CASA 258/10 - Approval and directions - operations without an approved digital flight data recorder

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, as amended by the F2010L01962 legislative instrument, was introduced to address a specific operational need concerning the use of Australian aircraft in private operations without an approved digital flight data recorder. This regulation was enacted to provide a temporary exception to the stringent equipment requirements stipulated in Civil Aviation Order 20.18, which mandates that certain aircraft must be equipped with an approved flight data recorder system. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), acting under the authority of Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, issued this instrument to allow the aircraft VH-SJP to operate without such a recorder, provided it adheres to all other equipment requirements outlined in CAO 20.18 and is not used for training flights. This measure was taken to accommodate specific operational circumstances while maintaining safety standards.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) govern the operations of Australian aircraft and establish the standards and requirements for safety and equipment, including the use of digital flight data recorders. Specifically, subregulation 207(2) of the CAR 1988 mandates that Australian aircraft must be equipped with approved instruments and equipment as determined by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Civil Aviation Order 20.18 (CAO 20.18) outlines the required equipment for certain classes of operations, including the necessity for an approved flight data recorder system for certain aircraft. However, this particular regulation allows the aircraft VH-SJP to operate without such a system, provided it is used solely in private operations and not for training flights, and it complies with all other requirements stipulated in CAO 20.18. This exemption is applicable to the specified aircraft and operations only, and any changes to this approval are subject to the disallowable instrument provisions under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. The regulation applies to aircraft operations within Australia and is subject to potential disallowance by Parliament.

Key Provisions

The primary sections of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) that are relevant here are section 98, which empowers the Governor-General to make regulations, and subregulation 207(2), which specifies that Australian aircraft must be equipped with approved instruments and equipment before being used in any class of operations. Under these provisions, and as elaborated in Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 20.18, certain aircraft are required to be fitted with an approved flight data recorder system for specific types of operations. However, subregulation 207(2) of CAR 1988 allows for exceptions, such as the operation of aircraft VH-SJP in private operations without an approved flight data recorder system, provided it meets all other requirements under CAO 20.18 and is not used for training flights. The obligations imposed by these regulations on the parties governed are multifaceted. Firstly, they must ensure that their aircraft are equipped with all approved instruments and equipment as required by CAO 20.18, unless a specific exception has been granted. For aircraft like VH-SJP, this means ensuring compliance with all other equipment requirements while operating in private settings and avoiding any use in training flights. Additionally, if a Civil Aviation Order (CAO) is amended or repealed, the new direction must be issued as a disallowable instrument under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (LIA) and followed by the necessary parliamentary procedures for tabling and disallowance if required. The consequences for non-compliance with these provisions are significant. Under subregulation 7(1) of CAR 1988, any breach of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 could lead to penalties as prescribed by the Act. These penalties may include fines and other sanctions that could affect the operator's ability to continue their aviation activities. Furthermore, if CASA issues a disallowable instrument as per regulation 5A of CAR 1988, the failure to adhere to this can result in further civil or criminal penalties, depending on the severity of the breach and the specific terms of the regulation. It is also worth noting that, under section 17 of the LIA, consultation with stakeholders has not been undertaken in this case, which could have implications if the disallowable instrument is subject to parliamentary review.