COMPLIANCE INFO_2013-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Showdown over S.J. landfill may co *o a head I Recordnet.com Page 2 of 2 Back on top of the landfill, Basso said the expansion area will not be as tall as the existing "mountain," as critics call it. The landfill and airport sat side by side for 50 years before any effort was made to scare away the birds, and yet the airport never reported any problems, he said. It's not like the landfill is a giant, bleeding heap of garbage. Most of it is capped in grass and soil. The only "refuse" on the summit is the droppings left by the goats that keep the grass in check. The "working face" of the landfill where trash is being buried is an area about 200 by 200 feet, like a postage stamp on an envelope. Any expansion, Basso said, will include "strict environmental controls." Documents produced by Forward claim that the bird -control program already in place will not only compensate for any risk posed by the landfill but will make the area safer than if the landfill did not exist at all. There are "many civilian and military airports near municipal solid -waste facilities in the United States," those documents say. In particular, Forward points to Denver International Airport, where a bird -control program has been in place for many years. A spokesman there confirmed that the airport "has not observed a direct threat to aviation safety." Some experts are not so confident. Research conducted for the Federal Aviation Administration in 2011 suggests there is not enough evidence to judge the effectiveness of bird -scare tactics. The FAA has weighed in on the Forward situation, acknowledging the landfill's efforts to reduce bird populations but maintaining that the location of the existing landfill, not to mention the expansion, "is not considered compatible with safe airport operations." Mavrogenes, the interim airport manager, fears that failing to follow the FAA's advice could make the county ineligible for airport grants in the future. The airport gets $1 million a year from the federal government in exchange for the promise that it won't do anything to jeopardize safety, he said. The airport hopes to use that money in the future to change airport lights, update the old baggage claim and complete repaving projects. Mavrogenes said the FAA's opinion counts. Formerly the redevelopment director in San Jose, he said that city was always careful to make sure buildings near its downtown airport were not too tall for fear of incurring FAA sanctions. "It's a serious concern," Mavrogenes said. "If we're going to be competitive and seek out other airlines for Stockton, which we're serious about doing, we need to have a competitive airport." Forty-one bird strikes have been reported at Stockton Metro since 1990, although it's unclear that any of those incidents are related to the presence of the landfill. Most of the birds involved in those cases were apparently not gulls, the birds most associated with foraging for garbage. Of course, those are only the strikes that are reported, and in some cases carcasses were not recovered. Four bird strikes have occurred in just the past year, and three of the airplanes involved were Allegiant jets, according to an FAA database. The planes were on the ground when the strikes occurred, and little or no damage was reported. Allegiant did not respond to requests for comment on the landfill's proposed expansion. Contact reporter Alex Breitler at (209) 546-8295 or abreitler@recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/breitlerblog. http://www.recordnet.com/appslpbcs.dll/article?AID=1201309211A NEWS1309210318&cid=sitesearc... 9/23/2013