Evidence for the Cessna SID's being placed on Cessna aircraft in Australia and the Regulatory Impact Statement [RIS] support for the SID's programme
Dear Civil Aviation Safety Authority,
Please provide the advice and relevant material [e-mail, letters, verbal discussions] that forms the basis for the recent press release by Peter Gibson.
In particular the material that gives the direct evidence for the potential corrosion and fatigue damage.
I require you to provide the effect and basis for the SID's requirement, including the RIS for private aircraft in Australia of the implementation of SID's and the basis for the non-mandatory requirement in the US, compared to Australia.
Peter Gibson in part said:
"SIDs inspections were developed jointly by Cessna and the United States Federal Aviation Administration due to concerns relating to potential corrosion and fatigue damage to principal structural elements of the aircraft.
In many cases these components, which are critical to the airworthiness of the aircraft, have not been inspected since the aircraft was manufactured many decades ago."
Yours faithfully,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
The basis for CASA's view that SIDS are mandatory is set out in an aviation ruling: https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/ne...
The Cessna SIDS documents speak for themselves as to the basis or need for inspections, namely service experience of fatigue cracking and corrosion. The inspection documents are proprietary Cessna publications.
In light of the above, please clarify what you seek access to.
Regards
Adam Anastasi
General Counsel
and Executive Manager
Legal Services Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph 02 6217 1040
Fax 02 6217 1607
Dear ANASTASI, ADAM,
I have read the ruling under the signature of "Mark Skidmore" of 15th December 2015 and:
I require you to provide the effect and basis for the SID's requirement, including the RIS for private aircraft in Australia in the implementation of SID's and the basis for the mandatory
requirement in Australia compared to the US, when the SID's requirements for Australia is based on the FAA requirements.
The effect and basis for this is to include all documents that refer to private operations vs. commercial operations and any direct communications with the FAA from/to CASA Australia.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
Thanks. CASA's FOI Officer will commence assessing your request for access on 4 January.
However, I take this opportunity to note that the ruling itself explains the basis for the view that compliance with the SIDS is mandatory. On this basis, there is no RIS document and there need not be one, because CASA has simply explained in the ruling how it considers the aviation legislation operates in relation to supplemental inspection documents.
Adam
Dear ANASTASI, ADAM,
In fact, which is the basis of the FOI request:
The Australian Government’s handbook on Best Practice Regulation states that stimulating productivity remains at the forefront of government policy. It also states that the centrepiece of the Government’s best practice legislation is a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) that is mandatory for all decisions made by the Australian Government and its agencies that are likely to have a regulatory impact on business.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
CASA services to the aviation community will NOT be available from Midday
Thursday 24 December 2015 until Monday 4 January 2016, when normal
services will resume. Services such as licences renewals, medical or AOC
variations will not be available during this shutdown period.
Urgent assistance regarding aviation safety matters is available during
the Christmas/New Year period - call 131 757 and follow the prompts.
Further information regarding CASA contact arrangement over the shutdown
period is available on the CASA website:
https://www.casa.gov.au/about-casa/stand...
Dear Civil Aviation Safety Authority,
I do not have a reply to this request made prior to the Xmas break.
I would appreciate you updating the current situation.
Yours faithfully,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
Your email from today was forwarded to me.
You have two requests on hand, the first one made on 9 December 2015. You will be provided with a decision in relation to your first request on or before 15 January 2015.
In relation to your second request (of 24 December 2015), I sent you an email yesterday (but this went to [email address]). I have attached it to this email for your reference.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
I require you to send me the e-mail to which you refer to the FOI request that I make here on SID's matters specifically and in direct reply to this message.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
Please find attached my email as requested. I wanted to ensure you received my email, which is why I sent it to an email I had used in the recent past. I will only send correspondence to this email address from now on.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
I only use this e-mail for the requested FOI on the Cessna SID's issues.
I draw your attention to:
Quote: "...I wanted to ensure you received my email, which is why I sent it to an email I had used in the recent past. I will only send correspondence to this email address from now on...."
I do not know what e-mail you refer as it appears that you have breached someone's privacy in what you refer to in the quoted section.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
I am out of the office, returning Monday 11 January 2016.
For any urgent FOI matters, please email [CASA request email],
otherwise I will respond to your email upon my return.
PLEASE NOTE YOUR EMAIL HAS NOT BEEN FORWARDED
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
Scope of Request:
1. Documents relating to the basis for the SID's requirement;
2. Documents relating to the RIS for private aircraft in Australia in the implementation of SID's and the basis for the mandatory requirement in Australia compared to the US, when and where the SID's requirements for Australia is based on the FAA requirements; and
3. Documents that refer to private operations vs. commercial operations and
4. Any direct communications with the FAA from/to CASA Australia on this issue.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
Appreciate an update as to status of my FOI.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
Please find attached a preliminary charges notice in relation to your request.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
FOI on Cessna SID's
As there are a large number of Cessna owners who privately own Cessna aircraft who have been impacted by the CASA decision. In light of this fact, CASA should simply provide the material in order that proper transparency is maintained through this request and that owners have proper access to the decision making process that has not been properly promulgated.
It is in the interest of a large percentage of Cessna owner's and in the public interest that this material be released without charge.
Please re-assess your charge to a "no cost in the public interest".
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I acknowledge your request for waiver of charges.
In accordance with s 29(6) of the FOI Act, we will respond to your request to waive charges within 30 days from receipt of your email.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
UNCLASSIFIED
Good afternoon,
Please find attached the decision regarding your Freedom of Information
Request – Assessment of Charges from Mr Joe Rule, Manager, Legal Branch
CASA.
Thank you,
Kristin Newman
Acting Administrative Assistant
Legal Services Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
P (02) 6217 1936 | F (02) 6217 1607 | E [1][email address]
[2]cid:image001.gif@01CD9B2C.D7F95380
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Dear Newman, Kristin,
Further to my request for specific information, I wish to inform you that I am an age-pensioner and unable to meet a request for the payment requested.
Please accede to my request to process this request without fee.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Good morning Mr Cumming,
Thank you for your email. I have forwarded your email on to the Freedom of Information Officer as I am not in that team. She will be in touch with you in due course.
Regards,
Kristin Soltys
Acting Administrative Assistant
Legal Services Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
P (02) 6217 1936 | F (02) 6217 1607 | E [email address]
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I refer to your email below of 17 March 2016.
To confirm, are you wishing to seek internal review of the charges decision of 2 March 2016?
If you are wishing to seek internal review of this decision, on the basis on financial hardship (which was not mentioned in your original request for waiver of charges), can you please provide documentation in support of this.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
I attach a copy of redacted centrelink card as proof of situation.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
As per your email of 22 March 2016, I confirm that you wish to seek internal review of the charges decision of 2 March 2016.
The review will be conducted by another CASA officer, and you will be advised of a decision within 30 days from the date of your email.
I note that there was no attachment to your email of today's date. Can you please forward the attachment.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
I have forwarded by separate e-mail, information to support reduced fee application
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I responded to an email on 1 April 2016, in relation to information regarding your application for waiver of fees. I have not received a reply from you in this regard.
Please let me know if you would like to me to forward that email to this email address.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
As I have already said to you., I have replied by separate e-mail with proof of my situation.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I note that you have forwarded information about your situation, however I responded to this email on 1 April 2016 asking for further explanation of what had been produced.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
I do not have any reply from you dated 1st April 2016.
Please explain.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
Please advise if you wish for me to send the email of 1 April 2016 to this email address or another.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
This is the emanating point for the FOI request. Was unable to attach the previous information you requested, hence sent direct.
Please reply to RTK
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
In my email to you of 1 April 2016, I asked you to please explain what it is that you have provided (as it is unclear what it is), and how it supports your claim of hardship.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
As I stated on 12th April 2016, I do not have an e-mail from you. Please reply to RTK.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Please find attached the email I sent you on 1 April 2016.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Dear Smith-Roberts, Jennifer,
This simply is a redacted copy of my pension card, showing that I am entitled to a no-charge FOI request. There is sufficient information for you to properly act and complete my requesat.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
I am out of the office, returning on Monday 18 April 2016.
For any urgent FOI matters, please email [CASA request email],
otherwise I will respond to your email upon my return.
PLEASE NOTE YOUR EMAIL HAS NOT BEEN FORWARDED
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I refer to your recent emails stating that you are entitled to a fee waiver because you are the holder of a pensioner concession card (aged pension). The fact you are the holder of such a card does not automatically entitle you to a fee waiver. Unlike certain State or territory legislation, the Freedom of Information (Charges) Regulations 1982 makes no provision for a fee to be waived based solely on an applicant being the holder of the card.
A person is entitled to the pension if they meet assets and income tests. In this regard, an applicant for the aged pension must have less than $348,500 in assets. Further, a person may apply for the aged pension only if their fortnightly income is less than $1,909.80. Accordingly, on the basis that you may hold sufficient assets or earn sufficient income to pay the $88 fee imposed by CASA, you are requested to provide details of your income, assets and liabilities by 20 April. If you do not provide such information, a decision will be made on your request to review the decision to refuse to waive charges on the information available to CASA.
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information and Finance Officer Legal Services Division Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
I attach a letter.
Adam Anastasi
General Counsel
and Executive Manager
Legal Services Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph 02 6217 1040
Fax 02 6217 1607
Dear ANASTASI, ADAM,
I note from your reply, that CASA has made "an error" in the assessment of the "charges".
Yet in your letter, you refer back to the Jennifer Smith-Roberts finding, saying [on assumption only], that I should be able to afford the charge.
There is no further note from Jennifer Smith-Roberts confirming what the charge actually is, in light of your ambiguous letter as to charge.
I will not supply information, in the form that Jennifer Smith-Roberts requests, as that is a serious infringement of my privacy, embodied in her request.
There is no basis given by her as to how my privacy would be respected, nor is there any likelihood that my privacy would be respected.
In a simple few words - "....I do not trust you or the organisation....." - CASA.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
There is no ambiguity in what the charge amount is. Page 1 of my letter stated that "the amount of charges should have read $88.58". Pages 2 and 3 of my letter also refer to that amount.
Adam
Dear Mr ANASTASI
Cost of FOI
I do not have a reply from Ms Smith-Roberts stating that she has made an error in the cost for the FOI application.
There is ambiguity in your reply Mr. Anastasi, as I do not trust you have advised Ms Smith-Roberts of her mistake. There is no evidence supporting that stance.
Please ensure that I have documentation on the cost from Ms Smith-Roberts, before I make my decision.
That you take this stand with me, is disturbing.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
Ms Smith-Roberts made no error. Her 19 January preliminary charges notice
included a schedule of charges setting out a total charges amount of
$88.58. Mr Rules decision of 2 March had a typographical error in it, in
that it referred to that charge mistakenly as $188.58. My decision letter
points out that error, but makes clear the charges amount I made my
decision on was $88.58. CASA will not entering into further
correspondence with you on this issue because it is clear what the
position is.
Adam Anastasi
Manager, Advisory, Commercial and Legislative Drafting
Legal Affairs, International Strategy and Regulatory Policy Branch
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Ph 02 6217 1040
Fax 02 6217 1607
Rob Cumming left an annotation ()
The agency has sent information to another e-mail, to which they assume is "my email" and the original material did not come to me until much later. The agency is well known for doing as they are doing - refusing to enter into any correspondence.
The person Anastasi, is head of CAsA legal Department and has refused, on spurious grounds, many previous FOI requests.
I have already referred a poorly answered [using the professional-legal excuse] in refusing a FOI request or limiting the request to the OAIC.
Thank you for the advice and I will re-refer the matter to them for consideration of a reduced fee.
Dear ANASTASI, ADAM,
I again request consideration of a zero $ fee for my request.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Rob
CASA sought further information from you about hardship on a number of occasions, which you did not provide. If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may seek review from the Information Commissioner (within 60 days of my decision).
Adam
Dear ANASTASI, ADAM,
Yes I am dissatisfied with your decision, but have had a member of the aviation community give me the money to pursue this. Please advise how to pay.
This payment is under protest and I will, under no circumstances give you the detailed personal material that you so dearly desire.
In the past you have published personal material about people, which I note identified personal material and seriously compromised the individuals privacy by giving public access to home addresses.
This material was subsequently removed from the casa site by yourself.
I will not put myself in the same situation as that person, by acceding to your request for further particulars to justify a no-cost FOI.
Yours sincerely,
Rob Cumming
UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Mr Cumming
I refer to your email to Adam Anastasi of 28 June 2016.
As it has been over 60 days since Adam Anastasi's decision of 21 April 2016, please lodge a new request by emailing [CASA request email]
Kind regards
Jennifer Smith-Roberts
Freedom of Information Coordinator
Legal Affairs, Regulatory Policy and International Strategy Branch
Ph: 02 6217 1445
Fax: 02 6217 1607
Email: [email address]
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
Mr Cummings, something is wrong with this request. I think maybe you clicked the "Request internal review" button sometime but I cannot see you to request an internal review. I expect that you have run out of time for internal review but it will be worthwhile to try anyway. You maybe could write again to the agency and ask them to waive a part of the charge because you are on a pension even if the agency will not make all the charge $0.
You should know that the officer is correct. The FOI Act does not mean that an agency must automatically waive charges. They must ask you what the reason is for you asking to waive the charge and then they must consider the information you have given them. But this does not mean "no charge". It means that it is for the judgment of the agency. If you do not like the decision, you can appeal to the FOI Commissioner but you must do it before you run out of time.