CASA 123/14 - Direction under regulation 209 — conduct of parachute training operations

Administered by Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts

Legislation au F2014L00954 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

Explanatory Statement

Civil Aviation Regulations 1988

Direction under regulation 209  conduct of parachute training operations

 

Legislation

Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) empowers the Governor-General to make regulations for the Act and the safety of air navigation.

 

Under subregulation 209 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), the operator and the pilot in command of an aircraft engaged in a private operation must comply with the provisions of CAR 1988 and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998) and with such additional conditions as CASA from time to time directs in the interest of safety (a CAR 209 direction).

 

Regulation 2 of CAR 1988 defines an approved system of maintenance, for an Australian aircraft, to mean a system of maintenance for the aircraft that has been approved under regulation 42M of CAR 1988, including any changes to the program that have been approved under regulation 42R. Approvals under regulations 42M and 42R are made by CASA or a person appointed by CASA.

 

Background

The dropping of parachutists engaged in training operations is regarded by CASA as a private operation. These operations are regarded by CASA as being in a separate category from those operations involving parachuting as a sporting activity carried out by established clubs. The second category is carried out in accordance with authorisations and specifications, issued under regulation 152 of CAR 1988.

 

Since the first category of parachute operations was regarded as private, the aircraft involved were maintained to private operations status and only required to be inspected annually, with engines being operated on condition, meaning that they could be operated until a licensed aircraft maintenance engineer refused to sign off on the annual inspection for that aircraft with that engine in it. Additionally, pilots on those operations only required a private pilot licence.

 

In 2006, at Willowbank in Queensland, 5 occupants died when an aircraft engaged in a parachute training operation crashed on take-off. The subsequent Queensland coroner’s report was critical of CASA’s policy of classifying such operations as private operations.

 

Enhanced maintenance standards for parachute aircraft

In response to the investigation findings of the Willowbank accident and CASA’s analysis of the appropriate maintenance standards for aircraft engaged in parachute operations, CASA required aircraft engaged in parachute training operations and all tandem descents to be maintained to charter aircraft standards rather than private aircraft standards. Other requirements have also been imposed. The conduct of some of those operations is subject to supervision by the Australian Skydiving Association Inc. (ASA), with CASA exercising overarching control.

 

This instrument contains directions relating to aircraft engaged in parachute training operations by organisations that are members of the ASA. This instrument is similar to an instrument relating to operations by organisations that are members of the Australian Parachute Federation Incorporated, which supervises a number of other parachute training organisations in Australia (CASA 239/13).

 

Legislative Instruments Act

The direction is considered to be a legislative instrument for section 5 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (the LIA). It is, therefore, subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LIA.

 

Consultation

Consultation has been undertaken with the ASA on this instrument. The ASA represents organisations and operators engaged in parachute training operations that are affected by this instrument. For this reason, it is CASA’s view that it was not necessary or appropriate to undertake any further consultation under section 17 of the LIA.

 

Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)

A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required because the direction is covered by a standing agreement between CASA and OBPR under which a RIS is not required for a direction (OBPR id: 14507).

 

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

A Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights is at Attachment 1.

 

Making and commencement

The instrument has been made by the Associate Director of Aviation Safety as a delegate of CASA under subregulation 11.260 (1) of CASR 1998.

 

The instrument commences on the day after registration and expires at the end of May 2017, as if it had been repealed by another instrument.

 

[Instrument number CASA 123/14]

Attachment 1

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011

 

Direction under regulation 209 — conduct of parachute training operations

 

This legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

 

Overview of the legislative instrument

This legislative instrument contains directions relating to aircraft engaged in parachute training operations by organisations that are members of the Australian Skydiving Association Inc.

 

The purpose of this legislative instrument is to significantly improve the safety of parachute training operations by directing compliance with conditions relating to maintenance of aircraft, conduct of operations, equipment, communication and air traffic control clearance.

 

Human rights implications

This legislative instrument does not engage any of the applicable rights or freedoms.

 

Conclusion

This legislative instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not raise any human rights issues.

 

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, amended by the Direction under regulation 209 – conduct of parachute training operations, were enacted to enhance the safety standards of aircraft engaged in parachute training operations. This legislative instrument was introduced to address the safety concerns highlighted by a tragic incident in 2006 at Willowbank, Queensland, where an aircraft involved in a parachute training operation crashed on take-off, resulting in multiple fatalities. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), acting under the authority vested in it by the Civil Aviation Act 1988, issued these regulations to mandate higher maintenance standards for aircraft involved in such operations, transitioning from private aircraft standards to charter aircraft standards. This change was aimed at ensuring that these aircraft are maintained to a higher safety standard, thereby reducing the risk of accidents during parachute training operations. The policy objective behind these regulations is to significantly improve the safety of parachute training operations by imposing stricter conditions on the maintenance of aircraft, the conduct of operations, equipment, communication, and air traffic control clearance.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, under direction 209, apply to the conduct of parachute training operations specifically for aircraft engaged in these activities that are operated by organisations which are members of the Australian Skydiving Association Inc. This regulation was introduced in response to a tragic accident in 2006 and aims to enhance the safety standards for such operations. The legislation imposes additional maintenance requirements, operational standards, and supervision by the Australian Skydiving Association Inc., with overarching control retained by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The regulations are applicable nationally and are in force until the end of May 2017. The instrument does not specify any exclusions or exemptions but mandates compliance with the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 and additional CASA-directed conditions in the interest of safety. The direction is subject to tabling and disallowance under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 and has been deemed compatible with human rights as per the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Key Provisions

The primary operative sections of this legislative instrument are those that provide directions under regulation 209 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988). These sections (sections 1 to 5) mandate the conduct of parachute training operations by organisations that are members of the Australian Skydiving Association Inc. (ASA). They require compliance with specific conditions related to aircraft maintenance, operational conduct, equipment standards, communication protocols, and air traffic control clearance. These provisions aim to enhance safety and ensure that parachute training operations adhere to higher maintenance and operational standards. The obligations and requirements imposed by this Act are comprehensive, focusing on the safety and oversight of parachute training operations. Operators must ensure their aircraft are maintained to charter aircraft standards, which include more rigorous inspection and maintenance schedules than those for private aircraft. Pilots must also comply with stricter licensing requirements, and operations may be subject to supervision by the ASA, with CASA retaining overarching control. Furthermore, all operations must adhere to the conditions set out in the directions, which include specific maintenance, operational, and equipment standards. In terms of offences, penalties, or consequences for breach, the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 provide the framework for enforcing compliance. Failure to comply with these regulations can result in significant penalties, including fines and potential imprisonment for individuals found guilty of serious breaches. For corporate entities, penalties can be substantial, often in the form of fines that can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending on the severity and impact of the breach. These measures are designed to ensure that the stringent safety requirements are not only met but are rigorously enforced to protect the public and maintain the integrity of aviation safety standards.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Aviation Law
Instrument
Regulation
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Compliance Obligations
Enforcement Powers

Interactions

Authorises

All Versions

Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation at 26 August 2026. For the latest information on Australian Government law please go to https://www.legislation.gov.au.