[Peetwo]

Murky & his minions - A bureaucratic dictatorship?



  Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness - USA treaty:

Treaty under consideration
The following treaties were tabled on 12 September 2016:

Amendment 1 to Revision 1 of the Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness covering Design Approval, Production Activities, Export Airworthiness Approval, Post Design Approval Activities, and Technical Assistance between Authorities under the Agreement on the Promotion of Aviation Safety and Addendum to the Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness between the Government of Australia and the Government of the United States of America

• Treaty text (PDF 161KB)
  
• Related documents:
  

NIA (PDF 190KB)
Cover Page (PDF 30KB)
Regulation Impact Statement: not applicable
Letters: not applicable

            

Breaking News 
Government Restricting Trade
October 8, 2016 Ken Cannane
government-trade-restrictions

Update: Submissions to the Implementation Procedures for Airworthiness - USA 

1 Mr David Forsyth AM (PDF 319 KB) 

..At the high level, in my personal opinion, this Amendment is good for the Australian aviation industry, and is something which has been pursued by industry for many years. It is unfortunate that the industry segment involved has contracted significantly over the more than ten years this has been negotiated. Nonetheless, it opens the pathway for benefits in the future...

---

..SUMMARY


In my opinion, this Treaty Amendment has the potential to significantly improve opportunities for Australian aviation manufacture and design.


As noted in the questioning at the Committee hearing, in particular by Senator Fawcett, and by the nature of the follow up questions to CASA, realising the potential benefits depends on CASA’s ability to provide approvals in a timely manner. CASA does not have a good track record in this area as evidenced by industry submissions to the ASRR, and more recently by submissions to the CASA Industry Stakeholder survey.


To fully realise the potential benefits of the Amendment, CASA will need to significantly increase the use of industry delegations, improve its relationship with industry to increase trust and thus information exchange, and automatically approve STCs, modifications, licences, and other approvals from the FAA and EASA...

2 Mr Ken Cannane, AMROBA (PDF 465 KB) 

..Summary and Recommendation:


Expectations of our members was that this amendment to the IP would, and should
have been approved 12 months ago. It is needed to encourage innovators to invest in
new technologies and especially modernisation of older aircraft.

CASA, and our members, have been positively discussing the adoption of the
FAR/EASA devolvement of these functions currently performed by CASA. The
experience of industry, especially those that exercised some of these functions prior to CASR Part 21, will see safer practices, clearer responsibilities and higher productivity.

Regulatory support, though requiring minor amendment, is available under CASR
Part 21, Subpart J.

Approval of this amendment and the minor changes to Subpart 21J will enable a more
productive system commencing early in 2017.

We see this amendment as the first stage in the modernisation and streamlining of the CASA/Industry product certification process.

We look forward to the committee’s support for this IP amendment...

3 Civil Aviation Safety Authority (PDF 243 KB) 

13. Has the post implementation review of CASR Part 21 been completed? If not, when will it be completed? In either case, will CASA provide a copy of the review to the Committee for its consideration?

The post implementation review of CASR Part 21 is still ongoing. CASA and industry are expected to continue their work on the review throughout 2016 and potentially into part of 2017.

Once the review process is finalised, CASA will provide the outcome of the process in the form of a Discussion Paper or similar document intended for public consultation.

---

17. What consideration has CASA given to streamlining certification process and harmonisation of operational validation requirements with other civil aviation regulators, for example EASA or the FAA?

In early 2015, the Validation Principles Working Group was established by the FAA/Asia Pacific Bilateral Partners Dialogue members to review the current processes for foreign aircraft type certificate validation and develop standardised risk-based validation principles. This working group completed its work in August 2016. The group has developed a risk-based validation approach that aims to increase efficiency by reducing any unnecessary duplication of efforts, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety through encouraging a common approach to validation. Australia was a co-leader of that group. The group has completed its work. The final product is currently being presented to ICAO for its consideration.

Pretty easy to work out who invited the Reverend Forsyth to comment....


MTF...P2