Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Exemption of authorised flying instructors employed by Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd
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 the interests of the safety of air navigation.
Paragraph 308 (1) (b) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) provides that CASA may, in relation to a particular aircraft or specified type or category of aircraft, exempt persons from compliance with specified provisions of CAR 1988 while they are in, on, or otherwise associated with the operation of, that aircraft, or aircraft of the specified type or category. Such an exemption is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.
Subregulation 308 (3) of CAR 1988 provides that CASA is authorised to give an exemption subject to any condition specified in the exemption as being necessary in the interests of safety.
Paragraph 5.70 (a) of CAR 1988 provides that if a student pilot has not passed a general flying progress flight test for the category of aircraft that the student proposes to fly, an authorised flight instructor must not permit the student to fly as pilot in command of an aircraft for more than 3 consecutive hours of flight time in aircraft of that category, unless after each period of 3 hours the student has undertaken dual flying in an aircraft of that category.
The Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd (the College) holds an Air Operator’s Certificate authorising domestic flying training operations. The College’s flying training syllabus permits student pilots to fly as pilot in command of an aircraft for more than 3 consecutive hours. This is inconsistent with the requirement in paragraph 5.70 (a) of CAR 1988.
This instrument exempts authorised flying instructors employed by the College from compliance with paragraph 5.70 (a) of CAR 1988 when conducting flying training.
The College has demonstrated for more than a decade that it can safely conduct student flying training operations in accordance with its syllabus of flying training and trains only Singapore Airlines staff who, upon completion of training, return to Singapore to obtain the appropriate licence.
The exemption is subject to conditions which are considered necessary in the interests of safety. Under these conditions, the flying training must be conducted in Cessna 172 and Beechcraft 58 type aircraft, the student pilots of the College must have a minimum of 20 hours aeronautical experience and the training must be conducted only for the purposes of the authorised flying instructors’ employment by the College.
Legislative Instruments Act
Subregulation 308 (4) of CAR 1988 declares an exemption 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. The exemption 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 under section 17 of the LIA has not been undertaken because the instrument applies only to the College and renews a current instrument to preserve an existing arrangement.
The exemption commences on 1 August 2006 after it is registered and stops having effect at the end of July 2008.
The exemption has been made by the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officer, a delegate of CASA, in accordance with subregulation 7 (1) of CAR 1988.
[Exemption number CASA EX35/06]
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 were amended in 2006 to provide a specific exemption for authorised flying instructors employed by Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd. This exemption was introduced to address the discrepancy between the College’s flying training syllabus and the regulatory requirements outlined in paragraph 5.70(a) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, which mandates that student pilots should not fly as pilot in command for more than three consecutive hours unless they have undergone dual flying in an aircraft of that category. The exemption was enacted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under the authority granted by the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and aims to ensure the safety of air navigation while accommodating the College’s unique training program, which has a proven track record of safe operations over more than a decade. The exemption is subject to specific conditions, including the type of aircraft used, the minimum aeronautical experience of student pilots, and the purpose of the training.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) under the Civil Aviation Act 1988 provide regulatory frameworks for aviation safety in Australia, and section 98 of the Act allows the Governor-General to make such regulations. In this context, an exemption has been granted to authorised flying instructors employed by the Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd from specific provisions of CAR 1988, specifically paragraph 5.70(a), which concerns the duration a student pilot can fly as the pilot in command without undergoing a general flying progress flight test. This exemption allows the College to conduct flying training operations beyond the standard 3-hour limit set by CAR 1988, provided that certain safety conditions are met. The exemption applies solely to authorised flying instructors employed by the Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd and is subject to conditions that ensure safety, such as restricting the training to Cessna 172 and Beechcraft 58 aircraft and ensuring that student pilots have a minimum of 20 hours of aeronautical experience. The exemption is a disallowable instrument under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 and thus subject to tabling and disallowance in Parliament, though no consultation was necessary as it pertains to a specific entity and renews an existing arrangement. This exemption is effective from 1 August 2006 until the end of July 2008.
Key Provisions
The key provisions of this instrument involve the exemption of authorised flying instructors employed by the Singapore Flying College Pte Ltd from certain requirements of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) (section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and subregulation 308(1)(b) of CAR 1988). This exemption allows the College to conduct flying training operations that deviate from the general requirement in paragraph 5.70(a) of CAR 1988, which limits the solo flight time of student pilots to no more than three consecutive hours without dual flying, unless a general flying progress flight test has been passed. The exemption is subject to specific conditions deemed necessary for safety, including the restriction of flying training to Cessna 172 and Beechcraft 58 aircraft, a minimum of 20 hours of aeronautical experience for student pilots, and the training being exclusively for the purposes of the authorised flying instructors’ employment by the College.
The obligations imposed on the parties governed by this Act are primarily focused on ensuring safety. The College must adhere to the conditions specified in the exemption, which are designed to maintain safety standards during flying training. These conditions include the type of aircraft used, the minimum experience level of student pilots, and the purpose of the training. Additionally, CASA, as the regulator, must ensure that the exemption does not compromise safety and that all conditions are met. The College must also demonstrate a consistent track record of safe flying training operations, as it has done over the past decade, to maintain the exemption.
Breach of the conditions specified in the exemption could lead to civil or criminal consequences. The exemption is a disallowable instrument under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, meaning it can be disallowed by Parliament. The failure to comply with the conditions set forth in the exemption could potentially lead to the revocation of the exemption and subsequent legal action. The maximum penalties for non-compliance with CAR 1988 provisions are not explicitly stated in the explanatory statement, but they could include fines or other regulatory actions as determined by CASA. The College's operations must remain within the parameters set by the exemption to avoid any legal repercussions.