[Archive Home][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
"FAA order confuses Washington state fliers"
- To: <ganews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: CAA: GA News, "FAA order confuses Washington state fliers"
- From: "Stephen Irwin" <stepheni@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 02:49:03 -0800
- Importance: Normal
- Reply-To: <stepheni@xxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: ganews-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Friday, November 2, 2001
FAA order confuses fliers
By Wendy Culverwell and Nathan Isaacs
The Kennewick, Pasco and Richland, (WA) Tri-City Herald
The Federal Aviation Administration's decision to ban private pilots
from flying near the nation's nuclear plant sites has generated
confusion in the Tri-Cities.
The rule technically applies only to air space but has prompted
authorities to halt private pilots from taking off or landing at the
Richland, Pasco and Kennewick airports through Wednesday.
The confusion stems from the wording of an FAA directive, even though
all three Tri-City airports lie outside the FAA's 10-mile restricted
zone.
Airports are being inundated by calls from people who think all flights
have been shut down, not just private ones. For the record, commercial
flights, cargo flights, charters and emergency airlifts are all
unaffected.
"You wouldn't believe the number of phone calls we have gotten, 'Are you
open?' " said Jim Morasch, manager of the Tri-Cities Airport in Pasco.
The temporary FAA directive, announced Tuesday in response to a security
alert from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, restricts private pilots
from flying within a 10-nautical-mile radius of nuclear facilities, or
from flying below 18,000 feet.
The restriction applies to airspace, not airports, said Allen Kenitzer,
an FAA spokesman in Seattle, who added that the Richland, Pasco and
Kennewick airports lie outside the restricted zone around the Hanford
site.
However, Clif Dyer of Kennewick Aircraft Services said the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission interprets the FAA directive to include the
Hanford 300 Area, causing added ambiguity.
Referring to an aviation chart, he said the restriction's 10 nautical
miles, or two fingers on the chart, extend to Vista Field.
Outside his office, his five Cessna single-engine airplanes remain
tethered to the ground.
"It's economically killing me," he said, referring to how the
restrictions have blocked pilot instruction and sightseeing tours. "It's
the main part of our business."
Malin Bergstrom-White of Bergstrom Aircraft at the Pasco airport said
there's a certain frustration at being shut down for the second time in
less than two months.
The restriction has forced Bergstrom to shut down its flight school,
aerial photo services and aircraft rentals. It has seen a bump in demand
for charters, but not enough to offset other losses, she said.
She said she's had a lot of calls from private pilots.
"A big part of them are confused: 'What's allowed?' she said. "It's kind
of hard to understand the logic."
Bergstrom and Kennewick Aircraft Services lost business in September
when the FAA halted air traffic in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Private pilots weren't allowed back in the air for more than a week.
And Dyer said it took a few days more before business returned to
normal. He doesn't know how many flight-restriction cycles his business
can weather.
Because conditions change with new threats, the FAA is urging all pilots
to check with their local flight service station before taking off.
"A prudent pilot, right now, will check each time before beginning a
flight," Dyer said.
Post your opinion on this story in the CAA General Aviation Forum
http://www.californiaaviation.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?conf=DCConfID2
*****************************************
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
If you have any queries regarding this issue, please Email us at stepheni@cwnet.com