Flying over a nuclear plant?

Charlotte, NC has two nuc plants, one on the north end of town and the other on the south end.

I could not find any regs regarding flight over nuc plants, although I know it is not good to loiter over them, I have always thought you could motor over them w/o issue.

Is there any blanket restriction? If so, could you post the exact regulation?

It's a NOTAM

It's a blanket NOTAM....

4/0811 ...SPECIAL NOTICE... THIS IS A RESTATEMENT OF A PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ADVISORY NOTICE. IN THE INTEREST OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE, PILOTS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO AVOID THE AIRSPACE ABOVE, OR IN PROXIMITY TO SUCH SITES AS POWER PLANTS (NUCLEAR, HYDRO-ELECTRIC, OR COAL), DAMS, REFINERIES, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEXES, MILITARY FACILITIES AND OTHER SIMILAR FACILITIES. PILOTS SHOULD NOT CIRCLE AS TO LOITER IN THE VICINITY OVER THESE TYPES OF FACILITIES. WIE UNTIL UFN

You can fly over them... just don't do a circling photo mission near one...

from the NOTAMS

FDC 4/0811 FDC ...SPECIAL NOTICE...
THIS IS A RESTATEMENT OF A PREVIOUSLY ISSUED ADVISORY NOTICE.
IN THE INTEREST OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE,
PILOTS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO AVOID THE AIRSPACE ABOVE, OR IN
PROXIMITY TO SUCH SITES AS POWER PLANTS (NUCLEAR, HYDRO-ELECTRIC, OR
COAL), DAMS, REFINERIES, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEXES, MILITARY FACILITIES
AND OTHER SIMILAR FACILITIES. PILOTS SHOULD NOT CIRCLE AS TO LOITER
IN THE VICINITY OVER THESE TYPES OF FACILITIES.

I work at one. A low flying aircraft is a call to approach control and the local sheriff and maybe even the FBI. Maintain a low profie, avoid the area if at all possible. If you loiter over the area, expect to have the sheriff waiting on you when you land.

I wondered about that last year as I turned base within 1/2 mile of Three Mile Island on approach to Harrisburg International (MDT). TMI cannot be avoided because it is about 1-2 miles south of the airport and directly under final for the pax jets. But given the history of TMI..............

how does "strongly advised" translate into can't?
How does 'strongly advised' translate into a violation?

use caution

Great topic...just wanted to chime in here, I'm a Miami center controller and we have a powerplant south of MIA... we actually run simulated scenarios of IFR aircraft deviating from their flightpath deviating to intercept the plant. It seems years ago...no problem...but now after 9/11, don't chance it. We have the SE air defense nearby. You should see two F-16's try to follow a light single, can you say s turns???? If you are in Class c airspace, the controller should ward you off so to speak...hope this helps...

Kahuna said:

how does "strongly advised" translate into can't?
How does 'strongly advised' translate into a violation?

Click to expand...

You're strongly advised to do 51% of the build yourself.

Ambiguity leads to questions.
Rule setting by commitee sometimes (I'm being generous with "sometimes") leads to ambiguity.

heard just last friday a light plane was circling the HB ROBINSON NUCLEAR plant at lake robinson in hartsville s.c. Supposedly two f-16s were sent to escort him from the area????? if i fly near it, and i do , i monitor 121.5. i suppose strongly advised means whoever is in charge that day can cry about an airplane circling the place. really, what could a light plane do to a facility like that other than chip the paint off of the concrete?

Dead Right

Kahuna said:

how does "strongly advised" translate into can't?
How does 'strongly advised' translate into a violation?

Click to expand...

I am quoting parts of a recent form letter I received from Aviation Safety: "Reports say that more than 1700 general aviation aircraft have been intercepted in the last two years. The Air Force says the number is much higher."

And this gem:

"A pilot was trying to help out ATC so he cancelled IFR when he broke out and saw the runway under an 800-foot ceiling in two miles of visibility. An FAA inspector on the ground busted him for operating VFR in IMC!"

My take on all this:

Given that any random FAA inspector can interpret the regulations in a seemingly arbitrary manner, I am not inclined to knowingly flirt with the fates thereby risking a lengthly, costly, and emotional investment in a legal defense that will essentially test my lawyer's skill at parsing the English language.

For years, I would overfly the nuclear power plant at Calloway County in Missouri for no other reason than to glimpse inside the dark abyss of the cooling towers but for me at least, those days are past. Those who feel froggy enough to tell officials to "go pound salt" may well enjoy certain technical niceties that *may* support their position relative to potential enforcement action (or worse) but really.....who needs the aggravation?

The airport that I fly out of is 7 miles east of a coal fired power plant and under CLT's class C airspace. I routinely fly past the plant at 1500' AGL. What I don't do is fly directly over it, circle it, or start a descent until after I am past the plant. So far it has worked fine.

Strongly Advised

Kahuna said:

how does "strongly advised" translate into can't?
How does 'strongly advised' translate into a violation?

Click to expand...

I agree with Kahuna, strongly advised does not translate into restricted.

Now for my rant...

Many years ago (before 911) when I was flying a Bell 206 for KUTV in SLC, anytime I was coming in from the sw of SLC I usually went by way of Toole. Where south of Toole was and may still be a military amunitions storage facility, south of the the Toole Army Depot, that was guarded by civilians in black with guns. Before I got back to the newsroom they were ringing the phones off the wall saying it was a restriced area and they could shoot me down. When in fact is was another of those "strongly advised" situations. In talks with the FAA they said they would appreciate me not flying over it but they could not stop me since it (the ammo dump) did not create a hazard for over flying aircraft. When I told them they the civilian security groups said they would shoot me down if I ever over flew it again, then it took on a whole different perspective. The security group got their hands slapped hard and I continued to be a jerk and flew over their facility at 200 feet when ever the opportunity presented itself. They always knew who's aircraft if was because of our huge logos and name all over the aircraft.

Now in the days of 911, I would imagine it is properly restriced. If I remember correctly the strongly advised statement is also over national parks and wilderness areas. One just has to be careful so they can't get you for operating in a careless and reckless manner. That has turned into the catch all for the FAA when they want to violate you but can't find a reg that is applicable.

N42AH said:

...If I remember correctly the strongly advised statement is also over national parks and wilderness areas...

Click to expand...

The general wording for national parks, etc. is quite a bit milder. "All aircraft are REQUESTED to maintain a minimum altitude of 2,000 feet above the surface of the following:"

Where I live, if you fly the ILS approach you violate this "request." I violate it routinely but selectively during normal scenic flights. I am very aware of where I am flying and what effect it might have on the visitors to the park below.

Of course there are now parks that have special rules; Grand Canyon, for instance.

Kahuna said:

how does "strongly advised" translate into can't?
How does 'strongly advised' translate into a violation?

Click to expand...

Exactly. This is the same discussion we had a couple of months ago regarding flying on top of Class B airspace. If the FAA wants to restrict flight over facilities in an enforceable manner, they need to chart them and restrict the airspace. Half measures do nothing but create confusion.

"Request" and "Advise" are ambiguous, and the FAA should not be surprised when people take them at face value.

bummer. i really want to fly around Lake Anna, VA. that's where we do a lot of year round water sports... and the Lake Anna nuke plant is there........


and i really wanna fly over that too... guess i won't do either of those

I guess it really depends on the area on what you should do. I fly very often directly over the Shearon Harris Nuclear plant just outside of Raleigh when flying from RDU to Sanford(TTA) and back. The control tower at RDU sends me straight over top and can look inside the cooling towers and the tower is outside the class C airspace.

The Bomb Plant in SC

Then there's the SRS south of and slightly west of Columbia SC.

"FOR REASONS OF NATIONAL SECURITY PILOTS ARE REQUESTED TO AVOID FLIGHT BELOW 2000' MSL IN THE AREA."

Requested but not required!?!?!? And after they've shot you down, you can argue about what you think "requested" means.

We do...

Robert M said:

Then there's the SRS south of and slightly west of Columbia SC.

.

Click to expand...

......fly over it, Bob. However, I always let the controllers at Bush field know, cause I think that they just might be able to talk to that F-15 jockey loafing overhead at 50,000'

Regards,

Must be an east/west thingy

I work at a nuclear plant in Wa. state. The only thing that raises an eyebrow is circling and stupid low. Other than that the commercial and locals fly over eveyday,so do I{not Daily}. The military does practice intercepts on occassion and F-18's in slow flight rock us out for A bit. It sounds like the eastern nuclear culture is a little bit uptight compared to here,we would never call the sheriff for something like this. And a shootdown for this would be criminal. Shall,should requested, big difference. Gene N86WA