Re: xSFO: What is THAT smell... ;-(

• Next message: Erik Eiseman: "(no subject)"
• Previous message: g o: "xSFO: What is THAT smell... ;-("
• In reply to: g o: "xSFO: What is THAT smell... ;-("
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

X-OldHeader: From jrstudio@home.com-DeleteThis.com  Wed Nov 28 09:54:02 2001
Return-Path: <jrstudio@home.com-DeleteThis.com>
Received: from opus.labs.agilent.com (root@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com [130.29.244.179]) by jr.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id JAA17608 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:54:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (msgbas1.cos.agilent.com [192.168.148.33]) by opus.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id JAA00917 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:54:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.254.60.23]) by msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9862B3510 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:54:01 -0700 (MST)
Received: from home.com ([24.1.69.3]) by femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20011128175400.MVMK20568.femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com-DeleteThis.com> for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:54:00 -0800
Message-ID: <3C05251C.53B76377@home.com-DeleteThis.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:55:44 -0800
From: JR Johnston <jrstudio@home.com-DeleteThis.com>
Organization: @home
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
To: wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com
Subject: Re: xSFO: What is THAT smell...  ;-(
References: <200111281130.AA106561914@mail.internetoutcomes.net-DeleteThis.com>

I thought I smelled something out there!

Anybody hitting HMB today?
I heard Alameda went off on Sat. - 9.0 kites!

J

g o wrote:

> As we all probably assumed (my primary concern for the SFO runway expansion), SFO is NOT a very good steward of bay and surrounding environments.
>
> Published today as a cover story in the SJ Mercury News, SFO has been charged by the Feds of violating the federal Clean Water Act and state pollution laws over 50 times in the last 3 years. If you got sick sailing in and around coyote, esp. after a good rain, now you know why... ;-(
>
> http://www0.mercurycenter.com/local/center/sfo112801.htm
>
> State water regulators today will consider ordering San Francisco International Airport to begin renovating its unreliable wastewater treatment plant by spring or potentially face stiff fines.
>
> Records show the airport has violated the federal Clean Water Act and state pollution laws more than 50 times in the past three years, spilling partially treated sewage into San Francisco Bay from its plant, the Mercury News has learned.
>
> The article also notes that since the revenue decline due to the dramatic drop in traffic in the last three months, they will NOT be undertaking a planned 40M development to upgrade there water treatment facilities due to LACK OF FUNDS. Hopefully, if they cannot scare up 40M, they will be very hard pressed to pull together the 5B for the runways... We will see.
>
> If you see, or smell, any further violations in and around the airport, please report this to the state or local authorities.
>
> Regards,
> g.

• Next message: Erik Eiseman: "(no subject)"
• Previous message: g o: "xSFO: What is THAT smell... ;-("
• In reply to: g o: "xSFO: What is THAT smell... ;-("
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 02:10:24 PST