AD/JBK 117/33 - Long Drive Shaft Rivets

The AD hinges on a small set of tightly specified technical and procedural concepts. Those concepts, as expressed in the source, are:

• Applicability: The AD applies explicitly to "Kawasaki BK 117 C‑2 helicopters." The label "Applicability" in the source confines the instrument to that model and variant only. Any analysis or action must begin by confirming model/version match with the operator’s logbooks and airframe documentation.

• Component at issue: "the long T/R drive shaft" (tail rotor drive shaft), which is the single component subject to inspection, replacement and the repair prohibition. The AD does not address other shafts or components.

• Correct fastener type: The directive differentiates between "solid rivets" (the correct hardware) and "blind rivets" (the incorrect hardware that was erroneously allowed by the AMM). The presence of blind rivets is the trigger for replacement.

• Service instructions: The inspection and the replacement are to be done in accordance with Kawasaki Service Bulletin No. KSB‑117‑306 dated "16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision." The SB is incorporated by reference for work scope and conformity. The document, as printed, includes the date wording "16 June May 2009," which appears in the source as presented; the AD allows later JCAB‑approved revisions of the SB.

• Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) provision: The AD explicitly references AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 as an erroneous repair instruction and prohibits its further use for repair and for installation of any shaft repaired under that instruction.

• Timing: Two temporal concept buckets are used. One is a one‑time action (the inspection and any necessary replacement) which must be carried out "Before further flight after the effective date of this AD." The other is an ongoing prohibition on the AMM repair procedure "From the effective date of this AD."

• Referential coordination: The AD notes that JCAB AD No. TCD‑7496‑2009 dated 1 July 2009 "refers." The inclusion of JCAB material signals coordination with the Japanese authority and that Kawasaki documentation and JCAB approvals are the authoritative maintenance sources the AD relies upon.

These main concepts structure obligations, technical scope and how compliance must be demonstrated. The AD does not define "serviceable unit" inside the text; it relies on the Kawasaki SB and standard maintenance practice to define when a replacement assembly is serviceable. The AD also does not expand applicability beyond the single model designation. The AD contains no explicit inspection intervals beyond the one‑time requirement; it does not mandate recurring inspections or life‑limits beyond the replacement trigger, nor does it specify who must carry out the work (licence/approval level), although the incorporated SB will typically set those procedural details.

The AD identifies and thus affects a limited set of parties by operation and implication. Explicitly, the AD's "Applicability" line states it is for "Kawasaki BK 117 C‑2 helicopters." That identification places primary operational and compliance responsibility on the persons who own, operate, or maintain those airframes. Practically, the affected parties include:

• Aircraft owners and operators of Kawasaki BK 117 C‑2 helicopters, who must ensure their helicopters are inspected and, if necessary, have the long T/R drive shaft replaced before further flight after the effective date.

• Maintenance organisations and certificated maintenance engineers who carry out scheduled and unscheduled repairs on BK 117 C‑2 airframes, because Requirement 1 and Requirement 2 demand actions to be performed "in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306" and the AMM repair method (AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3) is expressly prohibited from the effective date.

• Kawasaki (manufacturer and SB issuer) and JCAB (Japan Civil Aviation Bureau): the AD incorporates Kawasaki SB No. KSB‑117‑306 and allows "later JCAB approved revision" of that SB, and it refers to JCAB AD No. TCD‑7496‑2009. Those referrals mean Kawasaki and JCAB are relevant stakeholders for revised instructions, parts provisioning, and any further regulatory alignment.

• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) as the issuing authority: the AD is issued by a Delegate of CASA. CASA is the authority that published the directive and set the effective date and enforceability within the issuing jurisdiction; although the text does not list enforcement mechanisms, CASA’s role as issuer makes it the compliance overseer.

The AD’s design concentrates obligations and immediate compliance costs on operators and maintainers of the specific helicopter model. The AD does not address owners or operators of other models, third‑party lessors, insurers, or other stakeholders directly; indirect effects may arise through parts supply, maintenance scheduling and regulatory correspondence with Kawasaki and JCAB.

The AD contains a prohibition that affects future maintenance choices: "Do not repair any long T/R drive shaft in accordance with the instructions of Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3; and Do not install on a helicopter any long T/R drive shaft that has been repaired in accordance with AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3." That prohibition binds any person performing maintenance, so maintenance providers must alter repair procedures and acceptance checks. Those changes may in turn implicate inventory management, procurement of replacement assemblies, and recordkeeping.

Finally, the AD’s timing (effective 1 September 2009, with Requirements 1 and 2 due "Before further flight after the effective date") means that operators with BK 117 C‑2 aircraft operating around that date face immediate operational decisions. The AD therefore most directly affects those operators who have aircraft scheduled for near‑term flights and maintenance providers who must prioritise the inspection and any required replacement.

The text of the AD sets out a compact set of duties and implicit rights. Duties are explicit and prescriptive; rights are primarily procedural and referential.

Explicit duties

• Duty to inspect: Operators must "Inspect the long T/R drive shaft in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306 dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision" (Requirement 1). The obligation is an immediate, one‑time duty that must be done "Before further flight after the effective date of this AD."

• Duty to replace if non‑conforming: If the inspection finds blind rivets installed, the operator must "replace the affected T/R drive shaft assembly with a serviceable unit in accordance with the instructions of SB No. KSB‑117‑306 or later JCAB approved revision" (Requirement 2). This is a mandatory corrective duty triggered by the inspection result.

• Duty to cease use of a specified repair procedure: From the effective date, persons must not "repair any long T/R drive shaft in accordance with the instructions of Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3" and must not "install on a helicopter any long T/R drive shaft that has been repaired in accordance with AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3" (Requirement 3). This is an ongoing prohibition impacting future maintenance acts and acceptance/installation checks.

Timing duties

• The AD sets precise timing: Requirements 1 and 2 before further flight after the effective date; Requirement 3 in effect from the effective date. The AD "becomes effective on 1 September 2009."

Referential duties

• The AD binds work to Kawasaki SB KSB‑117‑306, including "later JCAB approved revision." The obligation to follow the SB means that the practical method, acceptance criteria, and possibly qualification of personnel will depend on the SB content as approved by JCAB.

Implicit duties (derived from structure)

• Recordkeeping and documentation: The AD does not explicitly state recordkeeping requirements, but compliance with an AD commonly requires maintenance entries and logbook endorsement to demonstrate the inspection and any replacement took place in accordance with the SB. The AD’s incorporation of the SB implies that SB‑specified documentation practices apply.

• Ensure airworthiness for flight: Because Requirements 1 and 2 must be completed "Before further flight," operators have an implied duty to ground the affected aircraft until compliance is demonstrated.

Explicit rights and limits

• Right to follow later JCAB approved SB revision: The AD allows use of "later JCAB approved revision" of Kawasaki SB No. KSB‑117‑306. This is an explicit procedural right enabling operators to use updated, JCAB‑approved procedures rather than being locked to only the edition quoted in the AD.

• No specified penalty provisions in the text: The AD itself does not set out criminal, civil or administrative penalty clauses inside the wording provided. The AD imposes compliance duties but does not enumerate sanctions or enforcement processes in the text supplied.

Who decides

• CASA Delegate issued the AD (James Coyne), placing CASA as the issuing authority and Kawasaki and JCAB as the technical documentation and approval controllers for the SB. The AD’s reliance on JCAB approvals means JCAB’s later SB revisions are authoritative for method.

What must change in behaviour

• Maintenance personnel must stop following AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 for long T/R drive shafts.

• Operators must schedule and complete the SB‑based inspection before next flight after the effective date and replace any shafts with blind rivets.

• Procurement may shift from repair under AMM procedure to sourcing serviceable replacement assemblies.

Each duty is described in the AD text; the AD does not create ancillary rights such as compensation, nor does it prescribe appeal or review mechanisms in the supplied text. Any appeals, delegations or enforcement procedures are outside the scope of the AD as printed.

The AD text supplied does not specify statutory penalties, fines, or a labelled enforcement regime inside its wording. It sets mandatory maintenance and safety duties with effect dates and prescriptive methods, but it contains no express penalty clauses or enforcement sanctions in the material provided. The publication context and the issuing signature do, however, permit a constrained set of inferences about enforcement realities based on the instrument’s form.

Issuer and formal authority

• The AD is published and signed by a Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (James Coyne) and is titled AD/JBK 117/33. The presence of CASA as issuer identifies the instrument as a formal airworthiness directive issued by the national aviation regulator, which is the appropriate agency to prescribe airworthiness measures.

What the AD requires for compliance

• The AD requires inspection and replacement actions to be carried out "in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306 dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision" and forbids repairs under AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 from the effective date. The AD prescribes timing: Requirements 1 and 2 "Before further flight after the effective date of this AD" and Requirement 3 "From the effective date of this AD." The AD becomes effective on 1 September 2009.

Consequences of non‑compliance (source‑based observation)

• The AD’s stated safety rationale warns that the incorrect use of blind rivets "could lead to a significant reduction of the lifetime of the long T/R drive shaft, potentially resulting in failure of the T/R drive shaft and consequent loss of control of the helicopter." That statement frames non‑compliance as a safety risk that the AD is intended to remove. The AD does not itself set out the enforcement steps or civil/criminal consequences for failing to comply.

Aspects not in the AD text

• The supplied AD does not list administrative enforcement mechanisms such as grounding orders, fines, certificate suspensions or directions that might be used by CASA; it also does not describe how CASA will verify compliance or the documentation required to evidence compliance. The AD refers to Kawasaki SB and JCAB approvals for technical method, but not to a compliance audit protocol.

Practical enforcement implications

• In practice, an AD from CASA functions as a mandatory airworthiness requirement. The AD’s requirement that the inspection and any replacement be completed "Before further flight" implies that an aircraft not compliant with the AD would not be in a permitted state to operate, and operators and maintainers typically document compliance in maintenance records to show airworthiness. The AD’s reliance on Kawasaki SB and JCAB‑approved revisions means that inspectors and compliance officers will look for evidence of the SB‑defined actions and relevant signatures/entries when assessing compliance.

Summary

• The AD prescribes mandatory actions and timing but does not include explicit penalty language in the provided text. It is issued by CASA and thus is an instrument that operating and maintenance personnel must follow; failure to do so creates the aviation safety exposure the AD describes, and the practical consequences would ordinarily be managed through airworthiness and regulatory oversight channels rather than through penalties spelled out in the AD itself.

The AD frames its technical obligations in relation to Kawasaki documentation and JCAB action. Within the text supplied, the notable cross‑references are internal to aviation safety governance and manufacturer documentation. The AD does not explicitly reference other statutes, regulations, or external legal instruments in the text provided. The specific interactions set out in the source are:

• Kawasaki Service Bulletin incorporation: The AD requires that the inspection and the replacement (if needed) be done "in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306 dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision." This makes the SB part of the compliance chain. Any operator or maintenance organisation must therefore follow the SB procedures to satisfy the AD’s requirements.

• Aircraft Maintenance Manual restriction: The AD expressly negates a particular procedure in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual: "Do not repair any long T/R drive shaft in accordance with the instructions of Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3; and Do not install on a helicopter any long T/R drive shaft that has been repaired in accordance with AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3." That interaction means the AD displaces the AMM procedure for the specified repair in the AMM chapter and paragraph named. The AD therefore changes the set of authorised maintenance procedures for that component.

• JCAB AD cross‑reference: The AD includes the note "Note: Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) AD No. TCD‑7496‑2009 dated 1 July 2009 refers." This indicates the AD coordinates with or takes technical lead from a JCAB AD. The AD further permits the use of "later JCAB approved revision" of the Kawasaki SB, tying the Australian AD to JCAB approvals and the manufacturer’s revisions as approved by JCAB.

Absent interactions and limitations in the source

• The AD text supplied does not expressly refer to or displace other national regulations, civil code obligations, contract law, warranty arrangements, lease covenants, insurance terms or employment agreements. It does not state how the AD interacts with aviation safety regulations or enforcement provisions outside the AD wording. Those interactions are not articulated in the instrument text and therefore are beyond the AD’s explicit content.

Operational interactions

• The AD’s timing provision ("Before further flight after the effective date") interacts operationally with flight scheduling, maintenance cycles and operational certificates: operators must ensure compliance before any subsequent flight, which practically means grounding or deferring flights until the inspection and any necessary replacement are completed and documented in the maintenance log in accordance with the SB.

Manufacturer and regulator interaction

• By referencing Kawasaki SB and JCAB approvals, the AD anchors the technical method to the manufacturer’s service instructions as validated by the Japanese regulator. That creates a flow of authority where the AD imposes regulatory duty and Kawasaki/J CAB provide the technical means of compliance. Any later JCAB‑approved revision of the SB is explicitly permitted, which allows future manufacturer or regulator changes to supply the operative method without requiring a subsequent CASA AD amendment.

In short, inside the text the AD interacts directly with two classes of documents: Kawasaki Service Bulletins (as the operative method) and the specified AMM chapter (as a specifically prohibited method), and it coordinates with JCAB AD TCD‑7496‑2009. The instrument does not, within the provided text, expand to or describe interactions with other legislative instruments or enforcement mechanisms beyond being a CASA AD.

The source material records the AD’s issuance, effective date, and references to related documents, but it does not show any prior amendments to the AD itself. The information in the text that bears on amendment history is as follows:

• Issue and signature date: The AD text is signed "James Coyne Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" and dated "19 August 2009." That is the date on which the delegate signed the AD as presented in the source.

• Effective date: The AD "becomes effective on 1 September 2009." That sets the operative date for the requirements and the prohibition.

• References to related regulatory action: The AD includes the note that "Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) AD No. TCD‑7496‑2009 dated 1 July 2009 refers." The JCAB AD precedes the CASA AD in chronological sequence according to the dates provided in the text.

• Incorporation of external document with revision provision: The AD requires compliance with Kawasaki Service Bulletin No. KSB‑117‑306 "dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision." The inclusion of the words "or later JCAB approved revision" indicates that the AD intentionally allows the operative SB to be updated by Kawasaki and approved by JCAB without necessitating an immediate CASA amendment to the AD for each such technical revision. Thus, the AD was drafted to remain technically relevant in the event Kawasaki and JCAB issue updated instructions.

What the source does not show

• The AD text contains no entries showing subsequent CASA amendments, corrections, revocations, or superseding ADs. The source does not record any corrigenda for the AD’s textual errors (for example the "16 June May 2009" wording in the SB date) nor does it document any follow‑up AD that modifies Requirements 1-3.

• The AD does not list prior versions, consultation drafts, or any legislative amendment history beyond the issuance and effective dates and the JCAB reference.

Practical interpretation

• The AD’s allowance for "later JCAB approved revision" of the SB functions as a dynamic clause enabling technical amendments at the manufacturer/JCAB level without a corresponding immediate CASA AD amendment. Any actual amendment to the AD’s mandatory content, scope, or effective dates would, however, require formal action by the issuing authority; none is recorded in the source.

• For practitioners reviewing an aircraft’s compliance history, the key historic points in the AD are issuance 19 August 2009 and effective 1 September 2009, and the JCAB AD dated 1 July 2009 that is referenced. Beyond those items, the AD does not present a longer amendment trail in the provided text.

The source document contains no litigation history, case references, judicial interpretations, or administrative appeals related to this AD. The AD does not name or cite any cases, nor does it report any disputes, challenges, or enforcement proceedings stemming from the AD. The only external regulatory document mentioned is JCAB AD No. TCD‑7496‑2009 dated 1 July 2009, and Kawasaki SB No. KSB‑117‑306 dated "16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision."

What the absence of litigation references means for practitioners

• There is no record in the AD text of any legal challenges to the AD, nor of court decisions construing its scope or obligations. Therefore, legal practitioners cannot draw upon judicial or administrative decisions from this text for interpretive guidance; interpretation must rely on the AD text itself, the referenced SB and AMM documents, and regulatory practice.

• Any interpretive or enforcement questions that arise in practice (for example, the exact technical meaning of "serviceable unit," the scope of prohibited AMM instructions, or the handling of prior repairs performed under the now‑disallowed AMM paragraph) would, in the absence of litigation or administrative determinations contained in the source, be resolved by reference to the SB, manufacturer guidance, JCAB approvals, and CASA direction or administrative process outside the text provided.

If litigation or appeals exist elsewhere

• If a practitioner suspects there have been enforcement actions, challenges or case law related to this AD, the source does not include those materials; the practitioner will need to seek administrative records, CASA enforcement notices, or court filings external to the AD text supplied. The AD itself contains no such records.

The AD text contains specific technical and drafting features that could create practical pitfalls if overlooked. These are concrete traps for compliance and interpretation surfaced directly from the source:

• Narrow applicability: The AD applies only to "Kawasaki BK 117 C‑2 helicopters." Ensure the exact model and variant match your aircraft documentation. Do not assume the AD applies to BK 117 models other than C‑2 unless other ADs or notices cover them.

• Timing imperative: Requirements 1 and 2 must be complied with "Before further flight after the effective date of this AD." That is a hard operational cut‑off. If an aircraft has flights scheduled around 1 September 2009, operators must ensure the inspection and any necessary replacement are completed and documented before the next flight, otherwise the aircraft will be non‑compliant for flight operations.

• Reliance on an external SB with an ambiguous date string: The AD mandates conformity to Kawasaki SB No. KSB‑117‑306 "dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision." The source contains the date string "16 June May 2009," which appears to be a typographical irregularity. Practitioners should cross‑check the actual SB edition and the JCAB approval date to ensure they reference the correct SB revision, and use the "later JCAB approved revision" allowance if a properly dated SB revision exists.

• Broad prohibition against an AMM repair paragraph: Requirement 3 does two things at once: it forbids performing repairs under AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3, and forbids installing any long T/R drive shaft that has been repaired using that procedure. This affects both future repairs and any previously repaired shafts that might exist in inventory. Practitioners must identify shafts in stock or already installed that were repaired under that AMM paragraph and take corrective action if necessary.

• "Serviceable unit" not defined in the AD text: The AD requires replacement with a "serviceable unit in accordance with the instructions of SB No. KSB‑117‑306 or later JCAB approved revision." The AD does not itself define "serviceable unit." The SB and any JCAB approvals will control what constitutes a serviceable replacement; verify SB acceptance criteria and sourcing channels to avoid installing an improper component.

• Interaction with records and acceptance procedures: The AD does not set out a detailed documentation or record retention requirement. Nevertheless, because compliance must occur "Before further flight," maintenance records and logbook entries consistent with the SB methods will be needed to evidence compliance. Failure to document properly may leave an aircraft operationally non‑compliant even if the physical work was done.

• JCAB‑approval dependency: The AD permits later "JCAB approved revision" of the Kawasaki SB. If an operator follows a revised SB that has not yet been JCAB‑approved, that divergence may create a compliance gap. Confirm JCAB approval status of any SB revision used.

• No enumerated enforcement steps in the text: The AD does not list penalties or inspection regimes in the text provided. While that does not remove the AD’s mandatory character, it means operators should seek CASA guidance or verify procedural enforcement expectations if they need certainty about evidence required to demonstrate compliance to regulators or auditors.

• Potential for hidden inventory issues: The prohibition on installing any shaft that was repaired under AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 could affect repair shops’ inventories and supply chains if multiple shafts were repaired under that instruction. Practitioners should check spare parts, installed items and records to identify any such shafts.

These aspects are all taken directly from the AD wording and structure. They represent concrete operational and compliance pitfalls to be managed by affected operators and maintenance organisations.

Compliance with the AD requires following the specified steps, using the Kawasaki SB as the operative procedural document, and observing the timing and prohibitions set out in the AD. The AD’s text prescribes the following compliance sequence and practical tasks:

1. Confirm applicability

   • Verify that the aircraft in question is a "Kawasaki BK 117 C‑2 helicopter" as named by the AD. Check the aircraft type certificate data and maintenance records to confirm model/variant.

2. Obtain and review the referenced Kawasaki SB

   • Acquire Kawasaki Service Bulletin No. KSB‑117‑306 (the edition corresponding to the printed date string "16 June May 2009" or any "later JCAB approved revision"). Confirm the actual SB publication date and JCAB approval status. The AD explicitly requires performing the inspection and any mandated replacement "in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306 ... or later JCAB approved revision."

3. Grounding/operational planning

   • Because Requirements 1 and 2 must be completed "Before further flight after the effective date of this AD" and the AD's effective date is 1 September 2009, plan to perform the inspection at the earliest opportunity before any subsequent flight. This may require rescheduling flights, arranging technical staff, and allocating hangar time.

4. Carry out the inspection per the SB

   • Execute the SB inspection instructions for the long T/R drive shaft as written in KSB‑117‑306 or the JCAB‑approved revision. Confirm inspection access, qualify the personnel as required by the SB, and follow any SB‑specified inspection methods, accept/reject criteria, torque/check sequences and associated checks.

5. Take corrective action if blind rivets are found

   • If the inspection identifies blind rivets installed on the long T/R drive shaft, replace the affected T/R drive shaft assembly with a "serviceable unit in accordance with the instructions of SB No. KSB‑117‑306 or later JCAB approved revision." Ensure the replacement conforms to SB acceptance criteria and is sourced or rebuilt according to Kawasaki and JCAB procedures.

6. Stop using the specified AMM repair method

   • From the effective date of the AD, do not repair any long T/R drive shaft in accordance with AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3. Also, do not install on a helicopter any long T/R drive shaft that has been repaired in accordance with that AMM paragraph. Review existing inventory and records to identify any shafts repaired under that AMM paragraph and quarantine them from installation until further direction or disposition.

7. Document the work

   • Although the AD text does not specify recordkeeping detail, evidence of compliance will typically be required. Enter maintenance logbook records showing:
     • The inspection was performed in accordance with Kawasaki SB No. KSB‑117‑306 (identify edition and JCAB approval),
     • The result of the inspection (no blind rivets found, or replacement undertaken),
     • Details of any replacement part (serial number, part number, source, serviceable certification), and
     • A statement that AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 was not used for any repairs to long T/R drive shafts from the effective date.

8. Verify SB revisions where applicable

   • If Kawasaki issues a later SB revision, confirm that revision is JCAB approved before relying on it as the method of compliance, because the AD allows "later JCAB approved revision." Use only JCAB‑approved SB revisions for compliance.

9. Communicate with stakeholders

   • Notify maintenance providers, parts suppliers and relevant operations personnel about the prohibition on AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3, and ensure procurement and acceptance procedures prevent installation of shafts repaired under that AMM paragraph.

10. Seek clarification from regulator or manufacturer if necessary

    • If there is uncertainty about the SB edition, what constitutes a "serviceable unit," or the compliance evidence required, obtain written clarification from Kawasaki, JCAB (for SB approvals), or CASA. The AD’s text ties compliance to SB instructions and JCAB approval; obtaining confirmatory guidance reduces the risk of non‑compliance.

11. Review downstream effects

    • Check spare parts inventories and any overhauled shafts to ensure none were repaired under the prohibited AMM paragraph. If such shafts exist, follow the SB or seek Kawasaki/CASA guidance on disposition (replacement, rework under an approved method, or scrapping).

12. Record and maintain audit trail

    • Keep copies of the SB used, JCAB approval records for the SB revision employed, maintenance entries and parts certificates for the replacement shaft. These records will be necessary to demonstrate compliance to auditors or inspectors since the AD requires actions to be carried out in accordance with the SB.

Follow the AD text precisely: the AD requires the inspection and replacement "in accordance with the instructions of Kawasaki Service Bulletin (SB) No. KSB‑117‑306 dated 16 June May 2009 or later JCAB approved revision" and prohibits the AMM Chapter 65‑11‑00, 8‑3 repair method "from the effective date." Conformity with the SB procedures and adequate documentation are the practical elements of compliance.

If in doubt as to specific procedural steps, qualification of personnel, or parts sourcing for replacement units, obtain the SB wording and JCAB approval documentation and, where necessary, escalate to Kawasaki or CASA for written guidance to ensure actions taken satisfy the AD’s requirements.