Tuolumne County Grand Jury • 2009-2010

Tuolumne County Airports

Published: June 17, 2010 3 pages
Ver PDF original

Findings 8 findings

F1
All previous Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations have been met.
F2
Work and time management is very important for all county airport staff. Work must be, and appears to be, scheduled in such a way that priority work is accomplished first and as soon as possible.
F3
Noise complaints continue to be a problem at both airports. Without being able to identify the aircraft responsible, there is nothing that can be done about this. Unfortunately, when the person complaining is asked such simple questions such as color, number of engines, or high wing/low wing, the answer is generally “I don’t know”. Airport staff has taken steps to mitigate noise complaints with articles in the airport newsletter, The Manager’s Approach. These articles emphasize noise mitigation techniques and the noise sensitive areas around both airports. (See Additional Explanations for amplification.)
F4
State aid for this year has been suspended. This aid accounts for approximately two percent (2%) of Columbia Airport’s annual budget, but approximately twenty percent (20%) of the PML budget. This loss will impact planned improvements at PML for this year and possibly next year as well.
F5
The grass runway at Columbia is a unique feature of public airports. It serves as a tourist draw bringing in flyers from around the world. It also serves to introduce fledgling pilots to probably the most challenging aspect of flying, landing. During certain wind conditions, it is the only safe runway for arrivals and departures.
F6
The deer fence at PML, recommended by Wildlife Services, has made PML much safer. Before the fence was installed, there were one or two deer/aircraft collisions each year. Since installation, there have been no reported collisions.
F7
While there are no scheduled inspections of the hangers at either airport, there are random inspections. Also, safety equipment such as heat detectors, smoke detectors, etc. is inspected on an annual basis. During this safety inspection, other housekeeping aspects are reviewed.
F8
While there is no precision approach (one that provides both course and glide slope information) at either airport, there are non-precision GPS (Global Positioning System) approaches. These provide only course information. There is a request for the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) to survey both airports for more precise GPS approaches than are presently available. As commercial and general aviation airports with a higher volume of traffic receive priority for these surveys, it will be some time in the future before this action will be completed. (See Additional Explanations for amplification.)

Recommendations 5