[Peetwo]

More airport development; & YMEN DFO related AQON -  

First from the CASA AQON (so far - ) - I'm confused  : PDF 51KB*

NX QON to CASA on airports:

Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:

1. Has CASA had discussions with relevant authorities planning Badgerys’s Creek on the requirements for a public safety zone around the new airport’s site?
2. Will CASA be the approving authority for that airport in respect of a public safety zone?

Answer:
1. No, this is a matter for the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
2. No, which is consistent with other federally-leased airports.

---

Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:

Can National Airports Safeguarding Advisory Group (NASAG) override CASA on a matter of air safety? If so, under what circumstances?

Answer:
No. CASA has legislative aviation safety obligations and powers under the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and Airspace Act 2007, and administers aviation regulations. NASAG is an advisory group, not a decision making body.

And to add to the confusion from M&M's Aviation & Airports division (so far)   : PDF 61KB*  

Senator Xenophon, Nick asked:

Senator XENOPHON: So do you think that building, the DFO at Essendon, with its proximity to the end of the runway, would meet your criteria for fulfilling CASA's views as to the safety criteria for a building of that size, of that height, in that proximity to the runway?
…
Senator XENOPHON: So if the ATSB says, 'We need to review public safety zones—

Mr Carmody: I would be very interested if they came out with something like that. At the moment, the investigation is afoot, I understand. I do not know what the cause of the accident was. I know what the consequences were. But I think that that is part of the picture.

Senator XENOPHON: There is always the cause, but would the outcome have been different if that building were not in the way?

Mr Carmody: And that is correct.

Senator XENOPHON: And it also is those on the ground, in that building. Just to finalise that, Mr Mrdak, could you please, on notice, provide me with details of what the department says are the legal and constitutional limitations of the Commonwealth overriding state planning laws in relation to these issues.

Mr Mrdak: Certainly.

Senator XENOPHON: I am surprised that not even the corporations power, or various powers, could be used in respect—

Mr Mrdak: We will provide you an update on where the work on public safety zones is up to and the legal position.

Answer:
Public Safety Zones (PSZs) are a land-use planning tool that reduce the risk of an air transport accident affecting people who live, work or travel in close proximity to airports. They enable suitable development to be properly located, noting that the risk of an air transport accident is already very low. The Commonwealth’s approach to
the establishment of PSZs in the vicinity of Australian airports is to work cooperatively with the States and Territories through the National Airports Safeguarding Advisory Group (NASAG). If agreement on PSZs cannot be reached at NASAG, the commonwealth may consider what options are available for legislating to regulate off-airport land use in PSZs for the purpose of protecting the safety of people on and near airports from any risks arising from aviation operations, noting that, as far as the department is aware, the relevant legislative powers have not been relied upon for this purpose previously.

Prior to the next NASAG meeting on 2 August 2017, members have agreed to brief their respective Ministers on a draft PSZ Guideline developed by the Commonwealth and Queensland Governments in consultation with other NASAG members. If State and Territory Ministers agree, the Guideline will proceed to targeted stakeholder consultation in the second half of 2017.

---

QON 97:

...Senator XENOPHON: Are these minutes made public?

Ms Spence: I do not think the minutes of NASAG are made public.

Mr Mrdak: No.

Senator XENOPHON: Is there any reason why they cannot be made public?

Mr Mrdak: I am happy to take that on notice.

Senator XENOPHON: Maybe it is a question for the committee as to whether or not they are made public as well. But can you take it on notice, and if you do not wish to make them public then it could be a question of an order for the production of documents. I will put some questions on notice.

Answer:
Consistent with other Commonwealth-State officials groups, the minutes of the National Airports Safeguarding Advisory Group (NASAG) are not made public noting that NASAG is not a decision-making body.
Err what's the big secret..

Which still leaves the Senator Fawcett (pregnant pause) QON yet to be answered (or obfuscated):

QON 122:

Senator FAWCETT: Mr Mrdak, as you are aware, we have spoken before about manual of standards part 139, which goes to airport design. Over the years we have seen what have essentially been open spaces for airports, with standards put in place. But as commercial pressures have built up that real estate and that airspace have been encroached upon right up to, and in some cases, I would argue, intruding into, the limits that MOS 139 is supposed to put in place.

What Senator Xenophon was pointing to, I think, is the fact that if you look at a safety system holistically—a bit like James Reason and his accident causation model—what we are finding is that each of those pieces of Swiss cheese has been thinned to the absolute minimum that is permissible by law, which maximises the chance of an accident by minimising the options for a pilot who has a malfunction in an aircraft. I guess the request here is that we sit back and look at this holistically, as opposed to saying, 'Yes, they have met this requirement or that requirement,' and look at the aggregation of the loss of margin and, therefore,options for an aircrew member who has an issue with an aircraft. Public safety zones are but one element of that whole system.

I guess I am seeking assurance from you, Mr Carmody, that CASA's approach to this, as we have discussed here on multiple occasions, will move beyond the, 'It can be made safe by limiting the operations' to, 'This is what an airport is designed to do in terms of the Commonwealth lease'—which says it must maintain its existing capacity and have the option to grow capacity—so that CASA will put its hand up and say, 'If these changes are made for existing or future operations, it will be unsafe,' as opposed to saying, 'It can be made safe by limiting operations,' which has been the practice in the past. I am seeking that assurance from you that the organisation will change the way it views its role in assessing that aggregation of safety implications.

Mr Carmody: I will certainly look at that.

MTF...P2