An aviation researcher, writer, aviation participant, pilot & agricultural researcher. Author of over 35 scientific publications world wide.


Good reads

Oil Prices


Has #casa met the terms of the Audit Office review??

Casa and surveillance – Aviation Safety Compliance Follow-up Audit by Australian National Audit Office in 2002.

The actual reports are here:

ANAO – 1999 00_audit_report_19 CASA Audit

ANAO report_66 CASA Audit 2001

ANAO – 2010 11_audit_report_13 CASA + Safety Implementation

2010-11 Audit Report No14

2010-11 Audit Report No 39 ASIC Cards

There is a previous ANAO report into #asa:

ANAO – 2000 01_audit_report_48 AirServices

The objectives of this follow-up audit were to determine, in respect of the issues addressed by the 1999 audit recommendations, whether:

• CASA has made satisfactory progress to improve its aviation safety surveillance and compliance activities; and
• the introduction of new strategies for further improvement is being appropriately managed.

Due to the scale of the changes to CASA’s Aviation Safety Compliance activities since the 1999 audit, the ANAO adopted an issues-based approach and incorporated the 1999 audit recommendations into five main themes: risk identification; surveillance; enforcement; resources; and corporate governance.

As was the case with the 1999 audit, the follow-up audit focused on the surveillance and compliance of organisations that CASA has certified to:

• operate aircraft for prescribed commercial purposes (Air Operator’s Certificates (AOC) operators); and
• maintain, design or distribute aircraft and their components (Certificate of Approval (COA) operators).

The follow-up audit methodology included consultations with a range of key personnel in CASA’s Head Office in Canberra and at its various locations throughout Australia; consultations with the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS); examining comments made by members of the Aviation Safety Forum; and examining documentation held by CASA concerning its surveillance and compliance activities.

Overall conclusions:

Overall, CASA has improved its management of aviation safety compliance since the 1999 audit, particularly in areas such as the identification of risks at the operator level; the frequency and coverage of surveillance; and enforcement of the Act. CASA has adequately addressed the majority of the recommendations from the 1999 audit and has partially implemented the remaining relevant recommendations.

Risk identification

CASA has improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the operator level. The Safety Trend Indicator (STI) is a useful tool for doing this. It will improve further with the introduction of STI version 2.
Recognising the potential increased risk to safety posed by financially marginal operators, CASA has targeted its financial viability assessment (FVA) process according to the areas of perceived greatest financial risk.


However, the ANAO considers that CASA has not improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the sector or industry level.

Progress with the development and implementation of the Safety Intelligence System (SIS) has been overly protracted.

There is much that CASA can do to improve its analysis of aviation safety data to help to identify emerging risk issues and trends;

And to apply the results to CASA’s strategic decision-making about where to best allocate its resources to achieve required performance.

Other files:
1. http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2010%2011_audit_report_13.pdf
2. http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2000%2001_audit_report_48.pdf
3. http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2001-2002/Aviation-Safety-Compliance-Follow-Up-Audit