The Pinocchio Chronicles #2: Palomar, County & FAA, #289

Article #288 explained how Supervisor Jim Desmond (JD) fumbled the ball when stating at the recent Board of Supervisor (BOS) meeting related to McClellan-Palomar Airport (Palomar) that: The FAA, not County or Carlsbad, determines whether Palomar remains an FAA-classified B-II airport.

The next few articles show why JD’s Palomar safety claims similarly crash and burn.

JD’s May 5, 2021 Safety - Claim #2: I’m hearing: Keep the safety standards at B-II while Palomar operates as a D-III. We need a runway extension, runway relocation, EMAS (runway end safety system), runway-taxiway separation, and an ARRFF (Airport Runway Rescue & Firefighting Facility) now. We have liability concerns.

Rebuttal: Pinocchio Growing Noses: 2 out of 4. The next few articles show (1) why JD should be embarrassed to claim that either the county or the FAA has ever put Palomar safety first, (2) why county need not spend $115+ million (county’s estimate) to safely serve Palomar aircraft, (3) how county tries to move the safety goal posts overseas (China) rather than regionally, and (4) why county sneakily claims a Palomar Runway extension is a safety rather than a capacity improvement (Hint: Follow the money).

Today -- time only to examine the county’s embarrassing Palomar safety record.

The Sad Palomar Airport Safety Record

Between 1966 and 2007, twenty six (26) Palomar-related airport aircraft deaths from thirteen separate accidents occurred. (See list in “Two Killed in Fiery Crash at McClellan-Palomar Airport” by Ireland and Kaye, 7/4/07 in the SD Union Tribune.) Several Palomar airplanes and helicopters have crashed since then.

So the BOS acted quickly, right? Actually, no. And shame on them.

The County Created Palomar Aircraft Risks for 35 Years and Even Ignored Safety and Crash Issues When the BOS Approved the 2018 Palomar Master Plan and EIR.

County Safety Strike No. 1. From 1964 to 1976, county opened and operated 3 different landfills 1000-feet from aircraft using the Palomar runway. Operating- landfills attract trash-seeking birds. Aircraft engines suck in birds, which cripple engines. Ask Sully Sullenberger who made the miraculous landing on the Hudson River after a bird strike.

County did this for 14 years despite accepting FAA monies to build and expand the Palomar runway. Despite FAA grant assurance conditions barring use of airport land for non-airport purposes and uses endangering aircraft. The county motto: Build baby build, no matter the consequences.

Safety Strike No. 2: When county circulated its 2018 PMP and PMP EIR, we specifically asked county to comment on certain safety issues. The county’s reply?: CEQA does not require us to address safety issues. Technically, true under CEQA. But county was adopting both a Master Plan and CEQA EIR, so a substantive reply was required but avoided. So county: Do you only cry safety when you want FAA monies?

Safety Strike No. 3: County on-airport developments do not assess safety risks off the airport. That task falls to the San Diego Regional Airport Authority Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC designates noise and safety zones around airports caused by more or bigger aircraft.

The State Aeronautics Act required the county to submit its 2018 PMP to the ALUC prior to BOS action on the PMP. In other words, before adopting the PMP, the ALUC should have had time to advise the BOS how increasing Palomar Airport activity would impact crash risks around Palomar.

What did county do? It gave the ALUC the county draft PMP only a few weeks before the October 2018 BOS meeting – knowing that a proper ALUC analysis could easily take 9 to 12 months. So the BOS acted in October 2018 PMP without ALUC safety analysis input.

So – was Supervisor Desmond correct? Does county need the 2018 PMP improvements? Well, yes partially but at a cost of under $30 million rather than over $115 million. Stay tuned.

And – oh Supervisor Desmond – since you say you have flown into Palomar hundreds of times – please provide all the letters you sent to the FAA and to the county complaining of Palomar safety issues over the last 10 years.