“Aviation is in our DNA” Safety and Growth – the double helix.
Being safe without growth is challenging. Growth without safety is impossible. Growth and safety working together present our best opportunity to achieve the target of a $16Bn sector revenue contribution to the economy by 2016.
LIB 4 –
the “Boots” got told off by an avid reader for not covering this point last week. The CAA has received their legal opinion but, as yet, has not shared it with us. Irrespective, we think the planets are more or less aligned as there is absolute agreement that a passenger is an “uninformed person.” The primary problem we have, and this is what happens when you issue Legal bulletins, is how you make change without undermining the power and authority of the Director.
Update on ACAG
ACAG is the community advisory group who works with CAA and MOT on rules development. This group met yesterday. The key points emerging were:
The competitiveness of our rules framework
CAA confirmed the review of medical certification and procedures with a view to reducing cost
New SMS Rule is about 6-8 weeks away. Essentially it will extend the QA provisions of the rules suite to include risk assessment and analysis. There will be a phased introduction of the rule changes, with the three broad groupings known about for some time, forming the basis of implementation
Accelerated and new rule making procedures – co-jointly CAA and ACAG have been developing a new TOR for the group because of new rule making procedures implemented by the MOT. These new procedures place more emphasis on identification and evaluation of the problem prior to rule making. Apparently there is a 107 page hand book that describes the process
Structurally, CAA now has 8-10 policy analysts who work on issues assessment, and their work forms the basis of any new rule. To the “Boots’” way of thinking, this doesn’t seem good risk management practice, and we may take this up with CAA at some point in the future.
Issues assessment is progressing with detailed documentation soon to be provided on CAA’s assessment. To get an issue assessed, the best method for Industry remains the petition process.
Confirmation that the next pricing review is underway. It would appear this review is an intensive look at issues of public and private good i.e. bureaucrat speak for who pays for what – Government, industry or levies.
Revision to the Civil Aviation Act – outside scope is the structure of the Authority and its functions. Anticipate consultations with MOT with a view to possible amendments to the Act being passed into law in 2015/16. This will be the first major review of the Act since passed in 1990
– we’d like information from you on areas for improvement, and particularly relative to practices around the globe. We have extensive information on flight training but would welcome other areas you see that New Zealand lags behind.
CAA rules do not deliver a system of managing safety
which ensures compliance with Health and Safety in the Employment Act, and cannot do so without fundamental overhaul. This means we either live in the space of two overlapping regulatory systems, or we deliver for you a system that allows you to operate comfortably within both. Even with the introduction of SMS under the CA Act this will still not assure compliance with the HSE Act.
We’ve been working extensively in this area of recent weeks in part because CAA are investigating accidents, as they are entitled to, pursuant to both the HSE Act and CAA Act. Presently, New Zealand statutes, AKA HSE require a systematic approach to managing “safety” including a hazard management regime. Standards exist and detail what a compliant system looks like. These Standards have similar terminology to the SMS AC published by CAA but they are not the same. Going forward, as the systematic involvement of HSE in our work places intensifies, if you have an accident or serious incident and you don’t comply fully with the HSE Act, then you have minimal defenses. AIRCARE™ delivers a solution by providing a documented system and an assurance process. So it’s not just about the CA rules and having an AOC as some may think, but providing assurance that you are in compliance with ALL relevant safety and environmental standards.
Two recent examples of this came to hand
On another note, those in the powerline construction and maintenance sectors, may, in the future, find a keen interest from the HSE guys as to how you are managing risk, and where is the list of all your tested and certified strops, lines, D shackles, hooks, etc, with all the test certificate records. When I was requested to supply this information for a big job next week, I merely sent my AIRCARE
™ certificate through, explaining to them I had just been audited. I do have a comprehensive test certificate portfolio, but it was never asked for, however, I have been requested to supply more information on AIRCARE
™ and its importance in assuring the right parameters have been met in training, flight safety, equipment, and COMPLIANCE.
The same thing happened yesterday with a gasline construction company, where we will start laying 3300 pipes in 10 days time. Because they work for the oil industry, they want to see DEMONSTRATED COMPLIANCE . I had sent them a copy of my AIRCARE
™ certificate, and when they arrived , I pulled out our SOPs , which have just been audited, and handed them a copy ( as they all want these days) Same thing with strops, lines ,shackles etc.( This group wanted to SEE the actual test data ) One of the group told me we got the job because of the comprehensive SMS systems in place . The thing that swung it was we had even tested and scribed each shackle, with its own test number and authentic following data, --something we never did a few years ago, I must admit.
The problem is that if there is an accident and the cause was a broken shackle, and they didnt check that we had every thing in place, then the oil company could(would) make it very difficult for them. From a legal perspective, they are the principal, and are just as liable now as the offender.
I know this doesnt affect you fixed wing operators, but for the Helicopter guys, times are-a-moving,.. fast. Be warned.
What does affect all operators is that we are being asked to comply with two safety systems –
many of you have systems of managing safety which will deliver compliance with both the CA Act and HSE Act. However, one of the more tricky areas is that the test for “safe” is quite different between the two systems. When the CA Act abandoned “safety at reasonable cost” we had no meaningful statutory test other than a “sustainable industry.” However, the HSE Act prescribes the test for “safe” as “all practicable means”. In our environment, the best way of complying with the “all practicable means” test is to stop flying. This is the ultimate mitigation – of course we may go broke!!!
So, look to the airlines sector and how they managed the risks associated with volcanic ash – a combination of intelligence, data, consultation and communication i.e. best risk management practice in accord with ISO 31000-2009. We provide you with training click here
backed up by the AIRCARE™ management and assurance programme. Around 68 operators are either accredited in accordence with the AIRCARE™ system or are in the process of becoming compliant.
We fully accept that AIRCARE™ is not the only method of compliance but it is the only method sanctioned and approved by the AIA Council, a body which comprises over 400 years of aviation operational experience. And it is that 400 years of operational experience that stands alongside those utilizing the AIRCARE™ brand owners. That cannot be matched by any other programme or scheme.
At the end of the day remember risk is the likelihood of not meeting your objectives. AIRCARE™ gives you tools, systems and processes for addressing those risks.
Protecting the reputation of New Zealand’s aviation industry is critical to the success of each one of us.
It was interesting to see that the recent tragic loss of one of our fellow helicopter pilots was reported in global aviation media within 24 hours of the event. We know these two media sources are read by around 100,000 practitioners. What they remember – the two brands mentioned: that of the country and manufacturer. As we move into promoting our very distinctive aviation industry products around the globe, having the right brand and each one of us committing to protect the brand, will be critical. We all want to be winners and we all want to have a smile on our face every day as we reflect on the accomplishments of our fabulous industry.
The Indonesian Aviation market continues to grow
. A strong team of companies will be visiting the market in May to promote New Zealand’s training, advisory services, engineering and airport development/fit-out capabilities. A comprehensive programme is being developed with NZTE. We will also participate in a New Zealand Business Forum, with other sectors from New Zealand. This will generate increased awareness of what NZ Inc has to offer. Sometimes, when looking at overseas markets, we think we are small – but if Auckland Airport was in Indonesia, it would be the second busiest in the country, Christchurch would be 5th
busiest and Wellington 6th
. With the right targeting we can be successful in these large markets.
Callaghan Innovation exists to help innovative R&D in New Zealand
. We had a meeting with this new entity during the week (it comes from the merger of a number of different government R&D organisations). We talked about the growth potential of our industry and some of the innovative work under way. They are very keen to encourage this and will be taking a much closer interest in aviation. This includes a presence at our conference in June. We’ll be meeting again soon.
New Zealand Government tenders in the aviation space
are advertised through GETS, the Government Electronic Tender Service. Companies have to register to get advice of tenders (www.gets.govt.nz
). There have been one recent tenders of possible interest to companies:
RFP by CAA ‘Aviation Safety Management System’ seeking proposals to undertake a review of the CAA’s business processes which enable delivery of regulatory functions. Responses due by 20 March.
Aviation is in our DNA