[Peetwo]

CASA AQONs 

Going through the QON is so far very interesting, kicking it off is the answers to
Senator Fawcett's QON 90 - 92..

 

Senator Fawcett, David asked:

Mr Skidmore: The Aviation Safety Regulation Review report included 37 recommendations from memory, with 32 of those relating to CASA. In regards to the implementation of those, we are continuing to work on the recommendations. The implementation plan is incorporated in our corporate plan, and we are addressing the KPIs and the performance in regards to those and reporting back through the department to the minister on those. The overarching status of the recommendations is probably best covered by the department in regards to a departmental response, but I think CASA is still on line in regards to addressing those. I cannot say exactly which ones have already been implemented, but there are a number—HSB, MOU—we are working on the regulation development reform, as you have stated. There are 12 regulations still to be implemented or outstanding at this stage, if you want to specifically go down those. On the ASRR, I think we are tracking along in regards to meeting our recommendations.

Senator FAWCETT: Perhaps if you could take on notice with respect to the ones that are outstanding your time frame that you see to actually finish incorporating those, that would be useful?

Mr Skidmore: For the ASRR recommendations?

Senator FAWCETT: Yes. A broad comment, particularly around the statement of your regulatory philosophy, that has been broadly welcomed by most of the stakeholders I have engaged with the industry, so thank you for that. I look forward to seeing that pursued with some vigour. I will go to some detailed issues. With respect to CAO 48.1, my understanding is that several industry sectors have been engaging with CASA and particularly the EMS sector, looking to have a specific appendix drafted for them. My understanding is that most stakeholders had agreed on a form, but that seems to have been delayed in being issued. In terms of certainty, and particularly I am aware there are some who are looking to bid for contracts with state governments, the uncertainty around that is causing issues. Do you have an update on 48.1, and particularly for the EMS and air ambulance sectors?

Answer:

Outstanding CASR Parts

Most draft CASR Parts have already been through or are going through industry consultation, with only Parts 103, 105 and 149 yet to begin that process. CASA is aiming to have CASR Part 129 made in 2015 with Parts 119, 133, 135, 121, 138, 132 and 91 expected to be made in 2016. CASA is committed to finalising the Regulatory Reform Programme as soon as possible, but will focus on ensuring the remaining CASR Parts are progressed in accordance with effective consultation with industry and the Government.

Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR)

Of the remaining ASRR recommendations CASA expects to complete 8a, 8b, 17, 28, 33/34 and 35 in 2015 and 8c, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21/22, 23, 24/25/26, 29 and 32 in 2016.

CAO 48.1

Consultation will continue with industry on the draft CAO 48.1 to address feedback until CASA is confident that unnecessary impacts on the sector are minimised and the effectiveness of the risk controls within the rule-set are maximised. Once the Fatigue Risk Management System Working Group finalises their feedback on the draft CAO 48.1 amendment, CASA will consult more broadly with industry. This is expected to occur by February 2016.

Representatives of the medical transport sector will continue to be involved in preparing the draft appendix.


Senator Fawcett, David asked:


Mr Weeks: We have arranged an industry workshop that will be held in Melbourne in early November. With that workshop invitations have gone out to all operators that have expressed an interest in undertaking the trial for the fatigue risk management system. That workshop is designed to take them through the process, so it is very much what the trial is aimed to do and the information that they would need to provide during that trial. The purpose of the workshop in Melbourne is to take industry and provide industry with exactly that detail.

Senator FAWCETT: So, provide the detail or have industry help develop the detail? I am just wondering if an operator, for example, is based in Darwin, whether that is reasonable for the regulator to expect them to travel to Melbourne just to receive information, or is the workshop indeed a workshop for them to have input into the conduct?

Mr Weeks: I have not seen the final agenda yet so I do not know the exact detail that will be covered. That would be something I would need to take on notice and come back with what the agenda entails.

Senator FAWCETT: At a broad position though, if you are in charge of this process, then I would assume that you would know whether this was an information session where you are just telling operators what is required or whether your intent is that this is a co-regulatory approach where they help develop the requirements. Do you know, in a binary sense; is it information giving or is it a collaborative effort?

Mr Weeks: My understanding is that it will be collaborative because we have a number of speakers that are there. We have an expert coming out from New Zealand who will be presenting at the workshop as well. I do not have the detail. I would need to get that for you.

Answer:

The primary goal of the CASA Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) Forum which was held in Melbourne on 11 November 2015 was to build a shared understanding between industry and CASA regarding achieving approval for an FRMS trial. The Forum brought industry and CASA representatives together to discuss the important issues relating to establishing a fatigue risk management system.

The Forum was arranged into four discrete sessions with each session involving short presentations from independent experts, industry and CASA representatives, followed by a panel discussion with a question and answer session involving operators.

By providing periods for questions and answers and involving industry based experts, CASA took a collaborative approach to build shared understanding of the FRMS trial process. Additionally, the forum was preceded by a questionnaire to discover concerns and areas where more information is required and followed by a post-forum questionnaire to check whether questions were answered effectually. This approach will help identify if additional guidance material is required to support industry to effectively and efficiently engage in the FRMS trial process.

So Wodger WAP had yet another talk-fest, wonder if the Alphabets & co were well represented with cardboard cut-outs? All Captain Booth & the AFAP had to do was hang a sign over their cardboard cut-out saying please refer here - AFAP - Strange dichotomy on CAO48.1?? 

“We have recently been advised that CASA, for reasons unexplained, has now delayed the implementation for a further 12 months, ’’ Captain Gardiner said.i


“This was done without any consultation with either of the pilots groups, who are the individuals who are required to work with the new rules and it raises questions about how serious they are about the whole issue of fatigue generally.

“Industry had three years to comply with these new requirements and it is the job of CASA as the regulator to ensure they do and not be complicit in bending the rules to suit.’’

Senator Fawcett, David asked:


Senator FAWCETT: That is probably a fair defence for a recent appointment. My understanding is that there was supposed to be a revised manual of standards issued in September for part 61 but that is not yet on the streets. Could somebody give me an update as to what is occurring there?

Mr Skidmore: I am not sure of the exact status of the time frame for the revised manual of standards. We would have to check that and get the information back to you.

Senator FAWCETT: My understanding is Mr Crosthwaite replied in May of this year that the amendment to MOS was planned by September this year.

Mr Skidmore: I can clarify that. The drafting structures were being written to address a number of issues and we are expecting an amendment to the part 61 MOS in December of 2015.

Senator FAWCETT: What is the corresponding time frame that you will be expecting industry to comply with the contents of the new manual of standards? My understanding is there have been some previous iterations where it was issued on Day X and Day X plus 1. Industry were being required to comply with it and we were seeing flying schools not able to conduct tests and other activities. I am interested to know what adjustment time you will be providing industry before they are expected to apply this?

Answer:

The legislative instrument that will amend the Part 61 Manual of Standards (MOS) has not yet been finalised but CASA will include transition provisions that ensure applicants who have embarked on a course of training would not be penalised by a change to the MOS.

The target date for making the MOS amendment was December 2015 but it is now expected by the end of March 2016. CASA has established a Part 61 Solutions Taskforce, informed by an industry advisory panel, as an initiative to address feedback received from the aviation community, including in relation to the Part 61 MOS.

The loaded QON - OK so Skates has conceded that the amended Part61 MOS has drifted past the December 2015 target date, with the next projected date being end of March, therefore my projection for December is still in the running. However I note the way Skidmore has deliberately side-stepped the other element of Senator Fawcett's QON:

What is the corresponding time frame that you will be expecting industry to comply with the contents of the new manual of standards? My understanding is there have been some previous iterations where it was issued on Day X and Day X plus 1. Industry were being required to comply with it and we were seeing flying schools not able to conduct tests and other activities. I am interested to know what adjustment time you will be providing industry before they are expected to apply this?

In the interest of the 'trust' factor & 'just culture' - to which Skidmore has supposedly laid down the law to his troops and put to CASA policy through a directive etc. - I would of thought this is one question that OST should not duck. Perhaps OST could put in place an 'Eleventh Commandment', stating a standard timeframe for compliance by industry for all new & amended regulations, MOS etc. And in a goodwill gesture there could be an appeal process for those industry members struggling to meet the standard timeframe for compliance -  

Instead what do we get?? Just another example of why Skidmore is little more than a bench warmer and 'glove puppet' to Murky Mandarin & the Iron Ring.