EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
CIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988
EXEMPTION FROM HAVING TRAINING AND CHECKING ORGANISATION
Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) empowers the Governor-General to make regulations.
Under subregulation 308 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988), CASA may, among other things, exempt an aircraft from compliance with specified provisions of the CAR 1988. Subregulation 308 (3) provides that the exemption is subject to the aircraft complying with any conditions specified by CASA as being necessary in the interests of safety. Under subregulation 308 (4) the exemption is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901.
Subregulation 217 (1) of CAR 1988 requires that the operator of a regular public transport service, the operator of any aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of more than 5 700 kg, or any operator that CASA specifies, must provide a training and checking organisation.
A training and checking organisation is intended to ensure that operating crews employed by the operator maintain their competency. The training and checking organisation and the tests and checks for which it provides, are, under subregulation 217 (3), subject to approval by CASA.
As a result of increases in the size of aerial work aircraft, operators using large aerial work aircraft with a maximum take-off weight that exceeds 5 700 kilograms are subject to subregulation 217 (1) and are required to have training and checking organisations. Aerial work purposes are prescribed in subregulation 206 (1) of CAR 1988 and include aerial spotting, agricultural operations and flying training. For operations of that kind, CASA considers that a formal training and checking organisation is not appropriate and imposes an unnecessary burden on the operators. Therefore, the exemption exempts aerial work operators from compliance with subregulation 217 (1).
The exemption is subject to various conditions. It does not apply to the operator of aircraft engaged in ambulance operations or to an operator holding an Air Operator’s Certificate that permits the carriage of passengers. The aircraft must also be used exclusively in aerial work operations and the operations must be conducted in accordance with the relevant operations manual.
The exemption comes into effect on the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments and stops having effect at the end of 30 September 2008.
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 in this case. The instrument replaces an existing instrument that expired on 30 September 2005. In the longer term, it is proposed to deal with these circumstances in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
The exemption has been issued by the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officer, a delegate of CASA, in accordance with subregulation 7 (1) of CAR 1988.
[Instrument number CASA EX44/05]
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 were enacted to establish and regulate the requirements for the safe operation of civil aircraft in Australia. This legislation was introduced to address the growing need for a comprehensive regulatory framework that could accommodate the complexities and risks associated with the expansion of civil aviation activities. Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 empowers the Governor-General to make regulations necessary for the implementation of the Act. The Civil Aviation (Exemption from Having Training and Checking Organisation) Exemption 2005 (F2005L03078) was issued under this authority, aiming to exempt certain aerial work operators from the requirement of having a training and checking organisation. This exemption was introduced in response to CASA's consideration that formal training and checking organisations impose an unnecessary burden on operators of large aerial work aircraft, while still ensuring safety. The exemption is subject to conditions, including that the aircraft must be used exclusively in aerial work operations and must comply with the relevant operations manual.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) provide a framework for civil aviation safety in Australia and allow the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to issue exemptions from certain regulatory provisions to ensure that safety standards are met without imposing undue burdens on operators. Specifically, subregulation 308(1) empowers CASA to exempt an aircraft from specified provisions of the CAR 1988, subject to conditions necessary for safety, as outlined in subregulation 308(3). Subregulation 217(1) of the CAR 1988 requires operators of certain aircraft, including those involved in regular public transport services and those with a maximum take-off weight exceeding 5,700 kg, to provide a training and checking organisation to ensure crew competency. However, in light of the impracticality of such requirements for operators of large aerial work aircraft, the exemption exempts these operators from the need to provide a training and checking organisation, provided the aircraft are used exclusively for aerial work operations and in accordance with the relevant operations manual. Notably, this exemption does not apply to operators engaged in ambulance operations or those holding an Air Operator’s Certificate that permits the carriage of passengers. The exemption is subject to disallowance in Parliament and has a fixed term, ending on 30 September 2008, after which it will be replaced by provisions in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
Key Provisions
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR 1988) contain several key provisions relevant to the operation of aircraft, particularly those involved in aerial work. Under subregulation 308(1) (2), the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has the authority to exempt an aircraft from certain regulatory provisions, provided that such exemptions are granted subject to safety conditions specified by CASA. The exemption in question applies to aircraft used exclusively for aerial work operations, defined in subregulation 206(1) of the CAR 1988, which includes activities such as aerial spotting, agricultural operations, and flying training. This exemption is intended to alleviate the burden on operators of large aerial work aircraft, which have a maximum take-off weight exceeding 5,700 kilograms, by not requiring them to establish a formal training and checking organisation under subregulation 217(1). However, this exemption does not apply to operators of aircraft engaged in ambulance operations or those holding an Air Operator’s Certificate that permits the carriage of passengers.
Operators benefiting from this exemption are subject to specific obligations. They must ensure that their aircraft are used exclusively for aerial work operations and that these operations are conducted in accordance with the relevant operations manual. This requirement is designed to maintain safety standards despite the exemption from formal training and checking organisations. The exemption is also subject to disallowance in Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (LIA), as it is declared to be a disallowable instrument under legislation in force before the commencement of the LIA.
Failure to comply with the conditions of the exemption could result in serious consequences. While the specific civil or criminal penalties are not detailed in the exemption itself, breaches of aviation safety regulations generally can lead to substantial penalties. These may include fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the severity of the breach. The exact penalties would be determined in the context of broader aviation safety laws and could vary widely based on the nature and impact of the non-compliance. Operators must therefore ensure strict adherence to the conditions specified in the exemption to avoid any legal repercussions.