{"id":"F2006B07914","name":"Airworthiness Directives 2004 - Revocation and Remaking - Learjet 60 Series Aeroplanes","slug":"airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":50948,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B07914-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 - Learjet 60 Series Aeroplanes","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\nmeta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 20.2\ntitle: I, DAVID ALAN VILLIERS, delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety\n---\n\n?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\n Airworthiness Directives 2004\n\n I, DAVID ALAN VILLIERS, delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety\n\n Authority, acting under subregulation 39.001 (1) of the Civil\n\n Aviation Safety Regulations 1998:\n\n (a) revoke the Airworthiness Directives mentioned in\n\n Schedule 1; and\n\n (b) make, as separate instruments, each Airworthiness\n\n Directive mentioned in Schedule 1 and attached.\n\n \n\n ![](image.001.png)\n\n David Villiers\n\n Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority\n\n \n\n  20 December 2004\n\n Note:   Each attached Airworthiness Directive is being re-made in exactly the\n\n same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive.\n\n \n\n\n Schedule 1 Revocation and Remaking of\n\n Airworthiness Directives\n\n Learjet 60 Series Aeroplanes\n\n AD Name AD Number\n\n Abnormal Brake Wear Condition AD/LJ60/1 Amdt 1\n\n Fuel Crossflow Tube AD/LJ60/2\n\n Brake Valve AD/LJ60/3\n\n Spoiler Actuator AD/LJ60/4\n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The instrument does not change the substantive scope of regulatory obligations. It revokes specified ADs and reissues them in the same form as their latest published editions, so the technical requirements and who must comply remain the same. The change is to the form and instrument status (administrative reissuance) rather than to substantive coverage or requirements [Schedule 1; Note]."},"complexity_factors":["Procedural, administrative action (revocation and re-making) rather than substantive regulatory change","Clear delegated legal authority cited (subregulation 39.001(1))","Schedule lists multiple ADs to be re-made (requires cross-referencing by operators)","Attachments (the re-made ADs) are referenced but not reproduced in this text, requiring users to consult the attached instruments or latest published editions","Low legal ambiguity about effect (status change of instruments rather than change to technical obligations)"],"plain_english_summary":"This instrument is an administrative action by a delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Mechanically, it does two things: it revokes a list of existing Airworthiness Directives (ADs) affecting Learjet 60 series aeroplanes (the ADs listed in Schedule 1), and it re-makes each of those ADs as a separate instrument in the same form as the latest published edition [subregulation 39.001(1); Schedule 1; Note].\n\nWho it affects\n- Owners, operators, maintenance organisations and other parties required to comply with the listed ADs for Learjet 60 series aeroplanes. The instrument does not state new technical requirements; it reissues the same content under fresh instrument forms [Schedule 1; Note].\n\nWhy it matters (official claim and practical effect)\n- Officially, the action preserves the existing safety requirements by reissuing the ADs; the Note states each attached AD is being remade \"in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive.\" That is the stated purpose [Note].\n- Practically, the substantive compliance obligations for aircraft operators remain unchanged (the technical requirements and actions prescribed by the ADs are not altered by this document). The principal effects are administrative: new instrument identifiers/forms may replace the prior instruments and relevant records, references and compliance documentation may need updating.\n\nWho pays and who decides\n- The delegate of CASA uses the power in subregulation 39.001(1) to perform the revocation and remaking [subregulation 39.001(1)].\n- Ongoing costs (compliance with the AD content) remain with aircraft owners/operators; any one-off administrative costs (for updating records, manuals, or references) fall on operators, maintainers and CASA, depending on which party maintains particular paperwork or databases.\n\nIncentives, trade-offs and implementation considerations\n- Incentives: Reissuing ADs in identical form keeps existing safety requirements in force while creating discrete, separately numbered instruments. That preserves regulatory continuity for safety oversight while allowing CASA to manage instrument records.\n- Trade-offs and opportunity costs: The action consumes administrative time and attention within CASA and among operators who must ensure their records and references point to the re-made instruments rather than the revoked instruments. Those are administrative costs rather than changes to technical compliance.\n- Compliance burden: There is no stated increase in substantive compliance burden because the AD content is unchanged. There may be minor compliance friction from updating manuals, databases, maintenance tracking systems and legal references to the new instrument forms [Schedule 1; Note].\n- Bureaucratic discretion and implementation risk: The instrument is an exercise of delegated power and does not itself change technical requirements. Risks are primarily clerical — misreferencing the old versus new instrument identifiers or failing to attach the re-made ADs where operators expect them — rather than substantive changes to obligations.\n\nConcrete mechanics to watch for\n- Verify which instrument identifiers/operators must cite for compliance (the original AD numbers are listed in Schedule 1, but the instrument text indicates the ADs are being re-made as separate instruments in the latest published form) [Schedule 1; Note].\n- Update maintenance control documents, logbooks and compliance registers to point to the re-made instruments so that proof of compliance tracks the current instrument forms.\n\nText citations: the delegate acts under subregulation 39.001(1); the list of ADs subject to revocation and remaking appears in Schedule 1; and the Note states the re-made ADs are identical in form to the latest published editions [subregulation 39.001(1); Schedule 1; Note]."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument maintains the exact same scope as the original Airworthiness Directives. The note explicitly states each AD is being re-made 'in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition.' This is purely procedural reorganisation, not an expansion of regulatory scope."},"complexity_factors":["Very short instrument (under 300 words)","Only 4 defined items in Schedule 1 (the AD numbers and names)","Simple binary structure: (a) revoke, (b) remake","No nested conditional logic or cross-references to other legislation beyond the empowering regulation (subregulation 39.001(1))","Straightforward administrative action with no substantive policy changes"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this legislation does:**\n\nThis instrument is a formal decision by a senior official at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to **revoke and immediately remake four specific Airworthiness Directives** for Learjet 60 series aircraft.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- **Owners and operators** of Learjet 60 series aeroplanes in Australia\n- **Maintenance organisations** that service these aircraft\n- **Pilots** who fly these aircraft\n\n**Why it matters:**\nAirworthiness Directives (ADs) are legally binding safety orders issued when a design flaw, manufacturing defect, or maintenance issue is found that could make an aircraft unsafe. They typically require specific inspections, repairs, or modifications within set timeframes.\n\nThis instrument is doing **administrative housekeeping**: the four ADs listed (covering brake wear, fuel crossflow tubes, brake valves, and spoiler actuators) are being formally cancelled and then immediately reissued as separate, standalone legal instruments. This appears to be a procedural reorganisation to ensure each directive has proper legal standing under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.\n\n**The four safety issues covered:**\n- **Abnormal Brake Wear Condition** (AD/LJ60/1 Amdt 1) — addressing unusual wear patterns in braking systems\n- **Fuel Crossflow Tube** (AD/LJ60/2) — addressing a component in the fuel system\n- **Brake Valve** (AD/LJ60/3) — addressing a valve in the braking system\n- **Spoiler Actuator** (AD/LJ60/4) — addressing the mechanism that controls spoiler deployment (spoilers are flight control surfaces used to reduce lift and increase drag)\n\nThe note confirms the technical content of each AD remains **exactly the same** — only the legal packaging is changing."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes","history":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes/history","analysis":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/airworthiness-directives-2004-revocation-and-remaking-learjet-60-series-aeroplanes/documents"}}