'... at the end of the day, this is a political process ... if
people are unhappy then the politicians will be held accountable
at the ballot box.' -- Richard Short, former Rushmoor planning
official

As a result of a High Court case (Parkins v Rushmoor) Rushmoor
were obliged to seek 'independent advice' on airport safety.

To date, two flawed reports have been submitted by ERM, a company
with a reputation for applying greenwash to flawed projects.

Now enter Halcrow. Halcrow have undertaken a review of previous
work. Halcrow have not themselves submitted any original work,
merely a commentary on what has gone before.

The Halcrow report itself forms part of a report to Rushmoor
planning committee, and is attached as an annexe.

 http://www.rushmoor.gov.uk/council/ci13ac.htm

The advice has to be independent. Halcrow have conducted a report
on business aviation for what was DETR, now DfT, they also
advised on business aviation, they are also currently engaged in
providing advice. In the report on business aviation, Halcrow
stated there was no risk at Farnborough.

Halcrow independent?

Halcrow have not independently verified either the crash
rates used or the models. Halcrow note the huge discrepancy
between the work by ERM and Nats. No explanation.

Halcrow quite correctly state that drawing risk contours takes no
account of the population on the ground. They also note that in
reaching a planning decision Rushmoor has to take note of the
population on the ground.

Perversely Halcrow seem to believe it is difficult to address ground
safety. It is not. Exactly the same inputs - crash rates, number
of movements, aircraft mix, aircraft weight, crash consequence
area - as used to draw individual risk contours.

To date, no study of ground safety has taken place.

Drawing risk contours has only two uses: determining a PSZ,
determining the exposure to 1:10,000 risk.

Halcrow quite correctly state the level of risk of 1:10,000 is at
the upper limit of tolerable risk (and cite HSE recommendations),
and that the risk should not extend beyond the airfield boundary.

1:10,000 extends beyond the airfield boundary at the western end.

Condition 16 is thus not acceptable and must be REJECTED.

The only use of the 1:100,000 risk contour is for the purpose of
drawing a PSZ.

A PSZ, public safety zone, is a sanitised zone in which people
should not live, work or congregate. It is drawn for the number of
movements in 15 years hence, ie not the number of movements now or
TAG's planning limit of 28,000 movements. TAG are currently in
the process of supplying DfT with their estimates for movements in
15 years hence to enable a PSZ to be drawn.

What we can say is that the 1:100,000 risk contour at Farnborough
encloses more people, ie more people at risk of being killed, than
at any other UK airport.

Heathrow 2200
Gatwick 2
Farnborough 3500

Condition 17 is thus not acceptable and must be REJECTED.

Drawing risks contours is not a ground safety study as no account
is taken of the population on the ground.

In the planning agenda (10 February 2003) reference is made to
various reports. To date, not counting this report, I have
submitted three reports. Not a single one is referenced. The
claimed, widespread consultation has not taken place. The previous
planning meeting did not consider the reports placed before the
committee, only considered the resolutions to defer a decision.

Further examples of the biased and corrupt nature of the planning
department at Rushmoor.

These are referenced below and can be found on the web.
Recommended reading.

References

Keith Parkins, Objections to TAG Planning Application
(Farnborough Airfield), September 2000

Keith Parkins, Globalisation - the role of corporations,
September 2000

Keith Parkins, Farnborough Airfield Judicial Review, UK
Indymedia, 4 February 2002

Keith Parkins, Air show, arms fair or corporate gateway to
Europe?, Corporate Watch newsletter, June-July 2002

Keith Parkins, Air show, arms fair or corporate gateway to
Europe?, Corporate Watch news, 9 July 2002

Keith Parkins, TAG Aviation outline planning conditions 16 and
17, October 2002

Keith Parkins, TAG Aviation Section 106 environmental monitoring
- movements and noise, October 2002

Keith Parkins, Farnborough Airport: ERM 'independent' report on
TAG risk contours, November 2002

Keith Parkins, Farnborough Airport - consultants 'gagged', UK
Indymedia, 4 November 2002

Keith Parkins, Big Business Jets In, Squall, 18 November 2002

Keith Parkins, Big Business Jets In, Red Pepper, December 2002

Keith Parkins, Farnborough Airport: Comments on planning agenda
and ERM supplementary report, December 2002

Keith Parkins, The Al-QinetiQ Network, to be published

Keith Parkins, Planning for the people?, to be published

Keith Parkins & Peter Barnett, Farnborough Airport: A disaster
in-waiting, Green World, Winter 2000/1

Web

 http://bvej.freewebsites.com
 http://www.farnborough-airport.org.uk
 http://www.heurka.clara.net/surrey-hants
 http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/tag-erm.htm