LSACL has a number of comments on the published Sustainability Appraisal and the associated Scoping report. Most of these are minor corrections which would not affect the soundness of the evidence and will be submitted separately. Some of the points are the same as for the Evidence Base report and are not repeated here. However, the following additional points should be addressed to ensure that the evidence is sound:
. The Scoping report should mention the Future of Air Transport White paper of 2003 when reviewing national policies.
. The Sustainability Appraisal scores Scenarios 2(b) and 3 differently on airport related environmental objectives, yet the two scenarios are noted as relating to the same level of passenger throughput
. The Sustainability Appraisal could take account of improvements which would come from conditions or section 106 agreements in the higher growth options, which would not be possible with low growth.
. Although one of the objectives is safety, none of the scenarios is scored in terms of aviation safety. In order to achieve the required safety standards, each of the scenarios is likely to have an effect on the runway configuration. Thus, Scenarios 1 and 2(a) risk having to shorten the runway to provide the required RESA at the north east end. Scenario 2(b) could, in addition, require the diversion of Eastwoodbury Lane. Scenario 3 enables a number of improvements to take place such that a positive result can be achieved in safety.
. The Sustainability Appraisal scores employment and wealth creation on the basis of no action being taken to match skills to jobs, whereas the whole point of the JAAP is to do just that.