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 issued Australian unique AD/R22/16 Amendment 4 affecting USA-made Robinson R22 model rotorcraft in 1994 mandating repetitive inspection of bearing assemblies to address an unsafe condition identified at that point of time. Australian industry recently requested CASA to review the AD on the basis that repetitive inspection of roller bearing and bearing assembly is causing deterioration of the assembly and is placing an unreasonable financial and operational burden on all R22 operators. CASA re-assessed the AD and as a result has cancelled Australian AD/R22/16, Amendment 4. The cancellation will become effective on 15 March 2007. No replacement AD is required, as the requirements of this AD are now found in Robinson Helicopter data and CASA regulations.
As this AD has been cancelled in response to a request from Australian industry and because cancellation will have a positive effect on the operators of Robinson R22 helicopters in Australia without affecting safety, no consultation with the Australian public has taken place on this AD cancellation. The Office of Regulatory Review has determined that ADs do not require a Regulatory Impact Statement.
The AD has been made by the Manager, New Technologies and Systems, 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, enacted by the Commonwealth Parliament, was introduced to regulate civil aviation in Australia and to ensure the safety of air navigation. Section 98 of this Act empowers the Governor-General to make regulations for the safety of air navigation, including the issuance of airworthiness directives (ADs) by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). These ADs are legislative instruments issued under regulation 39.001 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, with the aim of maintaining the continuing airworthiness of aircraft. The policy objective behind these regulations is to align with international standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and to ensure that the State of Registry, in this case CASA, maintains the airworthiness of aircraft registered in Australia. The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 thus provide a framework for CASA to issue ADs when necessary, such as the recent cancellation of AD/R22/16, Amendment 4 for Robinson R22 model rotorcraft, reflecting the balance between safety and operational efficiency.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation (Airworthiness) Regulations 1998, under the authority granted by section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, empower the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue airworthiness directives (ADs) concerning specific types of aircraft or aeronautical products. This legislative framework ensures that CASA, as Australia’s national airworthiness authority, can mandate safety requirements and address unsafe conditions identified in aircraft types registered in Australia. These directives are essential for maintaining the continuing airworthiness of aircraft as per Annex 8 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, where the State of Design is responsible for providing necessary information to ensure airworthiness. In the case of Australian-registered aircraft, CASA must assess the information from the State of Design and, if deemed necessary, issue corresponding ADs to enforce the required safety measures. The regulation applies to all entities involved in the manufacture, maintenance, and operation of affected aircraft types within Australia, ensuring compliance with national and international aviation safety standards. Subordinate instruments may extend or restrict the application of these directives, aligning with the overarching goal of ensuring the safety of air navigation.
Key Provisions
The Civil Aviation Act 1988, particularly section 98, empowers the Governor-General to create regulations aimed at ensuring the safety of air navigation. Under this authority, the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, specifically regulation 39.001, allow the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue airworthiness directives (ADs) for types of aircraft or aeronautical products. These ADs are legislative instruments, as per subregulation 39.001(5) and section 6 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. The ADs serve as a primary method for communicating continuing airworthiness information among ICAO Contracting States, as mandated by Annex 8 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
Under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, CASA has a responsibility to assess airworthiness directives issued by the State of Design, especially when these directives pertain to aircraft on the Australian Register. CASA must then determine if an Australian AD is necessary to mandate the requirements of the State of Design, ensuring that the continuing airworthiness of individual aircraft is maintained. This is in line with the responsibilities outlined in Annex 8, which places the State of Registry in charge of the continuing airworthiness of an individual aircraft. For example, in 1994, CASA issued Australian AD/R22/16 Amendment 4 for USA-made Robinson R22 model rotorcraft, mandating repetitive inspections of bearing assemblies due to identified safety concerns. Recently, following a review prompted by industry feedback, CASA cancelled AD/R22/16 Amendment 4, effective from 15 March 2007, as the requirements are now included in Robinson Helicopter data and CASA regulations.
The obligations imposed by the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 on parties include the requirement for CASA to assess and potentially issue airworthiness directives based on international standards and national safety considerations. The State of Design must provide necessary information to ensure the continuing airworthiness of aircraft types, while the State of Registry must develop or adopt requirements to ensure that individual aircraft remain airworthy. In this instance, CASA must ensure that any ADs issued are based on thorough assessments and do not unduly burden operators without compromising safety.
For breaches of the provisions outlined in the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, there may be both civil and criminal consequences. Offences under these acts can result in penalties, which may include substantial fines or imprisonment, depending on the severity of the breach. The maximum penalties are determined by the specific regulations and can vary widely. For instance, under section 316 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, an individual found guilty of an offence can be subject to fines of up to $210,000 and imprisonment for up to two years. The consequences underscore the importance of compliance with airworthiness directives and the role of CASA in enforcing these regulations to maintain aviation safety.