Expiration of medical

[Vref+5]

Has anyone tried throwing CASR 11.140 at CASA when they see that your medical certifcate has expired, despite you completing it before the expiration of the old one? 11.140 relates to time limited authorisations (a medical is one), and states that provided you submitted a completed application for the renewal 21 days before the expiration, you can continue to use the old authorisation past it's expiry until CASA makes a decision to issue/not issue.

[outnabout]

Looks like you can take your pick of the regs....hahaha

61.420 states
A pilot can only exercise the privileges of their licence if they carry a current copy of their medical or exemption.

[Lead Balloon]

A current copy of their medical is not the same as a copy of their current medical. You may be paraphrasing a little dangerously there, outanabout. :=

But in any event, if CASR 11.140 means what it says and applies to medical certificates, the outcome is that a medical certificate remains current beyond the date that happens to be specified on it as the expiry date, provided the criteria in CASR 11.140 are satisfied.

That's the point of Vref's question.

[Lead Balloon]

I add, in an attempt to provide a part-answer to Vref's question:

The failure by CASA to make any public statement or provide any industry guidance on the question whether CASR 11.140 applies to medical certificates is yet another manifestation of CASA's lack of corporate competence and integrity.

If:

(1) I have a medical certificate, and

(2) I've put in all the necessary paperwork to renew the certificate, including all of the reports that Avmed have demanded more than 21 days before my certificate is due expire, and whether or not Avmed's 'experts' require even more tests afterwards,

CASR 11.140 either keeps my certificate 'alive' until the bureaucracy gets around to making a final decision, or it doesn't.

There are no other alternatives.

CASA's tacit position must be that CASR 11.140 either:

(1) keeps my certificate 'alive' until a final decision on my renewal application has been made, or

(2) has no application to medical certificates or, if it does, it nonetheless doesn't keep my certificate 'alive' until a final decision on my application has been made.

My guess is that CASA has said nothing because the embarrassing reality may be that CASR 11.140 means what it says, with the outcome being a continuing in force of medical certificates, beyond their nominal expiry date, because of CASA's bureaucratic inefficiency and incompetence.

(Ironically, there would be no substantial increase in risk to aviation safety arising from that outcome, because Avmed no longer provides any substantial 'value-add' to the safety of air navigation anyway)

[havick]

Lead Balloon, even if your interpretation of keeping your medical 'alive' if all documents are submitted etc. Try getting an aircraft owner/employer to let you loose on the line with the ambiguity there which kind makes the whole thing a moot point unfortunately.

[Lead Balloon]

Then pilots can bend over and take whatever financial and career rogering that arises from CASA's corporate incompetence.

Why the industry wouldn't be pressing CASA to publish a formal position on its view of the application (or otherwise) and effect of CASR 11.140 is beyond me. If someone is 'ramp checked' and produces all the paperwork to demonstrate that an application with all the supporting documentation was submitted on time, and claims the relief of CASR 11.140, CASA must either agree or disagree.

Which one is it?

What could CASR 111.140 be intended to achieve, if not to provide protection for the industry in precisely these kinds of circumstances?

Not everyone needs an aircraft owner's permission to go flying. Some people own their own aircraft. And some commercial operators are themselves line pilots. I'd be very interested to hear Horatio Leafblower's thoughts on this.

[kaz3g]

I think the problem will be that your medical is a "certificate" not a "time limited authorisation".

Kaz

[LexAir]

I agree with Kaz3g.

[Lead Balloon]

But the word "authorisation" in the phrase "time limited authorisation" is itself defined. "Authorisation" is defined to mean, among other things, a certificate capable of being granted to a person under these Regulations:11.015 Definitions for Part

In this Part:

authorisation means:
...
(c) a certificate capable of being granted to a person under these Regulations.

Note: For the definition of civil aviation authorisation, see section 3 of the Act.

...

time‑limited authorisation means:

(a) an authorisation that, under another provision of these Regulations, ceases after a particular period; or

(b) an authorisation granted by CASA for a specified period.Isn't a medical certificate "a certificate capable of being granted to a person under these Regulations" and one that "ceases after a particular period" or is "granted for a specified period"?

In any event, CASA should state its position on the issue, one way or the other. The fact that CASA is silent on the question speaks - nay screams - volumes.

[kaz3g]

That definition is limited to Part 11 which is rather confusing because the Purpose of that part is to
...set out administrative provisions for the regulation of civil aviation, including in relation to:

(a) authorisations; and...

which seems to apply across the whole of the other zillion provisions.

And then medical certificates are dealt with in Part 67 which contains its own prescription of how applications, renewals, extensions and expiries are dealt with.

The usual rule is that, where there is specific legislative treatment of a matter then that will apply but what this all means is more than my old head can cope with after dinner.

Kaz

[Lead Balloon]

which seems to apply across the whole of the other zillion provisions.Well, at least to "these Regulations" as defined. But that does cover much of the regulatory regime, and that seems precisely the point of Part 11.

Part 67 is part of "these Regulations".

CASA itself argues that the power to impose conditions in Part 11 applies to medical certificates issued under Part 67. See, out of many examples, paras 32 and 33 of the O'Brien AAT decision: O'Brien and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2015] AATA 93 (20 February 2015) (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/AATA/2015/93.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=title(O'brien%20)).

How is it that an "authorisation" for the purposes of regulation 11.056 includes medical certificates, permitting CASA to impose conditions on those certificates, but an "authorisation" in regulation 11.140 doesn't include medical certificates?

If you read the definitions, "time limited authorisations" are merely a subset of "authorisations".

CASR 11.140(3) starts with the magic words: "In spite of any other provision of these Regulations ...". That's precisely the point of CASR 11.140. It has to work despite other provisions of the Regulations, otherwise it wouldn't do anything.

I'll make the point another way: to what time limited authorisations, as defined, does CASR 11.140 apply, if not medical certificates?

I say again, CASA's silence on whether it considers CASR 11.140 to apply to medical certificates screams volumes about CASA's position on the question (and about CASA's corporate competence and integrity).

[no_one]

What CASA needs is a mechanism for formally querying a regulation much like the "Legal Interpretations" mechanism the FAA has. If you have a query about a regulation (and it is a legitimate one) the FAA will provide a formal interpretation. These are published on the FAA website. See here (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/) The interpretations are binding on the FAA. It doesn't mean they cant change their mind but they have to change the interpretation first.

[Vref+5]

I agree, the Act defines what an authorisation is, and a medical certificate fits that bill. So I reckon it would work. It would certainly keep the lawyers enterntained until you eventually got your re-print.

Not any comfort for international operators though, when you get ramped in Vietnam and your medical certificate is out of date. Unfortunately they won't accept the CASR 11.140 defence, they will just ground you.

[Lead Balloon]

If 11.140 applies to medical certificates, it operates way beyond mere bureaucratic delay in doing a 're-print' of a medical certificate. It would mean that if you put in everything necessary at least 21 days before expiry of your current certificate, 11.140 keeps that certificate alive until CASA makes and implements a final decision, whether that's one month later or 2 years later. It would also mean that if, having received your application, CASA asks for the results of specified tests to be provided to it within 2 weeks, and you then provide those results within that time, the certificate continues to be kept alive until CASA makes and implements a final decision.

So it would cover all of the time wasted by Avmed in its deep thought processes in second-guessing mere private practitioners and specialists, and "complex case management meetings", as well as the basic inefficiencies of having turned what used to be an efficient process into a dog's breakfast. (All to 'value-add' to the safety of air navigation, of course.)

It's almost unthinkable to contemplate, but maybe 11.140 was put there precisely for the purpose of protecting the holders of time limited authorisations from this kind of bureaucratic inefficiency and obfuscation.

(And remember: "authorisation" for the purposes of 11.140 is defined to mean, among other things, "a certificate capable of being granted to a person under these Regulations", "the Regulations" include Part 67, and 11.140(3) starts with the magic words "Despite any other provision of these Regulations...".)

Alas, this is all just domestic law, so I see the conundrum for pilots who fly internationally. Other countries can apply whatever medical certification rules they like to foreigners who fly into their jurisdiction. I can only speculate on how commercial international pilots and their associations have resisted nuking CASA from orbit as a consequence of the uncertainty and frustration caused by those who have the comfort of a nice office and a nice six figure salary no matter how inefficient and ineffectual they may be.

It might take the sting off a bit to contemplate the machinations that must be going on in CASA to avoid acknowledging and dealing with the consequences of the reality that 11.140 might apply to medical certificates. All of the faux concern about the safety of air navigation if the delays caused by their own incompetence, inefficiency and sense of self-importance resulted in people being able to continue to go to work to feed and house their families, instead of being 'grounded' until Avmed condescended to deal with the distracting trivia of plebs and their plebeian problems.

That is, of course, unless CASA considers 11.140 doesn't apply to medical certificates, in which case CASA should have the corporate integrity to step up and say that, and why.