📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Yuba County Grand Jury • 2013-2014

Yuba County Airport

Published: June 10, 2014 16 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 16 findings

F1 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: The Yuba County Airport has contracted with a local farmer to provide the equipment and labor to cut a perimeter fire break around the airport in exchange for agricultural use of some of the land.
F2 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: There is no formal accident response plan or planned airport related exercises with local emergency responders.
F3 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: Ultra-light operations increase the safety risk at the airport and endanger other aircraft operations.
F4 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: The Airport Manager verbally approved the current ultra-light operating location.
F5 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: The Grand Jury found section 2.110.240, Security Requirements (County of Yuba Ordinance Chapter 2.110 Airport Rules and Regulations, dated 16 December 2008) does not state clearly the specific requirements for security gate operations or requirements for perimeter fencing.
F6 Page 146
The Grand Jury finds that: There is no daily log of inspections of all runways or taxiways for Foreign Object Debris (FOD), or lighting, windsocks, and airport general conditions. 2013-2014 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport
F7 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: There is no runway or taxiway sweeping schedule at the airport other than prior to special events. No proper sweeping equipment is available to the airport other than rental through Yuba County Public Works.
F8 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The airport is seriously lacking in airport building and hangar maintenance.
F9 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: There are many privately owned vehicles, trailers, and equipment that are stored near hangars without fees assessed or collected.
F10 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The Airport Manager Job Description is in need of updating to reflect the current responsibilities.
F11 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The airport does not have an oversight committee, or aviation group, that recommends improvements to the airport.
F12 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The airport lacks a well-documented complaint process. Currently, complaints are handled verbally by the Airport Manager.
F13 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: Two airport employees have retired and there are no plans to replace them. The Airport Manager is the only airport employee and is responsible for the 24 hour operation of the airport.
F14 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: There are no scheduled inspections of the rental hangars or facilities.
F15 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The Golden West Air Show has poor public attendance, is a loss to the county, and is not properly advertised in the local area. No local news media were used to advertise the air show.
F16 Page 147
The Grand Jury finds that: The airport funding for improvements has been accomplished by Grants, federal funding, and very little by county funds.

Recommendations 14

Commendations 2