{"id":"F2006B07763","name":"Airworthiness Directives 2004 - Revocation and Remaking - Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) 222 Series Helicopters","slug":"airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":50520,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B07763-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Airworthiness Directives 2004 - Revocation and Remaking - Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) 222 Series Helicopters","content":"Airworthiness Directives 2004\n\nI, DAVID ALAN VILLIERS, delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety\n\nAuthority, acting under subregulation 39.001 (1) of the Civil\n\nAviation Safety Regulations 1998:\n\n(a) revoke the Airworthiness Directives mentioned in\n\nSchedule 1; and\n\n(b) make, as separate instruments, each Airworthiness\n\nDirective mentioned in Schedule 1 and attached.\n\n![](image.001.png)\n\nDavid Villiers\n\nDelegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority\n\n20 December 2004\n\nNote: Each attached Airworthiness Directive is being re-made in exactly the\n\nsame form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive.\n\n  \nSchedule 1 Revocation and Remaking of\n\nAirworthiness Directives\n\nBell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) 222 Series Helicopters\n\nAD Name AD Number\n\nRetirement Lives - Fatigue Critical Components AD/BELL 222/1\n\nQuick Disconnect Dual Controls AD/BELL 222/2 Amdt 1\n\nTail Boom - Inspection and Modification AD/BELL 222/3\n\nTail Rotor Servo Control Linkage AD/BELL 222/4\n\nNg Operating Speed Restrictions AD/BELL 222/5\n\nDirectional Hydraulic Actuator P/N 222-382-002-101 AD/BELL 222/6 Amdt 1\n\nFin Assembly Attachment AD/BELL 222/7\n\nEmergency Flotation System and Squib Valve AD/BELL 222/8 Amdt 1\n\nEngine Chip Detector Lights AD/BELL 222/9\n\nFlapping Bearing AD/BELL 222/10 Amdt 1\n\nSwashplate Pins AD/BELL 222/11\n\nSwashplate Drive Link AD/BELL 222/12\n\nMain Rotor Yoke - CANCELLED AD/BELL 222/13\n\nHorizontal Stabiliser Assembly AD/BELL 222/14\n\nMain Rotor Yoke AD/BELL 222/15\n\nTail Rotor Boost Cylinder Support Bracket AD/BELL 222/16\n\nDrive Train Overheat Temperature Indicators AD/BELL 222/17\n\nTail Rotor Blades AD/BELL 222/18 Amdt 3\n\nRetrofit of Engine Overspeed Controller AD/BELL 222/19\n\nMain Rotor Grip and Flapping Bearing Assembly AD/BELL 222/20\n\nVertical Fin Attachment Bolt AD/BELL 222/21\n\nFlapping Bearing-to-Yoke Attachment Bolts AD/BELL 222/22\n\nSwashplate Rotating Ring Drive Pins - Torque Test AD/BELL 222/23\n\nMain Rotor Hydraulic Actuator Support AD/BELL 222/24\n\nMain Rotor Pendulum Weight Support AD/BELL 222/25\n\nMain Rotor Grips and Pitch Horns AD/BELL 222/26\n\nMemcor Truohm Magnetic Brake AD/BELL 222/27","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument appears to be administrative: it revokes listed Airworthiness Directives and reissues them in the same substantive form as the latest published editions. It does not expand or narrow the substantive safety obligations in those ADs. Therefore the scope (who and what is regulated and the regulatory burden) has not materially changed from the original directives; only the form and instrument structure have changed."},"complexity_factors":["Short instrument: single-page revocation and remaking action (low textual complexity)","Relies on a single statutory delegation reference: subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998","Schedule 1 lists 27 AD items (multiple items increase administrative complexity)","Several listed ADs show amendments (e.g., Amdt 1, Amdt 3) and one is marked CANCELLED — requires readers to reconcile amendment history","The instrument attaches full AD texts (not reproduced here) which are separate, potentially longer instruments to consult for substantive obligations","Minimal conditional logic or exceptions in the revocation/remaking instrument itself (low legal complexity)","Potential for implementation complexity in practice (updating records, ensuring reference to the correct re-made instrument)"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanics)\n\n- The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) delegate revokes a list of existing Airworthiness Directives (ADs) that applied to Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) 222 series helicopters, and at the same time reissues each of those ADs as separate, individual instruments. The action is taken under subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.\n\n- The ADs being revoked and re-made are listed in Schedule 1. They cover a range of topics (for example: retirement lives for fatigue-critical components, tail rotor blades, swashplate components, emergency flotation systems, engine overspeed controllers and others). Some entries show existing amendments (for example \"Amdt 1\" or \"Amdt 3\"). One item in the list is marked \"CANCELLED.\" A note in the instrument states each attached AD is re-made in exactly the same form as the latest published edition.\n\nWho this affects\n\n- Owners and operators of Bell 222 series helicopters registered in Australia.\n- Maintenance organisations, engineers and continuing-airworthiness personnel responsible for complying with ADs on those helicopters.\n- Suppliers or service providers who install parts or perform modifications required by the ADs.\n\nWhy it matters (practical effect)\n\n- Airworthiness Directives are mandatory safety requirements. Re-making them as separate instruments keeps the same mandatory tasks, compliance times and technical content but issues each AD as a discrete legal instrument.\n\n- Practically, affected operators and maintainers must continue to follow the requirements in the re-made ADs. The revocation-and-remaking does not, by itself, change the technical or compliance content of the directives (the instrument states each AD is re-made \"in exactly the same form\").\n\nOfficial rationale (claimed purpose)\n\n- The instrument states its purpose is administrative: to revoke the listed ADs and reissue them as separate instruments in the same form as the latest published edition. That is, it restructures how the ADs appear as legal instruments without altering their substantive requirements.\n\nTesting that rationale against costs, incentives and implementation considerations\n\n- Costs and who pays: The substantive compliance costs (time, parts, maintenance labour) stay with operators and maintenance providers; this instrument does not change those substantive obligations. Administrative costs to CASA and the legal/regulatory teams are incurred to reissue and publish the separate instruments. Operators may incur minor administrative costs (for example, updating document control records) to reflect the new instrument references.\n\n- Incentives and behaviour: Because the content is unchanged, there is no new compliance incentive or relaxation. The reissuing primarily affects legal form and document management rather than operational behaviour.\n\n- Trade-offs and opportunity costs: Reissuing ADs as separate instruments can improve clarity and machine-readability of specific directives, but it uses regulator time and publication resources that could be applied elsewhere.\n\n- Implementation risk and bureaucratic discretion: The delegate acts under an existing regulation (subregulation 39.001(1)), which delegates the power to make ADs. The instrument does not create new discretionary powers beyond existing authority. There is a small implementation risk if the reissuance causes confusion about which instrument is current; that risk is mitigated by the instrument explicitly stating each AD is re-made in the same form as the latest published edition.\n\n- Compliance burden and private choice: No increase in technical compliance burden is apparent from this revocation-and-remaking. The decision preserves previously imposed mandatory actions, so operators retain the same contractual and certification obligations.\n\n- Effects on markets, competition and suppliers: The action does not change technical standards or required parts; therefore it does not alter competitive positions among suppliers or affect product prices directly. Any effect is limited to administrative/documentation clarity which could modestly affect how quickly maintenance organisations process work.\n\nConcrete mechanics to note (where to look in the instrument)\n\n- The legal authority relied on: subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.\n- The list of ADs and their identifiers appears in Schedule 1 (27 listed items, some with amendment annotations, one marked \"CANCELLED\").\n- A note says attached ADs are reproduced in exactly the same form as the latest published editions, meaning the content and compliance obligations of each AD are intended to be unchanged.\n\nBottom line\n\n- This instrument is an administrative reissue: it revokes certain ADs for Bell 222 series helicopters and re-makes them as separate instruments without changing their substantive content. Operators and maintenance providers must continue to comply with the same AD requirements; the main effects are administrative (document reference changes and regulator publication).\n"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The instrument performs exactly the function described in its title—revocation and remaking of existing directives. There is no expansion beyond the original scope of maintaining airworthiness standards for the Bell 222 helicopter series. The note explicitly confirms each directive is re-made 'in exactly the same form,' indicating no substantive change to regulatory requirements."},"complexity_factors":["Single operative provision with straightforward (a)/(b) structure","No defined terms requiring interpretation","No conditional logic or nested exceptions","Cross-references limited to Schedule 1 and attached documents (external to this instrument)","Substantive technical content contained in 27 separate attachments not reproduced in the legislative text itself","Extremely short primary instrument (under 300 words of operative text)"],"plain_english_summary":"This instrument revokes the current bundled Airworthiness Directives for Bell 222 series helicopters and re-issues them as 27 separate, standalone ADs. The safety requirements remain identical—no operational or maintenance obligations change.\n\nIt affects Bell 222 owners, operators, and maintenance organisations in Australia (and CASA administratively) and is essentially a paperwork reorganisation to allow individual management of each directive."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series","history":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series/history","analysis":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-bell-helicopter-textron-canada-bhtc-222-series/documents"}}