Part 26 - Consultation

Note: This statement does not form part of the rules contained in Part 26. It provides details of the consultation undertaken in making the rules.

Background to the Rules

In April 1988 the Swedavia-McGregor Report on civil aviation regulation in New Zealand was completed. Following the recommendations contained in that report, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (formerly the Air Transport Division of the Ministry of Transport) commenced a complete review of all existing civil aviation legislation. The existing legislation that is still appropriate is being rewritten into the new Rules format. New legislation is being generated where necessary for the areas not presently covered.

Considerable research was carried out to determine the format for the new legislation. It was decided that the legislative framework should incorporate the advantages of the regulatory system of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of United States of America and the system being developed by the European Joint Aviation Authorities and published as Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR).

The new rules are structured in a manner similar to the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) of the FAA, and aim to achieve maximum harmonisation whilst allowing for national variations. Close co-operation is also being maintained with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority of Australia to ensure maximum harmonisation with their regulatory code.

New Zealand’s revised legislation is published as Civil Aviation Rules (CAR) which is divided into Parts. Each Part contains a series of individual rules which relate to a particular aviation activity.

Accompanying most Parts will be at least one associated Advisory Circular (AC) which will expand, in an informative way, specific requirements of the Part and acceptable means of compliance. For instance an AC may contain examples of acceptable practices or procedures which would meet the requirements of a particular rule.

The CAR numbering system is based on the FAR system. As a general principle the subject matter of a rule Part will be the same or similar to the FAR although the title may differ to suit New Zealand terminology. Where a CAR Part does not readily equate with a FAR number code, a number has been selected that does not conflict with any existing FAR Part.

The objective of the new rules system is to strike a balance of responsibility between the State authority and those who provide services and exercise privileges in the civil aviation system. This balance must enable the State authority to set standards for, and monitor performance of, aviation participants whilst providing the maximum flexibility for the participants to develop their own means of compliance.

Section 12 of the Civil Aviation Act 1990 requires participants in the aviation system to carry out their activities safely and in accordance with the relevant prescribed safety standards and practices. Section 28 of the Act allows the Minister to make ordinary rules.

Notice of Proposed Rule Making

To provide public notice of, and opportunity for comment on the proposed new rules, the Authority issued Notice of Proposed Rule Making 96-11 under Docket Number 1111 on 17 July 1996. This Notice proposed the introduction of Civil Aviation Rules Part 26 to provide a regulatory safety boundary for Additional Airworthiness Requirements. This Notice also proposed amendments to Parts 21, 91, 121, 135, and 137 resulting from the new rules developed for Part 26.

Supplementary Information

All comments made on the Notice of Proposed Rule Making are available in the rules docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarising each substantive contact with the Civil Aviation Authority contact person concerning this rule making has been filed in the docket.

Availability of the Document

Any person may view a copy of these rules at the Civil Aviation Authority, Level 15 Asteron Centre, 55 Featherston St, Wellington 6140. Copies may be obtained from the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, PO Box 3555, Wellington 6140.

Summary of Comments on Docket Number 1111 NPRM

Part 26 included proposed changes to Parts 21, 91, 121, 135, and 137. With the exception of Parts 137 and 21 the other rules were also in the NPRM stage of the rulemaking process. The responses to submissions on the rule changes proposed in the docket for Parts 91, 121, and 135 are included in the consultation documents attached to each of the applicable final rules.

1. General comments on the NPRM

From the 11 submissions received, four general issues were raised. These are discussed as follows:

1.1 Three commenters suggested improved wording and corrections to general errors in the NPRM document.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated all the recommended changes.

1.2 One commenter questioned as to why some Technical Standard Order references quoted specific amendments and others didn’t.

CAA response: In most cases, the Technical Standard Order reference has been rewritten to reflect the applicable Technical Standard Order series, allowing all current Technical Standard Orders in that series to be considered acceptable. In cases where the minimum acceptable performance standard has been assessed to be that of a specific amendment state of the Technical Standard Order then this amendment state has been included in the rule.

1.3 One commenter suggested that in the future there may be requirements to assess other countries’ specifications and include those in the acceptable standards.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and will respond to international developments and industry requests as they arise. The main purpose of specifying the standards in the appendices to the operational rules was to allow the easy updating of them as and when required.

1.4 Two commenters raised issues relating to the use of FAR references in the New Zealand CAR. The commenters questioned the FAR revision dates used for some requirements and the lack of revision dates in other reuirements.

CAA response: The CAA agrees with the points raised by the commenters and have checked the revision dates. Those revision dates that may have an effect on the certification of the aircraft have been retained. Those revision dates that could be brought into line with Appendix C of Part 21 have been.

The CAA agrees that without a revision date the subsequent amendment of FAR requirements may cause problems with compliance in New Zealand. In all cases the revision dates have been stated.

2. Specific comments on the NPRM

Specific comments received from the 11 submissions are discussed as follows:

2.1 Appendix B – All aircraft [Final Rule Appendix B]

One commenter suggested that the application of Part 26 should only be to standard and restricted category aircraft.

CAA response: The CAA disagrees. The CAA does not want to limit the applicability of Appendix B as the requirements are intended to apply to all aircraft, regardless of category. Appendices C, D, and E effectively limit the applicability by addressing either type certificated aircraft or those aircraft on air transport operations.

2.2 B.1 Marking of doors and emergency exits [Final Rule B.1]

One commenter questioned what was required to be marked to indicate an exit’s means of access. The commenter suggested that the wording of the requirement related to the means of access to the operating mechanism.

CAA response: The CAA agrees that the wording of the rule changed the possible interpretations of its meaning from the existing requirements. The rule has been amended to remove the confusion.

One commenter suggested that the way the marking requirements were worded was not clear.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated a change of wording to make the requirement clearer.

2.2 B.2 Crew protection requirements [Final Rule B.2]

One commenter suggested moving the crew protection requirements to Part 137 as they applied only to agricultural operations.

CAA response: The CAA agrees that the requirements are limited to agricultural operations but disagrees that they should be shifted. Unlike the other requirements in Part 137 that are related to equipment standards and could be applied after certification, the crew protection requirements are considered an integral part of the certification requirements. As part of the certification requirements the rule belongs in Part 26.

2.3 C.1 / D.1 Evacuation and egress provisions [Final Rule C.1 / D.1]

One commenter suggested restructuring Appendices C and D to separate out the doors and exits provisions from the emergency egress provision. The commenter also suggested rewording the door locking provisions to better reflect intent when compared to the FAR.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated the suggested changes.

2.4 C.1.1 Doors and exits [Final Rule C.1]

One commenter suggested that obstructions to exits should include items other than seats and seat backs.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated the suggested change.

One commenter suggested a revision to the requirements for over-wing exits and the assistance that should be provided for passengers exiting to the ground.

CAA response: The CAA agrees but subsequent research and discussion indicated assistance from the wing to the ground was not required. The provision suggested by the commenter relating to the height with the landing gear extended has been incorporated.

2.5 D.1.3 Emergency exit access [Final Rule D.1.1]

One commenter suggested that the types of exit be defined.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated the suggested change.

2.6 D.1.9 Emergency exit external markings [Final Rule D.2.10]

One commenter pointed out that requirement for external markings of emergency exits was worded such that it suggested not all exits were operable from the outside. This apparently conflicts with a previous requirement that all normal and emergency exits be operable from the inside and the outside.

CAA response: The CAA agrees that this may be an apparent conflict but sliding flight deck windows may function as an exit and may not be able to be opened from the outside. The requirement has been reworded and is consistent with the FAR.

2.7 D.5.1 Landing gear aural warning [Final Rule C.3.1]

Three commenters pointed out that the wording for the landing gear aural warning system meant that the warning would always operate with the flaps extended for landing.

One commenter also pointed out that the requirement would cause problems for an amphibious aircraft.

CAA response: The CAA agrees and has incorporated the suggestions.

2.8 E.1 Doors and exits [Final Rule E.1]

One commenter suggested that the locking mechanism requirement for a helicopter door meant that a completely new type of system would be required to prevent the inadvertent opening of the door as a result of a mechanical failure.

CAA response: The CAA disagrees. The requirement is similar to the requirement for other aircraft. The CAA considers that the design of helicopter doors can be shown to meet this requirement.


The Authority concludes from this consultation that the majority of aviation industry participants favour the direction of the new rules. Specific issues that were identified in the comments received from the consultative group have been addressed. The rules also meet New Zealand’s international obligations under the applicable ICAO Annex. The comments and all the background material used in developing the rules are held on the docket file and are available for public scrutiny. Persons wishing to view the docket file should call at the Civil Aviation Authority, Level 15 Asteron Centre, 55 Featherston St, Wellington 6140, and ask for docket file 1111.

Regulatory activities

This Part will replace existing requirements in the Civil Aviation Regulation 1953 and also the requirements contained in New Zealand Civil Airworthiness Requirements Volume 1 C.4, which is authorised under regulation 8A(4).

Specific amendments to the Regulations and NZCAR will not be necessary. Section 14(2) of the Civil Aviation Amendment Act 1991 (as amended by section 34 of 1996 No. 91) deems the Civil Aviation Regulations 1953 that are continued in force by section 8 of that Act to be revoked on the close of 31 March 1997.

Section 14(3) states that any order, notice, requirement, circular, or other publication continued in force by section 8 shall expire on the close of 31 March 1997.


Part 26 comes into force on 1 April 1997.