Voicing concerns

Consultation with CASA has revealed that it has been experiencing difficulties in maintaining a sufficient number of aerodrome inspectors to carry out its aerodrome safety inspection program. The AAA understands that aerodrome inspector staffing difficulties have arisen from a combination of staff resignations, long-service leave, and retirement. Normally these issues could be managed through the course of business but due to the Commonwealth’s efficiency dividend, has resulted in budget restrictions on recruitment.

The impacts of these shortages have been evident in recent consultation with a major regional airport member that indicated it had not been subject to an in-person inspection in some eight years. Given the size of the airport and the size of aircraft that service that airport, this is a very concerning outcome. While the AAA is confident that the internal processes at that particular airport are sound and that inspections are regularly undertaken by an accredited third-party inspector, it does raise questions about the scope and validity of the CASA inspection regime. To avoid potentially compromising safety in the future, it would be prudent to introduce a maximum allowable timeframe between aerodrome inspections, with any aerodrome inspections falling outside that timeframe to be reviewed as an urgent priority.

Another area of concern is the continually delayed review of CASA’s Manual of Standards (MOS) Part 139 – Aerodromes. A Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the standards has not been undertaken since its inception in 2008. Standard CASA practice allows for the PIR to take place approximately two years after implementation. By any standard, the review of MOS Part 139 is incredibly overdue.

After raising the need for a review of certain chapters of MOS Part 139 over a number of years with CASA, with nothing having been completed, the AAA was pleased when advised last October that the PIR was finally to be

A major regional airport has not been subject to an in-person inspection in eight years.

undertaken and resources had been allocated to the task, with two positions being advertised to undertake the work. Unfortunately no successful candidates were found in the recruitment process at that time. The lack of internal resources has meant that the PIR of MOS Part 139 has again stalled. Industry has now been waiting a further nine months for anything to occur.

The apparent ongoing lack of concern displayed by CASA, given the important need to undertake a review of MOS Part 139, is alarming. The industry has identified more than 100 issues that urgently need to be addressed in the document, through our paper titled “AAA Review of Manual of Standards 139”. This was provided to CASA in May 2014. The AAA has received no formal response from CASA and any meetings with CASA staff where the matter has been raised have resulted in statements indicating that nothing can be done until the staff are recruited for the PIR roles. From a risk perspective, should a serious safety incident occur at an airport, there is likely to be substantial criticism levelled on the approach taken by CASA in relation to its regulatory processes for airports.

In relation to the CASA board the AAA has argued that airport or aerodrome management experience should be a ‘highly desirable’ attribute for future board appointments. Australia’s aerodromes are absolutely critical parts of the national aviation infrastructure, and experience of their operation and management is vital to informing discussion and decisions on aviation safety and regulation matters. It is recommended that the CASA board, in broadening its aviation industry experience, endeavour to reflect all aspects of aviation operations, including aerodromes. In ensuring greater industry representation on the board, it is important that the diversity of the aviation industry is also adequately reflected and this extends beyond airlines and the flying community. Put simply there is no aviation industry without our aerodromes, large and small, across Australia.

Australia has a well-deserved reputation as a leader in aviation safety and the AAA was pleased that the independent review identified some key areas for improvement across the industry. It is important that the industry continues to work cooperatively with government and the regulator to address issues as they arise and ensure that Australia strives to be a best practice example of aviation safety regulation.