![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
How freaking stupid.
Let the FBO sale the fuel. Even if the truck accidentally dumped the whole truck it wouldn't hurt the ground water. I would be more worried about someone's septic tank. "Skylune" wrote in message lkaboutaviation.com... Well, I did hear back from the EPA concerning a local GA airport's efforts to get an exemption from regulations concerning fuel storage. You see, one of my most annoying local airports sits atop an important aquifer that supplies the whole region with groundwater. The local FBO's (who control the airport board) want a certain regulation concerning fuel storage voided so that they don't have to pay the cost of constructing a storage area (and probably because they want to put hangars there, to generate more profit). Anyway, the EPA was already on to it. Their response was encouraging. Here it is (with some minor blackouts -- don't want the poor EPA person to receive threats from some of the whacko pilots, you know, so I blacked out a few words...) "skylune" (my real name was on the letter: Thank you for the e-mail on August 3rd concerning xxx Airways, a Fixed Base Operator (FBO) at the municipal airport in xxxxxxxxxxx. The regulations that xxxxx referred to are the Oil Pollution Prevention regulations, which are a part of the Clean Water Act. Specifically, the regulations require the FBO to provide secondary containment around their fuel trucks at night under their Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. EPA-New England's Regional Administrator had recently received a letter from Senator Judd Gregg, wherein he forwarded two form letters from members of the aircraft refueling industry in New Hampshire. xxxxx had sent one of those letters to Senator Gregg. Similar form letters had been received at EPA headquarters in Washington DC from aircraft refueling companies around the country. This industry is taking exception to EPA's publication, in July of 2002, of revised SPCC regulations. In the preamble to the regulations, EPA re-stated its position that airport refueler trucks have always been considered "mobile and portable tanks" under the SPCC regulations. The refueling industry has disputed this since the regulations became effective in 1974, and the debate was re-ignited. You are correct to be concerned about fuel spills contaminating the xxxxx aquifer, the main source of drinking water in the xxxxx area. Such fuel spills, whether from fixed bulk storage tanks, or fuel trucks left full of product overnight, have the same devastating effect on groundwater quality. Rest assured that the EPA-New England region is inspecting airports for SPCC compliance, and enforcing the regulations at FBO's. xxxxxx Regional Spill-SPCC Enforcement Coordinator xxxxx xxxxx.gov Nice job Senator. But I wrote that Senator at the same time, as well as my other US Senator, Congressman, and state reps urging them to NOT relax any EPA regulations for the financial benefit of the FBOs. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Buried home heating oil tanks are the environmental time bomb. In
theory, the stuff in the septic tank is biodegradable. "Aluckyguess" wrote in message ... How freaking stupid. Let the FBO sale the fuel. Even if the truck accidentally dumped the whole truck it wouldn't hurt the ground water. I would be more worried about someone's septic tank. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Aluckyguess" wrote: How freaking stupid. Let the FBO sale the fuel. Even if the truck accidentally dumped the whole truck it wouldn't hurt the ground water. I would be more worried about someone's septic tank. Maybe you guys have a solution to the problem! Does "Skylune" have a double-walled tank for his heating oil? Is his septic tank up to spec? Has the fire marshall paid him a visit? IMHO, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Skylune has stated he doesn't care about the pollution, he's simply trying
to drive the aviation industry under. He cares nothing about the people he is trying to unemploy. He cares nothing about the financial losses that he is trying to burden pilots with. He is 'getting even' with pilots for not stopping one guy with a loud, low flying mooney. "ORVAL FAIRAIRN" wrote in message news ![]() In article , "Aluckyguess" wrote: How freaking stupid. Let the FBO sale the fuel. Even if the truck accidentally dumped the whole truck it wouldn't hurt the ground water. I would be more worried about someone's septic tank. Maybe you guys have a solution to the problem! Does "Skylune" have a double-walled tank for his heating oil? Is his septic tank up to spec? Has the fire marshall paid him a visit? IMHO, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve: You seem like a reasonable guy. It is not one guy in his mooney
that have really gotten under my skin. (Besides, that jerk seems to have abandoned his daily 4:55 am training sessions..). Its the Mooney, the Bonanza, the idiot in the Pitts, the twin Otter, etc. I think about 90% of the pilots who fly by my summer home try to "fly friendly." There are the 10% of idiots who create a damned racket nearly every weekend. And, the idiots at the airport authority have treated me and others I know who have complained about noise, with utter contempt. So, this is my little way of hitting back. Ironically, the level of GA traffic seems to have dropped off quite a bit over the last two years (maybe I can retire to my summer home afterall!). Maybe the rising cost of AV gas, rising rental costs etc. are taking a toll (the silver lining in $70/bbl crude)? Skylune out. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Your 'little way of hitting back' is costing ME money. Where do you think
the FBO will get the money to pay for this secondary containment equipment? You've touted the fact that you've reduced airport funding, so the only source of funds left is from the FBO customers (ME). The airport authority will turn around and show how they're being socially responsible by making me pay for this equipment. As stated earlier, no reported fuel spill has ever occurred that this equipment would prevent. You're simply taking money from MY pocket because of the Mooney, the Bonanza, the Pitts, The twin Otter and the etc. Thanks loads. "Skylune" wrote in message lkaboutaviation.com... Steve: You seem like a reasonable guy. It is not one guy in his mooney that have really gotten under my skin. (Besides, that jerk seems to have abandoned his daily 4:55 am training sessions..). Its the Mooney, the Bonanza, the idiot in the Pitts, the twin Otter, etc. I think about 90% of the pilots who fly by my summer home try to "fly friendly." There are the 10% of idiots who create a damned racket nearly every weekend. And, the idiots at the airport authority have treated me and others I know who have complained about noise, with utter contempt. So, this is my little way of hitting back. Ironically, the level of GA traffic seems to have dropped off quite a bit over the last two years (maybe I can retire to my summer home afterall!). Maybe the rising cost of AV gas, rising rental costs etc. are taking a toll (the silver lining in $70/bbl crude)? Skylune out. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well how am I, who bought property about 5 miles from the airport about 15
years ago, specifically avoiding areas around both runways and in the pattern, being compensated for pilots who want to engage in low level flying? And for the airport that now means to expand to attract more business?? I've gone to the meetings, and met the ridiculous "airport here first argument." (Because of their age, almost all airports were there first. Does that mean they can expand --with my taxpayer money and commercial airline surcharges--without limit?) I have been treated with disdain by the airport staff, and in a patronizing way by the moronic airport consultant they hired to conduct a public meeting. On the (only three) occassions I called to complain about a REALLY low, loud flier, I was treated by disdain by the airport staff and the FAA. (Like anyone on the ground can get an N number of a plane zoooming about 500 ft overhead....). So I got fed up, did my research, and exercised my rights to express my opinion. Never broke any laws, threatened, etc. Everyone knows that voluntary noise abatement is a total joke. Why is it that boats, motorcycles, cars, stereos, leaf blowers, barking dogs, EVERYTHING, are subject to community noise ordinances except GA? Its true that a leaf blower may make more noise up close (not more than the idiot Mooney pilot, though). The difference is that my neighbors have respect for one another, and we are not anonymous, unlike the looney Mooney pilot who was flying every morning before five -- I guess he likes the smooth air and how his plane could really rip at that hour...... As far as the EPA regulations, we all must abide by regulations we don't necessarily agree with. I didn't write them, and I may not even agree with them. Its the EPA that is costing you money on this particular issue. And rising fuel prices are taking a toll on everyone. Discretionary activities, like flying for pleasure (and most boating), will of course take a disproportionate hit. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well how am I, who bought property about 5 miles from the airport about 15
years ago, specifically avoiding areas around both runways and in the pattern, being compensated for pilots who want to engage in low level flying? The same way I am compensated by people who run leaf blowers in my neighborhood in the morning when I am trying to sleep. Jose -- Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe, except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why do you feel entitled to compensation? Bad things happen to good people.
Life isn't fair. Live with it. It seems that you're angry at the 10% (your figure) pilots who create the problem, along with the establishment for not resolving what you perceive as a problem, and have decided to do whatever you can to get even. Swatting flies with a cannon. Like I said, you are punishing ME, personally, by taking money from my pocket to pay for a useless containment system. What do you get from it, except the satisfaction of 'getting even'? You've stated that everything you've done is legal. Tell me, is it right? "Skylune" wrote in message lkaboutaviation.com... Well how am I, who bought property about 5 miles from the airport about 15 years ago, specifically avoiding areas around both runways and in the pattern, being compensated for pilots who want to engage in low level flying? And for the airport that now means to expand to attract more business?? I've gone to the meetings, and met the ridiculous "airport here first argument." (Because of their age, almost all airports were there first. Does that mean they can expand --with my taxpayer money and commercial airline surcharges--without limit?) I have been treated with disdain by the airport staff, and in a patronizing way by the moronic airport consultant they hired to conduct a public meeting. On the (only three) occassions I called to complain about a REALLY low, loud flier, I was treated by disdain by the airport staff and the FAA. (Like anyone on the ground can get an N number of a plane zoooming about 500 ft overhead....). So I got fed up, did my research, and exercised my rights to express my opinion. Never broke any laws, threatened, etc. Everyone knows that voluntary noise abatement is a total joke. Why is it that boats, motorcycles, cars, stereos, leaf blowers, barking dogs, EVERYTHING, are subject to community noise ordinances except GA? Its true that a leaf blower may make more noise up close (not more than the idiot Mooney pilot, though). The difference is that my neighbors have respect for one another, and we are not anonymous, unlike the looney Mooney pilot who was flying every morning before five -- I guess he likes the smooth air and how his plane could really rip at that hour...... As far as the EPA regulations, we all must abide by regulations we don't necessarily agree with. I didn't write them, and I may not even agree with them. Its the EPA that is costing you money on this particular issue. And rising fuel prices are taking a toll on everyone. Discretionary activities, like flying for pleasure (and most boating), will of course take a disproportionate hit. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why do you feel entitled to compensation? Bad things happen to good people.
Life isn't fair. Live with it. It seems that you're angry at the 10% (your figure) pilots who create the problem, along with the establishment for not resolving what you perceive as a problem, and have decided to do whatever you can to get even. Swatting flies with a cannon. Like I said, you are punishing ME, personally, by taking money from my pocket to pay for a useless containment system. What do you get from it, except the satisfaction of 'getting even'? You've stated that everything you've done is legal. Tell me, is it right? "Skylune" wrote in message lkaboutaviation.com... Well how am I, who bought property about 5 miles from the airport about 15 years ago, specifically avoiding areas around both runways and in the pattern, being compensated for pilots who want to engage in low level flying? And for the airport that now means to expand to attract more business?? I've gone to the meetings, and met the ridiculous "airport here first argument." (Because of their age, almost all airports were there first. Does that mean they can expand --with my taxpayer money and commercial airline surcharges--without limit?) I have been treated with disdain by the airport staff, and in a patronizing way by the moronic airport consultant they hired to conduct a public meeting. On the (only three) occassions I called to complain about a REALLY low, loud flier, I was treated by disdain by the airport staff and the FAA. (Like anyone on the ground can get an N number of a plane zoooming about 500 ft overhead....). So I got fed up, did my research, and exercised my rights to express my opinion. Never broke any laws, threatened, etc. Everyone knows that voluntary noise abatement is a total joke. Why is it that boats, motorcycles, cars, stereos, leaf blowers, barking dogs, EVERYTHING, are subject to community noise ordinances except GA? Its true that a leaf blower may make more noise up close (not more than the idiot Mooney pilot, though). The difference is that my neighbors have respect for one another, and we are not anonymous, unlike the looney Mooney pilot who was flying every morning before five -- I guess he likes the smooth air and how his plane could really rip at that hour...... As far as the EPA regulations, we all must abide by regulations we don't necessarily agree with. I didn't write them, and I may not even agree with them. Its the EPA that is costing you money on this particular issue. And rising fuel prices are taking a toll on everyone. Discretionary activities, like flying for pleasure (and most boating), will of course take a disproportionate hit. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Garmin GPS196 Update v.4 - obstacles? | [email protected] | Piloting | 13 | March 16th 05 06:05 PM |
GPS_LOG WinCE update (version 1.2.2.1) | Henryk Birecki | Soaring | 0 | January 14th 05 05:27 PM |
8th Anniversary : Kiwi Aircraft Images Update | Phillip Treweek | Military Aviation | 0 | August 13th 04 01:45 AM |
Anyone know how to update an old Loran database? | Tom Jackson | Home Built | 8 | December 3rd 03 02:15 AM |
Anyone know how to update an old Loran database? | Tom Jackson | Piloting | 6 | December 3rd 03 02:15 AM |