CASA Consultation Hub

We recently invited feedback on guidance material for remotely piloted aircraft operator’s certificate (ReOC) holders who conduct operations beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS).

We asked you to comment on:

• 5 BVLOS standard scenarios
• guidance material developed by CASA.

The documents consulted on were:

• Draft Standard Scenario application and documents – guidance material
• Draft AU-STS 1: Applicant response – BVLOS operations near a vertical object(s) with a controlled ground environment
• Draft AU-STS 2: Applicant response – BVLOS operations near a vertical object(s) with a sparsely populated ground environment
• Draft AU-STS 4: Applicant response – BVLOS operations in a remote area within 3 NM of a registered or certified non-controlled aerodrome
• Draft AU-STS 6: Applicant response – BVLOS operations in remote Australian airspace (below 400 ft AGL)
• Draft AU-STS 7: Applicant response – BVLOS operations in remote Australian airspace (400 ft AGL to 5000 ft AMSL).

Each standard scenario details:

• a type of operation
• the required operational mitigations
• information needed to apply to CASA.

These standard scenarios use the Specific Operations Risk Assessment (SORA) developed by the Joint Authorities for Rulemaking on Unmanned Systems (JARUS). The SORA is an internationally recognised risk assessment method.

We received 44 responses to the consultation:

• 18 ReOC holders
• 1 RPAS training organisation
• 9 commercial or professional RPAS pilots
• 2 sport or recreational drone pilots
• 2 government organisations
• 1 identified themself as ‘other aviation’
• 11 identified themselves as other, with backgrounds ranging from RPA manufacturing, technology development, and engineering.

Of the 44 responses received:

• 25 provided feedback for an organisation
• 19 provided personal feedback

CASA values the feedback from all respondents.

Your feedback

Responses to the consultation were positive. Most respondents found the standard scenarios either usable or requiring minor changes.

The feedback also revealed some common questions and themes about the scenarios. These included:

• whether a ReOC holder needs approval from CASA if an operation is carried out in alignment with a published standard scenario
• whether a 1:1 ground risk buffer is enough to ensure safe operations
• the definition and meaning of the 'J-curve'
• the impacts continuing evolution of the SORA will have on these scenarios in the future

In addition, several respondents commented on the IREX qualification needed to meet the aeronautical knowledge requirements in CASR 101.300 (4) (a).  It was noted that the IREX felt like an unnecessary burden for the standard scenarios and may not be fit for purpose. Safety concerns were also raised about electronic conspicuity requirements for non-remotely piloted aircraft.

We considered all feedback provided and incorporated or further clarified in this summary of consultation.

CASA approval is required for any BVLOS operation. The purpose of the standard scenarios is to lessen the time and resource burden on ReOC holders in the application process. The scenarios do not replace the need for a ReOC holder to seek CASA approval to operate BVLOS.

The 1:1 ground risk buffer detailed in the scenarios is the minimum buffer set out in the JARUS SORA. This buffer will not be suitable for all operations. The ReOC holder must show in their application that this buffer is enough or apply a larger buffer, where needed.

CASA acknowledges the documents provided did not define the term ‘J-curve’ in the context of the standard scenarios. This definition will be in the final versions.

The standard scenarios used the latest iteration of the SORA (at the time of publication). JARUS is continuing to develop and improve the SORA method. CASA will update the standard scenarios to align with the latest international standards and Australian regulations, when required.

CASR 101.300 (4) (a) mandates the remote pilot in command (RPIC) must hold an IREX qualification. This is beyond the scope of this consultation. This regulation was developed to allow medium and large RPA to operate BVLOS in the same airspace as piloted aircraft in the future. An IREX qualification would be essential to make sure these operations are safe. Some alleviations are already available in legislative instrument EX46/21. Separately, CASA is considering other pathways for remote pilots to gain the knowledge and skills needed for lower risk BVLOS operations.

We have noted feedback raised about the electronic conspicuity requirements for non-remotely piloted aircraft. This is beyond the scope of this consultation. 

What to expect

We will publish the final documents by the end of August 2021. Following their release, we will review the standard scenarios to find out if they have been useful guidance for BVLOS operations. We will make any updates or changes as required.

We will also aim to develop new scenarios based on your feedback. We will review the scenarios to ensure international consistency with our own standards and any new advice from JARUS.

Your feedback on the standard scenarios will be helpful in guiding the direction of the RPAS and Advanced Air Mobility strategic regulatory roadmap. This roadmap will aim to give industry a clear understanding of the future direction of RPAS regulations in Australia. The BVLOS standard scenarios are a step towards streamlining and improving the application process for complex operations in Australian airspace.

From 13 January 2021 to 10 February 2021, aerodrome and aircraft landing area operators, planning authorities, pilots, persons involved in the design, construction and operation of wind farms and wind monitoring masts and internal CASA personnel were invited to review and provide feedback on the suitability of guidance material on matters that should be considered when assessing a wind turbine development so that all necessary measures can be taken to protect aviation safety.

We received a total of 6 responses, all from different areas of industry. Three respondents consented to having their comments published, 2 did not give their consent and one respondent was a CASA officer.

Summary of feedback

Most respondents recommended changes that were editorial in nature.

Several matters were raised that required further consideration and clarification, including:

• Aeronautical studies commissioned by wind farm proponents can lack independence and down-play the extent and impact of the wind farm proposal on aviation activities. There is potential need for an independent accredited auditor to review aeronautical assessments to ensure non-biased assessments are being provided to CASA.
• Inclusion of more detail in the 'early review by proponent' stage to ensure proponents do not miss uncertified aerodromes and aircraft landing areas nearby to proposed sites.
• Providing clear guidance on what conditions and criteria CASA will base advice upon when aviation hazard lighting is recommended.

The need for the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications to update the National Airports Safeguarding Framework Guideline D: Managing Wind Turbine Risk to Aircraft to reflect current windfarm technology was noted.

Next steps

All comments provided by industry have been carefully considered and where appropriate, incorporated into the AC. The AC 139.E-05 v1.0 - Obstacles (wind farms) outside the vicinity of a CASA certified aerodrome is now available on the advisory circular page of the CASA website.

From 9 to 23 September 2020 we invited public comment on proposed changes to the rules for drones, also known as remotely piloted aircraft (RPA).

The summary of proposed changes included:

• the operation of foreign-registered drones under a permission in Australian territory
• the proper conduct of online examinations (operator accreditation)
• all registered RPA to, at all times, display CASA-generated registration mark(s) legibly
• registered drone modifications and the criteria any modified drone must meet for it to be re-registered, or registered, as a new drone
• replacing the requirements for excluded category notifications with registrations to reduce administrative burden on operators.

We also proposed additional relief in response to COVID-19, including a transitional amendment to Chapter 2 of the Part 101 Manual of Standards (MOS) for remote pilot licence (RePL) training courses and an 18-month extension for RePL training instructors to obtain the required qualifications.

The consultation asked if participants agree the proposed amendments to Part 101 reflect the policy change as set out in the summary of proposed changes, if it will work as intended and that the amendments will not result in unintended consequences.

CASA thanks the contributions provided by respondents and acknowledges that their feedback is beneficial for the consultation process. The consultation received responses from 56 individuals or organisations, including 17 remotely piloted aircraft operator’s certificate (ReOC) holders, 14 remote pilot licence (RePL) holders, seven training organisations and eight excluded category RPA pilots.

Key feedback

Responses were largely supportive of the proposed amendments. Sixty-seven per cent of respondents agreed that the proposed amendments reflected the change in policy and that they will work as intended. Thirty per cent of respondents did not agree. Almost 58 per cent agreed the proposed amendments would not result in unintended consequences and 39 per cent did not agree.

Respondents provided additional comments to support their response. Overall, additional responses provided feedback outside the scope of the consultation’s proposed amendments and mostly related to the registration requirements and drone safety rules, such as operating near aerodromes, maximum operating height and operating 30 metres from people. As part of our continuous improvement process we have documented this feedback which may inform future consultation and amendment.

Some responses highlighted that elements of the proposed policy relating to the COVID-19 transitional amendment for RePL training courses should be moved from 31 January 2021 to coincide with the respective state or territories first school term of 2021 to allow students to complete their RePL courses at school.

Some respondents advised that some elements of the proposed amendments were unclear, including the removal of the requirement for excluded category operators to notify CASA, registration requirements for modified drones and how this applies to modified drones used for research and development, and that the proposed 18-month extension for RePL training instructors to obtain the relevant qualifications is too long.

Other responses included specific feedback on RePL training course syllabi, the use of registration marks for drones registered in Australia and foreign registered drones operating in Australia.

In response to the consultation, we will extend the transitional amendment to allow any student who commenced a RePL course on or after 3 April 2020, but before 10 October 2020, to complete the course and its examinations and assessments under the relevant syllabi by 30 April 2021. This extension will allow those students and training organisations impacted by COVID-19 to complete their RePL courses during the first term of the 2021 school year. Any course commenced on, or from, 10 October 2020 must be completed against the new syllabi.

We will retain the proposed 18-month extension for RePL training course instructors to 10 April 2022 for Part 101 MOS paragraph 2.30 (2) (c) in Division 2.7. While we recognise some training instructors were able to obtain their qualifications, COVID-19 has had different impacts around Australia and the additional time will provide further support for all training instructors and organisations.

By incorporating the excluded category notification into the RPA registration process, CASA aims to reduce red-tape by simplifying the notification requirements. Combined with the requirement to register the RPA, the requirement for excluded category operators to obtain RPA operator accreditation before they fly will provide data about who is operating an excluded RPA. CASA does not believe the oversight of these operations will be diminished by simplifying the notification requirements.

CASA will consider all feedback as part of a post-implementation review.