Federal Register of Legislation - Australian Government

Primary content

CASA EX93/18 Exemptions as made
This instrument exempts certain holders of pilot type ratings from the requirement to have successfully completed certain instrument proficiency checks in an aircraft type covered by the rating and that is to be flown under the instrument fight rules, provided that the holder has successfully completed certain alternative checks.
Administered by: Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications
Exempt from sunsetting by the Legislation (Exemptions and Other Matters) Regulation 2015 s12 item 15
Registered 30 Aug 2018
Tabling HistoryDate
Tabled HR10-Sep-2018
Tabled Senate10-Sep-2018
To be repealed 31 Aug 2021
Repealed by Self Repealing

Explanatory Statement

Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998

CASA EX93/18 — Instrument Proficiency Checks for Aircraft Type Ratings Exemption 2018

 

Purpose

The purpose of this instrument is to exempt certain holders of pilot type ratings from the requirement to have successfully completed certain instrument proficiency checks (IPCs) in an aircraft type covered by the rating and that is to be flown under the instrument flight rules (the IFR), provided that the holder has successfully completed certain alternative IPCs.

 

Legislation — Part 61 of CASR

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.

 

Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) sets out flight crew licensing requirements. (References below to provisions that commence with the numerals “61” are references to provisions in Part 61 of CASR.)

 

Regulation 61.805 deals with limitations on the exercise of the privileges of pilot type ratings, in particular concerning the requirement to have IPCs for flight under the IFR.

 

Under subregulation 61.805 (1), the holder of a pilot type rating is authorised to exercise the privileges of the rating under the IFR, but only if the holder has a valid IPC for an aircraft type covered by the rating.

 

Biennial IPC for the aircraft type covered by a type rating

The holder of a pilot type rating is taken to have a valid IPC for an aircraft type other than a single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type during the following periods:

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (a) — the 24 months from when the holder passes the flight test for an instrument rating, a private IFR rating, a multi-crew pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence, in an aircraft of that type (that is, of the type which is covered by a type rating that the holder holds)

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (aa) — the 24 months from when the holder passes the flight test for the pilot type rating in an aircraft under the IFR

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (b) — the 24 months from when the holder passes the flight test for an instrument endorsement in an aircraft of that type (provided the flight test is conducted more than 6 months after the holder passed the flight test for the instrument rating)

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (c) — the 24 months from when the holder successfully completes an operator proficiency check that covers certain IFR operations in an aircraft of that type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (d) — while the holder is successfully participating in an operators’ training and checking system for an IFR operation in an aircraft of that type, and the operator holds an approval, under regulation 61.040 for the purposes of paragraph 61.805 (2) (d), for the system and operations in an aircraft of that type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (e) — the 24 months from when the holder completes an IPC for the aircraft type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (2) (f) — the 24 months from expiry of an existing check, provided that in the 3 months before expiry the holder has successfully completed an IPC for the aircraft type.

 

 

Annual IPC for single-pilot turbojet aeroplanes covered by a type rating

The holder of a pilot type rating is taken to have a valid IPC for a single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type during the following periods:

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (a) — the 12 months from when the holder passes the flight test for an instrument rating or a private IFR rating in an aircraft of that type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (b) — the 12 months from when the holder passes the flight test for an instrument endorsement in an aircraft of that type (provided the flight test is conducted more than 6 months after the holder passed the flight test for the instrument rating)

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (c) — the 12 months from when the holder successfully completes an operator proficiency check that covers certain IFR operations in an aircraft of that type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (d) — while the holder is successfully participating in an operators’ training and checking system for an IFR operation in an aircraft of that type, and the operator holds an approval under regulation 61.040, for the purposes of paragraph 61.805 (3) (d), for the system and operations in an aircraft of that type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (e) — the 12 months from when the holder completes an IPC for the aircraft type

·         under paragraph 61.805 (3) (f) — the 12 months from expiry of an existing check, provided that in the 3 months before expiry the holder has successfully completed an IPC for the aircraft type.

 

Relevant ancillary provisions

Under subregulation 61.805 (5), for paragraphs 61.805 (2) (e) and (f), and (3) (e) and (f) described above, the holder of a pilot type rating successfully completes an IPC for the relevant aircraft if, among other things, a particular assessment of the holder’s competency is carried out by CASA, a flight examiner or an approved person.

 

Under subregulation 61.805 (6), for paragraphs 61.805 (2) (e) and (f), and (3) (e) and (f) described above, the IPC must be conducted in a relevant aircraft or an approved flight simulation training device for the proficiency check.

 

Legislation — exemptions

Subpart 11.F of CASR deals with exemptions. Under subregulation 11.160 (1), and for subsection 98 (5A) of the Act, CASA may, by instrument, grant an exemption from a provision of CASR in relation to a matter mentioned in subsection 98 (5A). Subsection 98 (5A) matters are, in effect, those affecting the safety, airworthiness or design of aircraft.

 

Under subregulation 11.160 (2), an exemption may be granted to a person or a class of persons. Under subregulation 11.160 (3), CASA may grant an exemption on application, or on its own initiative. For an application for an exemption, CASA must regard as paramount the preservation of at least an acceptable level of safety. For making a decision on its own initiative, CASA is guided by the same test.

 

Under regulation 11.205, CASA may impose conditions on an exemption if necessary in the interests of the safety of air navigation. Under regulation 11.210, it is a strict liability offence not to comply with the obligations imposed by a condition.

 

Under regulation 11.225, CASA must, as soon as practicable, publish on the Internet details of all exemptions under Subpart 11.F. Under subregulation 11.230 (1), the maximum duration of an exemption is 3 years.

 

Background

Part 61 of CASR, including regulation 61.805, commenced on 1 September 2014. Under the previous licensing rules, pilots conducting IFR operations only needed to complete an annual instrument rating renewal in any aircraft covered by the instrument rating. For example, to operate a multi-engine aeroplane under the IFR as pilot in command, the pilot was required to have a current command (multi-engine aeroplane) grade of instrument rating. There were no type-specific renewals required. The rating authorised the holder to conduct a flight under the IFR in any multi-engine or single engine aeroplane.

 

The former annual instrument rating renewal rule was embodied in regulation 61.880. (Additional relevant rules in Civil Aviation Orders 82.0, 82.1, 82.3 and 82.5 continue to apply to pilots and operators conducting air transport or aerial work operations under the IFR.)

 

As set out in detail above, regulation 61.805 introduced new requirements for pilots operating type-rated aircraft under the IFR. Those requirements meant that:

1.      the pilot must, within the previous 24 months, and using one of the alternatives described above, have completed a check of the pilot’s competency conducting IFR operations in an aircraft covered by the type rating (see subregulation 61.805 (2)); and

2.      for single-pilot turbojet aeroplanes — the pilot must, within the previous 12 months, and using one of the alternatives described above, have completed a check of the pilot’s competency conducting IFR in an aircraft covered by the type rating (see subregulation 61.805 (3)).

 

Subregulation 61.805 (3) aimed to address the safety concerns associated with operating complex, high performance aeroplanes under the IFR as a single-pilot operation. These aircraft typically have complex systems and in certain circumstances high workload situations can arise for the pilot when operating alone. The purpose of the 12-monthly IPC in an aircraft covered by the type rating was to provide an acceptable level of assurance that pilots would be competent operating these kinds of aircraft that have higher cognitive workloads without the assistance of a co-pilot.

 

However, in the light of experience and feedback from the aviation industry, including discussions with the Flight Crew Licensing (FCL) Subcommittee of the Standards Consultative Committee (SCC) (a broad-based CASA/industry consultation forum), and the Industry Advisory Panel (IAP) (a joint CASA/industry consultation forum for Part 61), CASA undertook to review and reconsider the Part 61 pilot type-rating specific IPC requirements.

 

Before reaching a decision, CASA reconsidered the US Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) regulation 61.58 for single-pilot turbojet aeroplane operations under which pilots are required to have an annual proficiency check in any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type and a biennial check in the specific type.

 

In view of that FAA rule, and as an initial response to the broader type rating IPC issue, CASA granted an exemption for pilots operating single-pilot turbojet aeroplanes under the IFR. The exemption, CASA EX41/16, commenced on 11 March 2016. The exemption relieved pilots from the requirement to have a valid annual IPC for single-pilot turbojet aeroplane types, provided that the pilot had a valid annual IPC for any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type. Under this exemption, the pilot was not relieved from the biennial type-rating specific IPC requirement.

 

Following further consideration of the requirements, including consultation with the 2 consultation bodies described above, CASA now considers that, relative to the interests of aviation safety, the requirement insisting on 24-monthly (or 12-monthly — for the single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type) IPCs for each type rating under which pilots are exercising privileges, is onerous and unnecessary, and can be relaxed without adverse effects on aviation safety.

 

CASA repealed CASA EX41/16 and granted exemptions in CASA EX93/16, which commenced on 1 July 2016. The exemptions in CASA EX93/16 relaxed the requirements so that (as the case applies): a pilot must have completed an IPC in any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane within the previous 24 months; or in any multi-crew type-rated aircraft in the same category as the pilot type rating held within the previous 24 months; or in any other type-rated aircraft in the same category within the previous 24 months. (To be clear, these are specific, not overlapping or interchangeable, requirements.)

 

It should be noted that pilots are still required to satisfy the general instrument rating proficiency check requirements in regulation 61.880. That provision ensures that pilots exercising the privileges of an instrument rating are checked annually conducting operations under the IFR in an aircraft of the same category and, if the aircraft is a multi-engine aircraft, then the pilot is checked in a multi-engine aircraft of the same category.

 

CASA EX93/16 expires at the end of 31 August 2018.

 

The exemption

This instrument renews the exemptions in CASA EX93/16.

 

The effect of the exemption is that a pilot who complies with the relevant conditions of the exemption for acquiring a valid IPC, rather than with the requirements of subregulation 61.805 (2) or (3), will be authorised under subregulation 61.805 (1) to exercise the privileges of his or her rating during the relevant period.

 

The effects of the exemption must be understood in the context that, for the purposes of flying under the IFR, the holder of a pilot type rating must have successfully completed a relevant IPC within the prescribed preceding period.

 

Thus, the exemption exempts the holder of a single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type rating (the SP type rating holder) from, in effect, the obligation to have an annual IPC for the single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type covered by the rating and that the holder intends to fly under the IFR. Instead, a 24-monthly IPC in any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type will suffice.

 

The exemption exempts the holder of a multi-crew type rating for a particular aircraft from, in effect, the obligation to have a 24-monthly IPC for the aircraft type covered by the rating and that the holder intends to fly under the IFR. Instead, an IPC in any multi‑crew type-rated aircraft in the same category will suffice.

 

The exemption exempts the holder of a pilot type rating (that is not a single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type rating, or a multi-crew type rating for a particular aircraft) from, in effect, the obligation to have a 24-monthly IPC for the aircraft type covered by the rating and that the holder intends to fly under the IFR. Instead, an IPC in any type‑rated aircraft in the same category will suffice.

 

Consequential machinery exemptions

There are consequential machinery exemptions and related conditions to make the exemption operate without ambiguity in relation to what is “the relevant aircraft” for the conduct of an IPC, or for the use of an approved flight simulation training device for an IPC.

 

General condition

A general condition applies to the exemptions. Thus, an exemption does not apply to any of the pilot type rating holders mentioned in the instrument unless the holder’s pilot licence records that the holder has a valid IPC in accordance with the conditions in the exemption for having alternative valid IPCs.

 

The details of the provisions of the exemption instrument are set out in Attachment 1.

 

Renewal of CASA EX93/16 and expected amendments to CASR

The exemption is expressed to commence on 1 September 2018, which is immediately after the repeal of the previous exemption on this topic, CASA EX93/16.

 

The exemption is expressed to operate until it is repealed at the end of 31 August 2021. However, the exemption is an interim measure, pending substantive amendments to Part 61 which will remove the need for the exemption. These amendments will be part of a larger set of amendments to Part 61 for which CASA has provided drafting instructions to the Office of Parliamentary Counsel (OPC). It is expected that, subject to the capacity of OPC to produce them in the context of competing priorities arising from government drafting demands, the amendments will be made and in force within the next 12 months to 2 years.

 

Legislation Act 2003 (the LA)

Paragraph 98 (5A) (a) of the Act provides that CASA may issue instruments in relation to matters affecting the safe navigation and operation, or the maintenance, of aircraft. Additionally, paragraph 98 (5AA) (a) of the Act provides that an instrument issued under paragraph 98 (5A) (a) is a legislative instrument if the instrument is expressed to apply in relation to a class of persons. The instrument exempts a class of persons (holders of pilot type ratings) from complying with the provisions in regulation 61.805 of CASR. The instrument is, therefore, a legislative instrument, and is subject to tabling and disallowance in the Parliament under sections 38 and 42 of the LA.

 

Consultation

Background to consultation undertaken by CASA is described under the heading “Background” above.

 

For section 17 of the LA, CASA commenced consultation with the FCL Subcommittee of the SCC in May 2015. The initial consultation was for the single-pilot turbojet aeroplane IPC proposal. However, a separate proposal to review multiple checks and flight reviews was also discussed at the same time. General support was given to both proposals.

 

At a meeting on 16 December 2015, the IAP identified the question of pilot type rating IPCs as one requiring high priority and recommended removal of the type rating‑specific check requirements.

 

In May 2016, CASA posted proposal documents on the SCC and IAP discussion forum websites, followed by postings of the text of a possible exemption instrument. CASA received a number of responses and all supported the proposal. Bearing in mind these representations, and in the light of CASA’s own assessment of safety implications, CASA formulated the proposals embodied in CASA EX93/16, which are also reflected in this instrument.

 

CASA has not received any feedback from industry that the exemptions and the conditions on the exemptions are not appropriate or are no longer required. It is CASA’s view that the exemptions remain appropriate to the relevant portions of the aviation industry. In these circumstances, it is CASA’s view that it is not necessary or appropriate to undertake any further consultation under section 17 of the LA.

 

Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)

A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is not required because the exemption instrument 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

The Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights at Attachment 2 is prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. The instrument does not engage any of the applicable rights or freedoms, and is compatible with human rights, as it does not raise any human rights issues.

 

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.

 

The instrument commences on 1 September 2018 and ceases when it is repealed at the end of 31 August 2021.

Attachment 1

CASA EX93/18 — Instrument Proficiency Checks for Aircraft Type Ratings Exemption 2018

1          Name

                 This section provides that the title of the instrument is the CASA EX93/18 — Instrument Proficiency Checks for Aircraft Type Ratings Exemption 2018.

2          Duration

                 Under this section, the exemption instrument commences on 1 September 2018, and is repealed at the end of 31 August 2021.

3          Definitions

                 Under this section, assistance is given with definitions of terms used in the instrument.

4          Exemption No. 1 — Single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type ratings

                 Under this section, an SP type rating holder, for the exercise of privileges under the IFR, is exempted from subregulation 61.805 (3). The holder is also exempted from subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6). The exemptions are subject to the conditions in sections 5 and 10.

5          Conditions – Exemption No. 1 – Single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type ratings

        (1)     Under this subsection, the SP type rating holder must have a valid IPC as if the requirement under subregulation 61.805 (3), to have a valid 12-monthly IPC for the aeroplane type covered by the rating, applied as a requirement to have a valid 24-monthly IPC for any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type.

                 A Note explains that, for an SP type rating holder, the 12-monthly IPC requirement under subregulations 61.805 (1) and (3) may be satisfied by a 24-monthly IPC in any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type.

        (2)     Under this subsection, subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) must be complied with as if they applied despite the exemption in subsection 4 (2) of the instrument, except that references to “relevant aircraft” for paragraphs 61.805 (3) (e) and (f) must be taken to be references to any single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type (rather than the particular single-pilot turbojet aeroplane type covered by the holder’s rating).

                 A Note explains that it is therefore a condition of the exemption from the requirements in subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) that subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) be complied with, but in the particular context of the operation of the exemption.

6          Exemption No. 2 — Multi-crew type ratings

                 Under this section, the holder of a multi-crew type rating (the multi-crew type rating holder) for a particular aircraft category for the exercise of privileges under the IFR is exempted from subregulation 61.805 (2). The holder is also exempted from subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6). The exemptions are subject to the conditions in sections 7 and 10.

7          Conditions – Exemption No. 2 – Multi-crew type ratings

        (1)     Under this subsection, the multi-crew type rating holder for a particular aircraft category must have a valid IPC, as if the requirements under subregulation 61.805 (2) to have a valid 24-monthly IPC for the aircraft type covered by the rating applied as a requirement to have a valid 24‑monthly IPC for any multi-crew type-rated aircraft in the same category.

        (2)     Subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) must be complied with as if they applied despite the exemption in subsection 6 (2) of this instrument, except that references to “relevant aircraft” for paragraphs 61.805 (2) (e) and (f) must be taken to be references to any multi-crew aircraft type in the same category as that of the multi-crew type rating holder’s rating (rather than the particular aircraft type covered by the holder’s rating).

                 A Note explains that it is therefore a condition of the exemption from the requirements in subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) that subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) be complied with, but in the particular context of the operation of the exemption.

8          Exemption No. 3 — Other aircraft type ratings

                 Under this section, the holder of a pilot type rating for the exercise of privileges under the IFR is exempted from subregulation 61.805 (2). The holder is also exempted from subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6).

                 The section does not apply to SP type rating holders or multi-crew type rating holders, as sections 4 and 6 respectively, and the more prescriptive conditions in sections 5 and 7 respectively, apply to those rating holders.

9          Conditions – Exemption No. 3 – Other aircraft type ratings

        (1)     Under this subsection, the holder mentioned in section 8 must have a valid IPC, as if the requirement under subregulation 61.805 (2) to have a valid IPC for the aircraft type covered by the rating applied as a requirement to have a valid IPC for any type-rated aircraft in the same category.

        (2)     Under this subsection, subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) must be complied with as if they applied despite the exemption in subsection 8 (2) of this instrument, except that references to “relevant aircraft” for paragraphs 61.805 (2) (e) and (f) must be taken to be references to any aircraft type in the same category as that of the relevant type rating holder’s rating (rather than the particular aircraft type covered by the holder’s rating).

                 A Note explains that it is therefore a condition of the exemption from the requirements in subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) that subregulations 61.805 (5) and (6) be complied with, but in the particular context of the operation of the exemption.

10        General condition — Exemption Nos. 1, 2 and 3

                 Under this section, an exemption mentioned in section 4, 6 or 8 does not apply to the pilot type rating holder mentioned in the section unless the holder’s pilot licence records that the holder has a valid IPC in accordance with the condition in subsection 5 (1), 7 (1) or 9 (1) (as the case requires).

Attachment 2

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the
Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011

CASA EX93/18 — Instrument Proficiency Checks for Aircraft Type Ratings Exemption 2018

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 purpose of this instrument is to exempt certain holders of pilot type ratings from the requirement to have successfully completed certain instrument proficiency checks (IPCs) in an aircraft type covered by the rating and that is to be flown under the instrument fight rules, provided that the holder has successfully completed certain alternative IPCs.

 

Human rights implications

The exemption in 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. The 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