Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Monday, 2 December 2002
Page: 6943


Senator O'Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 10 July 2002:

(1) Since January 2000, how many reports have been lodged with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) relating to air contamination in BAe 146 aircraft operated by National Jet Systems.

(2) In each case: (a) When was the report lodged; (b) Who lodged the report; and (c) What action was taken by CASA in response to each report.


Senator Ian Macdonald (Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) —The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has provided the following advice.

(1) Airworthiness Directive AD/BAe146/86 mandated reporting of cabin air contamination to CASA. As at 27 September 2002, 51 reports of cabin air contamination have been received since the issue of Airworthiness Directive (AD) BAe146/86 on 3 April 2001.

Prior to the issue of the AD by CASA, there was no specific requirement for National Jet Systems (NJS) to report to CASA on incidents of air contamination. It is not possible to accurately identify such incidents among the major defect reports submitted under general reporting requirements for the period January 2000 to 2 April 2001.

In addition to the reporting requirements referenced in AD/BAe 146/86, CASA has received four formal reports from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) concerning cabin fume contamination incidents in BAe 146 aircraft operated by NJS.

(2) (a) In the event of cabin air contamination, AD/BAe146/86 mandates a set of corrective actions (based on British Aerospace Service Bulletin 21-150) to be taken before the next flight. Each of the 51 reports referred to in (1) above was submitted to CASA following completion of the maintenance actions required by the AD.

With respect to the formal reports lodged by the ATSB: (The Occurrence Dates below relate to information provided in respect to QoN 399 in Hansard on 19 August 2002.)

· Occurrence Brief 200002431 (Occurrence Date 30 April 2000) was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 10 November 2000;

· Draft Air Safety Occurrence Report 200102467 (Occurrence Date 31 May 2001) was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 16 May 2002, and Air Safety Occurrence Brief 200102467 was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 27 June 2002;

· Draft Aviation Occurrence Brief 200103696 (Occurrence Date 7 August 2001) was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 16 May 2002, and Aviation Occurrence Brief 200103696 was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 27 June 2002;

· Draft Air Safety Occurrence Report 200102292 (Occurrence Date 24 May 2001) was entered into the CASA correspondence management system on 5 August 2002, and Air Safety Occurrence Report 200102292 was entered in the CASA correspondence management system on 11 September 2002.

(b) The reports required by AD/BAe 146/86 were lodged by technical staff of NJS; and the formal reports were lodged with the Authority by the ATSB.

(c) CASA reviewed each report following lodgment and found the actions taken by NJS in response to each event of air contamination to be appropriate to the problem and consistent with the relevant requirements of AD/BAe146/86.

The reports received from the ATSB were reviewed by the Authority and as the reports numbered 200103696 and 200102467 referenced actions undertaken by the operator in accordance with AD/BAe 146/86, CASA deemed that appropriate action had been taken.

In response to the report numbered 200102292, CASA requested the ATSB to include the fact that the operator had complied with the requirements of the AD when it became apparent that the aircraft may have been having a fume event. The action taken by the operator was considered adequate.

In response to the report numbered 200002431, as the report stated that the company's maintenance personnel did not initially find any evidence of contamination and that the subsequent replacement of the Auxiliary Power Unit appeared to have rectified the problem, no further action was taken by CASA.