Explanatory Statement
Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 5)
Purpose
Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 5) (the instrument) prescribes type ratings for the purpose of relevant provisions in Part 142 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998). The instrument repeals and replaces instrument Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 4) (referred to in this explanatory statement as Edition 4).
Legislation
Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) empowers the Governor-General to make regulations for the Act and the safety of air navigation.
Under paragraph 98 (5A) (a) of the Act, such regulations may empower CASA to issue instruments in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation of aircraft.
Under subsection 33 (3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, where an Act confers a power to make, grant or issue any instrument of a legislative or administrative character (including rules, regulations or by-laws), the power shall be construed as including a power exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like conditions (if any) to repeal, rescind, revoke, amend, or vary any such instrument.
Part 141 of CASR 1998 contains regulations for recreational, private and commercial pilot flight training, other than certain integrated training courses. Such Part 141 flight training may be carried out by a Part 141 operator, that is, a person who holds a Part 141 certificate.
Part 142 of CASR 1998 contains regulations for integrated and multi-crew pilot flight training, training for the grant of a type rating, contracted recurrent training and contracted checking. Such training and checking may only be carried out by a Part 142 operator, that is, a person holding a Part 142 authorisation. For training and checking that is carried out in an aircraft, the form of the Part 142 authorisation is an air operator’s certificate (AOC).
The rationale behind Parts 141 and 142 of CASR 1998 is that flight training may be authorised to be conducted for a particular aircraft type rating only if the flight training operator has a course of training together with sufficient systems and personnel in place to safely and effectively manage flight training for the types of aircraft, including their variant models.
Within the range of available aircraft types, some can be grouped together and treated in a common way under Part 61 of CASR 1998. The groups of aircraft are known as class ratings. Thus, training to operate one type of aircraft may satisfy the training requirements for a number of other types of aircraft if they have similar characteristics and performance.
However, many types of aircraft are sufficiently complex or different from other types as to warrant type specific training to be required to fly these aircraft. These aircraft are identified as type-rated aircraft.
In some cases, aircraft types can have more than 1 model and the characteristics of the models can differ, for example, in such areas as operating systems, size, performance or handling. In some cases, the differences between the models are such that additional training (differences training) of the pilots is warranted to enable them to fly another variant of the aircraft type the pilot has been trained to operate.
The regulations ordinarily require flight training for the grant of a type rating, and type rating differences training, to be conducted by a CASR Part 142 operator. In some cases for the less complex type ratings, this training can be done adequately by the holder of a Part 141 certificate. In other words, the training would not require the additional organisational systems and processes that are required under Part 142. The regulations make provision for prescribing these aircraft in an instrument that can be made by CASA under regulation 142.045 of CASR 1998.
Regulation 142 of CASR 1998
Under paragraph 142.045 (a) of CASR 1998, for paragraph 98 (5A) (a) of the Act, CASA may issue a legislative instrument to prescribe type ratings for certain elements of the definition of Part 142 flight training.
Paragraph 142.015 (2) (d) of CASR 1998 provides that Part 142 flight training is defined as including training for the grant of a CASR Part 61 type rating that is not prescribed in a legislative instrument under regulation 142.045.
Under subparagraph 142.015 (g) (i) of CASR 1998, Part 142 flight training is also defined as differences training required under regulation 61.780, 61.835 or 61.1370 of CASR 1998 for a variant covered by a type rating that is not prescribed in a legislative instrument under regulation 142.045.
Under paragraph 141.015 (1) (d) of CASR 1998, Part 141 flight training is defined as including training for the grant of a Part 61 type rating that is prescribed in a legislative instrument under regulation 142.045.
Subparagraph 141.015 (g) (i) of CASR 1998 further provides that Part 141 flight training is defined as including differences training required under regulation 61.780 or 61.835 of CASR 1998 for a variant covered by a type rating that is prescribed in a legislative instrument under regulation 142.045.
Part 61 of CASR 1998
Regulation 61.780 of CASR 1998 requires the holder of a pilot type rating in an aircraft with variants to undertake differences training for other variants if the variants are prescribed, and differences training for them is required, under a legislative instrument made under regulation 61.055 or 61.060 of CASR 1998.
Regulation 61.835 of CASR 1998 authorises the holder of a cruise relief co-pilot type rating to act as co-pilot in an aircraft (in certain defined circumstances). Again, in particular defined circumstances, including passing a flight test in the aircraft model covered by the rating (the “first variant”), if differences training is required and completed for another aircraft model covered by the rating (the “second variant”), the holder may exercise the privileges in that second variant.
Under regulation 61.1370 of CASR 1998, the holder of a flight engineer type rating in an aircraft, who passed a flight test for the rating in an aircraft model (the “first variant”), may exercise the privileges of the rating in another aircraft model (the “second variant”) covered by the rating if all required differences training has been completed.
Instrument
The instrument prescribes type ratings for the purposes of Part 142 of CASR 1998. The effect of the instrument is that training in the relevant aircraft (and differences training for relevant aircraft) is defined as Part 141 flight training, instead of Part 142 flight training.
The instrument repeals and replaces Edition 4 in order to confirm the prescription of the BE350/1900 type rating for the Beechcraft 1900 aeroplane models. The instrument also confirms that differences training is required to fly Beechcraft 1900 models for those pilots who received the BE350/1900 type rating using Kingair 300 and Kingair 350 aeroplane models. The prescription of the BE350/1900 type rating and differences training requirements for these aeroplane models under this instrument confirms that the differences training for the BE350/1900 type rating is Part 141 flight training.
These matters were prescribed under the instrument named Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 3) for these purposes, and the changes have been made to correct the omission of the Beechcraft 1900 models from Edition 4.
The instrument also makes a minor change to the references to Dornier 228 and Lockheed L‑1049 model aircraft in Schedule 1 to confirm that the prescription of the respective type ratings for these aircraft under this instrument applies to all Dornier 228 and Lockheed L‑1049 models.
Legislation Act 2003 (the LA)
Under paragraph 98 (5A) (a) of the Act, CASA may issue instruments in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation of aircraft. Under subsection 98 (5AA) of the Act, an instrument issued under paragraph 98 (5A) (a) is a legislative instrument if expressed to apply in relation to a class of persons or aircraft.
In addition, subsection 8 (2) of the LA provides that if a primary law gives power to do something by legislative instrument, that thing must be done by instrument, and the instrument so made is a legislative instrument. Regulation 142.045 of CASR 1998 provides that CASA’s prescription of type ratings for paragraph (d) and subparagraph (g) (i) of the definition of Part 142 flight training in subregulation 142.015 (2) is made by legislative instrument.
The various prescriptions made by the instrument apply to classes of aircraft. The instrument also prescribes type ratings for paragraph (d) and subparagraph (g) (i) of the definition of Part 142 flight training in subregulation 142.015 (2) of CASR 1998. Therefore, the instrument is a legislative instrument, and is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LA.
Consultation
The instrument has been made by CASA in order to correct the omission of the Beechcraft 1900 aeroplane models from the prescription of aircraft under this instrument. Having regard to these circumstances, it is CASA’s view that it is not reasonably practicable or appropriate to undertake any further consultation under section 17 of the LA.
Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)
A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) was prepared by CASA for the regulations which constitute the head of power for the legislative instrument. This RIS was assessed as adequate by OBPR (OBPR ID: 2777) and applies for the purpose of the legislative instrument. The legislative instrument has been assessed by CASA as generally benefitting the aviation industry because the reduced number of aircraft covered by type ratings for which training by a Part 142 operator is required has the effect of reducing compliance costs.
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
The legislative instrument does not directly engage any of the applicable rights and freedoms and is compatible with human rights. To the extent that it may indirectly limit certain human rights, those limitations are necessary and proportionate in the interests of aviation safety. A Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights is at Attachment 1.
Making and commencement
The instrument has been made by a delegate of CASA, relying on the power of delegation under subregulation 11.260 (1) of CASR 1998.
The instrument commences on the day after registration.
[Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 5)]
Attachment 1
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011
Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 5)
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 Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 5) (the instrument) is a legislative instrument prescribing type ratings for the purpose of relevant provisions in Part 142 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998. The instrument thereby determines whether a Part 141 operator, rather than a Part 142 operator, may deliver flight training for the prescribed type ratings.
The instrument repeals and replaces Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 4) to correct the omission of the Beechcraft 1900 aeroplane models that were previously prescribed in instrument Prescription — type ratings for CASR Part 142 flight training (Edition 3), and to make a minor change to the references to the Dornier 228 and Lockheed L‑1049 model aircraft. The instrument is, therefore, essentially a machinery instrument whose requirements are consistent with Australia’s obligations of conformity to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, its Protocols and Annexes.
Human rights implications
To the extent that certain aircraft are not prescribed, it might be said that the right to work, equality and non-discrimination under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are engaged for Part 141 flight training organisations, since they cannot provide relevant flight training for aircraft types that are not prescribed. However, such differential treatment arises from the requirements of aviation safety for the particular types of specialised aircraft involved.
Conclusion
The 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. To the extent that it may also limit human rights, those limitations are reasonable and proportionate in the interests of aviation safety.
Civil Aviation Safety Authority