[Peetwo]

Fort Fumble under siege on CAO 48.1 -  

Slight change of tack but more evidence that the shambolic, duplicitous regulator is sliding into a completely dysfunctional rabble...

First there was this from Wingnut in the latest CASA bollocks missive:

..I am pleased CASA has recently delivered on two ongoing commitments, with the release of the medical certification discussion paper in December and the first steps taken to conduct an independent review of the new fatigue rules....

...We have gone to tender for the conduct of the fatigue review and will look to have the selection process finalised by March 2017 and a report delivered in the second half of the year...

---

& in more detail:

First step in fatigue rules review


In October 2016, CASA and its Board decided an independent review would be conducted of the latest fatigue rules for air operators and pilots. These rules are in Civil Aviation Order 48.1 Instrument 2013. In January 2017, CASA issued a tender to engage the services of a suitably qualified independent specialist, or team of specialists, to undertake the fatigue review. This independent review will provide CASA with an informed basis on which to finalise reform of the fatigue rules. The review has four objectives - determining if the new rules are necessary, evaluating the research and evidence used in developing the rules, evaluating how research and evidence takes into account the Australian operating environment and evaluating the extent to which the latest fatigue rules are consistent with the principles in CASA’s regulatory philosophy and the directive about the development of new regulations. The review will consider a range of issues including the standards and recommended practices of the International Civil Aviation Organization, along with the current and proposed fatigue rules of the European Aviation Safety Agency, New Zealand, the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Other issues to be considered include the results of investigations into fatigue related accidents and incidents and the approach to fatigue regulation by other transport regulators. The terms of reference were approved by the CASA Board.

Visit the fatigue review web page on the CASA website.

 
Next from Joseph Wheeler in the Oz:

Taxpayers foot bill for CASA
12:00amJOSEPH WHEELER
Taxpayers should not pay for CASA’s lack of self-confidence on fatigue laws.

Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for CASA’s lack of self-confidence on fatigue laws.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s fatigue rules regulating pilots, CAO 48.1, were a welcome initiative aimed at improving safety in aviation.

On these pages last year, I described the fact that certain elements of the fatigue laws were less than ideal, because they allowed some subtle and not so subtle pressures on pilots to work when not necessarily safe. That issue aside, overall the rules were a positive step, and professional pilots eagerly awaited their protections.

But three months after the new rules were unveiled, CASA announced it would not only extend the transition period for the new rules by a further year, but that it would conduct an independent review into the entire set of rules.

Given that the industry had been consulted on the rules since before 2013, why would CASA need to delay this safety measure by adding a further review to an already delayed implementation schedule?

It seems that the move to fatigue management principles — a move backed by the international air safety regulator ICAO — is still considered controversial in some corners of the Australian aviation industry.

A delay would be justified only if operators required the extra time and education to better understand the principles, incorporate them into operations manuals, or prepare new fatigue risk management systems.

But some quarters would argue the commercial cost of implementing a risk-based system accounts for a measure of the criticism, and indirectly led to the delay and impending review. The delays also seem to show a lack of faith by CASA in its own efforts on getting the rules made, or at very least a disturbing hesitance to stand by its finished product in the face of criticism.

To confound matters more, the selection process for an expert to conduct the independent review is now going to add to the uncertainty.

On January 9, CASA tendered for specialists to undertake the review. Does the unexpected expense to taxpayers that comes with reviewing this largely uncontroversial set of safety rules warrant that rule set being examined by the highest bidder? When it comes to pilots’ duty times, being “within the maximum” doesn’t always mean “safe”, and never has. But in the context of pilot fatigue mitigation measures, even getting close to the limits of existing prescriptive duty time rules can result in tragedy. This is why the new fatigue rules in CAO 48.1 must be implemented: so we can move to the modern and science-based principles that fall under the umbrella of FRMS.

Perhaps I am being too cynical and CASA is simply trying to get the regulatory mix right. That is an admirable goal. But in the face of limited resources, the swath of reviews being undertaken by CASA on topics as far ranging as medical certification processes to drones, would suggest that perhaps CASA ought to listen less, and assertively direct more.

Attaining perfection in law is impossible, but getting an outcome and moving forward is always possible if agencies like CASA demonstrate faith in the processes they have employed and stop the second guessing.

---

And finally the CAO 48.1 clusterf**k creates another bad look for 4D on the rising tide of "A"-Word issues..

CASA delays new rules
12:00amPAUL CLEARY

Transport Minister Darren Chester says lobbying by airlines has led CASA to delay and review pilot fatigue rules.

‘Profit before safety’ claim as CASA delays new rules

Transport Minister Darren Chester has confirmed that lobbying by regional airlines, among other stakeholders, has led CASA to delay and review the proposed rules for pilot fatigue management.

The comment has reinforced concerns among pilots that CASA’s delay in implementing the new rules means that the regime may be “derailed”, and that regional operators may be putting “profit ahead of safety”.

But regional operators contend that there is no evidence of fatigue problems in their sector and they welcomed the review.

This week, CASA announced the terms of reference for the expert review in the pilot fatigue rule known as CAO 48.1 Instrument. CASA has launched an open tender process to conduct the review, which is to be completed by September this year.

Mr Chester, a Nationals MP from Gippsland in regional Victoria, confirmed that the government had received numerous representations against all or part of the proposed rules.

“Several stakeholder groups, including regional airlines, general aviation and pilot unions, have lobbied against all or part of new rules. CASA has agreed to delay and review the rules to ensure they are appropriate and effective across all sectors of the commercial aviation industry,” a spokesman for the minister said.

The terms of reference ask the review panel to look at fatigue rules and practices in Europe, New Zealand, the US, Britain and Canada.

The Australian and International Pilots Association, which mainly represents pilots with the major carriers, says Australia is ahead of other countries on introducing this regime, but it is fearful that the policy agenda has been hijacked.

Shane Loney, a Qantas A380 pilot and director of safety and technical at AIPA, said the second delay in introducing the fatigue rules seemed ominous.

“The original instrument was announced in 2013 and it’s been delayed twice now,” he said.

“The last time was ostensibly for this review. It’s been going on for a long time.

“The problem appears to be ­elements within industry who have taken a long time to put effort into the strategic management systems and what 48.1 would require. They’ve come to the conclusion it will cost them money meaning they may be putting profit ahead of safety.

“It is very clear to us this is all about putting costs a long way ahead of safety. As pilots we see safety as very important. We know there’s been plenty of pressure on CASA over a period of time.”

Mike Higgins, the chief executive of the Regional Aviation ­Association of Australia, said there was “no evidence of any ­fatigue that is unmitigated by the safety management systems of the regional operators”.

The RAAA had made four freedom-of-information requests to CASA on this issue and had not found any evidence that there was a fatigue problem.

Mr Higgins said he “really ­appreciated” the role of the CASA board in announcing the review, along with the acting CASA chief executive Shane Carmody and the minister.

However, Mr Loney said AIPA was also concerned about the time frame for the review, which may not give the panel time to come to a reasonable conclusion. “We are concerned that ... the tenderer may be an individual rather than ‘a team of suitably qualified specialists’,” Mr Loney said.

“The most considered and therefore accurate review is likely to come from a team rather than individual approach. There’s plenty of science to support the need for change. CASA has to make sure those chosen are qualified and experienced. There’s not a lot of time for these people to go through all the things CASA has specified. There’s not a lot of time to deliver a full, reasoned review.”

 

MTF...P2