Charter Operators applying for RPT

[Mick Stuped]

Interested in comment from anyone about the latest explanation from CASA regarding RPT Exemptions.

INFORMATION SHEET

CHARTER OPERATORS APPLYING FOR RPT AUTHORISATION ON AOC AUGUST 2013

Background

1. By notice dated18 June 2013 (the notice), CASA wrote to charter operators

(a) reminding them of their obligation to comply with all applicable legislative requirements;

(b) providing general guidance on how to apply for anauthorisation to conduct regular public transport (RPT) operations as describedin regulation 206(1)(c) of the Civil AviationRegulations 1988 (CAR); and

(c) in this regard,advising them that CASA may consider exempting an operator from complying with certain otherwise applicable RPT requirements.

RPT AOC required to conduct RPT operations


2. An operator may not lawfully conduct RPT operations without holding an Air Operator’s Certificate (AOC) which expressly authorises RPT operations. Nothing in the notice said anything to the contrary. The holder of an AOC that authorises charter operations may not conduct RPT operations, irrespective of any ‘exemptions’ that may be given to that operator.

3. CASA has no power to issue an exemption against the requirement to hold an RPT authorisation on an AOC, but CASA may issue an exemption against a regulatory requirement that an RPT AOC holder must other wise meet.

4. The phrase “interim RPT authorisations” in the notice did not convey that an operator could hold a form of RPT AOC different to the usual form, only that the operatormay be issued exemptions which could be in force until such time as Part 135 of the Civil AviationSafety Regulations 1998 (CASR) was made.

Exemption process – what information must be provided to CASA


5. CASA’s notice of 18 June 2013 stated:

Charter operators considering applying for an AOC authorising RPT operations in circumstances of the kind mentioned above should carefully consider:

· all relevant requirements under the regulations currently governing RPT operations, from full compliance with which they would need to seek an exemption or from which an approval to deviate would be necessary;

· what they would be required to do in order to meet standards corresponding to those specified in proposed CASR Part135; and

· the benefits, as well as the demands, involved in moving to comply with those standards in advance of their adoption in the legislation, as conditions on an authorisation to conduct RPT operations that might be available in the interim.

6. If your organisation has already applied inresponse to the notice,you should provide the information set out by this information sheet if you have not already done so.

7. If an operator applying for an RPT authorisation on their AOC 1 seeks the issue of an exemption, the operator may also separately apply for an exemption from RPT related regulatory requirements, in accordance with CASR 11.190. Any such application should state or provide:

(a) specifically,what exemptions are sought (that is, what regulation(s) is an exemption sought against),
(b) the reasons for seeking each exemption,
(c) an explanation as to why the operator cannot meet the relevant RPTrequirement;
(d) how the application for the exemption relates, if at all, to proposed draft CASR Part 135 by specific reference to the relevant draft regulation in that Part;2
(e) details of how an acceptable level of safety would be provided if an exemption was to be given: see CASA Advisory Circular AC 11-02(2) August 2011 - EXEMPTIONS AGAINST THE CASR, CAR AND CAO, which explains the exemption application and assessment process3;
(f) any associated operations manual amendments that are specific to the exemption sought and detailing any operational requirements relating to the matters the subject of the exemption.

8. For example,if an exemption is sought against the requirement that an operator have a CAR 217 training and checking organisation, which requires pilots to be subject to two proficiency checks in each calendar year, CASA would not give an unconditional exemption against these requirements. Rather, an applicant for an exemption would have to explain,amongst other things, how it would ensure an acceptable level of safety would be provided.

9. Further,the aviation legislation sometimes sets out what must be provided to CASA to enable CASA to consider the relaxation of an RPT requirement. For example, if an operator wants to operate ow capacity RPT operations to an aerodrome that does not meet the RPT requirements set out in Appendix 3 of CAO 82.3, paragraph5.2.1 of CAO
82.3 enables CASA to approve the use of such an aerodrome, but only if:
(a) the operator provides CASA with details of the surface and dimensions of the aerodrome proposed to be approved, being details of the kind set out in Appendix3 of CAO 82.3; and

(b) CASA is satisfied,after considering those details,that the aerodrome is suitable for the take-off and landingof aeroplanes with MTOW not exceeding 5700 kg.

10. If before the notice was sent to operators, an operator had already applied to CASA for an RPT authorisation and has represented to CASA they can or do meet all RPT requirements, it is not likely that CASA would grant any exemptions against such requirements. In any event, in such a circumstance, CASA’s resources would best be directed to assessing the application for theRPT authorisation.

11. CASA cannot advise before hand what exemptions,if any,will be given in any particular case,as each application will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

12. It is the operator’s responsibility to reviewtheaviationlegislation,especiallyCAO82.3, to understand:

(a) what the current RPT requirements are;

(b) whether the operator can meet those requirements, and if not, why not; and

(c) in seeking an exemption from an otherwise applicable regulatory requirement, how the operator will satisfy CASA that an acceptable level of safety can and will be achieved and maintained.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority 22 August 2013