Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Act 1988
Civil Aviation Order 82.0 Amendment Order (No. 4) 2007
Purpose
The purpose of Civil Aviation Order 82.0 Amendment Order (No. 4) 2007 (the CAO Amendment) is to make some essentially technical amendments to Civil Aviation Order 82.0 (CAO 82.0).
Civil Aviation Order 82.0 Amendment Order (No. 3) 2007 (Amendment Order No. 3) was made on 13 July 2007 to facilitate international harmonisation of Australian and New Zealand standards for operators conducting extended diversion time operations (EDTO).
EDTO is analogous to the former concept of extended range operations (ETOPS). It means any flight by a turbine-engined aeroplane where, if 1 engine fails, the flight time from any point on the route to an aerodrome where the aeroplane can safely land, is greater than the “threshold time” for the aeroplane’s weight and type, for example, 90 minutes or 180 minutes.
The threshold time is usually taken as a safety limit in the form of a radial distance from an aerodrome which, without the presence of safety factors, should not be exceeded in order to enable an aeroplane with engine failure to safely reach an aerodrome.
There are circumstances in which CASA may safely allow the threshold to be exceeded. These were known as ETOPS operations and are now known as EDTO operations.
Legislative background
Under section 27 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act), CASA may issue Air Operators’ Certificates (AOCs) with respect to aircraft, for the purpose of safety regulation. Under section 28 of the Act, CASA must issue the AOC if satisfied that the applicant can comply with the requirements of Australian civil aviation safety legislation.
Under paragraph 28BA (1) (b) of the Act, an AOC has effect subject to any conditions specified in the Regulations or Civil Aviation Orders (the CAOs).
Part 82 of the CAOs specifies conditions on AOCs for various kinds of operations. CAO 82.0 contains general conditions on all AOCs and also some related definitions. Formerly, subsection 3B of CAO 82.0 set out the conditions for ETOPS. Amendment Order No. 3 repealed subsection 3B for ETOPS and substituted alternative provisions which imposed conditions on all affected AOC holders for EDTO. The CAO amendment makes some technical amendments to the new alternative provisions.
Details of the CAO Amendment
Under Amendment Order No. 3, ETOPS was replaced with the concept of EDTO. However, existing approvals for certain ETOPS operations were grandfathered by Amendment Order No. 3.
An amendment allows for the continued application of the earlier version of CAO 82.0 before Amendment No. 3 changed it. This is specifically so that the earlier version may be taken to continue to apply to these grandfathered ETOPS approvals.
The definitions of adequate aerodrome and EDTO alternate aerodrome are modified.
This also gave rise to some consequential amendments to ensure that the correct reference is made to the use of these respective aerodrome categories in EDTO operations.
Minor modifications clarify the occasions on which CASA approval is required for EDTO operations.
Some headings are modified to be more accurate and informative, and some typographical errors are corrected.
Specific details of the amendments are contained in Appendix 1.
Legislative Instruments Act
Under subsection 98 (4A) of the Act, CAOs made for the purposes of section 28BA of the Act are declared to be disallowable instruments. 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 CAO amendment 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
Consultation under section 17 of the LIA has not been undertaken because all of the amendments are technical in nature or beneficial in effect and arise from representations made to CASA by operators and individuals following the making of Amendment Order No. 3.
Regulation Impact Statement
The Office of Best Practice Regulation did not require preparation of a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) for Amendment Order No. 3 because it implemented the proposed changes to ICAO International Standards and Recommended Practices in Annex 6, Part I (Operation of Aircraft, International Commercial Air Transport — Aeroplanes), as required under Australia’s Chicago Convention obligations (RIS Exception ORR ID 5855).
Consequently, the technical and other amendments in the CAO amendment do not require the preparation of a RIS.
Commencement and making
The CAO Amendment commences on the day after it is registered. It has been made by the Director of Aviation Safety, on behalf of CASA, in accordance with subsection 84A (2) of the Act.
[Civil Aviation Order 82.0 Amendment Order (No. 4) 2007]
Appendix 1
Details of Civil Aviation Order 82.0 Amendment Order (No. 4) 2007
Section 1 — Name
This section names the instrument.
Section 2 — Commencement
This section provides for the instrument to commence on the day after registration.
Section 3 — Amendments
This section states that Schedule 1 amends CAO 82.0.
Schedule 1
Amendment No. 1
This amendment provides that CAO 82.0, as in force immediately before the commencement of Amendment Order No. 3, is taken to continue to apply to an AOC holder to whom the savings provision in section 3 of Amendment Order No. 3 applies.
The savings provision in section 3 of Amendment Order No. 3 grandfathered the position of existing ETOPS approval holders until immediately before 1 July 2008. The amendment provides that the previous version of CAO 82.0 is taken to continue to apply to these ETOPS approval holders during the grandfathered period.
At the time Amendment Order No. 3 was made, it had been assumed that preservation of the ETOPS approvals only was sufficient. Subsequently, it was realised that some grandfathered approvals may require consequential decision-making, for example, in relation to maintenance control manuals, which would only be possible under CAO 82.0 in its previous form under which the approval had been granted.
The amendment will only have effect in relation to aircraft of the same type as the aircraft to which the AOC holder’s ETOPS approval applies. Thus, there will be no extension of the grandfathered ETOPS approvals.
To assist with the administration of the grandfathered ETOPS approvals, there is a link on CASA’s website to CAO 82.0 in the form in which it was immediately before Amendment Order No. 3 took effect.
Amendment No. 2
This amendment modifies the definition of adequate aerodrome. Adequate aerodromes are used by operators when planning proposed routes to determine whether an EDTO approval is required. The amendment deletes additional requirements for services and facilities at adequate aerodromes that were originally inserted by Amendment Order No. 3. The additional requirements were more onerous than was necessary for an adequate aerodrome for a non-EDTO operation. The amendment restores the status quo in this respect.
Amendment No. 3
This amendment modifies the definition of EDTO alternate aerodrome. EDTO alternate aerodromes are adequate aerodromes used by operators as “stepping stones” when engaged in an EDTO operation. The amendment inserts additional requirements that must be met for an aerodrome to be an EDTO alternate aerodrome.
The additional requirements incorporate the requirements deleted (by Amendment Order No. 3) from the definition of adequate aerodrome (for example, certain radio coverage for EDTO alternates within Australia or air traffic control for EDTO alternates outside Australia). These additional requirements, although not necessary for an adequate aerodrome, are necessary for an EDTO alternate aerodrome.
Amendment No. 4
This amendment removes a misleading mention of EDTO in the headings to subsections 3BA, 3BB and 3BC which deal with more than EDTO, and substitutes a more accurate reference to “Distance limitations”.
Amendment Nos. 5 and 6
These related amendments merge the contents of paragraphs 3BC.3 and 3BC.4 and delete paragraph 3BC.4. Paragraph 3BC.4 gave the misleading impression that all AOC holders, rather than only those approved for EDTO, must comply with the conditions for EDTO in Appendix 5 of the CAO 82.0.
Amendment No. 7
This amendment clarifies the operation of paragraph 3BC.5 by providing that an AOC holder may operate a twin turbine-engined aeroplane more than 60 minutes (at 1 engine out cruise speed) from an adequate aerodrome only if the holder complies with paragraphs 3BC.6, 3BC.7 or 3BC.8, whichever is appropriate.
An EDTO approval and compliance with Appendices 4 and 5 are required for operations under paragraphs 3BC.7 and 3BC.8 because they are EDTO operations, but not for operations under paragraph 3BC.6, which is not considered to be an EDTO.
Amendment Nos. 8 and 10
These amendments correct a typographical error which resulted in mention of an incorrect paragraph reference within the text of subparagraphs 3BC.6 (c) and 3BC.8 (b).
Amendment No. 9 and 11
These amendments clarify paragraphs 3BC.7 and 3BC.9 (mentioned in Amendment No. 7 above) by substituting the requirement for “an EDTO approval” with the more accurate and specific “requirement for an EDTO under paragraph 3BC.3”, following amendment Nos. 5 and 6 which modified paragraph 3BC.3.
Amendment No. 12
This amendment is consequential on Amendment Nos. 2 and 3. It replaces mention of “adequate aerodrome” in the Note explaining the contents of operational specifications, with the more accurate mention of “EDTO alternate aerodrome”.
Amendment No. 13
This amendment modifies the heading for Appendix 2 about adequate aerodromes, by replacing mention of “physical characteristics” with the more accurate mention of “physical requirements”.
Amendment Nos. 14, 15, 21, 22 and 23
These amendments delete a misleading reference to “en route” from the description of “EDTO alternate aerodrome” in Appendices 4 and 5.
Amendment Nos. 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20
Consequential on Amendment Nos. 2 and 3, these amendments substitute mention of “EDTO alternate aerodrome” for “adequate aerodrome”.