Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
Exemption — Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) Controller’s Certificate requirements
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.
Subsection 98 (5A) of the Act provides that the regulations may empower CASA to issue instruments in relation to the following:
(a) matters affecting the safe navigation and operation, or the maintenance, of aircraft; or
(b) the airworthiness of, or design standards for, aircraft.
Subregulation 11.160 (1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998) provides that, for subsection 98 (5A) of the Act, CASA may grant an exemption from a provision of the Regulations in relation to a matter mentioned in that subsection. Under subregulation 11.160 (2), an exemption may be granted to a person, or to a class of persons, and may specify the class by reference to membership of a specified body or any other characteristic.
Under subregulation 11.205 (1) of CASR 1998, CASA may impose conditions on an exemption if this is necessary in the interests of the safety of air navigation. Under regulation 11.225, an exemption must be published on the Internet. Under subregulation 11.230 (1), an exemption ceases on the day specified within it (but no longer than 3 years after its commencement) or, if no day is specified, 3 years after commencement.
Under regulation 101.265 of CASR 1998, a person may act as the controller of a large unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV, also known as a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA)) that is an Australian aircraft if the person is certified as a UAV controller under Division 101.F.3. That Division includes regulation 101.295, which sets out the requirements that an applicant must meet before he or she can be certified by CASA as a UAV controller.
Instrument
The instrument exempts an applicant from compliance with the requirements set out in regulation 101.295 if the applicant has completed a basic remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS) training program and is registered with CASA by the approved RPAS training organisation.
Under paragraph 101.295 (2) (b) of CASR 1998, a person is eligible to be certificated as a UAV controller if, among other things, he or she has been awarded a pass in an aviation licence theory examination. At present, since there is no aviation licence theory examination for UAVs referred to in regulation 5.41 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, the theory examination that applicants usually undertake is a private pilot licence (PPL) examination. CASA considers that this examination is not appropriate for certain UAV operations. As a result, this exemption allows for the recognition of a basic RPAS training program approved by CASA that is tailored to the operation of UAV.
The requirements for certification as a UAV controller that are mentioned in subregulation 101.295 (2) are either addressed in the basic RPAS training program or are not relevant to the types of operation allowed by the instrument.
Paragraph 101.295 (2) (a) requires the applicant to qualify for the issue of a radio operator’s certificate of proficiency. As mentioned above, paragraph 101.295 (2) (b) requires the applicant to pass an aviation licence theory examination, which is usually the PPL examination. Paragraph 101.295 (2) (d) requires the completion of a training course in the operation of the type of UAV that the applicant proposes to operate, conducted by the UAV’s manufacturer. Paragraph 101.295 (2) (e) requires the completion of at least 5 hours’ experience in operating UAVs outside controlled airspace. By successfully completing the basic RPAS training program, the applicant will have demonstrated competencies that provide an equivalent level of safety to completing the requirements in paragraphs 101.295 (2) (a), (b), (d) and (e).
Paragraph 101.295 (2) (c) requires the applicant to pass an instrument rating theory examination. This requirement is not appropriate for operations within the UAV controller’s visual line of sight.
The basic RPAS training program preserves the spirit, intent and outcome of subregulation 101.295 (2) of CASR 1998. The difference is that the basic RPAS training program ensures that the training material meets the requirements to safely operate the RPA without the discrepancies of the PPL examination.
The applicants who successfully complete the competencies for a remote pilot are recognised by this instrument as eligible to be certificated under regulation 101.295.
Regulations 11.056, 11.067 and 101.300 of CASR 1998 allow CASA to grant the certification subject to conditions that it considers necessary in the interests of the safety of air navigation, including conditions that limit the areas where the remote pilot may control RPAs. Subject to the remote pilot having other qualifications, CASA intends to make the certification subject to conditions that limit the places in which the remote pilot may control RPAs to reflect the limited scope of the basic RPAS training program. Those conditions may include conditions that the remote pilot must not operate an RPAS unless the RPA is: at less than 400 feet above ground level; in visual line of sight; outside controlled airspace; more than 3 nautical miles from an aerodrome or aircraft landing area; not over a populous area; and not within 30 metres of a person, other than the operator’s personnel.
The provisions of CASR 1998 relating to UAV commenced in 2002. Since that time the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has approved new terminology such as ‘remote pilot’, ‘remotely piloted aircraft’, and ‘remotely piloted aircraft system’, instead of ‘UAV’ and related terms. CASR 1998 currently refers to ‘UAV’ and related terms. However, to the extent practical, this instrument uses ICAO’s approved terminology and includes relevant definitions to explain the relationship between those terms and the terms in CASR 1998.
Legislative Instruments Act
Exemptions issued under regulation 11.160 of CASR 1998 are issued under subsection 98 (5A) of the Act. Subsection 98 (5AA) of the Act states that an instrument issued under paragraph (5A) (a) is a legislative instrument if it applies to a class of persons or a class of aircraft. This exemption applies to a class of persons and so is a legislative instrument.
As a legislative instrument, it is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (the LIA).
Consultation
Consultation under section 17 of the LIA has been undertaken. There have been 2 industry studies, recommendations from an industry team that was invited by CASA to make recommendations, a test training program conducted, and industry agreement to competencies that underpin the basic RPAS training program.
The Australian Aerospace Industry Forum was established by the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research to contribute to the enhancement of Australia’s manufacturing in or around 2005. One of the subcommittees established within this Forum was for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). This subcommittee reported to CASA in August 2010 about the operation of UAS in civil airspace. The report discussed the need to revise training of those who operate UAS and their certification.
As a result, an Industry Training Development Team (TDT) was established to further define the requirements, using the material already provided by the UAS subcommittee, to develop training competencies and proposed licensing levels. The TDT released its report to CASA on 31 March 2011, recommending rapid development of a more defined process on the information on which RPA pilots are to be trained, assessed and licensed, and that as a matter of course, not priority, that these recommendations be transferred into the National Accreditation Certificate scheme.
As a result, 2 actions were taken, being the test of the TDT program, and the establishment with the Transport and Logistics Industry Skills Council (TLISC) of national competencies for RPAS. The test training program was conducted from 20 June 2011 to 1 July 2011, in a joint CASA-industry effort. The results of this program provided a precursor to the TLISC development of competencies that were published in the Aviation Training Package as Certificate III in Aviation (Remote Pilot) in July 2012.
The exemption is based on the recommendation for the Remote Pilot Level 1 program.
Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)
A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required because the exemption is covered by a standing agreement between CASA and OBPR under which a RIS is not required for exemptions (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 the Director of Aviation Safety, on behalf of CASA, in accordance with sections 73 of the Act.
The instrument commences on the day of registration and expires at the end of May 2016 as if it had been repealed by another instrument.
[Instrument number CASA EX58/13]
Attachment 1
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011
Exemption — Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) Controller’s Certificate requirements
This legislative instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised 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 exempts an applicant for certification as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) controller from the normal eligibility requirements if the applicant has completed a training program conducted by a training organisation approved by CASA and is registered with CASA by the organisation.
The primary purpose of the legislative instrument is to allow a person who has received appropriate training to operate a UAV in a limited area.
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