Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Defence, in writing, on 23 May 2011:

(1) Was the 2002 Parsons Brinckerhoff Study into the Salt Ash Weapons Range released to (a) the public, (b) Port Stephens Council, (c) the National Library of Australia, and (d) the Auditor General;

If so, when; if not, why not.

(2) What data and/or reports does he use to qualify that the continued use of Salt Ash Weapons Range is safe for the surrounding community.

(3) When approving the use of the Salt Ash Weapons Range, did he take into consideration the NSW Pollution Control Commission's statement that the F/A-18 Hornet's use of the Salt Ash Weapons Range does not meet its environmental criteria; if not, why not; if so, why was approval still given.

(4) Why was the site between Tea Gardens and Nerong not seen as a viable alternative to the current target and danger area at the Salt Ash Weapons Range, and was the cost of transporting Defence personnel to this alternative site a factor in the decision not to use it.

(5) Has he considered the risk to Defence personnel and civilians, of a single engine aircraft such as the Joint Strike Fighter, if shrapnel was to enter its only engine during strafing exercises at the Salt Ash Weapons Range.

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1) Defence is not aware of a Parsons Brinkerhoff study in 2002. There was a study by PPK Environment and Infrastructure ((PPK) a Parsons Brinckerhoff Company) in 2000. This study was provided to the Community Consultative Committee which comprised representatives of Defence, Port Stephens Council and residents. The study was also included as an appendix to the 2002 Hawk Aircraft Environmental Impact Statement which was made available to the public and the National Library of Australia. Defence has no record of providing the PPK report to the Auditor General.

(2) Information used to determine the continued use of Salt Ash Weapons Range is safe for the surrounding community includes:

(3) No. The Environmental Impact Statement for introduction of the F/A-18 Hornet, including its use of Salt Ash Air Weapons Range, was approved by the (then) Minister for Home Affairs and Environment on 5 July 1983. The Pollution Control Commission statement was made on 13 July 1983 as part of its submission to the Public Works Committee for the F/A-18 facilities development at RAAF Base Williamtown.

(4) According to the 2000 PPK study, considerable residential development was predicted in the Tea Gardens study area and would likely result in a higher number of complaints than was occurring at Salt Ash. The study also found that disturbance to internationally important habitats and a breeding colony of Goulds Petrel could be significant impacts. Additional costs to transport personnel were considered to be minimal and were not a factor in deciding where to conduct testing.

(5) The operation of aircraft with a single engine has been considered for all military operations, including those conducted at Salt Ash Air Weapons Range. All strafe passes developed by military aircraft, which include those conducted at Salt Ash Air Weapons Range, are designed to avoid the fragmentation envelope of delivered weapons. At no time are aircraft planned to fly through areas that could be affected by ricochet from the ground. Aircraft operations at Salt Ash Air Weapons Range are such that if a catastrophic engine failure was to occur, for any reason, sufficient energy is available to ensure the pilot can manoeuvre the aircraft safely away from populated areas. The RAAF operates, and has operated, single engine aircraft throughout its history, such as the Hawk, Macchi, Mirage and Sabre.