FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-087x.html
FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

Feb. 11 — AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
punished for their actions.

"AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
Airspace System."

The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
into the allegations.

AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
days prior to taking such action.

The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
notice must be given.

....

Larry Dighera wrote:

What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

A ban on holding any type of political post for the remainder of his life.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

Turn his house into a heliport.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Make him live in the derelict FBO through a Chicago winter without any
utilities.

Actually, I like George's suggestion better.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...
What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

Turn his house into a heliport.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Larry

Ban him from flying on any aircraft for 10 years. Let him ride the
bus.

Big John

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:58:28 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-087x.html
FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

Feb. 11 — AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
punished for their actions.

"AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
Airspace System."

The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
into the allegations.

AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
days prior to taking such action.

The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
notice must be given.

...

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:05:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:



Larry Dighera wrote:

What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

A ban on holding any type of political post for the remainder of his life.

He'd just run his wife as a candidate. But the penalty is to levied
against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

Larry Dighera wrote:

But the penalty is to levied
against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

Fine the city all funds paid for Meigs over all time multiplied by some
"penalty clause" factor.

This would never happen again.

- Andrew

Larry Dighera wrote:

But the penalty is to levied against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

You're probably right. AOPA talks about "the mayor and the city being punished",
but then talks about the "appropriate penalty to be imposed on the city".

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

Bring a pair of Catterpillars to his house at 1am, and carve X's into his
driveway.

With the car in the garage.


Larry Dighera wrote in
:


What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:58:28 GMT Larry Dighera wrote:


What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?


Withhold all federal funds allocated to Chicago for any projects
for 5 years.

And divert all air traffic destined/departing O'hare to fly over his house.


R. Hubbell



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-087x.html
FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

Feb. 11 _ AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
punished for their actions.

"AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
Airspace System."

The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
into the allegations.

AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
days prior to taking such action.

The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
notice must be given.

...