Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Direction — parallel runway operations at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport
Legislation
Subsection 98 (1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) provides that the Governor-General may make regulations for the Act and the safety of air navigation.
Under subregulation 99AA (5) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), CASA may, among other things, give directions about the use of a controlled aerodrome by aircraft engaged in instrument flight rules flights.
Under subsection 33 (3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (the AIA), where an Act confers a power to make, grant or issue any instrument of a legislative or administrative character (including rules, regulations or by-laws), the power shall be construed as including a power exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like conditions (if any) to repeal, rescind, revoke, amend, or vary any such instrument.
Background
Parallel runway operations at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport (KSA) (which is a controlled aerodrome), using the Instrument Landing System (ILS) Precision Runway Monitor (PRM), allow for a significant increase in runway capacity in poor weather conditions. The ILS PRM is very accurate and allows aircraft to fly side-by-side down the instrument approaches to the parallel runways separated by a no‑transgression zone of 2 000 feet. Special procedures apply when these operations are in progress and pilots are required to satisfactorily complete additional training for safety purposes.
On 30 August 2013, CASA issued a direction under subregulation 99AA (5) of CAR 1988 (CASA 192/13 refers), expiring at the end of July 2016, that requires that a pilot in command of an aircraft operating under an Australian Air Operator’s Certificate (AOC), or other Australian registered aircraft, is to complete ILS PRM approach procedures training either in a CASA approved flight simulator or on a training course approved by CASA. The requirements of the course and examination are set out in the direction.
CASA 192/13 also requires that a pilot in command of an aircraft, operating under a foreign aircraft AOC or other foreign registered aircraft, is to complete ILS PRM approach procedures training either in a flight simulator that supports the foreign operator’s operations, or on a training course conducted by the training facility approved by the National Aviation Authority (the NAA) which issued the foreign operator’s AOC. CASA must receive and accept in writing a range of corroborative documentation from the foreign operator and the NAA.
In March 2015, CASA and Airservices Australia (AA) conducted a review of operational requirements pertaining to the conduct of ILS PRM at KSA. It was decided that the requirements should be revised so a foreign operator that has been approved to conduct ILS PRM approaches by the operator’s NAA would be permitted to undertake ILS PRM approaches without further CASA approval. However, for a foreign aircraft operator not approved to conduct ILS PRM approaches by the operator’s NAA, the pilot in command would still be required to complete ILS PRM approach procedures training.
Instrument
CASA 41/15 is a new direction that repeals and replaces CASA 192/13. CASA 41/15 provides, under subsection 4 (1), that the pilot in command of an aircraft must not undertake an ILS PRM approach unless 1 of the following requirements are complied with:
- for Australian aircraft or aircraft operating under an Australian AOC — the pilot in command must satisfy the training requirements mentioned in Schedule 1, which include completing training conducted by the operator’s training and checking organisation or completing an approved training course conducted by CASA
- for foreign aircraft or aircraft operating under a foreign AOC — the operator must be approved by the NAA to conduct ILS PRM approaches
- for an aircraft operating under a foreign aircraft AOC, the operator of which has not been approved by the operator’s NAA to conduct ILS PRM approaches — the pilot in command has satisfied training requirements mentioned in Schedule 2
- for another foreign registered aircraft, the operator of which has not been approved by the operator’s NAA to conduct ILS PRM approaches — the pilot in command has satisfied training requirements mentioned in Schedule 2.
Schedule 2 requires a pilot in command of a foreign aircraft to satisfactorily undertake and complete a training course approved by CASA. A training course approved by CASA means the following 2 documents submitted to, and accepted by, CASA: a training course syllabus in ILS PRM approach procedures issued by the NAA of the foreign operator; and a statement by the NAA that the foreign operator’s training facility is approved to conduct training for ILS PRM approaches.
Under subsection 4 (2), a pilot in command who has not successfully completed the required training must report this fact to Air Traffic Control (ATC) so that alternative landing arrangements can be made. To ensure that ATC has adequate time in which to assess the impact of non-participation in the parallel runway operations, the requirement to report to ATC applies before entering controlled airspace within 120 nautical miles of KSA.
Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (the LIA)
Under subparagraph 6 (d) (i) of the LIA, an instrument is a legislative instrument for section 5 of the LIA if it is declared to be a disallowable instrument under legislation in force before the commencement of the LIA. Under subregulation 99AA (6A) of CAR 1988, a direction under subregulation 99AA (5) that is not given by means of a Civil Aviation Order is a disallowable instrument for section 46A of the AIA. The direction is, therefore, a legislative instrument and it is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LIA.
Consultation
In consultation with industry and AA, CASA has developed this direction to replace CASA 192/13. The new direction is beneficial to industry in that foreign operators may conduct ILS PRM approaches without CASA approval provided that the foreign operator has been approved to conduct ILS PRM approaches by the foreign NAA. Other requirements for the conduct of ILS PRM approaches by Australian aircraft have not been changed. It is CASA’s view that no further consultation under section 17 of the LIA is necessary or appropriate.
Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)
A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required because the instrument is covered by a standing agreement between CASA and OBPR under which a RIS is not required for directions (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 a delegate of CASA relying on the power of delegation under subregulation 11.260 (1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
The instrument commences on the day of registration and expires at the end of March 2018, as if it had been repealed by another instrument.
[Instrument number CASA 41/15]
Attachment 1
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011
Direction — parallel runway operations at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport
This legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognized or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.
Overview of the legislative instrument
The legislative instrument specifies the training requirements to be met by pilots who conduct parallel runway operations at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport (KSA). In the absence of completing those requirements, the pilot must notify Air Traffic Control before entering controlled airspace within 120 nautical miles of KSA.
The primary purpose of the legislative instrument is to ensure that pilots conducting parallel runway operations at Sydney Airport have received appropriate training in conducting those operations or notify Air Traffic Control so that alternative landing arrangements can be made.
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