[Peetwo]

RAAA News - Summer 2015/16

From the RAAA Summer newsletter in the LHS, Jim Davis opens up on the OTT CAO 48.1:

..However one area of great concern is CAO 48.1 which threatens to impose excessive cost and cause crippling disruption to industry without a commensurate safety gain. This legislation does not comply with CASA’s new regulatory philosophy.

CASA have gone to great lengths to publish their case but an analysis of the document ‘A Review of the case for change: Scientific Support for CAO 48.1 Instrument 2013’ shows an absence of hard evidence to justify the new rules. It is full of assumptions and scientific theory, much of it from other jurisdictions, but does not provide any real evidence of a systemic fatigue problem in the Australian context.

"..The closest it comes to offering any facts is when it references ATSB data. Here CASA make the extraordinary statement that ‘there have been approximately 65 incidents/accidents in the last 10 years in which human fatigue was identified as a factor (note: not a causal factor). A proportion of these occurrences have been in the Regular Public Transport (RPT) sector of the industry.’ This is manifestly absurd and hardly scientific analysis! The RAAA requested a copy of this data from CASA and when it was not forthcoming obtained the information by approaching the ATSB directly. After talking with the ATSB Chief Commissioner and Aviation Commissioner and having the data examined by industry experts no evidence of a systemic fatigue safety issue was found. .."

P2 comment: Hmm..that passage has some very disturbing similarities to the CVD Pilot's issue, especially when it comes to doctoring or ignoring empirical evidence that is contrary to the "Big R" regulator's subjective interest - now TFB (totally ducking believable) under OST    

Furthermore CASA have made no attempt to examine fatigue trends in the myriad amount of information contained in the SMS data bases of Australian passenger carrying air operators. They have disregarded the fact that mature operators in Australia have been successfully managing fatigue for decades.

It must also be asked why the prescriptive rules contained in CAO 48.1 are more restrictive than the equivalent rules in Europe (EASA Subpart FTL) or the US (FAA Part 117) despite the fact that both those jurisdictions exist in a far greater fatigue inducing environment than we have in Australia. There is no justification for this unnecessary hindering of participation in aviation and its capacity for growth.

The cost impact of the prescriptive rules in CAO 48.1 is very real and will cost some RAAA members millions of dollars per annum. It will also render some current operations totally unviable. CASA may claim that a FRMS will possibly negate these totally impractical rules but there is no guarantee and it begs the question of why they have been imposed in the first place. It also does not address the fact that some smaller operators may not be able to handle the costly exercise of introducing and obtaining CASA approval of a FRMS.

While it is encouraging that CASA has responded to the Statement of Expectations from the Minister with its new regulatory philosophy as embodied in Directive 01/2105, it now appears to be faltering at the first hurdle. CAO 48.1 does pre-date the Directive but it is not effective until 1 May 2017. In the interests of transparency and fair play the RAAA strongly feels that Directive 01/2015 should be applied to CAO 48.1.

The RAAA has been pointing out the inconsistencies and significant problems with CAO 48.1 for regional operators for some years but CASA have steadfastly refused to make any meaningful changes. Sadly, at least in the case of CAO 48.1, the ‘Big R regulator’ is still with us.

  
Makes you wonder if Senator Fawcett & other government Senators made a ill considered decision to vote down Nick Xenophon's CAO 48.1 disallowance motion -

Also in the RAAA newsletter we get the first instalment to the RHS segment from new CEO Mike Higgins:

..Early last year the CASA Director published ‘Directive 01/2015’, which essentially directs CASA staff to ensure that regulatory changes are justified on the basis of safety risk and do not impose unnecessary costs or unnecessarily hinder participation in aviation and its capacity for growth. This is an excellent document and I commend it to you for further reading. The Director has also been actively promoting this philosophy to all staff, particularly those involved in regulatory development. Alas there appears to be a degree of inertia within middle management which is frustrating the much needed cultural change required to fully implement this new philosophy. Fortunately the Director is made of sterner stuff and we understand that there is a significant refresh occurring shortly. His challenge will be to identify who to keep and who to let go.


On a more positive note, credit does need to be given to the CASA officers that led the last CASR 21 Design and Production Working Groups and the Small Aircraft Sector – Risk Profile Working Groups. The meetings were professionally run and in accord with the 01/2015 Directive philosophy and were therefore well received by all attendees.

The two items on the top of the current priorities list are CAO48.1 (Flight and Duty times / Fatigue Risk Management) and a Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the Aviation Safety Regulatory Review (ASRR).


CAO 48.1 would have a severe negative fiscal and financial impact on a number of RAAA members. The first step would be for CASA to recognise the empirical data we have gathered and monitored over the years that clearly demonstrate how we have been successfully been managing the risk of fatigue. The RAAA have recently identified two pre-eminent FRMS experts who can assist us in our endeavours.


The industry at large are wondering how the implementation of the ASRR is tracking. CASA have had the Ministers Statement of Expectations for some time now and indeed long enough for a review of how well the review recommendations have been adopted. This will form the basis of both our study of the PIR (when it happens), and inform the development of the TAAAF Policy Document for 2016.


The RAAA is an active member of the Australian Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF), and we are meeting with the author of the ASRR to gain further clarification around certain issues identified in the report. This document is published and presented to government members in each election year and has met with an agreeable level of acceptance and uptake in the past. The previous Policy Document 2013 is available on our website.


I recently met with CASA to discuss the way ahead on issues including CAO48.1, Professional Indemnity Insurance for CASA industry delegates, 1:50 ratio of Flight Attendantsassengers, CASR 121/135, CASR 61, certification of offshore MROs/CASR 145 organisations and inconsistencies in interpretation and application of policy and regulations between Canberra and Regional Office staff...

Some positive signs there for the future relevance of RAAA as a significant industry advocate..  However they need to maintain the rage otherwise their influence in Can'tberra, much like their membership, will drop off while the industry continues being slowly & inexorably strangled by the big "R" regulator -


MTF...P2