Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Act 1988
Revocation of authorisation — to carry out maintenance on class A or class B aircraft
Revocation of exemption — to certify maintenance on class A or class B aircraft
Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) provides that the Governor-General may make regulations for the purposes of the Act and in relation to the safety of air navigation.
Under subregulation 42ZC (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), the registered operator and the pilot in command of a class A or class B aircraft must not allow maintenance to be carried out on it in Australian territory by anyone other than a suitably qualified person described in regulation 42ZC.
Under subregulation 42ZC (6) of CAR 1988, CASA may also authorise a person to carry out maintenance on class A or class B aircraft subject to necessary safety conditions expressed in the authorisation, for example, that the maintenance be supervised.
Aircraft polishing
Aircraft polishing on class A and class B aircraft, where it is maintenance, is an inherently low level maintenance activity.
Authorisation
Instrument CASA 579/05 was intended to authorise a person to carry out aircraft polishing on a class A or class B aircraft specifically under the supervision of a person who was the holder of an aircraft maintenance engineer licence, or an airworthiness authority in the form of a maintenance authority covering maintenance on the aircraft. Supervision was defined in terms that meant the superviser would oversight the aircraft polisher’s performance of the maintenance to the extent necessary.
Exemption
Instrument CASA 579/05 also included an exemption from compliance with paragraph 42ZE (1) (b) of CAR 1988 to the extent that the paragraph required compliance with the provisions of Schedule 6 of CAR 1988 under which only the person who performs, that is physically does, the maintenance may certify for completion of it.
Consistency with existing rules
Thus, under the authorisation, a person was authorised to carry out aircraft polishing on class A or class B aircraft provided the work was supervised by a qualified superviser. Under the exemption, the superviser could certify for completion of the aircraft polishing although he or she had supervised rather than personally done the maintenance.
Under the existing law, such supervision and certification was permitted for more complex maintenance under Schedule 6 but not for aircraft polishing. The instrument was intended to extend these arrangements to aircraft polishing subject to safeguards in the form of conditions similar to those applicable for the more complex maintenance.
Revocation
CASA has received reports that, in some instances, the scope of instrument CASA 579/05 has been misinterpreted.
CASA issues explanatory material in the form of advisory circulars (AC) if it considers that this is necessary to ensure that the scope and intent of an instrument is understood in practical application. However, the preparation and issue of even an urgent AC takes some time. In this case, CASA has decided to revoke instrument CASA 579/05 to immediately remove the risk that it may be misunderstood and affect aircraft safety before an AC might be issued.
Legislative Instruments Act
Under subsection 308 (4) of CAR 1988, an exemption is declared to be a disallowable instrument. Under subparagraph 6 (d) (i) of the Legislative Instruments 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 subsection 5 (4) of the LIA where only some provisions of an instrument are of a legislative character, the whole instrument is a legislative instrument. The authorisation and exemption in instrument CASA 579/05 was, therefore, a legislative instrument subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LIA. Consequently, its revocation is also a legislative instrument subject to the same process.
Consultation
Consultation under section 17 of the LIA has not been undertaken in this case because CASA has decided to revoke instrument CASA 579/05 to immediately remove the risk that it may be misused and affect aircraft safety.
The instrument commences on 20 January 2006.
The instrument has been made by the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officer, a delegate of CASA, under subregulation 7 (1) of CAR 1988.
[Instrument number CASA 49/06]