PinkusDickus
15th Mar 2015, 21:18
Another example of intrusion and intervention by a government department.
From the Adelaide Advertiser:
A POPULAR airfield looks set for a courtroom showdown with the Environment Protection Authority over licence conditions that include extended curfews and creating a plan to combat noise complaints.
Aldinga Aviation, which operates Aldinga Airfield, has won a temporary stay against conditions imposed by the EPA, including mandatory recording of all flight data.
The Environment Court has stayed the EPA conditions until a judge can determine whether they are lawful.
The conditions include extending curfew hours for popular circuit flights from 8pm to 8am on Monday to Saturday, from 8pm to 9am Sunday, and banning all circuit flights on public holidays. The EPA has also demanded the operators submit an environmental management plan to combat noise complaints and to maintain records on all flight movements.
However, Aldinga Aviation director Ron Logan said there would be substantial extra costs if the company was forced to maintain flight data. “We are not an Adelaide Airport with big planes and heavy traffic, more than 60 percent of our aircraft have a maximum weight of 600kg and make no more sound than a motorcycle on the street,” Mr Logan said.
“This airfield is not used for passenger transport and jets and the airfield has been there for 40 years.”
Court documents show Aldinga Aviation believes the EPA has overstepped its jurisdiction and was not legally able to impose the conditions. “There is no legal reason why such data should be required ... doing this is an unreasonable, unnecessary and onerous process,” the documents state.
The board also argued that the EPA had no jurisdiction over its operations.
“(Aldinga Aviation) is not undertaking an activity that pollutes or might pollute the environment and in any event, (the company) has taken all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise harm,” it argues.
The board also said the EPA failed to give proper regard to the “financial implications of the various measures required in the conditions.” There are more than 50,000 takeoffs and landings each year from Aldinga Airfield, which also operates as a flying school.
Mr Logan said he hoped the court would rule that the EPA had no jurisdiction over the airfield. “We believe the legislation was not intended for recreational flying, so the issue is one of jurisdiction,” he said. The airfield, which opened in 1976, has been the subject of numerous noise and safety complaints from local residents.
Judge Susanne Cole suspended the implementation of the conditions until the matter is finalised. The case is listed for a directions hearing next month and is likely to go to trial.
From the Adelaide Advertiser:
A POPULAR airfield looks set for a courtroom showdown with the Environment Protection Authority over licence conditions that include extended curfews and creating a plan to combat noise complaints.
Aldinga Aviation, which operates Aldinga Airfield, has won a temporary stay against conditions imposed by the EPA, including mandatory recording of all flight data.
The Environment Court has stayed the EPA conditions until a judge can determine whether they are lawful.
The conditions include extending curfew hours for popular circuit flights from 8pm to 8am on Monday to Saturday, from 8pm to 9am Sunday, and banning all circuit flights on public holidays. The EPA has also demanded the operators submit an environmental management plan to combat noise complaints and to maintain records on all flight movements.
However, Aldinga Aviation director Ron Logan said there would be substantial extra costs if the company was forced to maintain flight data. “We are not an Adelaide Airport with big planes and heavy traffic, more than 60 percent of our aircraft have a maximum weight of 600kg and make no more sound than a motorcycle on the street,” Mr Logan said.
“This airfield is not used for passenger transport and jets and the airfield has been there for 40 years.”
Court documents show Aldinga Aviation believes the EPA has overstepped its jurisdiction and was not legally able to impose the conditions. “There is no legal reason why such data should be required ... doing this is an unreasonable, unnecessary and onerous process,” the documents state.
The board also argued that the EPA had no jurisdiction over its operations.
“(Aldinga Aviation) is not undertaking an activity that pollutes or might pollute the environment and in any event, (the company) has taken all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise harm,” it argues.
The board also said the EPA failed to give proper regard to the “financial implications of the various measures required in the conditions.” There are more than 50,000 takeoffs and landings each year from Aldinga Airfield, which also operates as a flying school.
Mr Logan said he hoped the court would rule that the EPA had no jurisdiction over the airfield. “We believe the legislation was not intended for recreational flying, so the issue is one of jurisdiction,” he said. The airfield, which opened in 1976, has been the subject of numerous noise and safety complaints from local residents.
Judge Susanne Cole suspended the implementation of the conditions until the matter is finalised. The case is listed for a directions hearing next month and is likely to go to trial.