damages .
Sincerely ,
Wally Wiggs , President , PMAC
�. sy
1
ED
or.
UT 1 g 1992
October 16, 1992
CLERK 6_.�RJOFSUPEP.VISORS
CONT;
Sunne McPeak, Chair of the Board
Members of the Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Members of the Board:
At the October 14 , 1992 Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council Meet-
ing the subject of supporting a moratorium on helicopter training
flights from Buchanan Airport Field was discussed . This letter
refers specifically to the Robinson R22 helicopter .
Following the discussion, a vote was taken and a motion was made
and unanimously approved that PMAC supports a moratorium on all
training flights from November 3, 1992 until they can be moved to
a safer location.
Copies of this letter will be sent to the Public Works Director
and Airport Manager.
Sincerely,
Wally Wiggs, President , PMAC .
CC: Mike Walford , Director
Hal Wight , Airport Manage.
CC. Ppb►�� l vor�.5 .D��.
ROM TO OFF AIRPORT SITE )I *1;� :r�' I �1 t
ORIGINAL PATIMN'
t
-� PATTERN #2
3ig0ON TRA I ,�c� �,��.? Tit
. � r ..
),� 1 I I Q I 15•=
! �' 1�lTd i 3150 1 '
�..
I c TA, s
— -- - -— -}-
32 .01
Iq H E E I C 0 P T '°e AU 0 N _
--
SHOULD. F
tT.tt,7•. r
3200.011 <<�;., ,, 01° , s`
CKtAMCAJ to
Of
I
3200 01�: `"° I 200,01 -- —
•0 � .MI •w Ct I 'I'
)I' '•
t� •� i j d� •�, / ' • 't I �•
_ _ - a•l�� t,;�k����•-•�r/^/�• +1 ~`Ot1 ` lLtr trt• "---- �—— � I --�- -- -�
3200- 2
l �LtPv.�O ut7r)
`.,./_• C� ,�...w7Xr ..tt..r..e• -- 1 (_ �� p v M•, itf�.tf M1 ate'
T1 i,.1t .,1•
wR •aw• I
too'
R
= -"Zn
O •) I .t•u.+..IP t, ��
(( •'� � R ..•ca tt n
—• � �' S clt,�D0�7— 11, Lot+ ++" —+— � •/!
c�
t. n 1"' • , : v.11I• ICi MOiwo /
�YfY►.Ir
y /
... �;� .�b � !•`Oa ''K� I) 0 li� 1 a ^�. ,4 ( 9 •►, �` t.M1 1110 , OIIV:
vow t o ;c i rlf r � ►r� 'S•Mww����llii0w �r 1 uY.r.w.�+
v, i' \,t� 1,,��Vitt �� otl �v I Ir•,r1•rw N.4 ,l
•M01 Cat•'•'� do
emmom
cr
.�.� I+ i1lC ` � � !%k• =� at„t�j�}�,�{'� i —yi Y i t i'Ji •r \
to
{ R o
•�i c ` t t tt. .n tl r
r F G• ♦�•� L Q r,��' .t, •. a ) rL ��. tit '• rOn f •'• vl �t t• .
0 J`•p : � :.�� {:�j17r t'Qa� LL•r '� RJ �� � :.
•� . ��.�• . 1 � ..'..': pew ExxIBIT A
_ url Trr1pTFR� 15 F
_� LY....�ERE • "� r
Friday, October 2, 1992 Contra Costa Times-3A
Judge weighs use of DNA evidence
In a case that may have a wide-ranging impact on criminal court cases, a
Contra Costa Superior Court judge is considering whether to allow DNA
evidence in the upcoming sexual assault trial of a Martinez man. —7A
Ictions after c
"if that helicopter had crashed on the County air traffic is valuable training.
Juvenile Hall facility, the county would "To make it easier for their economic
have been wiped out financially ... or if it viability, we're the ones who suffer," Fah-
had hit the elementary school or gone into den said.
a home." Since opening five years ago, the heli-
It was still unclear Thursday who exact- copter flight school's fleet has grown from
ly sponsored the fatal flight. The victims one helicopter to 20 and draws students
were flying in a Robinson R22 helicopter from around the world for its six-month
belonging to P.J. MacLellan Ltd. and shar- training program.
ing hangar space at Buchanan Field with Some helicopter training already occurs
Helicopter Adventures Inc., according to a at Byron,where two to three copters prac-
news release from Helicopter Adventures. lice every weekday.
The statement said Helicopter Adven- Scott Erickson, an investigator with the
tures believed the aircraft was on a shore National Transportation Safety Board,said
sightseeing trip. They declined any further details of Wednesday's ill-fated flight still
comment Wednesday and Thursday. were unknown.
But on Thursday, Buchanan Field's Wil- "There is a feeling that this was an in-
liams said the craft had been operated by troductory type of flight," he said, adding
Helicopter Adventures. that authorities believed Lacy was giving
"It is leased back to Helicopter Adven- Pol a 30-minute trip to see if he liked heli-
tures. ... that's where it was operating out copters and that the pair had just left the
of," Williams said. airport after being cleared for takeoff.
Helicopter school owners have resisted It could be six months before cause of
efforts to move to Byron, contending there the crash is officially determined, Erickson
is inadequate housing and restaurants for said. Witnesses said the craft's rotor
students,and that flying in heavier Central seemed to malfunction.
. SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK Board of Supervisors
Supervisor, District Four Contra
2301 Stanwell Drive Costa
Concord, California 94520 County
(510)646-5763
(510)646-5767(FAX)
October 28, 1992
Mr. Wally Wiggs
187 Freda Drive
Pacheco, CA 945513
Dear Mr.x9gs:wav_�
We received the enclosed letter on October 27, 1992, and will
consider it in conjunction with a report from the Aviation
Advisory Committee on November 3.
When President Wiggs appeared before . the Board of Supervisors on
October 27, we asked him three questions which we would like to
pass on to the full Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC) .
Those questions are:
1. Did PMAC make any recommendations regarding fixed-wing
aircraft training flights?
2. When the PMAC made the recommendation contained in your
letter, were the members aware that FAA restrictions
prohibit the county from making a distinction between
helicopters and other types of aircraft?
3. Has PMAC visited Byron Airport or met with the Byron
Municipal Advisory Committee to discuss the feasibility of
moving some or all of the training flights from Buchanan
Field to Byron Airport?
The Board of Supervisors respectfully requests the PMAC to
address these questions and advise us on what course of action
you recommend since (a) we cannot legally treat helicopters
differently from other aircraft; and (b) the helicopter crash in
late September was not a training flight so we need to deal with
helicopter safety issues apart from problems associated with
. training flights. Further, County Counsel has warned the Board
of Supervisors that declaring a moratorium on all training
flights from Buchanan Field (we would have to halt all training
flights, not just helicopters, in order to not violate FAA
regulations) is likely to be in conflict with the fixed-based
operators' (FBO' s) leases and agreements and expose the county to
legal financial damages. Although I voted against granting an
FBO lease to Helicopter Adventures and argued that it was
irresponsible to enter into an FBO lease with the helicopter
Mr. Wally Wiggs
October 28, 1992
Page Two
training lease until we had worked out restrictions on noise and
identified an alternative site for training, the Board voted 4-1
to enter into the agreement. Therefore, the county has a real
dilemma as to how to best act to relieve the impacts on Pacheco
from helicopter training flights and to ensure maximum safety
from all helicopter operations, while at the same time not
violating the FAA rules and incurring lawsuits. That is why I
have actively tried to locate an interim training site off
Buchanan Field. The Board of Supervisors would greatly
appreciate hearing your views on this matter and would entertain
any alternative site proposals you may have.
Thank you for your assistance and attention to this important
matter.
Sincerely,
unne Wright McPeak
SWM:vlb
Enclosure
-- I