CIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988
CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY REGULATIONS 1998
ISSUE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
Under section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, the Governor-General may make regulations for the purposes of the Act and in the interests of the safety of air navigation. Under regulation 39.001 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, CASA may issue airworthiness directives (ADs) for kinds of aircraft or aeronautical products. Subregulation 39.001(5) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 provides that an AD is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, an AD is a legislative instrument.
Under Annex 8 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the State of Design has overall responsibility for continuing airworthiness of an aircraft type, and must provide any information necessary to ensure the continuing airworthiness of a type to appropriate States of Registry. ADs (and their equivalents) are the most common form of continuing airworthiness information, and are issued by most ICAO Contracting States.
The State of Registry of an individual aircraft is responsible for its continuing airworthiness. Under Annex 8, the State of Registry must develop or adopt requirements to ensure the continuing airworthiness of aircraft. When a State of Design issues an AD against a type of aircraft on the Australian Register, CASA, as Australia’s national airworthiness authority, must assess that information and, if appropriate, issue an Australian AD to mandate the requirements of the State of Design.
CASA has raised AD/CESSNA 400/102 Amendment 4 to correct an unsafe situation on Cessna 425 and 441 aircraft. Australian examples of these two types have been found with cracks in the elevator forward spar, which, if not corrected, could result in a loss of control of the aircraft. The State of Design for these types, the USA, has not yet taken action to correct this unsafe condition. As there are several examples of these types on the Australian register, CASA has developed an AD to correct the problem on Australian aircraft.
CASA has not consulted with the Australian industry and public, because this amendment reduces the burden on operators by increasing the interval between inspections to allow the elevator spar to be checked during other, scheduled, maintenance. The change has been made at the request of an Australian operator.
The Office of Regulatory Review has determined that ADs do not require a Regulatory Impact Statement.
The AD has been made by the Manager, Airframes in the Manufacturing, Certification and New Technologies Office, on behalf of CASA, in accordance with subsection 84A (2) of the Act.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Act 1988 was enacted to regulate civil aviation in Australia, ensuring the safety and efficiency of air navigation, among other objectives. One of the mechanisms introduced to maintain safety standards is the issuance of airworthiness directives (ADs) under regulation 39.001 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, which empower the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to mandate specific requirements to ensure the continuing airworthiness of aircraft. These directives are considered legislative instruments under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. CASA, as Australia’s national airworthiness authority, issues ADs in response to unsafe conditions identified by the State of Design or other contracting states under Annex 8 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Recently, CASA issued AD/CESSNA 400/102 Amendment 4 to address an unsafe condition found in certain Cessna aircraft types registered in Australia, without prior consultation with industry or the public, as the amendment was made to reduce operator burden by adjusting inspection intervals. This action was taken to ensure compliance with international standards and address safety concerns raised by the discovery of cracks in the elevator forward spar of these aircraft.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 empower the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue airworthiness directives (ADs) for specific types of aircraft or aeronautical products to ensure the safety of air navigation. This regulatory framework applies to the persons or entities responsible for the operation and maintenance of aircraft registered in Australia, including aircraft manufacturers, operators, and maintenance service providers. Geographically, this Act and its regulations apply within the Commonwealth of Australia, with CASA acting as the national airworthiness authority to enforce compliance. Notably, ADs are considered legislative instruments under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, and they fall under the purview of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, making them disallowable instruments. The issuance of ADs by CASA is further guided by international standards outlined in Annex 8 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, which assigns responsibility for continuing airworthiness to the State of Design and the State of Registry. The AD/CESSNA 400/102 Amendment 4, which addresses cracks in the elevator forward spar of Cessna 425 and 441 aircraft, exemplifies how CASA can mandate corrective actions when the State of Design fails to address identified safety issues.
Key Provisions
The key provisions of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, as implemented through the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, allow the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue airworthiness directives (ADs) to ensure the safety of air navigation. Specifically, under section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, the Governor-General is empowered to make regulations for the safety of air navigation, and regulation 39.001 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 provides CASA with the authority to issue ADs for certain types of aircraft or aeronautical products. Section 39.001(5) of the regulations classifies ADs as disallowable instruments under section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, and therefore, as legislative instruments under section 6 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003.
The obligations imposed on parties by the Act and the regulations include ensuring the continuing airworthiness of aircraft. The State of Design, as specified under Annex 8 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of an aircraft type and must provide necessary information to the States of Registry. The State of Registry, which in Australia is CASA, must then develop or adopt requirements to ensure the continuing airworthiness of aircraft registered within its jurisdiction. This means that when an AD is issued by a State of Design, CASA must assess this information and, if necessary, issue an Australian AD to enforce the State of Design’s requirements on aircraft registered in Australia.
Failure to comply with ADs can result in serious safety risks, and the Act provides for civil and criminal consequences for breaches. Although the specific penalties for non-compliance are not detailed in the text, it is clear that adherence to ADs is mandatory and non-compliance can lead to enforcement actions. CASA, as the national airworthiness authority, is tasked with ensuring that ADs are followed to maintain the safety standards required under the Act.
CASA has issued AD/CESSNA 400/102 Amendment 4 to address an unsafe situation identified on Cessna 425 and 441 aircraft, which have been found to have cracks in the elevator forward spar. This AD was developed in response to the unsafe condition that could lead to a loss of control if not corrected. The State of Design, the USA, has not yet taken action to correct this condition, so CASA has issued an Australian AD to mandate the necessary corrections on aircraft registered in Australia. CASA did not consult with the Australian industry and public as this amendment increases the interval between inspections, allowing the elevator spar to be checked during other scheduled maintenance, thus reducing the burden on operators. This change was made at the request of an Australian operator. The Office of Regulatory Review has determined that ADs do not require a Regulatory Impact Statement, and the AD was made by the Manager, Airframes in the Manufacturing, Certification and New Technologies Office, on behalf of CASA, in accordance with subsection 84A(2) of the Act.