Supplementary written evidence submitted
by the Civil Aviation Authority (SAGE 42)
Thank you for your letter of 11 November 2010
in which you seek additional information for the Committee's review
of volcanic ash.
I am pleased to be able to provide the information
that you have requested as follows.
Firstly, with regard to the relationship between
SAGE and the CAA expert group(s) (Ref Q67 of the oral evidence),
I can confirm that there was no formal relationship between SAGE
and the group of experts that had been assembled by the CAA. The
CAA, on Friday 16 April, marshalled together specialists from
around the globe to work together to find a solution that would
help to open up airspace in Northern Europe that was affected
by ash. This group comprised representatives from regulators (eg
the American Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Canada,
and EASA), engine and aircraft manufacturers (including Airbus,
Boeing, General Electric and Rolls-Royce), airlines (including
British Airways), air traffic service providers, meteorologists,
vulcanologists, and geologists. In all, approximately 100 people
from over 60 organisations participated in the work, conducted
by a series of telephone conference calls and e-mail, that resulted
in a new tolerance threshold being scientifically established
for the operation of aircraft in ash. This enabled large parts
of airspace to be made available to flights on 20 April 2010.
Whilst a number of the UK experts in the "CAA
Group" also participated in the subsequent meetings of SAGE,
the timing of the meetings of this "CAA Group" and the
later SAGE meetings meant that there was no formal link between
the two.
I will now address your question about how SAGE
validated the CAA's work and how advice to Government was coordinated.
The SAGE meetings identified the problems causing the flight restrictions,
and considered what options were available to address them. SAGE
came to the view that the issues broadly fell into two areas:
1. How much ash was in the atmosphere and where
exactly was it?, and
2. How much ash could aircraft and engines safely
tolerate?
In focussing on these two areas and the ways
in which these issues could be tackled, SAGE confirmed that the
work that the CAA had already set in train was targeting the right
issues and objectives, thus effectively validating the approach
taken by the CAA.
On the final point regarding the coordination
of advice to Government, the CAA was only one source of such advice.
The CAA appointed a programme manager for ash to coordinate all
related activity within the CAA, and to ensure that all our advice
and guidance was coordinated before being provided to Government—principally
the Secretary of State for Transport and his Department—other
agencies and industry. In addition, the CAA contributed advice
through its participation in SAGE and was also in regular contact
with the Scottish Government.
Thank you for affording the CAA the opportunity
to contribute to this important review.
Ray Elgy
Head of Licensing & Training Standards
Civil Aviation Authority
22 November 2010
| 
