Question NW3424 to the Minister of Transport
10 November 2017 - NW3424
Groenewald, Mr HB to ask the Minister of Transport
With regard to airline compliance reports required by the SA Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA), (a) which airlines have failed to comply in the past three financial years, (b) what reasons were given for the noncompliance in each case, (c) what were the specified airlines requested to do to rectify each noncompliance issue, (d) what steps have the airlines taken in this regard, (e) which of the airlines failed to do any rectifications, (f) what did the SACAA do in each case and (g) what are the cost implications in each case?
Reply:
South African Civil Authority (SACAA)
The airline industry in South Africa needs to comply with the Civil Aviation Regulations of South Africa. According to these regulations, each airline must be certified to operate by complying with the requirements for an Air Operator Certificate (AOC). On an annual basis each airline must renew its certificate by participating in a renewal audit. The SACAA also conducts surveillance audits to ensure that all operators (airlines) comply with the SACAA’s safety and security regulations. Airlines from foreign countries are also subjected to ramp inspections; these are surprise inspections, conducted at the airports and the purpose of these inspections are to ensure that foreign airlines comply with the regulations of South Africa to operate in this country. These requirements are known upfront by all operators from foreign States wishing to conduct civil aviation activities in South Africa.
(a) In terms of local airline operators, in the past three financial years, only South African Express failed to comply with the requirements emanating from the audit conducted into their operations which affected the renewal of their Air Operator Certificate (AOC).
In relation to Foreign Air Operators:
- Air Zimbabwe;
- Qatar Airways;
- Turkish Airlines; and
- Saudi Airlines; did not qualify with the regulatory requirements for a Foreign Operator Permit (FOP).
(b) The reasons given for the non-compliance in each case is as follows -
- South African Express failed to comply with the requirements emanating from the audit conducted into their operations that related to the effective management of their safety management system;
- Whilst the aforementioned airlines were not in possession of the required Foreign Operator Permits.
(c) South African Express was expected to address the non –compliances identified during the safety oversight inspection as per the timelines communicated by the SACAA to them and the four Foreign Operators were required to obtain the Foreign Operator Permits.
(d) Following the grounding of the airline, South African Express eventually addressed the non-compliances identified by the SACAA in terms of the regulations. Their approval was subsequently reinstated. The four Foreign Air Operators did manage to obtain their Foreign Operator’s Permits after complying fully with the SA Civil Aviation Regulations in this regard.
(e) None, all the airlines addressed their non–compliances.
(f) South Africa Express: Air Operator Certificate (OAC) was suspended and the above-mentioned foreign airlines were restricted from exercising the privileges of an approved Foreign Air Operator.
(g) The SACAA did not incur any additinal cost for these oversight activities as this forms part of our planned oversight activites. (Shoud we mot list thepenalties for the FOP non-complainces though just in case or is it too much information?)
NW3816E