CASA EX78/24 –Transitional Training and Checking Requirements for Crew Members in Part 135 Operations – Exemption Instrument 2024

The instrument defines and uses a set of interlocking concepts that determine who can rely on the exemptions and for how long. These are contained principally in section 3 and section 5 with the operative schedule, Table 1.

• Relevant flight and relevant operator. A “relevant flight” is defined by reference to three categories: a Part 135 operation, a Subpart 121.Z operation, or an operation where the operator and pilot in command are complying with CASA EX74/24 (s 3, “relevant flight”; Table 1 header). The instrument therefore applies to aircraft operations that are operating under Part 135, certain limited Subpart 121.Z operations, and certain operations that are permitted under CASA EX74/24. The “relevant operator” is the operator of a relevant flight (s 3).

• Critical date. The “critical date” is the date notified to the relevant operator by CASA for the purposes of s 44 of CASA EX73/24 (s 5(1)). The instrument records that, as of 2 December 2024, the critical date is 28 February 2025 unless varied. The critical date functions as the administrative pivot: the prior event must have happened before the critical date; the requirement to which the exemption would have applied must arise on or after the critical date; and the relevant flight must occur on or after the critical date and before the expiry date specified for that item in Table 1 (s 5(2)(a)-(c)).

• Prior or “previous” event. Each Table 1 item specifies a “previous event” (Column 4) that the crew member must have completed either “immediately before the critical date” or within a prescribed window (for example, completion of at least one unsupervised air transport flight after 28 February 2024 but before the critical date). For some items the previous event is the emergency procedures proficiency test specified in Appendix IV of CAO 20.11 (s 3; Table 1 Column 4).

• Exempted provisions. Column 5 of Table 1 lists the Part 135 MOS paragraphs and CASR subregulations from which exemptions are granted if the instrument’s conditions are met. Commonly exempted items include paragraph 135.380(2)(f) for various subparagraphs of Part 135 MOS paragraph 12.03 and section 12.08, subregulation 135.385(1) (Item 1-4), paragraph 135.445(1)(b) for paragraphs 13.03(a), 13.03(e) and section 13.04, subregulation 135.450(1) (Items 5-8), and paragraph 135.460(1)(b), subregulation 135.465(1) (Items 9-12) and proficiency check exemptions at Items 3 and 11 (Table 1, Column 5).

• Temporal limits. Column 6 of Table 1 sets discrete expiry rules for each item. Some exemptions have no expiry date for certain elements (for example, “For the general emergency training , no expiry date” at Items 1, 5). Other elements expire on the earlier of the prior event’s expiry and fixed dates (commonly 28 February 2026), or on operationally specific windows (for example, complex staggered expiry dates tied to date ranges when a flight review was completed, in Item 3).

• Cross‑reference to CAO 20.11 and Part 61. The instrument imports the definition of the emergency procedures proficiency test from Appendix IV of CAO 20.11 “as in force immediately before 2 December 2021” (s 3). For conversion and proficiency checks the “previous event” can be a flight review valid for the aeroplane under Part 61 (for VFR) or an instrument proficiency check valid under Part 61 (for IFR) immediately before the critical date (Table 1, Item 3).

• “Duties analogous” phrase. Table 1 repeatedly includes crew members described as “with duties analogous to those of an air crew member” or analogous to a medical transport specialist. The instrument treats these persons as falling within the crew categories for the purpose of eligibility where the Table 1 item states that as the relevant “previous designation” (Table 1, Column 3).

Together these concepts set up a mechanism: a crew member and operator qualify for an exemption only when the regulatory requirement applies on or after the critical date, the crew member had completed the specified prior event before that critical date, and the relevant flight occurs in the defined post‑critical date/pre‑expiry window. The instrument therefore creates a conditional transitional path tied to administrative notification by CASA (s 5(1)) and to recordable prior events (Table 1 Column 4).

The instrument applies to two broad classes of persons: individual crew members of a “relevant flight” and the operators of relevant flights (s 4). The Table 1 schedule then disaggregates which designations of crew members are covered and what prior events qualify them for the exemptions.

• Crew members. The instrument addresses three primary crew categories in the Table: “flight crew member” (Items 1-4), “air crew member” (Items 5-8), and “medical transport specialist” (Items 9-12). Each item also contemplates persons who hold a previous designation, for example a flight crew member who, under prior rules, was required by subsection 12 of CAO 20.11 to undertake and pass the emergency procedures proficiency test for the aeroplane (Item 1). Table 1 therefore covers both persons who held the listed designation immediately prior to the instrument and persons who have duties analogous to those designations (“duties analogous” phrase appears repeatedly in Column 3).

• Operators. Section 4(b) explicitly applies the instrument to each operator of a relevant flight. Section 5(2)(e) clarifies that where a specified provision imposes obligations on an operator, or requires the operator to ensure that a crew member complies or that a flight may not commence unless the requirement has been met, the operator is exempted to the same extent the crew member is exempted (s 5(2)(e)(i)-(ii)). In practice that means operators may lawfully commence or continue relevant flights without enforcing the underlying Part 135 MOS or CASR obligation for the period and conditions stated.

• Operators who have opted out. The instrument does not apply to a relevant operator who has voluntarily opted not to take the benefit of CASA EX87/21 or its successor CASA EX73/24 (s 5(1) Note 3). That creates an explicit class of operators excluded from these exemptions by choice.

• Operations. The instrument only applies to “relevant flights”: Part 135 operations, Subpart 121.Z operations and operations conducted under CASA EX74/24 (s 3). The instrument therefore does not purport to cover Part 121 operations generally, nor operations outside those three categories. The instrument’s Note to the definition of “relevant flight” cites regulation 135.005 of CASR and its passenger seat and MTOW thresholds that delineate Part 135 scope (s 3 Note 2). It also notes that CASA EX74/24 is the successor instrument to CASA EX97/22 and allows certain MOPSC 10-13 aeroplanes to operate under Part 135 instead of Part 121 (s 3 Note).

Practical implications of who is affected

• Individuals: A flight crew member, air crew member or medical transport specialist who completed the specified previous event in the window the instrument requires (for example, an emergency procedures proficiency test valid immediately before the critical date, or at least one unsupervised air transport flight in the defined date range) may lawfully be treated as having discharged certain training/checking obligations for the limited period and purposes set out in Table 1 (Table 1 Columns 4-6; s 5(2)(d)).

• Operators: Operators of relevant flights who rely on these exemptions must confirm that the crew member meets the prior event conditions, that the relevant flight occurs in the post‑critical/pre‑expiry window, and that the operator has not opted out of earlier EX instruments (s 5(1) Note 3; s 5(2)(a)-(c)). Operators must also record and be able to demonstrate the event dates that create eligibility and observe the differential expiry rules in Column 6 of Table 1.

• Administrative dependence: Because eligibility hinges on a critical date notified by CASA, the instrument places an administrative step on operators: receipt and application of that notice to determine whether the prior events qualify (s 5(1)). The instrument records a default critical date as at 2 December 2024, but explicitly allows CASA to vary this (s 5(1) Note 2).

This instrument creates rights by way of exemptions and thus alters or suspends certain duties that would otherwise apply under the Part 135 MOS and specific CASR subregulations, for covered crew members and operators, subject to the instrument’s conditions.

Rights conferred by the instrument

• Right to exemption for crew members. Where the instrument’s conditions are satisfied, the crew member is explicitly “exempted from compliance with each provision mentioned in column 5 of the item” (s 5(2)(d)). This is a direct statutory exemption from the identified Part 135 MOS paragraphs and particular CASR subregulations listed in Table 1 Column 5.

• Right to exemption for operators. The operator of the relevant flight is “exempted from compliance with the same provision to the extent that the provision: (i) applies to the operator; or (ii) imposes on the operator an obligation to ensure that the crew member complies with the provision; or (iii) imposes on the operator an obligation that the relevant flight may not commence unless the provision has been complied with” (s 5(2)(e)(i)-(ii); note formatting tracks instrument). Thus the instrument creates a conditional right for operators to rely on those exemptions to begin or continue flights when, but only when, the Table 1 conditions are met.

Duties that remain and operator responsibilities

• Duty to satisfy instrument conditions. Although the instrument removes the specified obligations for covered provisions, operators and crew members still must ensure they meet the instrument’s eligibility conditions: the relevant requirement must apply on or after the critical date, the prior event must have occurred in the specified window, and the flight must occur between the critical date and the expiry date (s 5(2)(a)-(c)). That creates an administrative duty to track and verify dates, designations and validity of prior events.

• Duty to not rely where inapplicable. The instrument expressly excludes operators who have voluntarily opted out of the benefit of prior exemption instruments (s 5(1) Note 3). An operator that opted out cannot rely on this instrument. Where the specified prior events did not occur in the required timeframe, or the flight occurs after the item’s expiry date, the exemptions will not apply and the normal Part 135 MOS and CASR obligations remain.

• Interaction with underlying regulatory duties. The instrument does not purport to alter duties that are outside the specific provisions listed in Table 1 Column 5. It is therefore incumbent on operators to check whether other training and checking provisions or broader safety obligations remain applicable notwithstanding the exemption for the listed provisions. The instrument’s structure demonstrates it is a narrow, conditional relief instrument rather than a wholesale suspension of Part 135 training and checking obligations.

Specific duties and provisions affected

• Emergency training and general emergency check of competency. Items 1, 2, 5 and 6 grant exemptions from paragraph 135.380(2)(f) (for specified purposes within the Part 135 MOS) and corresponding subregulation 135.385(1) to the extent of the paragraph exemption. The effect is that where a crew member has completed the prior emergency procedures proficiency test or the specified unsupervised flights, certain annual general emergency training and competency check obligations are not required for specified durations (Table 1, Items 1-2 and 5-6, Column 5).

• Conversion training and proficiency checks. Item 3 grants exemptions from paragraph 135.380(2)(f) for paragraph 12.03(b) of the Part 135 MOS, subregulation 135.385(1) to that extent, and subregulation 135.405(1) and (2). The conversion training exemption can have no expiry date at the operator level, while the flight crew member proficiency check (FCM proficiency check) has staggered expiry rules dependent on when the relevant flight review was completed (Table 1 Item 3, Column 6).

• Line training and line checking. Items 4 and 8 provide exemptions from paragraph 135.380(2)(f) for paragraph 12.03(c) and paragraph 135.445(1)(b) for paragraph 13.03(c) respectively, and subregulation 135.385(1) or 135.450(1) to the extent of those paragraph exemptions. Both items specify “No expiry date” in Column 6 for the exemption.

• Medical transport specialist provisions. Items 9-12 mirror the structure used for flight crew and air crew with exemptions from paragraph 135.460(1)(b) for specified paragraph purposes and subregulation 135.465(1). The prior events and expiry rules are tailored to the medical transport specialist role and include similar distinctions for life raft competency and fixed expiry dates (Table 1 Items 9-12).

Rights and limits summary

• The instrument expressly limits the exemption to the provision(s) listed for the Table 1 item. It does not create a general defence to unrelated compliance obligations.

• The operator’s exemption is expressly limited “to the extent” the provision applies to the operator or imposes obligations on the operator to ensure crew compliance or to prevent a flight commencing. This framing preserves the operator’s duty to ensure compliance with any other applicable provisions and creates an efficient but conditional pass‑through of the crew exemption to the operator (s 5(2)(e)).

• Several exemptions have no expiry date for particular elements; however, the instrument itself has an outer repeal date of 1 December 2027 (s 2). Operators and crews should therefore treat “no expiry date” entries in Table 1 Column 6 as subject to the instrument’s overall repeal.

The instrument is an exemption instrument and contains no express penalty provisions of its own. Its legal operation is to suspend specified compliance obligations in identified provisions of the Part 135 MOS and corresponding CASR subregulations where the instrument’s conditions are satisfied (s 5(2)(d)-(e)). From the text of the instrument itself, several enforcement‑relevant consequences and practical enforcement considerations follow.

Enforcement mechanics implicit in the instrument

• Reliance on administrative facts. The instrument depends on three objectively verifiable facts: (1) whether the requirement to which the exemption would apply is in force on or after the critical date; (2) whether the prior event occurred in the period required by the item; and (3) whether the relevant flight occurs after the critical date and before the item’s expiry date (s 5(2)(a)-(c)). Regulators enforcing CAO and CASR obligations would examine these facts to determine whether reliance on the exemption was legitimate.

• Operator record‑keeping and proof. Because the prior events and unsupervised flights referenced in Table 1 are date‑sensitive and operator‑specific, an operator that relies on the exemption must be able to demonstrate the requisite dates and validity (Table 1 Column 4; s 5(2)(a)-(c)). The instrument does not itself specify record‑keeping standards, but compliance assessments will depend on documentary proof of the prior events and flight occurrences.

• Scope of operator exemption. Section 5(2)(e) limits the operator’s exemption to the extent the provision applies to the operator or requires the operator to ensure crew compliance or to prevent the flight commencing. Where a provision imposes distinct obligations on the operator beyond ensuring crew compliance, those operator obligations may remain. The instrument therefore creates a potential enforcement task to parse whether a provision’s obligations were fully or only partially suspended in respect of the operator.

Limits and duration for enforcement

• Temporal limits. Each Table 1 item contains detailed expiry rules (Table 1 Column 6). When the relevant flight occurs after the expiry date specified in Column 6 for the applicable item, the exemption ceases to apply for that crew member/operator in respect of the provision(s) listed for that item. The instrument’s overall repeal date of 1 December 2027 (s 2) further caps the instrument’s operational window. Enforcement action after those dates would assess compliance against the unmodified Part 135 MOS and CASR obligations.

• Administrative discretion regarding critical date. Section 5(1) makes the critical date one that CASA notifies to the relevant operator for the purposes of section 44 of CASA EX73/24 and records a default as of 2 December 2024, but allows CASA to vary it. An operator’s failure to rely on the correct critical date notification could be determinative in an enforcement context.

What the instrument does not address

• No penalty provisions included. The instrument contains no new penalty regime. It is not an amending regulation that replaces the Part 135 MOS obligations; it is an exemption instrument that temporarily relieves compliance. The instrument does not state procedural enforcement mechanisms, sanctions or appeal pathways for disputes about CASA’s critical date notices or about whether a prior event qualifies.

• Enforcement of unrelated obligations. The instrument does not suspend or alter obligations that are not expressly listed in Table 1 Column 5. Enforcement attention may therefore be focused on ensuring compliance with any other Part 135 MOS requirements, broader CASR requirements, or safety obligations that the instrument does not touch.

Practical enforcement risks and compliance exposure

• Misapplication risk. If an operator claims an exemption incorrectly because the prior event did not meet the precise time or designation criteria, or because the operator had opted out of earlier EX instruments, the operator and crew could be subject to enforcement for failure to comply with the underlying Part 135 MOS/CASR provision. The instrument places an evidence burden on operators to substantiate claims of eligibility.

• Timing and expiry handling. The instrument’s multiple expiry paths (including staggered expiry rules tied to when a flight review was completed) create complexity that regulators may scrutinise. Operators must track those expiry points closely to avoid periods where a crew member’s exemption has lapsed but the operator nevertheless operates as if the exemption continued.

The instrument is not a freestanding regulatory framework. It expressly interacts with CAO 20.11, the Part 135 MOS, the CASR Dictionary, the CASR (notably regulations 121.005 and 135.005 as referenced in the notes), and other CASA exemption instruments such as CASA EX73/24, CASA EX74/24, CASA EX87/21 and CASA EX97/22. The instrument’s text makes those interactions explicit and conditions its operation on administrative steps linked to those instruments.

Direct textual interactions

• CAO 20.11. The instrument defines “CAO 20.11” as Civil Aviation Order 20.11, “as in force immediately before 2 December 2021” (s 3). It imports the definition of “emergency procedures proficiency test” as the crew member emergency procedures proficiency test specified in Appendix IV of CAO 20.11 (s 3). Several Table 1 items rely specifically on successful completion of that test “that was valid immediately before the critical date” (Table 1 Column 4, Items 1, 5, 9). The instrument therefore treats CAO 20.11’s Appendix IV test as the qualifying prior event for certain exemptions.

• CASR Part 61 interaction. For conversion training and proficiency checks (Item 3), the instrument treats as the prior event a flight review valid for the aeroplane under Part 61 for VFR or an instrument proficiency check valid under Part 61 for IFR, both “immediately before the critical date” (Table 1 Item 3, Column 4). Thus the instrument’s eligibility hinges on Part 61 processes , operators must verify the validity of such Part 61 reviews/checks.

• Part 135 MOS and CASR subregulations. The exemptions are expressly granted from specified paragraphs of the Part 135 MOS and from specified CASR subregulations (Table 1 Column 5). The instrument therefore reduces certain Part 135 MOS and CASR obligations for covered crew/operators for defined windows. It does not amend the Part 135 MOS text but creates an exemption from compliance with those provisions.

• CASA EX73/24 and notification regime. The “critical date” is a date notified to the relevant operator by CASA for the purposes of s 44 of CASA EX73/24 (s 5(1)). The instrument therefore depends on the administrative machinery created under CASA EX73/24 for notification of the critical date, and it expressly notes that operators who have voluntarily opted not to take the benefit of CASA EX87/21 or its successor CASA EX73/24 are outside its scope (s 5(1) Note 3). This creates an administrative dependency between the instruments.

• CASA EX74/24 and Subpart 121.Z operations. The instrument includes operations conducted under CASA EX74/24 as qualifying “relevant flights” (s 3 and Table 1 Notes). CASA EX74/24 is described in a Note as the successor instrument to CASA EX97/22, which allowed certain MOPSC 10-13 aeroplanes to operate under Part 135 in place of Part 121 (s 3 Note). This interconnection means that operators who are operating under EX74/24 status can also be treated as “relevant operators” for the purposes of relying on the exemptions in this instrument.

Practical implications of these interactions

• Administrative sequencing. The instrument requires operators to follow an administrative sequence: confirm their status under EX73/24/EX74/24 where relevant, receive CASA’s critical date notification for that operator, confirm the qualifying prior event as defined by CAO 20.11 or Part 61 where relevant, and then apply the exemption only within the post‑critical/pre‑expiry window. Failure in that sequence will mean the underlying Part 135 MOS or CASR obligations continue to bind.

• Dependent instruments. The instrument is part of a suite of CASA exemption instruments. Its operation therefore depends on prior choices by operators (for example, whether they opted into EX73/24) and the existence and content of other instruments (for example, EX74/24 for certain aircraft). Operators who previously elected not to take up the benefit of EX87/21/EX73/24 are explicitly excluded (s 5(1) Note 3).

• No amendment of underlying law. The instrument does not purport to amend CAO 20.11, Part 61 or the Part 135 MOS. It provides a temporary exemption from compliance. That means obligations and definitions in those instruments and regulations remain applicable and must be read alongside this instrument to determine overall legal duties.

The instrument itself is a discrete instrument titled CASA EX78/24 and was signed on 19 November 2024 by Steven James Campbell, Executive Manager, National Operations & Standards, as a delegate of CASA (instrument heading; signature block). It expressly states its commencement and repeal dates: it commences on 2 December 2024 and is repealed at the end of 1 December 2027 (s 2). The instrument contains internal cross‑references to earlier CASA exemption instruments and CAOs but does not record prior amendments to itself.

References to earlier instruments and continuity

• Legacy instruments referenced. The instrument makes explicit references to CASA EX73/24, CASA EX74/24, CASA EX87/21 and CASA EX97/22. The Notes in the instrument clarify relationships: for example, CASA EX74/24 is described as the successor to CASA EX97/22 (s 3 Note). The instrument also records that CASA EX73/24 is a successor to CASA EX87/21 (s 5(1) Note 3). These references show the instrument’s place in the broader series of CASA exemption instruments addressing flight operations regulations, safety management system (SMS) and training and checking systems.

• CAO 20.11 temporal reference. The instrument defines CAO 20.11 “as in force immediately before 2 December 2021” (s 3). That temporal anchoring clarifies that the instrument relies on the version of CAO 20.11 in force at that earlier date for the definition of the emergency procedures proficiency test specified in Appendix IV. That temporal tie is important for determining the content of the qualifying prior event.

No internal amendments recorded

• The instrument text does not show any amendments or schedules other than Table 1. There is no amendment history contained within the instrument that alters its own text. The instrument is framed as a single exemption instrument with a fixed start date and an outer repeal date. Any future changes in the operation of the instrument would require a further instrument or amendment by CASA, which is not recorded here.

Interpretation of “no expiry date” entries

• Several Table 1 items state “no expiry date” for some elements of an exemption (for example, “For the general emergency training , no expiry date” in Items 1 and 5; “No expiry date” for line training and line checking Items 4 and 8). Those “no expiry date” entries exist against the back‑drop of the instrument’s overall repeal date of 1 December 2027 (s 2). Therefore, while the instrument leaves some exemptions without a separate item expiry, the instrument as a whole ceases to have effect after 1 December 2027. The instrument does not itself state whether “no expiry date” exemptions would be carried forward beyond instrument repeal.

Administrative variation possibility

• Critical date variation. The instrument provides a default critical date (28 February 2025) “as of 2 December 2024, unless varied by CASA” (s 5(1) Note 2). That establishes a mechanism for CASA to vary the critical date administratively, but the instrument does not record any past variations or a process for how such variation is to be made or challenged. Any variation would therefore appear to require administrative action by CASA outside the text of this instrument.

The instrument itself contains no references to judicial decisions or litigation, and no case law is cited within the text. It is an administrative exemption instrument made under CASR regulations 11.160 and 11.205 and is not accompanied by any adjudicative or judicial history in its text.

What the instrument records

• No cases or remedies. There are no references to legal proceedings, appeals, or prior determinations in the body of the instrument. It is silent on dispute resolution mechanisms or on judicial review processes specifically related to CASA’s issuance of the critical date or any CASA decision surrounding these exemptions.

Implications for litigation risk (text‑limited)

• Potential administrative law issues. Because the instrument depends on an administrative act by CASA (notification of a critical date to the “relevant operator” under s 44 of CASA EX73/24), disputes may, in principle, arise concerning the validity of a critical date notice, whether an operator is a “relevant operator”, or whether an operator validly opted out of the benefit of earlier instruments. The instrument does not itself provide dispute resolution mechanisms; any challenge would have to be advanced within the existing administrative law framework and applicable judicial review avenues, which are not set out in this instrument.

• No record of litigation. The instrument contains no factual or legal history of litigation about these measures. The absence of litigation history in the instrument does not indicate the absence of litigation risk in practice , it simply means the instrument does not document any.

The instrument includes several detailed and technical conditions and differential expiry rules that create potential practical traps for operators and crew relying on the exemptions. The following “gotchas” are grounded in the instrument’s text.

1. Dependence on the CASA‑notified critical date. The instrument’s eligibility test hinges on a “critical date” notified by CASA to the relevant operator (s 5(1)). The instrument provides a default (28 February 2025 as of 2 December 2024), but CASA may vary that date. Operators must rely on the precise date notified to them , the instrument makes clear that the prior event must have occurred “before the critical date” and that the relevant flight must occur “on or after the critical date” (s 5(2)(a)-(c)). Using an incorrect date in eligibility calculations will mean the exemption does not apply.

2. Opt‑out exclusion. Operators who voluntarily opted not to take the benefit of CASA EX87/21 or its successor CASA EX73/24 are out of scope for this instrument (s 5(1) Note 3). That opt‑out is a voluntary administrative choice with operational consequences: an operator that previously opted out cannot subsequently rely on this instrument’s exemptions.

3. Narrow prior event windows. Several items require that the qualifying prior event was “valid immediately before the critical date” (for example, Items 1 and 3 rely on prior completion “that was valid immediately before the critical date”) or that an unsupervised flight occurred “after 28 February 2024 but before the critical date” (Items 2, 4, 6-8, 10-12) (Table 1 Column 4). These are narrow, date‑sensitive windows; operators must have documentary proof of the relevant event dates.

4. Different expiry rules across items. Column 6 contains varied and specific expiry rules. Examples include:

   • Emergency procedures exemptions that, for the general emergency training, have “no expiry date” while the general emergency check of competency may expire on the earlier of the prior test expiry date or 28 February 2026 (Items 1 and 5, Column 6).

   • For the general emergency check of competency for the use of life rafts, the expiry may be the earliest of several possibilities: three years after the date of the prior test; three years after completion of a competency assessment where the completion is after 28 February 2023; or 1 December 2027 (Items 1 and 5, Column 6).

   • Conversion training FCM proficiency check expiry is staggered depending on when the flight review was completed, with multiple date ranges and corresponding expiry dates (Item 3, Column 6).

   These variant expiry paths create complexity in compliance planning and increase the risk of inadvertent lapses.

5. “No expiry date” does not equal permanent exemption. Several items state “no expiry date” for particular elements (for example operator’s conversion training exemptions and line training/line check exemptions). However, the instrument as a whole is repealed on 1 December 2027 (s 2). Operators should therefore not treat “no expiry date” as meaning an exemption that survives the instrument’s repeal.

6. Operator exemption limited “to the extent” the provision applies to the operator. Section 5(2)(e) explicitly limits the operator exemption to those parts of the provision that apply to operators, or to operator duties to ensure crew compliance or to prevent flight commencement. That requires parsing the text of the underlying Part 135 MOS or CASR subregulation to determine whether operator obligations are fully or only partially suspended.

7. Reliance on CAO 20.11 as at a historic date. The instrument ties the emergency procedures proficiency test to Appendix IV of CAO 20.11 “as in force immediately before 2 December 2021” (s 3). If the content or labeling of that test differs between versions, operators must ensure they reference the correct historical version. The instrument’s text anchors the prior event requirement to that historic version.

8. “Duties analogous” language. Table 1 covers persons “with duties analogous to those of an air crew member” or “analogous to those of a medical transport specialist” (Column 3). The instrument does not define “duties analogous” within its text, so operators must interpret whether a particular person’s actual duties fit that phrase. That opens potential ambiguity that CASA may need to resolve administratively if contested.

9. Proof of unsupervised flights. Several items predicate exemption on the conduct of “at least 1 unsupervised flight” that is an air transport, non‑scheduled or medical transport operation for the operator and aeroplane after 28 February 2024 but before the critical date (Table 1 Column 4). Operators must be able to prove those unsupervised flight occurrences with appropriate records.

10. No express record‑keeping or procedural guidance. The instrument does not set out required documentation formats, certification or notification procedures to CASA when an operator claims an exemption. Operators will need to determine suitable internal procedures for documenting eligibility and be prepared to produce records on inspection or enforcement.

Operators and crew planning to rely on CASA EX78/24 should put in place a compliance checklist tied to the instrument’s conditional and date‑sensitive nature. The following steps are grounded in the instrument’s text and identify concrete actions to satisfy the instrument’s eligibility and to manage the operational and administrative tasks the instrument requires.

1. Confirm whether you are a “relevant operator” and whether your flights are “relevant flights”. Review whether the operation is a Part 135 operation, a Subpart 121.Z operation, or an operation compliant with CASA EX74/24 (s 3). If an operator has voluntarily opted out of CASA EX87/21 or CASA EX73/24, the instrument does not apply (s 5(1) Note 3). Document the operator’s status with respect to prior exemption instruments.

2. Obtain and record CASA’s critical date notification for your operator. The instrument’s eligibility pivots on the critical date notified to the relevant operator under s 44 of CASA EX73/24 (s 5(1)). Although the instrument records 28 February 2025 as the default critical date as of 2 December 2024, CASA may vary this. Ensure receipt of the official CASA notice, record its date, and use that date in subsequent eligibility assessments.

3. Map individual crew members against Table 1 designations. For every crew member who might operate a relevant flight, determine whether they are a “flight crew member”, “air crew member” or “medical transport specialist” as used in Table 1, or whether they fall within the “duties analogous” language (Table 1 Column 2-3). For those with prior designations under CAO 20.11, identify the prior designation and whether that prior designation entailed the emergency procedures proficiency test (Table 1 Column 3).

4. Verify qualifying prior events and their validity. For each crew member, determine whether the qualifying “previous event” listed in Table 1 Column 4 occurred in the required window:

   • For items referencing the emergency procedures proficiency test, confirm the date of successful completion and whether that test was “valid immediately before the critical date” (Table 1 Items 1, 5 and 9, Column 4; s 3).

   • For items referencing at least one “unsupervised flight” after 28 February 2024 but before the critical date, ensure flight records, duty logs and manifests can demonstrate that unsupervised operation occurred for the operator and aeroplane (Table 1 Items 2, 4, 6-8, 10-12, Column 4).

   • For Item 3 (conversion training/proficiency check) confirm whether the crew member had a flight review valid under Part 61 (for VFR) or an instrument proficiency check valid under Part 61 (for IFR) immediately before the critical date (Table 1 Item 3, Column 4).

5. Record expiry triggers and calendar constraints. For eligible crew members, record the expiry rules in Table 1 Column 6 that apply to the relevant exemption item. Examples include:

   • For general emergency checks of competency (other than life rafts), many items expire on the earlier of the expiry of the emergency procedures proficiency test or 28 February 2026 (See Items 1, 5, 9 Column 6).

   • For life raft competency, expiry may be the earliest of three years after the prior test date, three years after a competency assessment where completed after 28 February 2023, or 1 December 2027 (Items 1, 5, 9 Column 6).

   • For Item 3 FCM proficiency checks, the expiry is staggered depending on the date the flight review occurred (Item 3 Column 6). Operators must map each crew member to the correct expiry path.

   Use these dates to create training calendars that schedule the next required training/check sufficiently before the expiry of the exemption.

6. Update training and checking records and T&C systems. Because the operator’s exemption only applies “to the extent” a provision applies to the operator or imposes obligations to ensure crew compliance (s 5(2)(e)), operators should update their T&C (training and checking) records and SMS documentation to reflect reliance on the exemption for the listed provisions and to show the documentary basis for that reliance (prior event dates, critical date, flight dates, expiry dates).

7. Maintain evidence of unsupervised flight operations. For items that require “conduct of at least 1 unsupervised flight” after 28 February 2024 but before the critical date, ensure flight records, crew rosters, air operator’s certificate logs, flight reports or equivalent documents can prove the occurrence. Absent such proof, the operator and crew cannot validly rely on the corresponding exemption.

8. Treat “no expiry date” with care. Where Table 1 lists “no expiry date” for certain training elements, note that the instrument itself is repealed at the end of 1 December 2027 (s 2), and plan training and checking accordingly so as not to end up without required qualifications once the instrument ceases to operate.

9. Consider conservative scheduling. Because many exemptions expire on fixed dates (commonly 28 February 2026) or on the earlier of competing dates, operators should schedule replacement training and checks well ahead of those dates to avoid any gap in compliance. For the items with staggered expiry paths (Item 3), ensure the training schedule matches the specific expiry applicable to each crew member.

10. Clarify ambiguous “duties analogous” cases with CASA. Where a crew member’s actual duties are not clearl y within the labels “air crew member” or “medical transport specialist” but might be “analogous”, seek CASA guidance or a formal determination before relying on the exemption. The instrument does not define “duties analogous”, so administrative confirmation will reduce risk.

11. Keep a compliance file for audits. Prepare a readily accessible file for each crew member and relevant flight containing: CASA’s critical date notice; evidence of the prior event and its validity; the specific Table 1 item being relied upon; the relevant flight records showing the flight occurred during the post‑critical/pre‑expiry window; and the operator’s internal risk assessment and decision record for relying on the exemption.

12. Monitor CASA communications and successor instruments. The instrument sits within a family of CASA exemption instruments. Monitor CASA for variations to the critical date or for further guidance that may affect the operation of EX78/24 or its relationship to EX73/24 and EX74/24. Because the instrument expressly ties the critical date to CASA EX73/24 and references successor instruments, administrative changes in that suite could have operational implications.

13. Legal review where uncertain. Where there is doubt as to applicability (for example, whether a prior event was “valid immediately before the critical date”, or whether a person’s duties are “analogous”), obtain formal legal or regulatory advice or seek clarification from CASA rather than relying on internal interpretation alone. The instrument provides narrow, date‑sensitive exemptions and does not contain dispute resolution prose; reliance without certainty carries risk.

By following these steps operators and crew can align operational practices to the instrument’s precise, date‑sensitive structure. The instrument grants conditional, time‑limited relief from specific Part 135 MOS and CASR obligations where the narrow criteria in Table 1 are met; compliance therefore turns on accurate administration, documentary proof and careful calendaring.