Airworthiness Directives 2004 - Revocation and Remaking - British Aerospace BAe 3100 (Jetstream) Series Aeroplanes

The instrument operates on three core concepts drawn from its text: delegated decision-making, revocation, and re-making as separate instruments. The statutory source cited for the delegate’s power is subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998; that is the legal basis the instrument records for the acts taken. The instrument records an exercise of delegated regulatory power rather than primary legislation.

Revocation is the first technical action. The delegate “revokes the Airworthiness Directives mentioned in Schedule 1.” Revocation operates to remove legal force from previously existing AD instruments listed in that schedule. The instrument does not, within its text, reproduce the full text of the previously existing ADs; instead it refers to them by name and number in the schedule.

Re-making as separate instruments is the second technical action. The delegate “makes, as separate instruments, each Airworthiness Directive mentioned in Schedule 1 and attached.” The instrument therefore creates new, separate AD instruments corresponding to each item in the schedule; the instrument asserts that those attached ADs are re-made “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive.” That phrase indicates the remade instruments should be substantively identical to the most recently published versions of the ADs at the time of re-making.

The schedule structure is a conceptually important element. The ADs are listed with descriptive names that indicate the type of regulatory action each AD embodies: modification, inspection, life limitation, replacement, or cancellation. Several AD entries are marked with “Amdt” indicating they have been amended in their published form. A smaller number are specifically marked “CANCELLED,” which signals that the latest published edition of that AD was a cancellation notice. The schedule therefore captures not only the identities of the ADs but also their current status categories as at the date of this instrument.

Finally the instrument is administrative rather than substantive in the sense that it does not itself set technical compliance requirements for airworthiness beyond the mechanics of revocation and re-issue. The substantive requirements, where present, are located in the attached ADs and the referenced “latest published edition,” which this instrument asserts have been replicated.

The instrument’s effects are determined by the population that is covered by the underlying ADs. The text identifies the subject aircraft type specifically: British Aerospace BAe 3100 (Jetstream) series aeroplanes. Accordingly the immediate set of parties potentially affected consists of the owners, operators, maintainers, certificated engineers, and registrants of BAe 3100/Jetstream series aeroplanes who are subject to Australian airworthiness regulation.

Because the instrument revokes and remakes existing ADs, the likely practical audience is parties who had obligations under the ADs listed in Schedule 1. Those parties will need to locate the separately made AD instruments (the attachments referred to in the instrument) and deliberate whether any change to legal citation, record-keeping, or compliance procedure is required. The instrument itself does not list owners or operators by name; it operates by reference to aircraft type and to existing AD numbers.

Parts manufacturers, maintenance organisations, and suppliers that produce or supply components listed in the AD names are also indirectly affected. The schedule contains entries referring to specific parts and systems, for example “Battery Temperature Monitor Unit - Inspection AD/JETSTREAM/5,” “Inboard Wing Leading Edge Hydraulic Lines AD/JETSTREAM/6,” and “Main Landing Gear Pintle Housing AD/JETSTREAM/21 Amdt.” Where an AD requires modification, inspection, replacement, or life-limitation for a part, the supplier and maintenance chain will face the operational task of implementing whatever those ADs stipulate in their attached form.

Regulatory bodies and legal advisers who maintain registries, compliance trackers, or advisory materials are affected by the change of legal form. The instrument revokes a set of AD instruments and re-issues each as separate attached instruments; that changes the instrument identifiers and possibly the way those directives are cited and referenced in compliance databases. The instrument’s Note that the remade ADs are “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition” signals that there is no intended substantive change to obligations, but the change of instrument identity and the administrative step of re-attachment will require updates to official repositories and to any compliance systems that track AD instruments by citation and date.

Finally, the instrument may affect record-keeping and audit processes. Organisations that prove airworthiness compliance in audits or when transferring aircraft may need to show that the relevant ADs remain in force and have been reissued; because revocation and re-making are legal acts, documentary evidence of the new separate instruments will be necessary to demonstrate continuous compliance.

The instrument itself contains a single set of operative duties: the delegate’s duty to exercise power under subregulation 39.001(1) and the mechanical duty to revoke and re-make the listed ADs. The instrument records that duty in express terms. It does not itself set operational duties, compliance timelines, or rights for third parties; those duties and rights reside in the separately-made ADs that are attached or in the ADs as they appear in the latest published edition.

From the instrument text, the immediate legal rights and duties it establishes are as follows. First, it confers on the delegate the power to revoke and re-make ADs under subregulation 39.001(1); the instrument is the record of that exercise. Second, by remaking each AD “as separate instruments” and asserting that the re-made ADs mirror the latest published edition, the instrument creates a set of discrete legal instruments, each capable of creating obligations by their own terms. The instrument therefore alters the form of legal entitlements and obligations from being embodied in a prior instrument to being embodied in those new separate instruments.

The schedule entries describe the types of measures the remade ADs address, and those descriptive names indicate the kinds of duties that will likely be imposed within the attached AD instruments. Entries include “Modification,” “Inspection,” “Life Limitations,” “Replacement,” and “Amdt” (amendment). For example, entries such as “Fuselage Drain Holes - Modification AD/JETSTREAM/1” and “Wing/Fuselage Attachment Spigot Bush - Inspection AD/JETSTREAM/3” indicate that the attached directives will, in their content, require particular physical interventions, inspections, or component actions. Those interventions typically carry duties on owners and operators to ensure the aircraft comply with the ADs. The instrument itself does not specify who must act or the content of the acts; it locates those duties in the ADs that are re-made.

Rights available to affected parties are not set out in this instrument. There is no express right of appeal, deferral, or exemption in the revocation-and-remaking instrument. Any rights to seek relief, request alternative means of compliance, or challenge the technical content would be determined by the substantive remade ADs, by the underlying Civil Aviation Safety Regulations, and by any administrative or judicial review processes that apply under those regulations. This instrument merely reorganises the legal form of existing directives.

In summary, the instrument shifts how duties and rights are recorded and cited by revoking existing AD instruments and re-issuing each as a separate instrument; the substantive content of duties and rights remains located in the attached ADs, which the instrument declares are identical to the latest published editions.

This instrument contains no express penalty or enforcement provisions. Its operative actions are limited to revoking the listed AD instruments and making new separate AD instruments attached to it; it does not specify sanctions, time-limited compliance requirements, or enforcement procedures. Consequently, any penalty, sanction, or enforcement mechanism that may be applied in relation to the substantive requirements must be found in the individual ADs that are remade, or in the underlying Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and related enforcement frameworks.

The instrument does provide the legal channel by which those substantive ADs are placed into legal effect as separate instruments. That channel means enforcement bodies, auditors, and regulatory compliance officers will need to treat the re-made AD instruments as the operative legal texts. Where individual ADs require inspections, modifications, life-limit changes, or part replacements, enforcement action for failure to comply would depend on the content of those ADs and the statutory enforcement powers available under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 and associated enforcement regimes. None of those enforcement powers are reproduced or altered in this revocation-and-remaking instrument itself.

A practical enforcement implication flows from the administrative step of revocation and re-making. Parties that fail to update their compliance records or that rely on superseded instrument citations may face evidentiary or procedural difficulties when subject to compliance checks. Because the instrument changes the legal form of the ADs, regulatory officers and inspectors will need to verify that the separately made AD instruments are the operative versions. The instrument’s Note that each attached AD is “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition” mitigates the risk of substantive surprise, but does not eliminate procedural enforcement obligations to prove currency.

Finally, a small number of schedule entries are labelled “CANCELLED.” The presence of cancelled ADs in the schedule means that some items listed may be currently recorded as cancelled in their latest published edition; remaking a cancelled AD as a separate instrument will formalise its cancellation in the instrument record. That outcome affects enforcement only to the extent the cancelled ADs no longer impose duties; conversely, where an AD remains in force, enforcement of its requirements will proceed according to the substantive terms of that separate instrument and the general enforcement provisions of aviation law.

The instrument expressly records that it is made under subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, and so it interacts directly with that regulation as the legal source of authority for the delegate’s action. The instrument does not itself reproduce or vary the text of subregulation 39.001(1); rather it records the exercise of the delegated power under that provision. Therefore the legal validity of the acts in this instrument rests on the authorising regulation and any limits that regulation places on the scope of delegated powers.

Interactions with other laws are otherwise implicit and must be inferred from the instrument’s mechanical effect. The instrument revokes certain AD instruments and re-creates them as separate instruments. In practical terms that affects statutory interpretation and citation practices across regulatory, contractual, and administrative domains where those ADs are relevant. For example, contracts that specify compliance with particular AD numbers or editions will need to be read against the remade instruments to determine whether contractual obligations have been disturbed. The instrument does not itself alter contractual rights and obligations, but it changes the legal documents that a contract may point to.

The instrument’s attachments (the re-made ADs) will interact with the broader regulatory framework that governs airworthiness, maintenance, continuing airworthiness obligations, and safety certification. Those interactions are not specified here but will arise through the content of the separate AD instruments and through the way the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations implement airworthiness obligations. Similarly, any statutory enforcement powers, administrative review rights, or judicial remedies that exist under aviation regulations will interact with the remade ADs in the same fashion as they would with other regulatory instruments.

The instrument’s administrative nature limits its direct interaction with criminal or civil liability regimes. It does not create or alter criminal offences, nor does it create civil remedies. Any such legal consequences stemming from non-compliance with the substantive ADs will be found either in those ADs themselves or in other legislative provisions that impose sanctions for failing to meet airworthiness requirements.

Finally, the instrument’s note that the attached ADs are “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition” indicates an intention to preserve substantive legal content. That intention points to a limited interaction with other laws: the instrument is an administrative repackaging rather than a substantive policy change. Still, it can interact procedurally and evidentially with other laws, because parties and courts will have to identify the current operative instruments for purposes such as certification, audits, litigation, and regulatory enforcement.

The instrument is itself dated 20 December 2004 and is presented as a discrete act by a CASA delegate. It carries no internal history of earlier amendments to this specific instrument. The amendment history that is visible within the instrument is limited to annotations in Schedule 1 which indicate which ADs previously have amendments or cancellations.

Schedule 1 lists numerous AD entries with the suffix “Amdt,” indicating that the latest published edition of those ADs included amendments. Examples include “Main Landing Gear Hinge Fitting and Support Angle AD/JETSTREAM/7 Amdt 2,” “Nose Equipment Bay Spine Member AD/JETSTREAM/11 Amdt,” and “Main Landing Gear Pintle to Cylinder Interface AD/JETSTREAM/69 Amdt.” These annotations show that, prior to this revocation-and-remaking exercise, those particular ADs had been amended at least once, and the latest published edition being replicated in this instrument includes those amendments.

A subset of entries is annotated with “CANCELLED,” for example “Nose Gear - Top Cap Bolts - CANCELLED AD/JETSTREAM/13 Amdt” and “Brake Master Cylinder Mounting Bracket - CANCELLED AD/JETSTREAM/28.” The presence of “CANCELLED” in the schedule indicates that in the latest published edition an AD’s operative status was a cancellation notice. The instrument therefore remakes cancelled ADs as separate instruments that reflect their cancelled status in the latest published edition.

The Note appended to the instrument states an explicit preservation principle: each attached AD is re-made “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive.” That statement functions as an amendment-history control: it fixes the content of the remade ADs to whatever the latest published editions were, including their amendments and cancellations, as at the time of remaking. This instrument therefore functions as an administrative synchronisation: it captures, in separate instruments, the current edition of each AD as recorded in the published AD registry.

The instrument itself does not enumerate dates of prior amendments, does not reproduce amendment texts, and does not alter amending mechanisms. It also does not provide a chronological list of when each AD was first made or amended. Its amendment history footprint is therefore limited to the fact of re-making and the apparent incorporation of whatever amendments were present in the latest published editions of the ADs listed in the schedule.

The instrument contains no reference to judicial proceedings or administrative appeals, and there is no litigation history recorded in the instrument itself. The text does not cite any cases, disputes, or contested administrative reviews associated with these ADs. Because this instrument is an administrative revocation and re-making exercise, any litigation that might arise in relation to the underlying ADs or to this instrument would need to be sourced from external records; the instrument does not provide that information.

From the instrument’s contents it is possible to note two litigation-relevant facts. First, the instrument is an exercise of a delegated power under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, specifically subregulation 39.001(1). If any party sought judicial review of the delegate’s exercise of that power, judicial review would typically engage questions about whether the delegate acted within the scope of the delegated authority and whether procedural fairness and statutory requirements were satisfied. None of those potential legal questions are addressed within the text.

Second, because the instrument revokes earlier AD instruments and re-issues separate instruments, litigation or disputes arising from interpretation of the operative AD text would need to take account of the re-made instruments as the operative versions for the relevant period. That procedural fact is litigation-relevant insofar as parties contest what the operative directive was at a given time. Again, this instrument does not record any litigation or legal challenge.

In sum, the instrument contains no internal litigation history and does not reference any case law. Any litigation history relevant to these ADs is external to the instrument and not contained in the text provided.

This instrument contains a number of practical traps or pitfalls for compliance officers, registrars, maintenance organisations, and legal advisers. The first is the administrative nature of the change. The instrument revokes and re-makes ADs that are stated to be “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition.” The substantive content is therefore intended to be unchanged, but the legal form is changed. Parties that rely on document identifiers, parliamentary instruments registers, or internal compliance tracking that records ADs by instrument number, date or instrument citation will need to update their records to reflect the re-made separate instruments. Failure to do so can create evidentiary and procedural issues in audits or inspections.

Second, Schedule 1 includes ADs annotated as “CANCELLED.” A “CANCELLED” annotation in the schedule means the latest published edition of that AD is a cancellation notice. The instrument’s re-making of the AD “in exactly the same form” will therefore reproduce the cancellation as a separate instrument. That outcome can be counter-intuitive: the instrument revokes the old instrument and reissues a cancelled AD as a separate instrument that is itself a cancellation. Practitioners should confirm the operative status of each AD in the attached instruments rather than assume that inclusion in the schedule means the AD imposes current requirements.

Third, many AD entries include “Amdt” tags. Those indicate that the latest published AD edition included amendments. Users must ensure they consult the correct edition of the re-made AD, because the presence of amendments in prior history shows that AD content has varied over time. Reliance on an incorrect edition when performing maintenance or when certifying compliance can lead to non-conformance with the actual operative requirement.

Fourth, the instrument does not reproduce the text of the attached ADs within the main body supplied here. It asserts the attachments exist and are “in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition,” but the instrument text provided to a reader may not include those attachments. Practitioners must obtain the attached instruments from the official source and verify the precise terms and compliance dates. Assuming that the schedule titles alone are sufficient to understand obligations is a potential trap.

Fifth, because the instrument changes the legal instruments that confer obligations, documentary continuity is important in sale, transfer and certification contexts. When aircraft change hands, the purchaser’s due diligence must show compliance with the operative AD instruments. The revocation-and-remaking process can create a need to cross-reference prior AD instruments with the new separate instruments to demonstrate a continuous compliance chain.

Finally, although the instrument records the delegate’s action, it does not record whether procedural or notification steps were taken prior to the exercise of power. Parties who rely on public notification procedures or who expect transitional arrangements should not assume additional procedural steps are included in this instrument unless they appear in the attached AD texts or in other regulatory documentation.

Compliance requires a practical sequence driven by the instrument’s mechanical operations. Step one is documentary confirmation. Affected parties should obtain the separately made AD instruments that this instrument says are attached, and verify that each attached AD is identical to the latest published edition as stated in the Note. The schedule provides the AD identifiers and descriptive names to locate the correct documents, for example AD/JETSTREAM/1 for “Fuselage Drain Holes - Modification” and AD/JETSTREAM/99 for “Revised Airworthiness Limitations.”

Step two is classification and prioritisation. Use the schedule’s descriptive labels to triage actions. Items labelled “Inspection,” “Modification,” “Life Limitations,” or “Replacement” suggest ongoing or immediate maintenance tasks. For example, “Battery Temperature Monitor Unit - Inspection AD/JETSTREAM/5” implies an inspection regime, while “Main and Nose Landing Gear - Life Limitations AD/JETSTREAM/90” implies life-limit tracking. Items annotated “CANCELLED” do not impose active obligations but should be documented for completeness.

Step three is calendarisation and records reconciliation. Because the instrument revokes prior instruments and replaces them with separate instruments, reconcile internal compliance logs, maintenance schedules, airworthiness records and certificates against the remade AD instruments. Ensure maintenance entries cite the correct instrument number and edition. Where ADs impose periodic inspections or life limits, update maintenance planning software and logbooks to reflect the remade instrument identifiers.

Step four is technical implementation. For each attached AD, implement the technical requirement stated in that directive. The revocation-and-remaking instrument does not change the substantive requirements, per its Note, but the separately made instruments are the operative legal texts. Ensure tasks are performed to the specification in the attached ADs, using appropriately certificated personnel and parts. For items involving structural inspection, life limits, or replacement, document compliance with dates, parts numbers and work orders to create an auditable trail.

Step five is supply-chain coordination. Where ADs require parts, modifications or inspections, coordinate with manufacturers and maintenance organisations to obtain parts or instructions and to schedule downtime. Many AD names in the schedule reference specific assemblies or parts, for example “Propeller Governor Low Speed Setting From 94% to 96% AD/JETSTREAM/26” and “Engine Fire Protection System Hose Assemblies AD/JETSTREAM/55.” Confirm parts availability and approved modification data before undertaking work.

Step six is legal and contractual review. Review any contracts that reference the earlier AD instrument citations. If contracts tie compliance obligations or warranties to specific AD numbers or editions, update contract annexures or provide counterparties with evidence of the remade instruments to avoid disputes.

Step seven is audit and certification readiness. Prepare documentary evidence that demonstrates compliance with the re-made ADs for audits, regulatory inspections and for aircraft transactions. Because the instrument changes the legal citation of the ADs, maintain a cross-reference table that links prior AD instruments to the remade separate instruments.

Finally, maintain a watch for any subsequent amendments or cancellations. Although this instrument re-made the ADs in their then-current published form, some ADs in the schedule carry the “Amdt” label indicating prior amendments, and further amendments may be issued after 20 December 2004. Ensure a process exists to track new AD publications and to update compliance actions promptly.