August 2012 - Indian Airforce

probability of their strike. This was taken cognizance of in India as early as 1937 (decades before the
boom in aviation). The Aircraft Rules 1937, is a subsidiary document to the Aircraft Act 1934 which
governs the operations of aircraft in the country. Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules (as amended in 2009) is
given in the box. The rule provides teeth to hold accountable personnel responsible for enhancement
of bird activity in an area of up to 10 Km from the Aerodrome Reference Point (ARP).
Though, the rule has existed since then and been revised from time to time, lack of knowledge or
the cold response from the civil administration has made it impossible to derive any benefi t from it.
However, it is important to enforce the rule before any bird attracting establishment/venture comes up
in the vicinity of aerodromes. Once it comes up, while it may be opposed by locals as it is not a pleasant
experience for the surrounding residents, removing it may be diffi cult as it supports the economy of
others.
The rule also has a fl ip side. In most cities, the garbage dump is designed and maintained by the
Municipal Corporations. However, it is a real Catch 22 situation to fi le an FIR against them in a Police
Station, as most of the administrative support for the station comes from the Municipal bodies. Hence,
it is important that we utilize the provisions and prevent such establishments (Govt or private) from
creating such hazards, than allowing them to come up and then keep fi ghting them. It is for this reason
that periodic bird surveys (both on ground as well as from the air) are carried out, and the environment
monitored.
Air Force Station BKT is one station that reaped the benefi t of this clause. On noticing that a private
party was dumping carcass on the approach path, an FIR was lodged. Just this step ensured that the
person left the city and did not return. This proves that the rule is a potent deterrent. Another case has
been lodged by Air Force Station Yelahanka. The results on the ground are yet to be achieved, but the
process has certainly begun.
It is important to note that even USA where aviation has advanced so much, did not have such a
potent law, though the need was always felt. Section 503 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and
Reform Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 106–181) (AIR 21) prohibits the construction or establishment
of a new Municipal Solid Waste Landfi ll within 6 statute miles of certain public-use airports. Before
these prohibitions apply, both the airport and the landfi ll must meet very specifi c conditions. These
restrictions do not apply to airports or landfi lls located within the State of Alaska. However, the Indian
law is more powerful in this regard in that it can force an existing landfi ll to close down. Hence, it is more
a question of how much we want to make use of rather than asking what the law can give us?
“No person shall slaughter or fl ay any animal or deposit or drop any rubbish,
fi lth garbage or any other polluted or obnoxious matter including such material
from hotels, meat shops, fi sh shops and bone processing mills which attract or
are likely to attract vultures and other birds and animals within a radius of 10 Km
from the Aerodrome Reference Point.”
(Aircraft Amendment Rules, 2009; Published vide Ministry of Civil Aviation
Notifi cation {G.S.R 532E} dated 16 Jul 2009)
INDIAN AIR FORCE 2 0 1 2 A u g u s t
Aerospace Safety 3