AD/PHZL/87 Amdt 2 - Propeller Thrust Bearings

The instrument revolves around a short set of interconnected technical and administrative concepts drawn from the AD text and the referenced manufacturer service bulletin.

• Applicability scope. The AD applies to Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC‑E4A‑3( )/E10950( ) propellers. The text clarifies that the parentheses in the model number indicate the presence or absence of additional letter(s) that vary the basic propeller model, and the AD "still applies regardless of whether these letters are present or absent in the propeller model designation" (Applicability). The AD additionally notes that these propellers are installed on, but not limited to, Raytheon Beechcraft 1900D aeroplanes (Applicability).

• Prescriptive technical work. The AD prescribes a defined set of maintenance actions: "Inspect and rework the propeller blade retention radius and replace the propeller thrust bearing for each blade" following paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of Hartzell SB HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4, or a later FAA‑approved revision (Requirement). The AD therefore adopts the SB's Accomplishment Instructions as mandatory instructions.

• Mandatory replacement rule. The AD departs from the SB’s conditional instruction in paragraph 3.G.(6). Where the SB permits installing new blade thrust bearings only "if required", the AD makes installing new blade thrust bearings mandatory for each blade ("this AD requires to always install new blade thrust bearings") (Requirement). That is a prescriptive tightening.

• Compliance timing tied to TSO or next disassembly. The AD differentiates initial compliance timing by time‑since‑overhaul: for propellers with 4,000 or more hours TSO, a short‑term compliance window (within 100 operating hours after 7 June 2007) was required followed by intervals per the SB; for propellers with 2,000 to fewer than 4,000 hours TSO, the initial action was required "at the next propeller disassembly" (Compliance). The AD defines "next propeller disassembly" as "any maintenance requiring separating of the propeller hub halves" (Requirement).

• Relationship to manufacturer SB and FAA AD. The AD relies on the Hartzell service bulletin as the source of inspection and interval detail, and it explicitly permits later FAA‑approved revisions of the SB. It also references FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 and notes that the manufacturer's SB revision is approved as an AMOC to the original compliance interval (Note 2; Background).

• Credit for previous work. The AD allows credit for work already done to earlier revisions of the Hartzell SB prior to the AD's effective date ("Previous credit is allowed for inspections, rework, and replacements that were done using the preceding revisions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, before the effective date of this AD.") (Requirement).

• Effective scope and administrative form. The document is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (signed by a delegate), and it became effective 24 August 2010 (Effective date). The document contains amendment history notes indicating Amendment 1 increased the repetitive inspection/rework interval and Amendment 2 harmonised the interval with the latest SB revision (Background).

These concepts interact: the AD imposes a mandatory technical regime by reference to a manufacturer SB while tightening one material choice (mandatory bearing replacement), tying timing to TSO or disassembly events, and allowing prior compliance credit for earlier SB revisions. The AD also records that later SB revisions can be FAA‑approved and act as AMOCs to the original compliance intervals.

The AD affects a defined set of actors connected to the specified Hartzell propellers; the text identifies primary and secondary affected parties.

• Owners and operators of the specified propellers. The primary economic actors who must take the AD’s actions are the owners and operators of aircraft fitted with Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC‑E4A‑3( )/E10950( ) propellers. The Applicability explicitly ties the AD to those model numbers and notes installation on Raytheon Beechcraft 1900D aeroplanes "but not limited to" those aircraft, signifying the AD’s reach is to the propellers wherever they are installed.

• Maintenance organisations and maintainers. The work mandated , inspection, rework of blade retention radius, and replacement of each blade thrust bearing , falls into routine or specialised maintenance tasks carried out by licensed maintenance organisations or personnel. The AD defines technical steps by reference to paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of Hartzell SB HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4, establishing the procedural standard that maintenance personnel must follow.

• Hartzell Propeller Inc. (manufacturer). The manufacturer’s service bulletin is incorporated by reference as the source of the Accomplishment Instructions and compliance intervals. The AD also modifies one procedural discretion in the SB by requiring new blade thrust bearings always be installed regardless of the SB paragraph 3.G.(6) wording.

• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and delegated decisionmakers. CASA is the issuing authority (the AD is signed by "Mike Higgins, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority"), so CASA’s delegates and inspectors are the administrative actors who issue and monitor compliance with the AD.

• Regulators and counterpart foreign authorities. The AD explicitly refers to FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 and permits "later FAA approved revision" of the Hartzell SB. This creates a direct inter‑authority interaction with FAA approvals and indicates foreign regulatory materials are relevant to compliance.

Who bears the direct costs. The AD does not list monetary penalties or fund payments; the text of the AD therefore implies the direct compliance costs fall on the propeller owners/operators and their maintenance providers because they must perform inspections, rework the blade retention radius and replace each blade thrust bearing as required. The AD allows prior credit where work was done under earlier SB revisions before the AD effective date.

Who decides. CASA, through its delegate who issued and signed the AD, is the authority that decides the requirement and effective date. The AD also incorporates decisions by the FAA in enabling later FAA‑approved SB revisions to be used. The manufacturer’s SB provides the technical method, but the AD makes compliance mandatory and tightens a matter of discretion in the SB.

The AD sets out a compact set of duties and limited rights, by direct text and by incorporation of the Hartzell service bulletin.

Duties (mandatory actions):

• Inspect and rework the propeller blade retention radius. The AD requires "Inspect and rework the propeller blade retention radius and replace the propeller thrust bearing for each blade, in accordance with paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of the Accomplishment Instructions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 dated 5 June 2009 or later FAA approved revision" (Requirement). The Accomplishment Instructions of the SB are therefore mandatory instructions.

• Replace each blade thrust bearing. The AD requires replacement of the propeller thrust bearing for each blade and explicitly overrides the SB’s conditional language: "Although Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4, states in paragraph 3.G.(6) of the Accomplishment Instructions, to install new blade thrust bearings if required, this AD requires to always install new blade thrust bearings." That is an unambiguous duty to install new bearings in every case (Requirement).

• Comply to specified timing. For propellers with 4,000 or more operating hours TSO, the AD required action "within 100 operating hours after the 7 June 2007 (the effective date of the original issue of this AD), thereafter at intervals specified in the Compliance section of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision." For propellers with 2,000 or more but fewer than 4,000 operating hours TSO, the AD required action "at the next propeller disassembly, thereafter at intervals specified in the Compliance section of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision." The AD defines "next propeller disassembly" as "any maintenance requiring separating of the propeller hub halves" (Compliance; Requirement). These are firm timing duties attached either to TSO thresholds or to physical maintenance events.

Rights, permissive provisions and credits:

• Use of later FAA‑approved revisions of the SB. The AD permits compliance using Hartzell SB Revision 4 "or later FAA approved revision." That provides owners and maintainers the right to follow later FAA‑approved SB revisions insofar as they are approved (Requirement).

• Credit for prior work. The AD grants "Previous credit ... for inspections, rework, and replacements that were done using the preceding revisions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, before the effective date of this AD." That limits the duty to perform redundant work where the required tasks were already completed under earlier SB revisions (Requirement).

• Implicit right to follow the SB as AMOC. The Background states Amendment 1 and 2 modified intervals to reflect the manufacturer's SB "which is approved as an AMOC to the original compliance interval as detailed in FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." This indicates the SB functions as an acceptable means of compliance (AMOC) for certain timing aspects, subject to FAA approval.

Procedural definitions that affect duties:

• Model designation clarifications. The AD’s Applicability clarifies that parenthetical letters may alter a model designation but the AD applies regardless, closing a potential loophole where a slightly different suffix might have been argued to evade applicability.

• Scope of "next propeller disassembly". By defining "next propeller disassembly" to mean "any maintenance requiring separating of the propeller hub halves" the AD aligns the timing duty with a discrete maintenance event rather than an ambiguous operational threshold.

What the AD does not do:

• The AD does not set out penalties, civil fines, or criminal sanctions in its text. It prescribes mandatory maintenance actions and compliance timings but does not enumerate enforcement penalties in this text. Enforcement mechanisms are therefore not explicit in the AD text itself.

Together these elements create a duty regime that is prescriptive on method and timing, narrows a permissive discretion in the SB by requiring new bearings, allows some credit for prior compliance, and permits the use of later FAA‑approved SB revisions.

The AD text does not specify monetary penalties, sanctions, or particular enforcement processes. The instrument is framed as an airworthiness directive with mandatory actions and an effective date, signed by a CASA delegate, but no penalty provisions are included in the printed text provided.

What the document states:

• The AD imposes mandatory maintenance actions and timing obligations (Requirement; Compliance). It identifies the issuing authority as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority through a delegate signature ("Mike Higgins, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority") and provides an effective date of 24 August 2010 (Effective date).

What the document does not state:

• There is no explicit fine, penalty schedule, or administrative enforcement step described in the text supplied. The AD does not prescribe the mechanism by which CASA will verify compliance, record infractions, impose fines or take corrective enforcement action within the printed content.

Implications derivable from the text:

• The AD’s mandatory wording indicates an expectation of compliance, and the inclusion of technical and timing requirements establishes objective tasks for operators and maintainers. The AD’s signature by a CASA delegate and the effective date are the formal administrative elements by which the directive operates.

Practical enforcement considerations observed in the text:

• Because the AD mandates work "in accordance with paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of the Accomplishment Instructions" of the Hartzell SB, enforcement of the AD would be based on verifying that those Accomplishment Instructions were followed and that new blade thrust bearings were installed for each blade, as required by the AD text. The AD also allows credit for prior actions completed under earlier SB revisions, which creates a recordkeeping and verification point for compliance assessment.

• The AD refers to FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 and the acceptance of Hartzell SB revisions as AMOCs. That cross‑reference means that part of the compliance and enforcement calculus is whether the SB revision used is FAA‑approved; the AD limits compliance to Revision 4 or later FAA‑approved revisions of the SB. Verification would therefore include confirming the SB revision used and whether it is FAA‑approved.

Because the instrument does not itself set fines or enforcement procedures, anyone relying on this text alone should treat the AD as a mandatory technical requirement whose enforcement details (inspection, audit, and sanctioning procedures) are not specified in the document supplied.

The AD explicitly references and incorporates materials from the manufacturer and from the FAA, creating direct inter‑authority interaction within the text.

Incorporation of manufacturer service bulletin:

• The AD makes the "Accomplishment Instructions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 dated 5 June 2009 or later FAA approved revision" the technical standard for required inspections, rework, and replacements (Requirement). By doing so, the AD binds operators to a manufacturer’s service bulletin as a required means of compliance. The AD also allows use of later SB revisions when they are FAA‑approved.

Interaction with FAA AD:

• The AD contains two explicit references to the FAA. Note 2 says "FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 Amdt 39‑15019 dated 3 April 2007 refers" (Requirement). The Background further explains that Amendment 1 increased repetitive inspection/rework intervals "to reflect the latest revision of the manufacturers service bulletin which is approved as an AMOC to the original compliance interval as detailed in FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." Amendment 2 similarly "harmonizes the repetitive inspection/rework interval with the latest revision of the manufacturers service bulletin which is approved as an AMOC with FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." These statements show that the AD explicitly recognises the FAA AD as a related regulatory instrument and treats the Hartzell SB (as approved by the FAA) as an acceptable means of compliance.

Scope and extraterritorial application:

• The AD applies to specific Hartzell propeller models irrespective of the suffix letters, and notes these propellers are installed on, but not limited to, Raytheon Beechcraft 1900D aeroplanes (Applicability). This makes the AD applicable to the installed propellers regardless of the aircraft’s country of registry, provided the propeller model is the same. The AD does not purport to change foreign regulators’ rules, but it ties compliance to FAA approvals for later SB revisions.

AMOC relationship:

• The AD identifies the manufacturer’s SB revision as "approved as an AMOC to the original compliance interval as detailed in FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." That creates a two‑way relationship where the manufacturer’s SB, once FAA‑approved, functions as an alternative method of compliance for the relevant timing provisions. The AD permits adherence to "Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision," effectively deferring to FAA approval for later SB revisions.

Credit for prior work:

• The AD grants credit for inspections, rework and replacements done under previous SB revisions prior to the AD’s effective date. That interacts with past compliance actions undertaken under the manufacturer’s documents.

What the AD does not specify:

• The AD does not set out how it interacts with other Australian regulatory instruments or the broader Civil Aviation Regulations in administrative detail within the text supplied. It does not, for example, state explicit cross‑references to particular regulation numbers aside from the FAA AD reference and the SB. Enforcement mechanisms and penalties are not set out in the text, so interaction with administrative enforcement law is implicit rather than explicit in this instrument.

In summary, the AD binds operators to the Hartzell SB procedures, defers to FAA approval for later SB revisions as AMOCs, and situates itself in a regulatory space that recognises FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 as a related instrument.

The AD text itself records an amendment history in the Background and in the header information. The following points are stated in the document:

• Original issuance and effective date references. The Compliance section uses "the 7 June 2007 (the effective date of the original issue of this AD)" as the baseline for earlier required actions. The AD as amended in this document has an effective date stated as "This Amendment becomes effective on 24 August 2010." That indicates the original AD predates this Amendment and had an effective date of 7 June 2007.

• Amendment 1. The Background states: "Amendment 1 increases the repetitive inspection/rework interval to reflect the latest revision of the manufacturers service bulletin which is approved as an AMOC to the original compliance interval as detailed in FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." This records a prior amendment which lengthened the interval between required inspections/rework, and that change was made to reflect the then‑current manufacturer's SB revision which the FAA had accepted as an AMOC to the original interval in FAA AD 2007‑08‑02.

• Amendment 2 (this document). The Background then reports: "Amendment 2 harmonizes the repetitive inspection/rework interval with the latest revision of the manufacturers service bulletin which is approved as an AMOC with FAA AD 2007‑08‑02." This indicates that Amendment 2 adjusted intervals again to be in line with the then‑latest manufacturer SB revision and the FAA AD’s acceptance of that SB revision as an AMOC. The header shows the AD identifier "AD/PHZL/87 Amdt 2" and the publication identifier "16/2010", and the effective date in the body states "This Amendment becomes effective on 24 August 2010."

• Relation to the SB revision. The Requirement references "Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 dated 5 June 2009 or later FAA approved revision." The amendment history notes indicate that the manufacturer SB revisions have driven changes to the AD’s repetitive inspection/rework interval and that those SB revisions were accepted as AMOCs by the FAA AD 2007‑08‑02.

• Credit provision and prior revisions. The Requirement includes a provision that "Previous credit is allowed for inspections, rework, and replacements that were done using the preceding revisions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, before the effective date of this AD." That clause operationalises transition for work done under earlier SB revisions prior to the effective date of the AD or its amendments.

From the text supplied, Amendment 2 is the current version, effective 24 August 2010, and the stated driver of the amendments has been alignment of repetitive inspection/rework intervals with the manufacturer’s SB revisions as accepted by the FAA. The document links these amendments to FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 and the SB’s approval as an AMOC.

The AD text supplied does not record any litigation history. There are no references to judicial proceedings, court decisions, injunctions, or administrative hearings within the text provided. The only external legal instrument expressly referenced is FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 (Note 2; Background), and the Hartzell service bulletin is referenced as the technical document incorporated by the AD.

What the document contains:

• An explicit reference to FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 Amdt 39‑15019 dated 3 April 2007 (Note 2; Background). That is a referenced regulatory document, not a court case.

What the document does not contain:

• No court cases, litigation outcomes, appeals, or judicial reviews are mentioned. There is no record in the text of enforcement actions being litigated or of declaratory relief sought in relation to this AD. There is no mention of proceedings under administrative law tribunals in this text.

Implications for practitioners reading the AD:

• Because the AD itself contains no litigation record, any legal challenges or litigation that might have occurred in relation to the original AD or its amendments are not recorded in the text supplied. Users seeking a litigation history would need to consult external legal databases or CASA administrative records, but that is beyond the scope of the AD text provided here.

• The AD’s references to FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 and to an AMOC relationship indicate inter‑authority regulatory interaction, but nothing in the AD text claims that such interactions resulted in litigation.

In short, the document contains no litigation history in its own text. It identifies related regulatory materials (the Hartzell SB and the FAA AD) but does not assert any disputed legal proceedings or judgments connected to this AD.

The AD text contains specific formulations and small details that could trip up operators, maintainers or compliance staff if overlooked.

• Model‑designation parentheses do not create exceptions. The Applicability notes that the parentheses in the model number "indicates the presence or absence of an additional letter(s) that varies the basic propeller model" and that "This AD still applies regardless of whether these letters are present or absent in the propeller model designation." Practically, this means a suffix letter or letters in the propeller model do not exclude a propeller from the AD’s scope.

• "Not limited to" wording broadens practical reach. The Applicability states the propellers are installed on, but "not limited to, Raytheon Beechcraft 1900D aeroplanes." That phrase confirms the AD is tied to the propeller model, not to a narrow set of aircraft types. Operators of other aeroplanes fitted with the listed propellers remain in scope.

• Mandatory replacement despite SB conditional wording. The SB’s paragraph 3.G.(6) reportedly instructs to "install new blade thrust bearings if required", but the AD requires "to always install new blade thrust bearings." If maintenance staff follow only the SB text without reading the AD, they might leave bearings in place when the AD requires their replacement. The AD’s instruction supersedes the conditional SB wording for the purpose of compliance with this Directive.

• Definition of "next propeller disassembly" may differ from in‑use expectations. The AD defines "next propeller disassembly" as "any maintenance requiring separating of the propeller hub halves." That is a clear mechanical threshold; organisations that equate "disassembly" to broader actions should ensure their maintenance event meets this definition to trigger the compliance timing.

• Compliance timing references an earlier effective date. The Compliance paragraph requires certain actions "within 100 operating hours after the 7 June 2007 (the effective date of the original issue of this AD)." The current Amendment becomes effective 24 August 2010, but some timing obligations in the AD reference the original 2007 effective date. Careful reading is required to map the AD’s timing language to your propeller’s TSO at the relevant historical dates.

• Reliance on FAA‑approved SB revisions. The AD allows use of "Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision" of the Hartzell SB. That ties compliance to whether a later SB revision is FAA‑approved. Operators must confirm that the SB revision they apply is indeed FAA‑approved; the AD’s permission is conditional on FAA approval.

• Credit for previous work is limited to preceding SB revisions done before the AD’s effective date. The AD permits "Previous credit ... for inspections, rework, and replacements that were done using the preceding revisions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, before the effective date of this AD." That wording indicates timing matters for credit and that work done after the effective date under earlier revisions may not be creditable.

• AD does not list penalties or enforcement steps. The absence of explicit penalties or enforcement procedures in the text does not mean non‑compliance is without consequence; it does mean the AD itself does not spell out sanction mechanisms. This can complicate compliance planning because the AD provides no stated enforcement rubric.

• The document references FAA AD 2007‑08‑02 but no other Australian instruments by number in the text supplied. If practitioners search for linked Australian regulatory instruments or interpretive guidance, they will not find them in the AD text.

• Administrative duplication in the document. The text repeats header lines, multiple title lines and a placeholder image reference ("image.001.png"). Those duplications indicate the source document may have editorial artefacts; practitioners should rely on the core requirement, applicability and compliance paragraphs rather than peripheral header repetitions.

Awareness of these details will prevent misreading points where the AD tightens, clarifies or conditionally permits actions relative to the Hartzell SB.

The AD prescribes a short, rule‑based compliance pathway. The following steps are a distilled, source‑grounded checklist based on the Requirement, Compliance, and related paragraphs of the AD. Every item below is traceable to the AD text supplied.

1. Confirm applicability. Verify the propeller model is Hartzell HC‑E4A‑3( )/E10950( ). Remember the AD applies "regardless of whether" additional suffix letters are present or absent in the model designation, and these propellers may be installed on, but are not limited to, Raytheon Beechcraft 1900D aeroplanes (Applicability).

2. Determine your propeller’s TSO and the relevant initial compliance window. The AD divides compliance timing by time‑since‑overhaul:

   • If the propeller has 4,000 or more operating hours TSO, the AD required action had to be done "within 100 operating hours after the 7 June 2007 (the effective date of the original issue of this AD), thereafter at intervals specified in the Compliance section of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision."
   • If the propeller has 2,000 or more but fewer than 4,000 operating hours TSO, the initial action is required "at the next propeller disassembly, thereafter at intervals specified in the Compliance section of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision." The AD defines "next propeller disassembly" as "any maintenance requiring separating of the propeller hub halves" (Compliance; Requirement).

3. Obtain the correct technical instructions. Acquire Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 dated 5 June 2009, or a later FAA‑approved revision. The AD instructs that inspections, rework and replacements be carried out "in accordance with paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of the Accomplishment Instructions" of that SB (Requirement).

4. Plan the prescribed work sequence. The AD requires:

   • Inspect and rework the propeller blade retention radius.
   • Replace the propeller thrust bearing for each blade. These steps are to be executed according to paragraphs 3.G.(1) through 3.G.(9) of the SB (Requirement). Note that the AD overrides the SB’s paragraph 3.G.(6) conditional wording and mandates that new blade thrust bearings must always be installed.

5. Ensure replacement of blade thrust bearings for every blade. The AD explicitly requires "to always install new blade thrust bearings." Do not apply any conditional judgment based on the SB’s earlier wording for paragraph 3.G.(6) if the SB suggests bearings are replaceable only "if required"; the AD requires replacement in all cases.

6. Recordkeeping and prior credit. If inspections, rework, or replacements were already completed using preceding revisions of the Hartzell SB before the effective date of this AD, the AD permits "Previous credit ... for inspections, rework, and replacements that were done using the preceding revisions" (Requirement). Maintain records showing the SB revision used and dates of completion to substantiate any claim for credit.

7. Use FAA‑approved SB revisions when applicable. The AD allows "Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision" of the SB. If you intend to rely on a later revision, confirm that the revision is FAA approved, because the AD’s permission is conditional on FAA approval.

8. Follow the SB’s compliance interval rules after initial compliance. After the initial mandated action (per TSO or next disassembly threshold), subsequent inspections and rework must be scheduled "at intervals specified in the Compliance section of Hartzell Propeller Inc. SB No. HC‑SB‑61‑287, Revision 4 or later FAA approved revision." Ensure your maintenance planning references those Compliance section intervals.

9. Note effective dates. The AD as amended here became effective on 24 August 2010, but certain compliance windows reference the original effective date of 7 June 2007. When determining what work remains outstanding or whether credit applies, map your propeller’s TSO and previous maintenance dates against the AD’s effective date language and the credit clause.

10. Liaise with CASA or authorised delegates as needed. Although the AD text does not set out enforcement procedures or penalty rules, the AD is issued by CASA and signed by a CASA delegate. If you have uncertainty about whether a later SB revision is FAA‑approved or whether a specific maintenance action meets the AD’s requirements, seek clarification from CASA or an authorised CASA delegate, using the AD’s text as the governing document.

11. Practical maintenance logistics. Given the AD requires new blade thrust bearings for each blade, plan for procurement of the specified bearings and for the required downtime to separate the propeller hub halves, carry out the rework of the blade retention radius per SB paragraphs 3.G.(1)-3.G.(9), and complete the replacements and any subsequent checks before returning the propeller to service.

12. Document compliance. Maintain documentation recording the SB revision used, dates of disassembly and reassembly, serial numbers and identification of replaced bearings, work order details referring to paragraphs 3.G.(1)-3.G.(9) of the SB, and any certification signatures required by maintenance regulations. These records will demonstrate compliance and support any claim for prior credit.

All of the above steps derive from the AD’s Requirement and Compliance sections and the defined terms in the AD supplied. The AD’s mandatory instruction to always install new blade thrust bearings is a critical compliance point that must be reflected in any maintenance plan and parts procurement schedule.