F-16 drops fuel tanks into the Great Salt Lake

Discussions about F-16.net news articles. A topic is created automatically whenever someone posts a comment in the F-16 News section.
F-16.net Editor
F-16.net Editor
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

by Asif » 16 Dec 2008, 18:21

StandardNET wrote:Fuel tank cleanup remains unresolved
Tuesday, December 16, 2008

HILL AIR FORCE BASE -- The total environmental impact of about 500 gallons of jet fuel in the Great Salt Lake remains an uncertainty, environmental officials say.

On Friday morning, a 388th Fighter Wing pilot in an F-16 dumped two external fuel tanks into the Great Salt Lake, about three miles north of Antelope Island, after the jet's sensors indicated a fire hazard.

Using the plane's internal fuel system, the pilot safely landed a short time later, but the 18-foot long, 370-gallon tanks were destroyed on impact. The tanks were approximately two-thirds full when they landed in water about a foot deep.

Lynn de Freitas, executive director of Friends of Great Salt Lake, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting and preserving the lake, said the impacts are still unknown, but that the Air Force shares in the responsibility to find out.

"It was an obvious place to eject the containers, but it's the responsibility of the military to provide some kind of analysis so we can learn how to mitigate any potential impacts," de Freitas said. "It's all a part of what we don't know that turns it into a concern."

De Freitas said any time a hazardous material enters a wildlife area, there is cause for concern.

Shortly after the incident, Hill Air Force Base emergency response teams coordinated with local authorities to recover the tanks and clean up any excess fuel.

"Initially, there was a plan to burn off the remaining jet fuel since it was determined to be the quickest and safest way to clean up the fuel," said Col. Linda Medler, 75th Air Base Wing commander, in a written statement. "However, due to weather and site conditions on Saturday, the team was unsuccessful. As a result, Hill will re-attempt the burn or develop another cleanup alternative."

Medler said the base will work with local environmental agencies to determine whether to burn off the remaining fuel, bring in equipment and pump it out, or let the fuel degrade naturally.

Jeff Salt, director of the Great Salt Lakekeeper, said it's not uncommon for planes to drop fuel into the lake.

"That's standard with the airports around here," he said. "That's their backup plan for emergencies -- it's one of the only places where there aren't any people."

Salt said much of the fuel would likely just evaporate, but whatever didn't would spread out over the surface of the lake, posing a threat to birds in the area.

"The impact is going to be to the birds that might come in contact with the fuel," he said.

Salt said the eared grebe, an aquatic bird that breeds in shallow, highly saline lakes and ponds, would likely be affected and bald eagles could also be impacted. He said any impact to the lake's brine shrimp would be minuscule.

"It is of great concern, but unfortunately, there's not much that can be done to stop it," Salt said. "If there is a legitimate emergency, that's probably the safest bet. Hopefully they aren't just dropping them for practice -- and it would be interesting to see what constitutes an emergency."

Col. Scott Dennis, 388th Fighter Wing commander, said the base only drops fuel like it did on Friday in extreme circumstances and the pilot who dropped the fuel acted "extremely professionally" during the emergency.

"The F-16 does not have the capability to release fuel without jettisoning its external wing tanks," he said. "The only reason an F-16 pilot would jettison the aircraft's tanks would be in the event of a dire emergency."

Medler said Hill has been working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Davis County Health Department, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Antelope Island State Park since the incident happened.

source: http://www.standard.net/live/news/158940/
Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: 11 Jul 2008, 02:45

by Code3 » 16 Dec 2008, 19:35

"It is of great concern, but unfortunately, there's not much that can be done to stop it," Salt said. "If there is a legitimate emergency, that's probably the safest bet. Hopefully they aren't just dropping them for practice -- and it would be interesting to see what constitutes an emergency."


Dropping them for practice...this guy is an idiot. Hill has some of the best ranges in the nation, and he thinks they want to drop on the Salt Lake for practice? And dropping fuel tanks for practice? That's why they make bombs I'm pretty sure...they might be a little more effective than fuel tanks. Man, I want to find this guy and slap him for such a stupid comment.

And then he finishes it off with "I would like to see what constitutes an emergency"...please, like he's qualified to determine what is or isn't an emergency on ANY aircraft, let alone an F-16. This guy needs to go pound sand.


F-16.net Editor
F-16.net Editor
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

by Asif » 21 Dec 2008, 19:14

The Salt Lake Tribune wrote:Military: Let nature deal with jet fuel at lake
By Mike Stark
The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 12/20/2008 03:34:02 PM MST

SALT LAKE CITY » Military officials plan to leave alone the remaining jet fuel from two F-16 tanks jettisoned over the Great Salt Lake last week.

Hill Air Force Base officials said they'll let natural processes break down fuel left in the soil.

Most of the fuel evaporated shortly after impact and there's no sign that it's building up in the water or low spots in the area, according to Col. Linda Medler, 75th Air Base Wing Commander. The process of "natural attenuation" will deal with what's left behind, she said.

"The bacteria population naturally found in the ground is very good at breaking down and eliminating fuels from the environment," she said in a statement.

The process will take one to three years, she said.

The pilot dropped the 18-foot-long tanks Dec. 12 onto a mud flat about three miles north of Antelope Island after the plane's sensors indicated a fire shortly after take-off. The pilot landed safely.

The tanks, capable of carrying 370 gallons of fuel, were about two-thirds full when they were dropped. The tanks have been removed from the site.

Crews tried twice to burn the residual fuel at the impact site but were unsuccessful because of cold, wet conditions.

Hill Air Force Base biologists visiting the site have seen no sign of problems for wildlife in the area, Medler said.

Removing the fuel from the area would have required heavy equipment and likely lead to far more environmental damage, Medler said. State officials said they agree with the decision.

"Any attempts to physically remove the fuel would probably result in greater damage to the environment over a larger area and for a longer time," Dave Grierson, of the state's Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands, said in a statement.

Military officials will monitor the site, sampling soils to track how well the fuel is being broken down, Medler said. State officials will also participate in the monitoring.

The 388th Fighter Wing, which the pilot belongs to, is investigating the incident. Officials with the wing said last week that the initial indications are that the pilot acted properly in jettisoning the tanks into an unpopulated area.

source: http://www.sltrib.com:80/news/ci_11279124
Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 272
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 20:23
Location: Texas

by tjodalv43 » 21 Dec 2008, 20:40

Is it just me or does the article's title sounds pretty biased: "Military: Let nature deal with jet fuel at lake"? I mean, really if its just me someone say so. But while its true, the perception it would make at a glance at the article looks like the military doesn't care about the situation and is washing their hands of it. A more apt title should read "Natural decomposition best alternative for fuel spill" or something. Sheesh! :?


User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 31 Jan 2004, 19:18
Location: SW Tenn.

by LinkF16SimDude » 21 Dec 2008, 22:17

No, it's not just you. It's pervasive throughout the media that no matter what the military does to correct an "incident", there's either some nefarious ulterior motive or they just don't care about the consequences. Never let the fact the all branches of the military have some of the finest scientific minds on the planet get in the way of your journalistic agenda. :roll:
Why does "monosyllabic" have 5 syllables?



Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests