1 | P a g e

“The High-way to effective self-governance” is an illustration of mile stones achieved in the journey to

develop a constructive, transparent and cost effective body to serve the recreational aviation industry in South

Africa, whilst at the same time support the regulatory functions of the South African Civil Aviation Authority.

The goal of creating a body made up of people from the industry and the aviation authority was realised in 2008,

and has since gone from strength to strength.

It is with the benefit of hindsight that we realise the importance of continuity and cooperation.

When this compilation was put together, it was again incredible to witness the friendship and essence of the Aero

Club of South Africa to assist in every aspect from supplying material to proof reading and rendering support for

whatever is needed!

I thank our many great friends of flying in their continuous efforts in every aspect of aviation!

…Neil de Lange

A chronological account of key events leading up to the establishment, and subsequent milestones

achieved since the creation of the Recreation Aviation Administration – South Africa.

2 | P a g e

Summary:

“…Following years of planning, on 20 November 2008 the Commissioner and CEO of the Civil Aviation Authority

called a media conference and officially launched the Recreational Aviation Administration of South Africa. This

followed the Minister of Transport’s decision to designate a body to focus on the needs and requirements of the

recreational pilot and his environment…”

….Extract Sport Aviation over South Africa 2012

The above extract needs to be contextualised against the quest of the private recreational aviation industry’s call

for a focused service and regulatory system.

The South African Civil Aviation Authority was created by its own Act (40 of 1998) in line with international best

practice. The purpose of the Act was to provide for the establishment of a South African Civil Aviation Authority;

for the transfer of certain functions of the State to the Authority; and for matters connected thereto.

One of the prime matters “connected thereto” was South Africa’s desire to comply with the 1944 Chicago

Convention generally referred to ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation).

Adherence to the Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) of this Convention would ensure South Africa’s

status as a safe and secure origin and destination of Scheduled and Commercial Air Traffic.

This status was maintained previously through the direct involvement of the Department of Transport via its

Directorate of Civil Aviation.

The CAA developed its structure to align itself with this convention and ICAO compliant scheduled air service

provision, and to be responsible for developing safety regulation for this purpose.

Private, and more specifically, recreational aviation was not the core focus of the CAA, and a need was identified

by both the CAA and industry to establish a solution to regulate, control and oversee this section of the industry.

This sector of the aviation industry is largely responsible for supplying aspirant pilots and technical personnel to

the large airlines and maintenance facilities. It could be regarded as the incubator for commercial air service

providers.

It was found by the CAA that applying the expertise from this very industry would be the most efficient and

beneficial way to manage safety in this recreational environment.

As opposed to the Military or Airline industry where formal disciplinary structures exist by virtue of the

employment regime, in the recreational aviation industry adherence to the safety rules is largely based on

voluntary compliance. Voluntary compliance is dependent on the buy-in of people to whom it applies.

The following compilation is a chronological record of events leading up to the establishment of RAASA, and is the

foundation for further development of this recreational industry.

3 | P a g e

INDEX

1. History of Designation

1.1 The principle of “industry will contribute resources if they have a say”

1.2 The formalisation of the concept in 1989

1.3 Development and introduction of the CARs 1997 – Part 149

1.4 The designation of the Aero Club

1.5 The withdrawal of Designation from the Aero Club

2. History of RAASA

2.1 Concept of Designation revisited 2004 – 2006

2.2 Designation v Delegation – an Administrative arrangement.

2.3 Incidental meeting with Min. J Radebe – DOT 2006

2.4 Concept development by Zakes Mayeza – Commissioner for CAA 2007

2.5 Model development and Aero Club of SA buy in

2.6 Ministerial approval and Treasury notification.

3. Solidifying the value proposition – the MOA

3.1 Revisiting the Value proposition – a case for designation

3.2 Agree the structure with the DCA

3.3 Confirm the applicability of the ACT (Aviation Act) s 22 and s 155

3.4 Confirm the applicability of the CAR 149

3.5 Formalising the MOA

4. Giving legal effect to RAASA

4.1 Establish a S21 Company

4.1.1. Articles of Association

4.1.2 Memorandum of Incorporation (old Act 61 of 1973)

4.2 CAA Press release and media interview – 20 Nov 2008

4.3 Advertising to fill operational vacancies

4.4 Notice in the Gazette 1109 GG No. 33786

4.5 Registration in terms of the Non-Profit Act (Directorate for Non Profit Organisations)

5. Operational procedures

5.1 Amalgamate the previous Aero Club functions with CAA functions

5.2 Solidify Standard Operating Processes

5.3 Advise the Industry of effective dates.

6. Further development

6.1 Register as NPC – New Companies Act

6.2 Acquire BBEEE rating in 2012

6.3 Internship Program

6.4 The Board – Directors and Charter

6.5 Re-align Articles of Association (Act 71 of 2008)

4 | P a g e

7. Industry perception and feedback

7.1 Website interactivity (Compliments and Complaints)

7.2 AeCSA Board reporting and feedback

7.3 RA-ILF

7.4 Activity and accident statistics

ANNEX A Abbreviations and Acronyms

ANNEX B Aero Club of South Africa Sections and Statement of Purpose

ANNEX C International Comparison (Benchmarking)

ANNEX D Sample statistics (activities and accidents)

ANNEX E Directive from the DCA to phase SSSA oversight in with RAASA’s responsibilities

5 | P a g e

Chapter 1: History of designation

1.1 The principle of “industry will contribute resources if they have a say”

With the development and growth of the various forms of recreational flying since the 1970s, the flying

club structures were slowly evolving from the “Light Plane Clubs” to discipline-specific groups such as the

Parachute Association, the Power Flying Association, the Soaring Society, the Experimental Aircraft

Association, and later also the Microlight Aircraft Association and the Gyroplane Association, to name a

few.

With this evolution, the need to better regulate and oversee this part of the industry arose. This was

initially undertaken by the Aero Club of South Africa, as at the time there was little regulation in place

that dealt with this oversight.

The Aero Club of South Africa is a structure made up of the various Associations, and is governed by a

board made up with a representative from each such association.

(Detail on the structure of the Aero Club of South Africa can be found in ANNEX B).

Around 1973 the then Directorate of Civil Aviation together with the Aero Club developed the LS/1

Document which broadly took care of both the operations- and airworthiness matters.

This document served the industry well, and it was only during the rewriting of the Aviation Navigation

Regulations of 1976 into Civil Aviation Regulations of 1997 that the LS/1 Document was absorbed into the

official legislation. Matters relating to Airworthiness and Operations were now dealt with in a more

structured fashion by specific parts in the regulations being allocated thereto.

During the development of these regulations, specific provision was made for the traditional concept of

“industry involvement”. This provision of industry involvement was later specifically provided for in Part

149 of the regulations. This involvement would ensure that the primary oversight would be vested at the

airfield or site where the flying activities take place.

As is later explained in this document, this principle was hotly debated at Board meetings of the Aero Club

as well as Special General meetings called for the purpose. Industry involvement, particularly active

participation by the Aero Club of SA was therefore to become the core of the success of RAASA.

The entire principle of simple and affordable administration was based on industry buy-in. the concept

and mantra becoming generally acceptable was that “we will contribute to the success of oversight and

administration of our industry, provided we are involved”

1.2 1989: The formalisation of the administration concept

With the development of models of effective oversight, many meetings and discussion took place.

None was more prominent than the meeting taking place during 12 – 14 May 1989 at the Wigwam Hotel

in Rustenburg. At this meeting representatives from all Aero Club Associations as well as the Directorate

for Civil Aviation were present.

6 | P a g e

Certain functions and responsibilities were then given to the Aero Club, but the transfer of these duties

were not as formal as the industry would have today, and a formal contract to this effect did not exist.

The extent of the duties so bestowed was not clear and rested largely on the people involved at the time.

By the mid-1990s the Department of Transport – Civil Aviation Directorate paid the Aero Club an annual

amount of R250 000 in lieu of the services rendered by it.

A more formal system/agreement was investigated, and the requirement for this became more apparent

as the 1997 regulations took shape.

7 | P a g e

1.3 1997: Development and introduction of the CARs 1997 – Part 149

Soon after the first democratically elected Government of South Africa took office, the first Minister of

Transport, Min. Mac Maharaj, gave instruction to Africon (a semi-state consultancy), to develop the

relevant regulatory framework to effectively manage Civil Aviation in South Africa.

These regulations were called the Civil Aviation Regulations 1997, and replaced the Aviation Navigation

Regulations of 1976.

When Africon was busy with this task, different parts of the regulatory framework were entrusted to

different legal writers. The development of Part 149 which gives legal context and recognition to the

discipline-specific associations were placed under the care of Advocate Laureen Statham.

Adv. Statham consulted with the Aero Club of South Africa in the design of Part 149, albeit in structure

only.

The principle was that these associations would become known as Aviation Recreation Organisations

(AROs), and that these AROs would actively oversee the operations of their own members.

Applicability of Part 149

To provide for the approval of AROs (149.01.01):

Part 149 contains all conditions relating to the operations, advertising, staffing, period of approval and

any other conditions relating to the ARO.

Further, all supporting technical matter to successfully execute the operation of an ARO is contained in

the SA-CATS-ARO document.

For completeness sake, the Minister included reference to A DESIGNATED BODY in Part 149, so as to

illustrate the difference inter se.

“ The Commissioner may, in terms of section 2 (3) and (4) of the Act, appoint a body to …” 149.01.02

“…. to exercise control over aviation recreation organizations ……”

NOTE: THE DESIGNATED BODY is not approved in terms of the Regulations (CAR’s), but DESIGNATED in

terms of the Aviation act.

(See ANNEX F for a comprehensive discussion on Designation)

When the Civil Aviation Regulation 1997 was developed, it was felt prudent by the drafters to provide for

the specific recreational aviation activities. This led to the development of operational parts - Parts

98(Powered Paragliders), 100(Gyroplanes), 101(Line-Controlled Kites, Model Aircraft, Captive and

Unmanned Free Balloons), 102(Free Balloons and Airships), 103(Microlight Aeroplanes), 104(Gliders),

105(Parachutes), and 106(Hang Gliders) of the CARs 1997.

8 | P a g e

The language used in these parts was consistent with that used in Part 149 to illustrate the difference

between the ARO as the member organisation approved in Part 149 versus the organisation designated in

terms of the regulations provided for in Section 22 of the Aviation Act 74 of 1962 (Part 149.01.2).

It must be noted that the content of Section 22 of the said Act was transplanted into Section 155 if the

Civil Aviation Authority Act 13 of 2009.

Save for Part 105 dealing with parachuting activities, these parts never took effect. The reason for this

was that the specific flight rules were not comprehensive, and in some instances attempted to deal with

airworthiness matters.

These parts were later consolidated into one specific part of the regulations to deal comprehensively with

airworthiness (Part 24), and one specific part to deal with flight operations (Part 94). Later, a part to deal

comprehensively with maintenance of these aircraft was developed (Part 44).

The development of Part 24, 94 and 44 made the existence of Parts 98 through 106 (barring 105) of the

1997 CARs obsolete.

The Role of the Aviation Recreation Organisation (ARO)

The Minister of Transport carefully considered the effectiveness of his oversight duty of the recreational

flyers.

Consultation with the industry at the time revealed that the existing associations (various sections of the

Aero Club) are a cost effective mechanism to discharge this function.

The motivation from the Minister of Transport, who is tasked with the making of regulations in terms of

the Civil Aviation Act, was that “if they oversee their own, we don’t have to establish such mechanism. If

they don’t, we have to erect structures for this purpose on a user pays principle”.

To give legal effect to these associations and groups, formal recognition had to be given to it by

regulation. For this purpose Part 149 of the Civil Aviation Regulation was created.

Also, a provision in the regulation dealing with operations was then included to compel membership of

these approved organisations.

The Civil Aviation Act provided for the designation of a body to oversee these AROs, and to establish and

determine rules to license pilots and aircraft in the recreational arena.

1.4 April 2000: The designation of the Aero Club

The introduction of the Civil Aviation Regulation of 1997 now provided for the particular functions which

such designated body may exercise.

It is important to note that the functions contained in regulation 149.01.2 are subject to the approval of

the Minister of Transport in terms of Section 4(2) and (3) of the Aviation Act 74 of 1962.

9 | P a g e

The Aero Club proceeded with the preparation of an extensive manual setting out how each of these

functions was going to be executed.

A detailed budget was prepared and submitted to the CAA.

The Commissioner, Trevor Abrahams, agreed to the proposal in principle, and the Aero Club started to

ready itself for designation.

On the 28th April 2000, the following notice was published in the Government Gazette:

10 | P a g e

1.5 January 2001: The withdrawal of designation from the Aero Club

The prepared budget indicated that the Aero Club needed approximately R1 600 000 per annum to

discharge the designated functions.

The Commissioner at the time, Trevor Abrahams, found this amount unpalatable, and offered to rather

reinstate the grant from the DOT towards the Aero Club in the amount of R250 000. Sadly the Executive

Director at the time (Mr. M van Ginkel) and Chair of the Aero Club at the time (Mr. A Westworth) tried to

make do with this counter offer, and had to move away from the carefully planned procedures to

discharge this rather big task.

Shortly after the designation, the Commissioner was suspended pending some investigation, and his

deputy, Me. Wrenelle Stander, was appointed as Acting Commissioner.

The CAA seconded personnel to the Aero Club office to assist with a multiple of challenges now

experienced due to the deviation from the original procedures. Some of the Aero Club sections seconded

some of their senior committee members to take office at the Aero Club to also assist.

By November 2000 the CAA appointed Arthur Anderson Consulting to do a financial audit of the Aero

Club, and the Microlight Association (MISASA) called for a Special General Meeting of the Aero Club at the

beginning of December of the same year.

The CAA received the report from its external auditors in January 2001, which showed alarming trading

and operational shortcomings. The decision to rescind designation was made, in an effort to remedy this

unfortunate situation.

The following notice was published in the Government Gazette on 26 January 2001:

As was to be expected, this withdrawal sent shock waves through the industry, but as the process was

underway for a short time only, it was manageable.

This has also led to the resignation of the Chair of the Aero Club, followed by other non-executives, and

finally by the executive director.

The Board appointed an interim Chair, and spurred by the forensic investigation and audit by firm

Accountants @ Law, appointed new management and started the journey to financial and reputational

repair.

11 | P a g e

Chapter 2

Chapter 2. History of RAASA

2.1 2004 – 2006: The concept of designation is revisited

The Aero Club has been able to resurrect itself from the consequences of the attempted designation, and

has re-established itself as the primary representative body for sport aviation.

The Aero Club relooked at the concept of designation, and considered the value it could have in line with

new legislation that had come into force since 2000. Primarily the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act

(Act 3 of 2000), which gave meaning and effect to the constitutional provision (Section 33) for

procedurally fair, lawful and justifiable administrative action. The Aero Club, being a collective of elected

members of the recreational industry, could add considerable value to this process.

At this stage the Aero Club had agreed with the CAA which functions it exercised. These were not

perfectly aligned with the functions contained in Part 149 of the Civil Aviation Regulations, nor was the

agreement a formal designation.

The Aero Club was investigating the potential of a more formal agreement in terms of the Aviation Act

(1962).

2.2 Designation vs Delegation – an administrative arrangement.

More research was conducted to understand the principals involved with de-centralisation and de-

concentration. The concept of designation took shape, and the following illustrations can best describe

the relationship between a designator and designee:

The fundamental difference is the process of dependence and independence.

Designation:

• Duties and activities are transferred to an independent person or body.

• The designated person or body acts in an independent capacity.

Delegation

• Entrusting of a responsibility to another person (normally from a manager to a subordinate) to carry out

specific activities.

• The delegator remains accountable for the outcome.

12 | P a g e

It is important to note the discussion on oversight and auditing of the models as contained in ANNEX F.

2.3 2006: Incidental meeting with Min. J Radebe – Department of Transport

During 2006, the Aero Club was asked to attend a meeting with the North-West Province Premiers office

and the Minister of Transport. The aim was to discuss the vision of the province to develop the Mafikeng

Airport into a general aviation hub with production, maintenance and pilot training facilities. This would

not have had an influence on its international status and operations. The Experimental Aircraft

Association was also to join, and was represented by Terrence Hertz. Aero Club was represented by Neil

de Lange.

The Minister called the start of the meeting, but the representatives of the province did not arrive.

Nonetheless the Minister insisted on continuing the meeting with the two representatives, and was

joined by Dr. Ian Phillips as his advisor.

In the absence of a formal agenda, the Minister requested Mr. de Lange share his views of the private,

and more importantly, the leisure aviation industry.

13 | P a g e

De Lange explained industry concerns regarding the Civil Aviation Regulation Committee (CARCOM). Of

concern was the largely based on the time required to promulgate proposed amendments and

recommendations to the regulations, whereupon the Minister called the newly appointed Chair of

CARCOM, Mr Levers Mabaso to the meeting. A short discussion of possible remedies was held, and Mr

Mabaso excused.

The Minister then prompted any other problems or proposals. The Aero Club raised the issue of its

interest in being designated, and gave the Minister a short verbal presentation highlighting practicalities

of this as a solution.

Following some questions on structure and composition, the Minister appeared to like the idea, and

instructed his advisor, Dr. Philips, to pass his sentiment to the appropriate directorate for further liaison

with the Aero Club.

Further technical meetings then took place with the Department through the Director Generals office.

2.4 2007: Concept development by Zakes Myeza – Commissioner for CAA 2007

The Aero Club approached the CAA with a further proposal to advance the concept of designation at the

time when Mr. Zakes Myeza was heading the CAA as Commissioner.

After numerous deliberations, the Commissioner suggested that the proposal, albeit a good one, would

come under pressure at times due to possible conflict in its representational roles versus its

administrative function.

The Commissioner suggested that a Non-Profit Organisation be established where the parties (CAA and

Aero Club) have the right to appoint non-executive directors. The Directors then appoint a CEO as ex-

officio director.

The Aero Club board deliberated further on the matter.

Following intensive discussion the Aero Club concluded that it would consider the idea, but did not want

yet another “Civil Aviation Authority” to be established.

Mr. Myeza departed the CAA, and was replaced by Capt. Colin Jordaan during December of 2007.

2.5 2008: Model development and Aero Club buy in

As can be expected, the change in direction from an Aero Club designation, to the Aero Club being a party

to such designation had to be considered carefully.

This led to discussions at the Aero Club board where all the discipline specific sections of the organisations

were represented (see ANNEX B).

An Open Special General meeting of the Aero Club, which was very well attended, was held and the

matter explained.

14 | P a g e

The Commissioner was invited to the Special General Meeting to explain the CAAs role in the process, and

answer any questions from the attendees.

Following these meetings, there was overwhelming support from the Aero Club members for the principle

of establishing a new company to take the role of designation. There was also a minority of the members

of the Aero Club who were not in favour of relinquishing any self-control held at the time, specifically the

Soaring Society of South Africa (SSSA) and the Parachute Association of South Africa (PASA) who were

therefore not included in the initial designation. It was decided that they would be added as capacity was

created. This decision was taken in the light that historic administrative structures were still in place, and

the transition should be smooth.

The SSSA was later added, following a directive from the Commissioner in November 2009 (see ANNEX E).

The Aero Club also debated the appropriate name for such body, and through consensus it was decided to

adopt Recreation Aviation Administration South Africa (RAASA). Other aspects of the name which were

discussed but not adopted was “Recreational”, “Federation”, “Sport”, “Leisure” and “Southern”

2.6 October 2008: Ministerial approval and Treasury notification.

As stipulated in the Civil Aviation Regulation, the Commissioner could only designate a body subject to the

Ministers consent.

A letter of intent was sent by the Chair of the CAA Board to the Minister, containing both the issue of

designation as well as an exemption from section 54(4) of the Public Finance Management Act.

The Minister replied giving his support to the designation of RAASA, but advised that Treasury should be

notified of items relating to it in terms of the PFMA.

The Minister’s full reply is included hereunder.

The CAA Board Chair then replied with notification to Treasury. The full notification is included herewith.

15 | P a g e

16 | P a g e

17 | P a g e

Chapter 3. Solidifying the value proposition – the MOA

3.1 Revisiting the value proposition – a case for designation

During the time when the CAA Board was engaging the Minister on the prospect of designation in 2008, a

lot of preparation went into solidifying the legal concept of the organisation. The actual value of the

principle of designation was well understood by all, but had to be written down to form the basis of a

formal agreement.

Each of the functions listed in regulation 149.02.1 was premised on the following:

To benefit from the combined inputs from specialists in the recreational aviation environment;

To save costs by harvesting the expertise of the voluntary subject experts where required;

To establish, manage, maintain and review consensus standards for the safe operation of all

recreational aviation and associated activities within South Africa;

To oversee and develop the NTCA industry;

To build administrative and people capacity;

To enhance operational oversight; and

To develop and transform participation.

Each of the principles listed above was applied to every function, and is summarised as:

1) Establish safety standards for recreational aviation;

2) Establish Quality Standards for the airworthiness of, and operation of aircraft;

3) Exercise control over aviation recreation organisations approved by the DCA;

4) Establish suitable Standards for the licensing of personnel;

5) Issue such licenses and permits as required for skilled and safe conduct of all operations; and

6) Advise the Director for Civil Aviation of any matter related to recreational flying.

The real value of designation lies in the access to numerous expert volunteers who contribute from within

the recreational aviation industry. These experts are used on a “as and when required” basis, and are

compensated only for expenses incurred in their contribution.

These industry experts include:

Non-executive board = 6

Aircraft Technical committee = 9

Post grad students (WITS) = 3

Advisory instructors = 19

Authorised Persons = 16

Professionals (Legal, Medical, Financial) = 8

3.2 Agreeing the structure with the DCA

The Commissioner, Capt. Jordaan was adamant that the Board of RAASA must contain a representative

from the general aviation field, an aircraft technical specialist, and someone to confirm adherence with

Corporate Governance.

Additionally, he proposed the inclusion of the CAA General Managers from Air Safety Operations and

Aircraft safety.

18 | P a g e

The designers and promoters of the new body, who at the time was the Chair of the Aero Club and its

General Manager was then included, bringing the total number of board members to seven.

The prevailing Companies act (Act 61 of 1973) provided for Companies not for profit to be incorporated

under Section 21 of the Act, and that was agreed as the most appropriate avenue to follow for the

establishment of RAASA.

Articles of Association were lodged with the Registrar of Companies (CIPRO), and RAASA was duly

established in August 2008.

3.3 Confirming the applicability of the Aviation Act (Act 74 of 1962) s 22(1)(g)

During the process of designation, a legal connection had to be established between the act of

designation and the Aviation Act.

It was found in Section 22 (1)(g) that The Minister may make regulations regarding the designation of a

body or institution for purposes of the Act –

(i) to exercise control over the aviation recreation activities specified in the regulations;

(ii) to determine standards for the airworthiness or the operation of aircraft engaged in such

activities; and

(iii) to advise the Commissioner on any matter connected with the airworthiness or the operation of

aircraft engaged in such activities and on the licensing of persons involved in such activities.

This provision read with Section 4(2) and (3) of the same Act provided adequately for the Minister to

agree to and approve the designation.

With the advent of the rewritten Civil Aviation Act (Act 13 of 2009), this provision was included under

section 155 of the Act.

3.4 Confirming the applicability of the CAR 149

Part 149 – Aviation Recreation Organisations

Applicability: To provide for the approval of ARO’s (149.01.01)

All conditions relating to the operations, advertising, staffing, period of approval and any other conditions

relating to the ARO is contained in Part 149.

Further, all supporting technical matter to successfully execute the operation of an ARO is contained in

the SA-CATS-ARO document.

For completeness sake, the legislature included reference to A DESIGNATED BODY in Part 149, so as to

illustrate the difference inter se.

Regulation 149.01.2 is quoted to graphically illustrate the difference between the designated body and

the ARO

19 | P a g e

149.01.2 (1) “ The Commissioner may, in terms of section 2 (3) and (4) of the Act, appoint a body to …”

(a) …………

(b) exercise control over an aviation recreation organisation approved under the provisions of this

part.

(c) ………….

(d) ………….

(see page 5 for a complete quotation of this regulation)

This regulation was then again quoted and elaborated on in the development of the Memorandum of

Agreement between the CAA and RAASA.

3.5 Formalising the MOA

The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) set out in 12 pages the rationale for designation, the

identification of the parties, the functions to be performed, payment for services rendered, dispute

resolution and other usual contract provisions.

The Agreement would be valid for three years, whereupon it would be renewable.

Addendums could be made to the agreement as and when required and agreed between the parties, and

later a few such addendums were agreed, mainly dealing with payment increases to deal with function

roll-out and inflation.

Chapter 4. Giving legal effect to RAASA

4.1 Establishment of a S21 Company

4.1.1. Articles of Association

The Articles were written from a general Section 21 company template, and were amended to give effect

to the procedures of the company, appointment and duties of Directors, and general matters.

4.1.2 Memorandum of Incorporation (old Act 61 of 1973)

4.2 20 November 2008: CAA press release and media interview

On 20 November 2008, the CAA communications department hosted a media briefing and interview to

advise the industry of the designation.

The CAA issued a press statement dealing with the process followed and legal reference of designation,

the adherence to the PFMA, some history of the previous attempts to designation, the legal entity, the

persons to be appointed as Board members, and some of the functions to be carried out by RAASA.

The press statement was prepared by the CAA’s communications department, and delivered by the

Commissioner, Capt. Colin Jordaan.

During the press interview, journalists from approximately 20 publications attended representing all the

aviation publications, general daily papers, weekly papers and web-based news platforms.

20 | P a g e

21 | P a g e

22 | P a g e

Clipping from the BUSINESS DAY of 21 November 2008

23 | P a g e

Online article from the Government Newsletter service – BuaNews.gov.za

24 | P a g e

25 | P a g e

4.3 Advertising to fill operational vacancies

In anticipation of the designation taking effect, RAASA advertised for a few staff positions. Following

interviews, appointments were made for an operations person, administration and finance, licensing

clerks, and event support.

Training took place prior to the effective date of service four months later, and on the 2nd of February

2009, RAASA issued its first licenses.

4.4 Notice in the Gazette 1109 GG No. 33786

Regulation 149.01.2(2) requires notice of the designation to be also published in the Government

Gazette, and the follow notice was eventually published during 2010.

26 | P a g e

Chapter 5. Operational procedures

5.1 Amalgamate the previous Aero Club functions with CAA functions

With the finalisation of the specific function now to be discharged by RAASA, some of the duties which

were dealt with by the Aero Club, following the rescinding of designation in 2001 had to be placed

accordingly.

All such functions were identified as those clearly the duty of the CAA, and therefore were separated from

previous functions dealing with The Aero Club’s sporting functions and its concomitant liaison with the

Department of Sport and Recreation.

The latter included the Aero Club’s liaison with South African Sports Confederation and Olympics

Committee, Air Traffic and Navigational Services, the South African Weather Services, the Commercial

Aviation Association, the Air Force, Liaison with foreign Countries, membership of CARCOM and

membership of the National Airspace Committee.

Some functions which were cascaded from the Aero Club to associations which were the sections of the

Aero Club tasked with specific disciplines, were also included in the list of functions of RAASA.

RAASA would therefore focus solely on domestic recreational civil aviation.

Other functions discharged by the CAA, but which were covered under the provisions of Part 149.01.2

were also brought under the purpose and duty of RAASA.

5.2 Solidifying SOPs

In line with the now solidified role and scope of functions of RAASA, it had to develop operational

procedures against which the functions were to be delivered.

In many cases, existing procedures could be transplanted into the processes of RAASA. These covered a

wide range of functions, whether from the CAA, the Aero Club or its associations as extensions.

A prime example of this would be the administrative of pilot licenses. This procedure was exactly

transplanted to RAASA, inclusive of the computer-based system and the use of pre-printed stationary.

Examples of adjusted procedures would be the issuing process of Display Authorisations to pilots. The

previous system used by the Aero Club was supplemented by a specific committee, the Display

Authorisation Committee, to validate applications by examiners.

An example of a completely new system was that of the issuing of Authority to fly documents to aircraft

owners. No system existed with sufficient traceability allowing quick turn-around of applications. Here a

computer-based system was developed allowing electronic capturing and linking a computer user with

the paper file.

The Issue of the approval of these operational procedures and processes was discussed at numerous

meeting of the Board of RAASA, as well as with various different DCAs. Every decision reached at the

27 | P a g e

various meetings concluded that the Board of RAASA, via its CEO as ex-officio director approve the

processes and report back to the board.

The rationale behind this decision was that Designation was not the approval of an internal part of the

CAA, or the approval of an organisation in terms of the Civil Aviation Regulations, but an independent

body answerable to its board. The outcomes of the functions to be executed by RAASA were to the

measured, not the process followed.

The CAA would, in terms of the MOA between the parties, approve the manual of procedures – not to

micro manage the procedures, but to ensure the focus. This would also form the foundation of the

Service Level Agreement to be entered into later. It was also for this purpose that the DCA would appoint

representatives onto the board of RAASA.

5.3 2009: Industry roll out.

Once the foundation for the delivery of services by RAASA was solidified, and a target date for the roll out

was established, RAASA, together with the CAA and the Aero Club began to advise the users of the

services accordingly.

Circulars were sent to individuals and groups via the Aero Club information database, and the existing

good relationships with the various aviation magazines helped to spread the message of the effective

dates.

Most of the services would commence on the 2nd of February 2009, with a few functions to be brought on

line in the months that followed.

The roll out was reasonably flaw-less, and well accepted by the industry.

Chapter 6. Ongoing development

6.1 Registration in terms of the Non-Profit Act (Directorate for Non Profit Organisations)

To solidify RAASA as a Non-Profit Organisation, it lodged an application with the Department of Social

Services for recognition as a Non-Profit Organisation

This would later be used by RAASA to apply to SARS for tax exemption status in terms of the Income Tax

Act.

With the advent of the new Companies Act (Act 71 of 2008), RAASA registered as a Non-Profit

Organisation. This replaced the Section 21 company regime.

RAASA was now not only a Non-Profit Company (NPC), but also a Non-Profit Organisation (NPO).

The Companies Act requires that “NPC” be added behind the name of such company, and therefore

RAASA NPC appears on official company letter heads.

28 | P a g e

29 | P a g e

6.2 2012: Acquisition of B-BBEEE rating

In line with RAASA’s commitment to social responsibility, it aligned itself with National objective in terms

of BEE. It appointed a ratings agency, BEE RATINGS – SA to assist with the verification of its status.

The first Verification Certificate issued to RAASA appears hereunder.

6.3 2012: Internship programme

In line with its commitment to continuously render an excellent administrative service, RAASA had to

develop a training programme for clerical staff.

30 | P a g e

This programme proved so effective, it was decided to start an intern programme with the aim of

developing administrative capacity for all businesses in the aviation environment.

The programme started in 2012, and in 2014 saw its third intake. The intern programme started with four

young people (holding at least a matriculation certificate), and in 2014 has six participants. A dedicated

programme facilitator was employed to assist with curriculum development and course lecturing.

Interns have progressed to further training as commercial pilot, aircraft maintenance engineer and cabin

crew, with some today employed by the Aero Club and RAASA as administrative clerks.

6.4 The Board – Directors and Charter

With the establishment of RAASA, a huge amount of time and consultation was spent on the composition

of the board of RAASA.

It was proposed that Stan Oliver would chair the proceedings of the board as non-executive chair, and this

was solidified at the first meeting of the directors. This was based on the fact that as Aero Club Chair, he

was instrumental in the process of the establishment of RAASA, and lead the discussions with the CAA

and the Aero Club in the finalisation of the principles to govern RAASA. This was a natural progression of

the planning.

As a direct consequence of his involvement in the establishment of RAASA, and his planning of the

process and setting up of the business, it was proposed that Neil de Lange progress from the position of

General Manager of the Aero Club of South Africa to executive director of RAASA.

Together with the then DCA, discussions was held to confirm the proposals to the board. The DCA agreed

to the proposals of the chair and executive director, and required that a person with established standing

in the aviation industry as well as experience in the audit industry be appointed for Corporate

Governance. This portfolio would ensure adherence to the King 2 and later King 3 reports on good

31 | P a g e

corporate governance. Chris Booysen, senior partner with Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC) was

approached and agreed to the appointment.

The DCA further required that a technical expert be appointed to the board. Johan Lok, Chair of the Aero

Club Technical Committee was approached and accepted the appointment.

It was further suggested that someone involved with a broad understanding of the various divisions of the

Aero Club, and who carries respect and support of the flying industry be appointed as general non-

executive director. Robert Gassmann, previously treasurer of the Aero Club, a member of the committee

of the Microlight Association, a member of the Experimental Aircraft Association, and a member of the

Power Flying Association, was approached and accepted the appointment.

Finally the DCA suggested that, as most of the functions RAASA were to be responsible for fell under the

area of Flight Operations and Aircraft Airworthiness, the respective General Managers of the CAA

responsible for these functions also form part of the board.

The Companies Act at the time stipulated that the registration of a Section 21 company (not for profit) be

subject to a membership of at least seven. It was therefore agreed that the first seven directors be the

first seven members. This was so entered into the Articles of Association of RAASA and accepted by the

Registrar of Companies.

The later conversion from the Articles of Association to a Memorandum of Incorporation, required by the

new Companies Act, has seen the requirement for members dropped. The company is now controlled by

the directors.

The following is a record of the board changes since RAASA’s existence:

Stan Oliver – Still on the board

Neil de Lange Still on the board

Chris Booysen – Still on the board

Roberts Gassmann – Resigned 2012

Johan Lok – Resigned 2011

Obert Chakarisa – Resigned 2011

Anton Richman – Resigned 2011

Yolinda Mooloo (CAA) – Appointed 2011

Goodness Mkhoza (CAA) – Appointed 2011

Yolinda Mooloo (CAA) – resigned 2013

Goodness Mkonza (CAA) – resigned 2013

Subash Devkaran (CAA) – Appointed 2013

Anton Richman (CAA) – Appointed 2013

Anton Richman (CAA) Resigned 2013

Asruf Seedat (CAA) – Appointed 2013

Chris Linakis (Aero Club) – Appointed 2013

Subash Devkaran (CAA) – Resigned 2014

32 | P a g e

2013: Board Charter

During an audit conducted by the CAA’s internal audit department in April 2013, it was suggested that

RAASA develops a document setting out how the board functions.

This document supports the MOI in that it covers the frequency of meetings, but extends into areas such

as the appointment of sub committees to deal with Audit and Remuneration, Risk, and Information

Technology. It also deals with the election of the Chair and general conduct of the board.

This document is based on the format of the CAA board charter.

At the end of 2013 it had not been formally adopted as some items were still under discussion.

It is important to note that such board charter is not a legally required document, nor is it the subject of

the King reports on corporate governance. It merely serves to assist new appointments to the board.

6.5 2014: Re-alignment of Articles of Association (Act 71 of 2008)

RAASA developed its Articles of Association into a Memorandum of Incorporation during 2013, and

lodged this at the end of 2013. This was accepted by CIPC in February 2014.

The most notable change to the MOI from the Articles was the removal of the clauses dealing with

membership of the organisation.

Chapter 7. Industry perception and feedback

7.1 Website interactivity (compliments and complaints)

As with any company or organisation in today’s modern electronic environment, RAASA offers internet-

based services. It has developed a comprehensive website offering information and application forms

required for its services.

A direct feedback facility was added to allow members of the public to address a message containing a

compliment or complaint to RAASA. This message is delivered to the administration manager, the CEO as

well as the non-executive director chairing the Audit Remuneration and Risk Committee of the board.

Over the five years that RAASA has been operating this service, four complaints have been received.

Three were from people not understanding the application process, and one was unhappy as his

application for a license had never been responded to. It turned out the post office delivered his parcel to

the wrong town, and it was collected by an unknown person. He applied anew, and was happy for the

service.

Responses to such messages are resolved or replied to within one business day.

33 | P a g e

7.2 Aero Club Board reporting and feedback

In line with its constitution, the Aero Club of South Africa holds regular board meetings where all the

sections of the club have representation. The Aero Club has invited RAASA to have permanent positions at

these meetings. During these meetings various operational and strategic items are discussed and any

challenges addressed.

These meetings are also a platform for RAASA to bring any matters of general concern to the industry.

7.3 2014: RA – Industry Liaison Forum.

RAASA established a forum for all AROs to discuss items affecting their operations with one another as

well as with RAASA.

The terms of reference of this meeting were developed from the terms used by the CAA to administer the

general Industry Liaison Forum.

The purpose of the RA-ILF is to add to transparency and to further improve the service by RAASA to the

recreational industry.

7.4 Activity and accident statistics

Following an increasingly skewed perception of the safety of recreational aviation, RAASA identified the

need to compare activity statistics with incidents/accidents.

These statistics included:

The collection of the number of pilot licenses issued;

The number of hours flown by the pilots when an application for renewal is made;

Data collection on the number of flight permits (Authorities to Fly) issued; and

The number of hours flown per year between renewals.

This information is compared with accidents and trends are identified.

This information allows objective assessment of probable causes of accidents and assists the

development of appropriate remedies including regulatory provision.

Statistics can be viewed in ANNEX D

34 | P a g e

ANNEX A

Abbreviations and acronyms

ABUL Associacao Brasileria de Pilotos de Aeronaves Leves

Act Act of parliament (citations at start)

AeCSA Aero Club of South Africa

Aero Club Aero Club of South Africa

ARO Aviation Recreation Organisation

ATNS Air traffic and Navigation Services Company

BBBEE Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment

CAA South African Civil Aviation Authority

CAR Civil Aviation Regulation

CARCOM Civil Aviation Regulation Committee

DCA Director for Civil Aviation

DOT Department of Transport

LAA CR Light Aircraft Association - Czech Republic

LS/1 a document used for regulation purposes

MISASA Microlight and Light Sport Association of South Africa

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

MOI Memorandum of Incorporation

NPC Non-Profit Company

NPO Non-Profit Organisation

NTCA Non Type Certificated Aircraft

PASA Parachute Association of South Africa

PFMA Public Finance Management Act 1 of 1999

RAANS Recreation Aircraft Association of New Zealand

RAASA Recreation Aviation Administration South Africa

RA-Aus Recreation Aviation Australia

S21 Section 21 of the Companies Act 1973

SACAA South African Civil Aviation Authority

SA-CATS Civil Aviation Technical Standard

SAGPA South African Gyro-Plane Association

SLA Service Level Agreement

SOP Standard Operation Process

SSSA Soaring Society of South Africa

35 | P a g e

ANNEX B

36 | P a g e

37 | P a g e

ANNEX C

International Comparison (Benchmarking)

1. Australia (RA-AUS)

2. New Zealand (RAANZ)

3. Check Republic (LAA CR)

4. United Kingdom (LAA)

5. Brazil (ABUL)

Recreation Aviation Bodies

The aim of this paper is to compare various international recreational aviation organisations.

1. Recreational Aviation Australia (RA-Aus)

RA-Aus received a delegation from the Civil Aviation Authority, the Australian Civil Aviation Safety

Authority’s predecessor to perform these functions:

• registration of Microlight aircraft,

• accrediting flying schools and

• accrediting pilots certificates, Pilot certificates are limited to Microlight and ultralight aircraft,

limited to 2 seats and a maximum take-off weight of 600 KG.

RA-Aus is an incorporated association regarded by the Australian Security & Investments Commission

(ASIC) as a registrable Australian body whose internal governance operates under its own constitution.

RA-Aus consist of ordinary, honorary, temporary, life and affiliate (clubs and other organisations)

members. Ordinary members are admitted to membership of the Association in accordance with the

association’s Constitution and are entitled to certain rights and privileges under the Constitution. One of

the privileges is to elect state representatives for a two-year term into a committee also known as the

Board; the Executive Members are then elected from the Members of the Board. The Board is responsible

for managing the association’s affairs. The CEO of RA-Aus is responsible for the day-to-day-

administration of the association and functions in accordance with directions issued by the Executive

Members of the RA-Aus Board.

The Board appoints the Operations Manager and the Technical Manager who are responsible to the

Executive for the overall control, supervision and discipline of the operational and technical requirements

of the relevant governing legislation. The Operations Manager approves the appointment of the

following:

a) Regional Operations Co-ordinators

b) Pilot Examiners,

c) Chief Flying Instructors,

d) Instructors,

e) Pilots,

f) Students.

38 | P a g e

RA-AUS signed a memorandum of agreement with the Department of Aviation for the administration of

power-driven ultralight aeroplane aviation. Thus, RA-AUS is working under the supervision from the

(CASA).

Relationship between RA-Aus and CASA

Australian sport aviation operates under self-administration. CASA sets the regulations and then works in

close cooperation with the RAAO (RA-Aus)to ensure that the regulations are applied and enforced. The

CASA conducts oversight by monitoring RA-Aus performance by using these strategies: six monthly

reporting, annual auditing and on-going engagement. This is acceptable since RA-Aus is acting under

delegated authority.

The operational and regulatory activities of RA-Aus are governed by the Operations Manual and Technical

Manual, both of which are published and amended following approval by CASA. RA-Aus administer the

Operations Manual and the Technical Manual on behalf of the CASA. The maintenance of the recreational

aircraft airworthiness standards are governed by the provisions of the Technical Manual. Owners of sport

and recreational aircraft are responsible for ensuring the standards expressed in the Technical Manual are

met and maintained, and registration of an aircraft by the RA-Aus is not to be held out as certification that

the aircraft is airworthy. Similarly, the standards for operations of sport and recreational aircraft are

governed by the provisions of the Operations Manual. Owners/operators of recreational aircraft are

responsible for their operation in accordance with the standards provided for in the Operations Manual.

2. The Recreation Aircraft Association of New Zealand (RAANZ)

RAANZ, a membership based association is a Part 149 certificated Recreational Aviation Organisation

(ARO) comprising of an unlimited number of full members and Affiliated Clubs. The society holds an

annual General Meeting where members are elected to vacant positions on the Executive Committee.

Amongst other functions, the Executive Committee appoints the CEO, Operations Officer, the

Administration Officer, an Internal Systems Auditor, a Technical Officer, a Medical Adviser, and a

Helicopter Officer to carry out functions of the association.

Part 149 Compliance

The Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (NZCAA) delegated authority to RAANZA to perform certain

functions, holders of such delegation are: the CEO, Operations Officer and the Administration Officer. The

delegation holders issue Certificates though the Certificate Issue procedure and approve modifications to

Microlights through the Modification Approval procedure.

As a certificate holder, RAANZ administers the following: Microlight Pilot certificates and ratings,

Microlight Instructor certificates, Microlight Pilot hang-glider tow ratings; authorises Microlight

Inspectors, and approves modifications to Microlights.

Internal System Auditor

Though appointed by the Executive Committee, the internal auditor is responsible and reports to the CEO

of RAANZ. The auditor’s functions include the following:

Conducting a safety audit of RAANZA, its affiliated clubs, and operators against the procedures contained

in RAANZ’s manual.

Reporting to the CEO any and all non-compliance, non-conformance and observations found in the audits.

Carrying out spot audits detailed by the CEO.

Acting as liaison with the NZCAA on safety matters through the CEO.

Act and liaise in accordance with any delegation issue by the NZCAA.

39 | P a g e

The CEO, Internal system auditor and the Administration Officer review their performances every year in

order to understand their roles and to identify any training needs

Internal audit

The appointed auditor conducts the following audits on RAANZ:

a. Conformity to safety policy to ensure that the safety Policy is being achieved and still is still

appropriate to the members needs. This audit is conducted annually.

b. An annual Management review is conducted on Internal Audit Procedures, the Quality Assurance

Action File and procedures and methods detailed in the RAANZ manual. The review is conducted

by the CEO, Internal System Auditor and the Administration Officer; and then passed to the CEO.

c. Field audits occur at locations determined by the Internal Systems Auditor, on the input steps to

RAANZ Administration and the resulting outputs from procedures used.

d. An audit sampling procedures and data at the head office in order to verify the integrity of the

Internal Systems with respect to CAA part 149 compliance.

3. Light Aircraft Association Czech Republic (LAA CR)

The LAA CR is an association of pilots, builders, designers, manufacturers and operators of light aircraft

with MTOM up to 450 kg. The LAA CR is a dual organisation; there are 12 employees who perform the

duties delegated to the Association. The association has the following personnel: President, Vice

President Managing Director, Chief technical inspectors for ULL, MPK, PG and Chief operational inspector

for ULL and trikes, editor of the members’ magazine, a Pilot, 2 ladies in registry, 1 lady for insurance and

one economics. The President of the Association is elected by the highest body of the association i.e. the

General Assembly. Members of the General Assembly are nominated from the sub-assemblies of the

powered subsections of ULL, PPG, Trikes, etc. Members have influence in the running of the association

but are not involved in matters regarding the delegated responsibilities. The other part of LAA deals with

their members.

The LAA CR has authority for certification, licensing and operation of microlights in the Czech Republic.

The Ministry of Transport authorised the LAA CR to engage in trade, to execute delegated functions of

state administration in sport flying equipment which covers paragliding, powered paragliding, gyroplanes,

helicopters, weight shift and aerodynamically controlled Microlights. The LAA is authorised by the

Ministry of Transport to exercise the following functions:

checking the airworthiness of the sport flying equipment and issue the technical certificate of the

sport flying equipment;

assigning registration plate to sport flying equipment;

keeping evidence of sport flying equipment and their users, including registration;

specifying the conditions for the selection and approval of the take-off and landing areas of sport

flying equipment;

issuing certificates of competence to users of sport flying equipment;

Supervising the activities of users of sport flying equipment.

The LAA issues the following certificates: Type certificate, Manufacturer‘s certificate, School‘s certificate,

Registration of airfields/airstrips. The LAA also issues Pilot‘s licences and Technical licences. Licences and

certificates issued upon complying with the procedures and rules of the LAA CR.

The LAA CR is governed by the Civil Aviation Department of the Ministry of Transport thus has no

relations with their CAA they only cooperate on equal basis (see diagram below). The Civil Aviation

40 | P a g e

Department performs oversight on LAA by performing annual audits on the part of the association that

deals with delegated functions.

4. United Kingdom Light Aircraft Association (LAA)

The LAA is an organisation for powered Sports and Recreational Aviation (S&RA) and amateur aircraft

construction. S&RA primarily covers non-commercial activities and personal business. LAA has more than

8 000 members and approximately 4 000 light aircraft. The LAA works under the delegation of the UK CAA

to provide airworthiness services to its members; this includes overseeing the construction and

maintenance of homebuilt aircraft. LAA aircraft are in the Annex II of the European Safety Agency (EASA)

group which does not fall under the jurisdiction of EASA but remain under CAA control. Annex II aircraft

include: microlight, light gyroplanes, amateur built aircraft and ex-military aircraft.

The LAA is governed by the Board. The Board makes rules (concerning the matter of LAA governance) and

regulations (for operational and administrative matters) of the LAA, members of the LAA are required to

comply with these rules. In order to be elected as a board member, the person must be a beneficial

shareholder continuously for at least two years. Before a person can be appointed as a CEO, he is requires

to be a registered shareholder of all the association’s shares.

Pilot coaching scheme

The Pilot Coaching Scheme with the support of the CAA was developed in order to train LAA members.

Only members of the LAA are eligible to be a coach. Requirements include the following: the person must

hold a current CAA or JAR-FCL pilot licence and a valid JAR-FCL Medical Certificate; must hold a current

Flight Instructor or Class Rating Instructor Rating; must own or have owned an LAA aircraft. The LAA

provides an in-house Class Rating Instructor course.

LAA engineering Department

The engineering department performs airworthiness oversight over more than 2 500 Permitted aircraft,

and 1 500 projects. This includes approval of standard modification, examining test flight results

submitted by an owner of an aircraft who want to renew his Authority to fly; registering of a project by a

member who wishes to build an aircraft.

Inspection System

The LAA has an inspection system consisting of nearly 400 approved inspectors all over the UK found

suitable by the LAA for the issue of an inspector’s approval. Most of the inspectors are practising

professional aircraft engineers or experienced amateur aircraft builders and are members of the

Association. Inspectors are graded according to their experience.

The CAA performs oversight on LAA by conducting audits on the association.

Ministry of Transport

Light Aircraft Association Czech CAA

41 | P a g e

The LAA has a Foundation offers that provide a Flying Scholarship towards a private pilot's licence on a

regular basis to a young person between the ages of 17 and 21 at the date of application to student

members of the LAA.

The LAA Educational Trust (LAAET) was established to advance education with regard to aviation,

specifically the design and construction of aircraft, aircraft systems and the operation of light aircraft. The

LAAET benefits the general public, thus non-members benefit from the Educational Trust.

5. Associacao Brasileria de Pilotos de Aeronaves Leves (ABUL)

ABUL is the highest civil authority and sporting body which unites members who have an interest and

involve in Microlight aircraft in Brazil. ABUL was recognised and authorised by the National Agency of Civil

Aviation (ANAC) with specific goals to promote, and coordinate activities in Ultralight flying; defend and

represent their members’ interests; organise and direct flight competitions, represent Microlight pilots

participating in the Microlight and Paramount Commission (CIMA), the FAI. Since ABUL was authorised by

ANAC, ABUL accordingly reports to ANAC on sport and recreational aviation with regard to safety and

flight regulations.

ANAC authorised ABUL to issue Certificates of CPD-Pilot Sports and Medical Certificate CMPU (Certificado

Médico de Piloto de Ultraleve)-Pilot trike for its members.

Regional members’ interests of ABUL are represented by RRABUL.

RTABUL

ABUL has technical representatives that are experienced maintenance technicians responsible for carrying

out inspections and complete the RIAM report (Annual Inspection Maintenance Report) that is required

by the ANAC.

CCPDABUL- CPD checker

ABUL accredits a CCPDABUL, a pilot with recognised experience, qualified as an instructor. These

candidates are required to have extensive knowledge of legislation. A CCPDABUL is responsible for

evaluating candidates in the pilot flying ultralight sport and assists the RRABUL in advising and guiding

members regarding procedures required by legislation for aircraft documentation, and guiding pilots

regarding fight safety and compliance with the Rules of Air (Air Law).

MCBUL

ABUL has a group of medical examiners who assist the association in performing clinical evaluations for

sport pilot applicants. The examiners order laboratory tests that must be submitted by applicants for

review; issue a Statement of Fitness Psychophysics that must be sent to ABUL for the issuing of a CMPU.

42 | P a g e

ANNEX D Sample statistics (activities and accidents)

Fig 1 – Number of licenses issued (2010 – 2014)

43 | P a g e

Fig 2 – Number of flight permits issued against number of average hours flown

Fig 3 – Aircraft hours flown compared to fatal accidents and fatalities.

44 | P a g e

ANNEX E

Directive from the DCA to phase SSSA oversight in with RAASA’s responsibilities.