[Peetwo]

DLM 3 2022 and the Gemmell review??

Via SSCSDL webpages: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...on/Monitor

3 of 2022 /10 March 2022/Monitor

Of interest:

Pg33:

CASA 114/21 — Exclusion from the Operation of Airworthiness Directives FAA AD 2021-23-12 and FAA AD 2021-23-13 Instrument 2021 [F2021L01909] / Principle (k) exemption from sunsetting /Committee secretariat considering response.

---

From Pg 45 under outstanding undertakings:

Part 133 (Australian Air Transport Operations—Rotorcraft) Manual of Standards 2020 [F2020L01614] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the explanatory statement to the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 20/04/2021

Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Flight Operations—Consequential
Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2021 [F2021L00200] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to
amend the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 21/05/2021

Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Flight Operations—Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2021 [F2021L00200] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 08/06/2021

Part 60 Manual of Standards Amendment Instrument 2021 (No. 1) [F2021L01303] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the explanatory statement to the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 12/11/2021

CASA EX83/21 – Part 121 and Part 91 of CASR – Supplementary Exemptions and Directions Instrument 2021 [F2021L01399] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the explanatory statement to the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 04/01/2022

Civil Aviation Order 95.12.1 (Exemptions from CAR and CASR — LSA Gyroplanes and ASRA-compliant Gyroplanes) / Instrument 2021 [F2021L01663] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the explanatory statement to the instrument in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 07/02/2022

Various instruments made by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority [F2021L01671][F2021L01675] [F2021L01679][F2021L01681][F2021L01682][F2021L01683] [F2021L01684][F2021L01685][F2021L01687][F2021L01688] [F2021L01697][F2021L01680] / The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook to amend the explanatory statements to the instruments in response to the committee's scrutiny concerns. / 07/02/2022

Hmm...wonder what the hold up is - 

On exemptions to legislative instruments issued by CASA, I noted the following comment from AF CEO Marjorie Pagani...  

"Angel Flight continues to negotiate with CASA for an exemption to the instrument and a lot of progress has been made. We expect that to be finalised within the next few days..."

I fully understand why AF is applying for an exemption to the CSF instrument, however I find it unbelievable that they are forced to do this even before the ink on the amendment has even dried - 

This brings me back to #Post 24 (above) and the statement from former CASA CEO John McCormick of 'almost  ruling by exemption'.

Perhaps now might be the time to resurface this SBG edition from 2 years ago: https://auntypru.com/sbg-23-2-20-ignoran...-paranoia/

And in particular this KC and AMROBA reference to former CASA Deputy Director Bruce Gemmell's 2001 Review of Regulatory Reform Program:

In 2001, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s Deputy Director, Mr Bruce Gemmell, produced a
report titled “Review of Regulatory Reform Program” which documented reasons why regulatory
change had not been successful and how the purpose for change had been lost. Nothing has changed.

Gemmell’s Review of Regulatory Reform Program states under “History of Regulatory Reform” the
various phases since government listed the prime objective (see below) in the late 1980s for change.

• 1990 – Harmonisation with the New Zealand Civil Aviation Regulations
o Director of Aviation Safety Mr Ron Cooper
• 1993 – Regulatory Structure Validation Project (RSVP)
o CEO Doug Roser/Director of Aviation Safety Mr George Macionis
• 1996 – Regulatory Framework Program (RFP)
o CEO/ Director of Aviation Safety Mr Leroy Keith
• 1998 – Aviation Safety Standards Division (ASSD)
o CEO Mr Mick Toller/Deputy Mr Richard Yates
• 1999 – Regulatory Reform Program
o CEO Mr Mick Toller/Deputy Mr Bruce Gemmell

Post Gemmell’s Report
• 2003 – European Aviation Safety Regulations Harmonisation
o CEO Mr Bruce Byron
• 2008 – Regulatory Reform Program – Application of Criminal Code
o CEO Mr John McCormick.
• 2010 – Recreation of Aviation Safety Standards
o CEO Mr John McCormick

Mr Gemmell clearly stated that “repeated changes in [CASA] management and direction over the last
decade have restricted progression of regulatory reform.” The government’s prime objective for
regulatory change back in the late 1980s is still seen as the reasons for change by the industry. The
prime objectives stated by the Minister in 1986 post a Parliamentary Inquiry (not a CASA Inquiry) to
provide for cost effective safety system were as follows:

1986 Ministerial Statement:

The prime objective of the Regulations is to reduce costs to the aviation industry by:
• simplifying the previous maintenance requirements and improving safety standards by harmonisation
with overseas standards;
• eliminating unnecessary administrative processes;
• eliminating unique Australian maintenance requirements unless such differences are clearly justifiable;
• aligning Australian procedures with the internationally accepted approach towards aircraft
maintenance;
• increasing the flexibility for maintenance of general aviation aircraft; and
• correcting deficiencies identified in the previous maintenance regulations and Orders that have resulted in unnecessary or ambiguous maintenance requirements and practices.

New Zealand, who continued with regulatory reform when CAA changed direction, now has an
aviation regulatory system that has been adopted by nearly all our Pacific trading countries. Gemmell
clearly identified that CASA/CAA moved away from harmonisation with NZ at the first opportunity.

At the start of this government initiated regulatory change there was industry support to harmonise
with New Zealand to reduce any differences with personnel qualifications to meet the intent of the
Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Agreement and to provide an outcome of minimal differences to
achieve a Single Aviation Market not only for the airline sector but general aviation as well. Every
CAA/CASA regime, since the original objectives were identified by government, has changed the
objectives mainly to meet their own internal perceptions of aviation – many current proposals
resurrect the requirements that caused the government review in the 1980s.

So why is aviation regulatory change so difficult? – Gemmell again answers this in an observation.
“Reasons for embarking on the complete rewrite of the regulations have become clouded over time.
[CASA] Management has failed to consistently articulate the key objectives for the review leaving
project managers with the difficult task of resolving conflicting priorities.”

The prime objectives stated by government in 1986 still exist today – regulations now being produced
do not meet the original prime objectives. With no corporate knowledge left in CASA why the
regulatory rewrite began, and no political corporate knowledge as to why the government wanted new
regulatory requirements, the outcome will be another unique Australian regulatory system that will
have a negative impact on the future of aviation, especially the non airline segment.

Another reason seen by Gemmell as a reason why the regulatory reform continues to falter is “No one
person/group [within CASA] has a clear understanding what the ‘big picture’ is in terms of product
release. Linkage between Parts, implementation and transitional arrangements.”

Twenty one years later and how things have changed...err NOT! 

The 2010 AMROBA paper could have been written today without too much editing -     

Perhaps the DPM and the department should take on board the following extract:

In hindsight, it is now obvious that any complete regulatory rewrite to align with the other international aviation regulatory systems should have started by a complete review of the Civil Aviation Act to comply with the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) recommendation for the creation of a Civil Aviation Authority. ICAO provides a sample enabling Act for the creation of a contracting State’s Aviation Authority. Unless CASA is correctly structured with the duties and responsibilities as recommended by ICAO, then regulatory requirements produced will not harmonise with other countries. See ICAO/FAA endorsed Model Act attached.

Recommendation: That the original objectives, as stated in 1986, be confirmed by the
Minister so that the Act, Regulations and Instruments will provide the community and aviation
industry with:

Efficient regulations where the total benefits to some people will exceed the total costs to others by:

• simplifying the previous requirements and improving safety standards by harmonisation with
overseas standards, especially New Zealand for general aviation;
• eliminating unnecessary administrative processes;
• eliminating unique Australian requirements unless such differences are clearly justifiable;
• aligning Australian procedures with New Zealand’s approach towards aircraft maintenance;
• increasing the flexibility for regulations of general aviation aircraft; and
• correcting deficiencies identified in Regulations and Orders that have resulted in unnecessary or
ambiguous requirements and practices.

Regulatory and administrative changes that CASA’s predecessors have imposed on the industry during this period of regulatory change have contributed to the current Pilot and LAME shortages.

Past regulatory changes and structural/responsibility changes within CASA has not provided Regulations where the total benefits to some people exceeded the total costs to others. Cost benefits to the community have not been considered by CASA as they state their only concern is safety.

MTF...P2