Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Direction — number of cabin attendants
Legislation
Subsection 98 (1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) provides that the Governor‑General may make regulations for the Act and in the interests of the safety of air navigation.
Under regulation 208 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), CASA may give directions as to the operating crew required to be carried on an aircraft having regard to the safety of air navigation. Subsection 7 and subparagraph 6.1 (a) of Civil Aviation Order 20.16.3 (CAO 20.16.3) were made under regulation 208 and provide, among other things, that aircraft carrying more than 36 and not more than 216 passengers must carry a cabin attendant for each unit of 36 passengers or part of that.
CAO 20.16.3 has remained in the same form since 1960 and as such represents a 47 year gap since a reassessment of cabin attendant numbers against a criterion of allowable seating rather than passenger numbers. CASA in a report Review of policies and practices for first-of-type certification of imported aircraft recommended the recognition of the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America (the FAA) certification standards. The recommendation was adopted.
The Airbus certification of the aircraft relates to the design of the floor plan and the seating configuration in relation to the location of exits. CASA does not call for a re‑evaluation of the aircraft design; instead CASA accepts the design criterion. CASA does require operators to demonstrate the procedures that are specific to the operator, which are evaluated, thus there is a subtle distinction between the certification criterion and an operator imposed safety procedure which may or may not enhance the evacuation of the aircraft in an emergency evacuation.
Safety improvements in redesign of the “Self-Help” Type III overwing exits by the aircraft manufacturer, Boeing, and safety recommendations from Cranfield University on briefing passengers seated in overwing exit row seating are cause to reassess the emergency evacuation procedures in conjunction with the aircraft certification requirements of the FAA.
Tiger Airways Australia Pty Limited (the operator) has incorporated procedures for the briefing of passengers seated at self-help exit rows as part of the pre-departure passenger safety briefing, taking into account the conclusions of the Cranfield University research. The operator has incorporated pre-warned emergency briefings for passengers seated in Type I and III exit rows based on the verbal briefing criteria specified in the Cranfield University research. The revised briefings are acceptable to CASA and are seen as a safety enhancement.
CASA is satisfied the evacuation of a full complement of passengers for the Airbus A320 is able to be achieved in a time of 90 seconds. CASA is satisfied that the demonstration of the evacuation procedures adopted by the operator to support their application to operate with the certification criterion of 4 cabin attendants has been demonstrated successfully.
CASA does not consider that safety would be compromised if an Airbus A320 carried cabin attendants during operations with a complement of 1 cabin attendant to each 50 seats, or part of that number, fitted to the aircraft.
Legislative Instruments Act
Under subparagraph 6 (d) (i) of the Legislative Instrument Act 2003 (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 regulation 5A of CAR 1988, if CASA has issued a Civil Aviation Order (CAO), and CASA later issues a direction that affects the operation of the CAO, the later document is declared to be a disallowable instrument. The instrument affects the operation of subparagraph 6.1 (a) of CAO 20.16.3. As a legislative instrument, it is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LIA.
Consultation
Consultation has not been carried out in accordance with section 17 of the LIA. The direction is in terms identical to one previously issued to another operator in respect of the same type of aircraft. The operator requested this direction and has had to meet the same standard as that applied to the previous operator. Any other operator requesting a direction in the same terms would have to meet the same or an equivalent standard.
The instrument commences on the day after it is registered and stops having effect at the end of 30 November 2008.
The direction has been issued by a delegate of CASA, under subregulation 7 (1) of CAR 1988.
[Instrument number CASA 450/07]
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, enacted to ensure the safety of air navigation, have been updated through the issuance of an explanatory statement in 2007. This explanatory statement addresses a long-standing gap in the regulation of cabin attendant numbers on aircraft, specifically focusing on the number of cabin attendants required for aircraft carrying between 36 and 216 passengers. The problem it aimed to resolve was the outdated criterion for determining cabin attendant numbers, which had not been reassessed since 1960. The explanatory statement was issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under the authority granted by the Civil Aviation Act 1988. The policy objective was to enhance safety by ensuring that cabin attendant numbers are appropriate for modern aircraft designs and emergency evacuation procedures. This update recognises the Federal Aviation Administration's certification standards and incorporates safety recommendations, particularly in relation to emergency evacuations.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 apply to all aircraft operated within Australian territory, as well as Australian-registered aircraft operated outside of Australia, and is enforced by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Specifically, the Direction regarding the number of cabin attendants pertains to aircraft carrying more than 36 and not more than 216 passengers. This regulation was established under the authority of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, and is designed to ensure the safety of air navigation. The Direction extends the allowable ratio of passengers to cabin attendants from 36:1 to 50:1 for Airbus A320 aircraft, a change accepted by CASA based on the operator's successful demonstration of evacuation procedures that meet safety standards. This change is subject to the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, making it a disallowable instrument that can be subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament. Notably, while consultation has not been carried out as per the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, the Direction aligns with a previous one issued to another operator for the same aircraft type, ensuring consistency in safety standards across operators.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, as amended by the direction CASA 450/07, pertain to the number of cabin attendants required on aircraft carrying between 37 and 216 passengers. Under section 98(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1988, the Governor-General has the authority to make regulations for the Act, and in this case, the regulation is aimed at ensuring the safety of air navigation. Regulation 208 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 empowers the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue directions regarding the operating crew required on aircraft, taking into account safety considerations. Specifically, subparagraph 6.1(a) of Civil Aviation Order 20.16.3 stipulates that aircraft carrying more than 36 but not more than 216 passengers must have a cabin attendant for every 36 passengers or part of that number.
Under the amended regulations, the obligations for operators of aircraft in the specified passenger range are to ensure that they have the requisite number of cabin attendants based on the seating configuration of the aircraft. Operators must demonstrate to CASA that their evacuation procedures are adequate and compliant with the new direction. This includes incorporating specific safety briefings for passengers seated in overwing exit rows, as recommended by research from Cranfield University. The operator in this case, Tiger Airways Australia Pty Limited, has already incorporated these procedures and has had them accepted by CASA.
The amended direction also stipulates the acceptance of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification standards for aircraft design, particularly in relation to seating configurations and exit locations. Operators are required to align their safety procedures with the certification requirements but may implement additional safety measures that go beyond the minimum requirements. CASA has concluded that the evacuation of a full complement of passengers on an Airbus A320 can be achieved within 90 seconds under the new direction, and that the demonstration of evacuation procedures by operators is satisfactory.
The legislation includes provisions for civil and criminal consequences for non-compliance. Under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, the direction issued by CASA is considered a disallowable instrument. This means that it is subject to tabling and potential disallowance in Parliament. Failure to comply with the direction could result in CASA taking enforcement action, which might include fines or other penalties as prescribed under the Civil Aviation Act 1988. The maximum penalties for such breaches can be significant, depending on the severity and frequency of the non-compliance.