CASA 93/21 — Training and Checking (CASR Part 135 and Subpart 121.Z) Determination 2021

The instrument builds on a small set of legal concepts and implements them through the Schedule. Those concepts are:

• Relevant flight: defined in cl 3 as a flight for an operator to which Part 135 or Subpart 121.Z of CASR applies; the instrument applies "in relation to a relevant flight" (cl 5). The Schedule therefore does not apply outside the operation types covered by those Parts (see cl 3 notes referencing reg 135.005 and subreg 121.005(2)).

• New requirement / new event: the training or checking obligation that applies on or after 2 December 2021 under CASR Part 135/Subpart 121.Z. The Schedule sets out, in Column 1, the new requirement to be met (for example, "operator’s general emergency training and flight crew member general emergency check of competency" for the aeroplane, with statutory references to subregulation 135.380(2)(f) and 135.380(4), and the Part 135 MOS paragraph 12.03(a)).

• Old event: the pre‑2 December 2021 training or checking event which, if it happened before that date and meets the other clause 6 conditions, is to be treated as satisfying the new requirement. Column 2 of Schedule 1 records the matching old events. Examples include "successful completion of the emergency procedures proficiency test" under CAO 20.11, flight reviews under Part 61 of CASR, instrument proficiency checks under Part 61 of CASR, or successful completion of operator training/checks under CAO 82.0 and the operator’s training and checking manual.

• Expiry date / expiry mechanics: Column 3 sets the cut‑off at which the deeming effect will no longer apply. The Schedule often specifies the "earlier of" multiple events (for example, the day the old proficiency check expires; the day the crew member undertakes a specified recurrent check; or a fixed calendar date such as 2 December 2022). For some training elements (notably operator conversion training and differences training) the Schedule records "no expiry date". For other items the expiry is time‑limited (for example, many recurrent proficiency deemings expire on 2 December 2022, while life‑raft competency deemings often have a 3‑year or 2 December 2024 limit).

• Persons covered: the Schedule uses role labels (flight crew member, air crew member, medical transport specialist) and repeatedly allows coverage for "a crew member, with duties analogous to those of an ACM/MTS, under a T&CO", or for persons to whom an initial paragraph does not apply (and who instead qualify by having performed unsupervised charter/aerial work flights). Clause 3(1) supplies definitions and cross‑references to CAO 20.11, CAO 82.0 and CAR.

• Relationship to MOS and operator manuals: the Schedule does not rewrite the MOS; it ties the new requirements to the operator’s training and checking manual and Part 135 Manual of Standards (MOS) provisions (for example, paragraph 12.03 of the Part 135 MOS). Notes in the Schedule repeatedly state that remedial training under specific MOS sections (for example sections 12.09, 14.09, 15.09) "may still be required".

Legally, the instrument is a deeming/determination instrument that operates only for the purposes of regulation 202.418 of CASR (see cl 4 and cl 6). It does not amend CASR or the MOS; it creates transitional recognition of particular legacy events for the new regulatory regime, subject to the Schedule’s temporal limits.

The instrument affects three categories of people and the operators that employ them, as recorded in Schedule 1 and the clauses:

1. Flight crew members (FCMs). Schedule items 1-5 address FCMs. The instrument distinguishes:

   • FCMs who were required under subsection 12 of CAO 20.11 to undertake and pass an emergency procedures proficiency test (item 1 and item 4 references);
   • FCMs who were subject to an operator’s T&CO under reg 217 of the old CAR (items 2 and 3 reference "an FCM under a T&CO");
   • FCMs who do not fall into those paragraphs but have conducted at least one unsupervised aerial work or charter (air ambulance) flight for the operator using the relevant aeroplane (these can qualify under the alternative old event column entries).

2. Air crew members (ACMs). Schedule items 6-11 cover ACMs, including:

   • ACMs who had to pass an emergency procedures proficiency test under the prior CAO (item 6);
   • ACMs who were under a T&CO before 2 December 2021 (items 7-11), or who have unsupervised charter/aerial work flight experience that meets the old event standard.

3. Medical transport specialists (MTSs). Schedule items 12-17 cover MTSs in analogous layout and with similar T&CO / unsupervised flight alternatives.

Operators: the instrument affects the operators that carry out relevant flights under Part 135 or Subpart 121.Z because it changes what events can be recorded as meeting new requirements for the purposes of reg 202.418. Clause 3(4) expressly states that a reference to an operator’s training and checking manual includes relevant text included in the operator’s operations manual. The table repeatedly links the "new requirement" to compliance with operator procedures in accordance with specified MOS paragraphs (for example, paragraph 12.03 of Part 135 MOS for flight crew general emergency training, paragraph 13.03 for air crew, paragraph 14.03 for MTS etc).

Regulatory status of T&CO crew: persons who were subject to a T&CO under regulation 217 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR) immediately before 2 December 2021 are explicitly captured in many old‑event columns as being eligible (see repeated wording "was subject to the operator’s training and checking organisation (T&CO) under regulation 217 of CAR").

Who pays and who decides: CASA, by delegate, made the instrument (signed by the Executive Manager, National Operations & Standards) and decides the deeming effect (cl 1 signature and cl 6 determination). Operators and affected crew bear the compliance and record‑keeping burden to show that an old event happened and was valid immediately before 2 December 2021, and to track expiry triggers in Column 3. The instrument applies only in relation to relevant flights (cl 5).

Geographic and operational scope: the instrument is limited to flights where Part 135 or Subpart 121.Z applies (definition of "relevant flight" in cl 3 and cl 5). Notes in cl 3 explain the seat/weight thresholds that delineate applicability of Part 135 and Subpart 121.Z (reg 135.005 and subreg 121.005(2) referenced in notes).

The instrument does not create new positive duties on operators or crew beyond the requirements in CASR Part 135 or MOS; instead it prescribes that, for certain transitional flights and periods, specific historic training or checking events are to be "taken to have happened" and the new requirement "taken to have been met" for the purposes of reg 202.418 (cl 6(d)-(e)). Nevertheless this produces practical obligations and entitlements:

• Duty to establish eligibility for the deeming effect. The person and operator must show the three clause 6 conditions are met: the new requirement applies to the relevant flight; the old event happened before 2 December 2021; and the flight occurs on or after 2 December 2021 but before the expiry date in Schedule 1 (cl 6). Operators and crew must therefore maintain records proving the old event occurred and was valid immediately before 2 December 2021 , the instrument repeatedly requires the old event be "valid immediately before 2 December 2021" (see multiple old event descriptions in Schedule 1).

• Deemed compliance entitlement. If conditions of cl 6 are satisfied, the operator and the person can treat the new training/checking requirement as met for a relevant flight that takes place before the expiry date in Column 3 (cl 6(d)-(e)). That is an entitlement for the purposes of reg 202.418 (cl 4 gives the instrument its legal basis).

• Temporal limits and triggers. The Schedule sets explicit expiry mechanics. For many proficiency checks, the expiry is the earlier of a) the day the old proficiency check ceases to be valid; b) when the person undertakes the new required recurrent check as specified in another Schedule item; or c) a fixed date (commonly 2 December 2022). For some training items (for instance the operator’s conversion training or differences training, in several items) Column 3 shows "no expiry date". The instrument therefore differentiates between training modules that are treated as permanently satisfied and competence checks that are time‑limited as to the deeming.

• Interplay with remedial training in MOS. The Schedule repeatedly notes that remedial training under particular MOS sections "may still be required" (for example: notes referencing section 12.09 of Part 135 MOS, section 14.09, 15.09, etc). That indicates that even where the old event is deemed to satisfy a new requirement, the operator may still be obligated under the MOS to provide remedial training in circumstances specified in those MOS provisions. The instrument does not remove MOS obligations; it only recognises historic events for the purposes of reg 202.418.

• Right to use T&CO‑based old events. Many old event columns permit successful completion of operator training/checking "under the T&CO" before 2 December 2021 to be the qualifying old event. Thus crew who were trained and checked via the operator’s T&CO immediately before the CASR transition can rely on that as an old event where the Schedule says so.

• Right to be treated as compliant only within scope. The deeming is explicitly "for the purposes of regulation 202.418 of CASR" (cl 4 and cl 6). It does not amend or otherwise change MOS or CASR standards; it only provides transitional recognition for the limited statutory purpose. The instrument does not remove operators’ broader regulatory obligations under Part 135 and other CASR provisions.

Practical implication for operations: operators and affected crew should interpret the instrument as a temporary or limited legal mechanism that allows continuity of operations post‑2 December 2021 by recognising certain legacy training/checking events, but subject to the precise expiry triggers and potential remedial training requirements set out in the MOS references in the Schedule.

The instrument itself does not create penalties or an enforcement regime; it is a statutory determination for the purposes of subregulation 202.418(3) of CASR (cl 4). Enforcement consequences and penalties for non‑compliance with CASR remain in the primary safety legislation and regulations, not in this determination. The instrument therefore has the following enforcement implications, as can be read from its terms:

• No novel penalty provisions in the instrument. There are no penalty clauses or infringement provisions in CASA 93/21. It simply directs that, for specified purposes, particular old events are to be taken as meeting new requirements while the Schedule conditions hold.

• Enforcement remains under CASR and related instruments. Because the instrument is expressly a determination for the purposes of subregulation 202.418(3) (cl 4) and operates by deeming for that regulatory purpose (cl 6), any compliance checks, enforcement notices, sanctions or penalty proceedings for non‑compliance with CASR remain matters under the CASR, the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the enforcement framework those instruments provide. The instrument itself does not alter the enforcement tools available to CASA under the Act and CASR.

• Record‑keeping and evidentiary burden. The instrument places an implicit administrative burden on operators and individuals: to rely on the deeming effect an operator must be able to show the old event happened before 2 December 2021 and was valid immediately before that date (Schedule 1 repeated requirement). Failure to produce records may result in CASA treating the person as non‑compliant with CASR requirements for the flight, which could lead to enforcement action under the primary regulatory instruments. The instrument therefore increases the practical importance of robust training and checking records for the date immediately before 2 December 2021.

• MOS‑linked remedial obligations. The Schedule's notes repeatedly flag that remedial training in MOS sections (for example Part 135 MOS section 12.09, 14.09, 15.09) "may still be required". If remedial training obligations under the MOS apply and are not met, enforcement action could follow under the CASR/MOS framework even where the old event has been deemed to satisfy a new requirement for a time‑limited period.

• Time‑limited compliance defence. Where the Schedule deems an old event to meet a new requirement until a specified expiry, that deeming functions as a legal basis to show regulatory compliance in relation to reg 202.418 for flights conducted before the expiry. Once the expiry is passed, the deemed compliance ceases and operators must ensure the person meets the new requirement under Part 135/Subpart 121.Z or face the usual enforcement consequences for non‑compliance.

In short, CASA 93/21 does not itself punish or enforce; it modifies the evidentiary/legal position that CASA and operators will consider for the purposes of reg 202.418 during the Schedule’s temporary transition periods. All enforcement tools remain in the parent regulatory framework.

The instrument explicitly cross‑references and interacts with a set of existing instruments and statutory provisions. The most important interactions in the text are:

• CASR (Part 135 and Subpart 121.Z): Clause 4 states the instrument is a determination for the purposes of subregulation 202.418(3) of CASR. Clause 3(3) clarifies that a reference to provision with the prefix "135." is to that provision as contained in Part 135 of CASR. Clause 5 fixes application to "relevant flight", and cl 3 defines "relevant flight" by reference to Part 135/Subpart 121.Z (Notes under cl 3 refer to reg 135.005 and subreg 121.005(2)). Therefore the instrument operates within the CASR framework and only affects flights that fall under those Parts.

• Civil Aviation Orders (CAO) and Civil Aviation Regulations (CAR): Clause 3(1) defines CAO 20.11 and CAO 82.0 as the CAOs in force immediately before 2 December 2021, and CAR as Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 as in force immediately before 2 December 2021. Schedule 1 repeatedly treats completion of legacy CAO/CAR‑era proficiency tests and checks (for example the emergency procedures proficiency test in Appendix IV of CAO 20.11) as qualifying old events. Thus the instrument creates a bridge from the pre‑CASR regulatory regime (CAO/CAR) to the new CASR regime.

• Part 135 Manual of Standards (MOS): Schedule entries tie the new requirements to specified paragraphs of the Part 135 MOS (for example paragraph 12.03 for flight crew general emergency training, paragraph 13.03 for ACMs, paragraph 14.03 for MTSs, and references to sections 12.04, 12.05, 12.06, 12.08, 12.09 etc). Those MOS provisions remain operative; the instrument does not change MOS content but instructs that certain old events are to be treated as meeting new MOS‑linked requirements for limited periods.

• Operator documents and T&CO: Clause 3(4) expressly states that a reference to an "operator’s training and checking manual" includes relevant text included in the operator’s operations manual. Schedule 1 includes old events described as successful completion "under the T&CO" (operator’s training and checking organisation under reg 217 of CAR) , the instrument therefore recognises operator internal processes under the old regime as potentially satisfying new CASR requirements during the transitional period.

• Civil Aviation Act 1988: Clause 3 notes that certain terms have the same meanings as in the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the regulations (for example "aeroplane", "air crew member", "flight crew member", "IFR flight", "medical transport specialist", "VFR flight"). The instrument therefore relies on definitions from the primary Act/regulatory dictionary for scope and interpretation.

• No substitution of MOS/CASR obligations: The instrument does not purport to change the substantive content of CASR or MOS obligations outside the limited deeming purpose; it does not repeal or amend MOS or CASR provisions. It creates a limited evidentiary legal fiction , old events are "taken to have happened" , only "for the purposes of regulation 202.418" (cl 4 and cl 6). MOS provisions (including remedial training sections) remain in force and applicable where they require further training notwithstanding the Schedule.

• Temporal interactions with legacy competence events: The Schedule ties expiry to the expiry under legacy regimes (for example the expiry date of an emergency procedures proficiency test, or the day an instrument proficiency check is no longer valid under Part 61 of CASR), or to the day a recurrent check under CASR Part 135 is undertaken. This means the instrument interacts legally with the pre‑existing expiry rules for the old events and with the new expiry/recurrent rules under CASR and MOS.

Overall, the instrument is a narrowly framed transitional connector between the pre‑2 December 2021 CAO/CAR/T&CO regime and the new CASR/MOS regime for Part 135/Subpart 121.Z operations. Its operation is conditional and time‑limited and relies on both legacy and current regulatory definitions and expiry mechanics.

The instrument text itself contains the following amendment and provenance information:

• Instrument name and number: CASA 93/21 , Training and Checking (CASR Part 135 and Subpart 121.Z) Determination 2021 (cl 1).

• Making officer and date: It was made by Christopher Paul Monahan, Executive Manager, National Operations & Standards, a delegate of CASA, and signed on 28 November 2021 (signature block immediately before the instrument title). Clause 2 records commencement on 2 December 2021.

• Legislative basis: The instrument is made under subregulation 202.418(3) of CASR (opening paragraph and cl 4). That subregulation is the legal hook for making determinations of this kind; the instrument is expressly "a determination for the purposes of subregulation 202.418(3)" (cl 4).

• No internal amendments recorded: The instrument does not record any amendments to itself, and the document provided contains only the original instrument text. There are no schedules of amendments, no notation of repeal or modification of earlier determinations within the instrument text.

• Legacy instrument references: Clause 3(1) defines CAO 20.11 and CAO 82.0 "as in force immediately before 2 December 2021", and CAR "as in force immediately before 2 December 2021". That phrasing indicates the instrument is intended to operate against the state of the pre‑CASR legal environment and that the instrument’s transitional mappings refer to legacy instruments as they stood immediately prior to CASR becoming operative in relation to Part 135/Subpart 121.Z.

• No repeal clause or sunset formal amendment: The instrument achieves time‑limits for particular deemings via Schedule 1 Column 3 expiry dates; it does not, however, include an overall sunset clause for the instrument itself. The determinations cease to apply for specific persons/events in accordance with the expiry mechanics in Column 3. The instrument does not otherwise indicate future amendment schedules or automatic renewal; any amendment or repeal of CASA 93/21 would therefore require further formal action by CASA under the relevant legislative power.

The instrument is therefore a single‑purpose transitional instrument made late November 2021 and commenced 2 December 2021; the Schedule itself provides most of the temporal limitation mechanics. The instrument text contains no recorded subsequent amendments or prior versions.

The instrument text contains no litigation history, case references, or recorded judicial consideration. It is a delegated administrative determination (signed by a CASA delegate) and the instrument itself does not cite any judicial decisions. The table and the clauses do make references to CAO, CAR, CASR and MOS provisions but no court or tribunal decisions are named.

What the instrument does show about potential litigation risk or issues that could produce litigation:

• Evidentiary disputes. Because the instrument conditions its deeming effect on the old event having been "valid immediately before 2 December 2021" (see many old event entries in Schedule 1), disputes could arise between operators and CASA about whether a particular historic certificate/check was valid at that time. That is an evidentiary issue that, if contested by CASA in enforcement proceedings, could lead to litigation in which the facts about the old event’s validity are determinative.

• Interpretation questions. The Schedule uses role labels and alternative phrases such as "a crew member, with duties analogous to those of an ACM/MTS", and refers to old operator‑based checks "however described". Those formulations leave open scope for argument about whether a particular person or event fits the Schedule’s old event wording. If CASA and an operator disagree, that could become a question in a tribunal or court proceeding concerning the construction of the instrument and the Schedule items.

• MOS remedial obligations. The Schedule’s repeated notes that remedial training under MOS sections "may still be required" means that disputes could arise about when remedial training is triggered and whether the deeming rule displaces or coexists with MOS remedial obligations. If CASA were to take the view that remedial training was required and an operator resisted, that could produce contested enforcement matters.

• No recorded cases. The instrument does not name any cases and does not record any litigation arising from it in the provided text. Practitioners needing to know whether litigation occurred after commencement would need to search administrative law and aviation enforcement decisions post‑December 2021.

In short, the instrument itself contains no litigation history; it creates factual and interpretive question areas (validity of an old event, whether a person falls within an item, interplay with MOS remedial obligations) that in practice could generate disputes that might be litigated under the CASR enforcement regime, but no such cases are recorded within the instrument.

The instrument contains multiple potential traps for operators and crew; the Schedule’s careful drafting produces several operational and legal pitfalls that must be tracked precisely:

• Deeming only for the purposes of reg 202.418. The instrument repeatedly states that it is a determination for the purposes of subregulation 202.418(3) of CASR (cl 4), and cl 6’s effects are similarly framed "for the purposes of regulation 202.418". It does not amend MOS or change other CASR obligations. Reliance on the instrument outside the specific legal context of reg 202.418 could be misplaced.

• Requirement that old event was valid immediately before 2 December 2021. Many Schedule items condition the old event on being valid "immediately before 2 December 2021". Absent clear documentary proof of that validity at that precise cut‑off, an operator cannot rely on the deeming. Operators must therefore possess contemporaneous records proving the old event’s validity at that exact time; post‑hoc or ambiguous records may not be accepted.

• Different expiry mechanics for training vs checks. The Schedule often differentiates between training elements (which in several items show "no expiry date") and checks/proficiency (which usually have an "earlier of" formula that can trigger expiry upon the old check’s own expiry, the person undertaking the new recurrent check, or on a calendar cut‑off such as 2 December 2022). A common error will be assuming "no expiry date" for an item extends to all parts of that item; in many instances the training element has no expiry but the competency check element does.

• Multiple trigger points and "earlier of" logic. Column 3 frequently uses "the earlier of the following" formulations. That creates operational complexity: the first of several possible triggers (expiry of old test, undertaking the new recurrent check, or fixed date) ends the deeming. Operators must track multiple potential triggers and take proactive steps to arrange recurrent checks if desired to extend eligibility beyond the earliest trigger.

• MOS remedial training may still be required. The Schedule’s note entries explicitly flag that remedial training per MOS sections (for example section 12.09) "may still be required". The deeming of an old event does not necessarily discharge remedial training obligations under the MOS. Operators should not assume that deemed compliance eliminates MOS‑based remedial requirements.

• T&CO and "duties analogous" language creates ambiguity. Several items permit "a crew member, with duties analogous to those of an ACM/MTS, under a T&CO" or alternative qualification by having undertaken unsupervised charter/aerial work flights. Those formulations are fact‑specific and could be subject to differing interpretations between CASA and operators. Operators should not assume that informal or loosely described responsibilities satisfy the instrument’s "analogous duties" language.

• The instrument applies only to Part 135/Subpart 121.Z relevant flights. It does not apply to other categories of operation. The cl 3 notes make clear the seat/weight thresholds that determine whether Part 135 or Subpart 121.Z apply (references to reg 135.005 and subreg 121.005(2)). Applying the Schedule to an inapposite flight type is a mistake.

• Record integrity risk. Because the instrument’s effect is conditional on historic validity, operators who lack secure, timestamped records for checks and proficiency tests immediately before 2 December 2021 risk losing the benefit of the deeming. This is especially salient where crew have changed employers or where paper records are incomplete.

• No instrument‑level enforcement guidance. The instrument does not set out administrative processes for CASA audits, evidence submission, or dispute resolution of eligibility questions. Operational managers should therefore assume CASA will apply standard CASA enforcement and audit processes under CASR and plan accordingly.

• Fixed calendar expiry dates. Several items use a fixed date cut‑off (principally 2 December 2022 and 2 December 2024 for life‑raft checks). Operators relying on a deemed event must note that these are absolute backstops and will terminate the deemed status regardless of other continuing circumstances.

Those "gotchas" flow directly from the instrument text (see cl 6, cl 3, and the detailed expiry entries and notes in Schedule 1). They create practical compliance risks that operators must manage by record‑keeping, scheduling and interpreting MOS remedial rules conservatively.

The instrument prescribes a narrow legal mechanism; operators and affected crew should follow these concrete compliance steps, grounded in the instrument’s clauses and Schedule wording:

1. Identify applicability: confirm that each flight is a "relevant flight" as defined by the instrument (cl 5 and cl 3 notes). That means verify the operation falls under CASR Part 135 or Subpart 121.Z (see reg 135.005 and subreg 121.005(2) referenced in cl 3 notes for seat/weight thresholds).

2. Map crew roles to Schedule items: classify persons as Flight Crew Member (items 1-5), Air Crew Member (6-11) or Medical Transport Specialist (12-17) according to the instrument’s role labels and the operational duties they perform. For crew "with duties analogous" to ACM or MTS, document role descriptions to support that characterization (Schedule language recognises "crew member, with duties analogous to those of an ACM/MTS").

3. Confirm the old event occurred and was valid immediately before 2 December 2021: for the person and item you intend to rely upon, ensure documentary proof exists that the specified old event was completed and valid immediately before 2 December 2021. Schedule 1 repeatedly conditions the old event on being "valid immediately before 2 December 2021". Collect original proficiency test certificates, T&CO training/completion records, flight review records under Part 61, instrument proficiency check records, or other operator training/checking manual records.

4. Determine the relevant Column 3 expiry rule: for the Schedule item you rely upon, identify the expiry mechanics in Column 3 exactly. Common formulations are:

   • "No expiry date" for operator conversion/differences training items , training recognised indefinitely (Schedule entries showing "no expiry date" for training elements).
   • "Earlier of: (a) the day the old proficiency/check is no longer valid; (b) the day the person undertakes a specified recurrent check; (c) 2 December 2022" , schedule these triggers and plan recurrent checks well before the earliest trigger.
   • For life raft competency the earlier of expiry of old test, undertaking a recurrent check for life rafts, or fixed 2 December 2024; or a 3‑year rule (three years after old proficiency test) , check precisely which applies in the relevant item.

5. Plan recurrent or conversion checks proactively: if the Column 3 expiry will occur (for example the fixed 2 December 2022 date or the expiry of the old proficiency test), plan to conduct the new recurrent checks early enough to avoid any gap once the deeming ceases. Many items indicate undertaking a recurrent check mentioned in another Schedule item will end the deeming for the old event and effectively transition the person into the new CASR check regime (see cross references in Column 3).

6. Account for MOS remedial training: the Schedule’s notes repeatedly say remedial training under the Part 135 MOS "may still be required" (for example notes referencing sections 12.09, 14.09, 15.09). Operators should review the applicable MOS sections referenced in Column 1/notes for the item and be ready to provide remedial training even where an old event is being relied upon. Add MOS remedial training triggers to your compliance matrix.

7. Preserve and index T&CO records: if old events were completed "under the T&CO" before 2 December 2021, ensure those records are preserved and clearly labelled. Clause 3(4) treats "operator’s training and checking manual" as including operations manual text; Schedule entries accept T&CO‑based qualification in Column 2 for many items. Demonstrating T&CO status and the content of the operator’s manual as it applied to the person immediately before 2 December 2021 will be necessary.

8. Maintain an expiry‑tracking register: because Column 3 often uses the "earlier of" mechanics and fixed cut‑off dates, maintain a register, per person, listing (a) the old event date and validity expiry; (b) the fixed calendar expiry from Schedule 1; (c) any new recurrent checks undertaken that will terminate the deeming effect; (d) remedial training requirements. Use this register to schedule training/checks and avoid inadvertent non‑compliance once a deemed period lapses.

9. Produce evidence on audit or enforcement: the instrument’s deeming effect is legally conditional and will be relevant "for the purposes of regulation 202.418". If CASA audits or inspects, produce documentary proof that the old event was valid immediately before 2 December 2021 and that the relevant flight falls within the Schedule’s expiry period. Operators should have staff authorised to retrieve and present T&CO/operator manual evidence, MOS cross‑references, and personnel files.

10. Do not assume the instrument removes MOS obligations: use the Schedule as an eligibility tool only; do not rely upon the instrument to avoid MOS remedial training obligations or other CASR/MOS compliance. If remedial training is triggered under MOS sections referenced in the Schedule, provide it.

11. Legal/operational review and documentation: update the operator’s training and checking manual (and operations manual where relevant) to reflect the transitional bridge the instrument provides, the internal processes for documenting old events, the expiry rules, and how staff scheduling will handle transitions to CASR checks. Clause 3(4)’s inclusion of operations manual text in the definition of "operator’s training and checking manual" supports documenting the transitional approach in operator manuals.

12. Seek clarification where ambiguous: when a person’s status is borderline (for example "duties analogous to those of an ACM/MTS" or the old event is described in non‑standard language), consider obtaining a formal CASA clarification in writing or seek specialist regulatory advice. The instrument contains language intended to be flexible in places, but that flexibility creates interpretive risk.

These steps derive directly from the instrument’s clauses and the specific wording in Schedule 1. Operators should integrate these steps into their compliance management and record retention processes to preserve the transitional benefit the instrument provides and to avoid gaps once the Schedule expiry triggers occur.