Airworthiness Directives 2004 - Revocation and Remaking - Pilatus Britten-Norman BN-2 Series Aeroplanes

The instrument rests on a small set of legal and administrative concepts stated in the source text.

• Delegated instrument. The action is taken by "DAVID ALAN VILLIERS, delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" and is executed in that capacity. The text thereby indicates that the power to revoke and remake ADs is exercised by a delegate rather than by the Authority collectively. The instrument does not recite the internal delegation instrument or conditions of delegation; it identifies the delegate by name and role.

• Statutory authority. The delegate expressly acts "under subregulation 39.001 (1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998." The instrument invokes that provision as its enabling law. The source does not reproduce the wording of subregulation 39.001(1); it merely records the enabling reference.

• Revocation and remaking. The instrument performs two discrete legal acts: revocation of the listed ADs (Schedule 1) and making new, separate instruments for each AD listed. The form of these acts is set out in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the operative clause. The Schedule lists AD identifiers and short titles; several entries include amendment numbers (for example "AD/BN-2/1 Amdt 1") and some are annotated "CANCELLED" or "Superseded - CANCELLED."

• Repetition of content. The instrument includes an explicit note that "Each attached Airworthiness Directive is being re-made in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive." That statement frames the remaking as a republication without substantive alteration to the published content of the ADs.

• Subject matter specificity. The Schedule and the title identify the targeted fleet: Pilatus Britten‑Norman BN‑2 series aeroplanes. The list is detailed by AD number (AD/BN‑2/1 through AD/BN‑2/83) and by topic (for example "Fuel Tank Sump - Modification", "Elevator Trim System - Modification", "Tail Plane Front Spar Attachment - Inspection").

• Administrative traceability. By re‑making each AD as a separate instrument and attaching them, the instrument creates an administrative record pairing each AD identifier to an individual instrument. The source does not include the attached AD texts within the body; it states they are attached and identical to their latest published editions.

These concepts together show the instrument's purpose as an administrative reorganisation: a delegate, using statutory authority, revokes previous forms of listed ADs and reissues each AD as a discrete, attached instrument, keeping substantive content unchanged per the note. The source does not expand on consequences, enforcement mechanisms, compliance deadlines, or transitional arrangements beyond the revocation and remaking itself.

The instrument targets the universe of persons and entities that are subject to Airworthiness Directives for Pilatus Britten‑Norman BN‑2 series aeroplanes. The Schedule explicitly lists ADs affecting this aircraft family, so the primary affected groups are:

• Operators and owners of Pilatus BN‑2 series aeroplanes. Operators and owners who must comply with any AD applicable to their aircraft are directly implicated because the instrument revokes prior ADs and re‑issues them as separate instruments for that same aircraft series. The source does not list individual operators or serial numbers; it identifies the aeroplane type only.

• Maintenance organisations and certificated engineers. Organisations and personnel responsible for maintenance, inspections or modifications mandated by the ADs will need to track the re‑issued instruments to ensure compliance. The Schedule’s entry titles (for example "Main Fuel Pipe - Modification", "Wing Rear Spar - Inspection", "Engine Mounting Brackets - Inspection") show that the ADs concern recurring inspections, structural modifications and component replacements, which fall within maintenance workflows.

• Airworthiness managers and continuing airworthiness holders. Entities charged with continuing airworthiness oversight for BN‑2 aeroplanes, such as continuing airworthiness management organisations, will be affected because the instrument changes how the ADs are published and recorded: each AD is now a separate instrument with attachments stated to match the latest published editions.

• Registration and regulatory record‑keepers. CASA or delegates responsible for keeping authoritative registries of ADs and issuing notices will be affected by a change in instrument form. The instrument itself is an administrative act that will need to be reflected in whatever official AD repository or database is used.

• Third parties relying on AD citations. Lessor, insurers, auditors and other parties who reference ADs in contracts, airworthiness records or audit trails will be affected by the change in instrument form and numbering; they must ensure their references point to the new separate instruments or the attached texts.

The source does not state specific compliance dates, exemptions or transitional relief. It does mark some AD entries in the Schedule as "CANCELLED" or "Superseded - CANCELLED." Where an AD in the schedule is flagged "CANCELLED", that notation appears to be descriptive of the AD’s status and is part of the Schedule listing. The instrument’s structure (revocation and remaking of the listed ADs) implies that any operative obligations reside in the attached instruments that are "re‑made", which are stated to be identical to the latest published editions. Therefore the practical effect for those affected is continuity of substantive obligations while necessitating administrative updating of records and documentary references to reflect the separate instruments.

The source instrument is narrowly framed and does not itself enumerate duties, compliance procedures, or rights in operational detail; instead it performs an administrative legal change: revocation and re‑making of listed ADs as separate instruments. From the text we can extract the following functional allocation of duties and rights as they flow from that administrative act.

• Duty to consult the re‑made ADs. The instrument revokes the listed ADs and remakes them "and attached." The note states the attached ADs are "being re‑made in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive." Therefore the operative duties that apply to owners, operators and maintainers will be those set out in the attached ADs. The instrument itself places the practical duty on affected parties to read and apply the re‑made, attached ADs, rather than relying on the now‑revoked instruments.

• Duty to update records and references. Because the instrument changes the form of the legal instruments (separate instruments attached), entities that maintain compliance logs, maintenance records, continuing airworthiness files, contractual references, or audit trails must update those records to reference the newly made separate instruments and their attached texts. The source sets out the change in instrument form but does not prescribe the mechanics of record updates; the operational duty arises from the change in legal documentation.

• Right to rely on unchanged substantive content. The explicit note that each attached AD is "being re‑made in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive" creates a right for affected parties to expect that the substantive technical requirements have not been altered by this instrument. The instrument thus preserves the substantive content of the ADs as it appears in their latest published editions. From the source, any claim of substantive change would be inconsistent with that note.

• Delegated procedural discretion. The exercise of the revocation and remaking power is performed by a named delegate (David Alan Villiers). That indicates that the execution of these particular AD procedural steps has been delegated to an individual acting under the statutory provision cited. The instrument thus formalises the delegate's authority to effect these revocations and re‑issuances; it does not, however, enumerate appeal rights, review mechanisms, or internal procedural rights in relation to this administrative step.

• No explicit transitional exemptions or new obligations in instrument body. The source does not introduce new inspections, modifications, compliance deadlines, exemptions or waivers in the text. Any duties or rights beyond the administrative act therefore reside exclusively in the text of the attached re‑made ADs (which the instrument says are identical to their latest published editions). Practically, this means duties and rights are not newly conferred or removed by the revocation/remaking process itself, aside from the documentation change.

In short, the instrument transfers the duty of operational compliance to the attached (re‑made) ADs, imposes an administrative duty to align records and references with the new instrument form, and preserves the substantive content of the ADs as published. The instrument locates decision‑making authority in the named delegate operating under subregulation 39.001(1), but does not create new operational requirements itself.

The instrument’s text does not set out penalties, enforcement mechanisms, sanctions, or specific compliance procedures. Its operative content is limited to revocation of listed ADs and re‑making each as a separate instrument; it cites subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 as the enabling power. The instrument does not reproduce or summarise any enforcement provisions from that subregulation or any other provision.

Consequently, from the source alone:

• The instrument does not itself impose a penalty regime or specify enforcement steps. Any enforcement, sanctions or regulatory consequences for non‑compliance with obligations that arise must be found in the substantive ADs attached or in the broader Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and other statutory instruments under which ADs operate.

• The instrument does not state whether the re‑made instruments attract new registration numbers, filing dates, or administrative identifiers that would affect enforcement start dates, limitations or detection windows. It simply revokes and remakes the ADs "and attached", and states they are identical to the latest published editions.

• The source does not indicate any transitional enforcement leniency for the revocation and remaking step, nor does it state whether action taken in compliance with the prior form of any AD will be treated as compliance with the re‑made instrument. Practitioners must therefore look to the attached ADs and the enabling CASR provisions for enforcement detail.

• The only enforcement‑related statement present in the instrument is implicit: by re‑making the ADs and attaching them in identical form to their latest published editions, the instrument preserves whatever enforceable obligations and associated enforcement mechanisms those ADs and their enabling statutes previously contained. The instrument itself does not expand on that.

For regulatory, legal or compliance advice concerning penalties and enforcement consequences, the attached AD texts and the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (and any relevant enforcement provisions contained in them) would need to be consulted. The present instrument functions as an administrative republication and does not itself contain enforcement or penalty clauses.

The instrument expressly situates itself within the Civil Aviation regulatory architecture by invoking subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 as its enabling authority. Beyond that explicit cross‑reference, the source text does not set out detailed interactions with any other statutes, regulations, instruments or legal regimes.

From the text in the source we can make the following observations about legal interaction mechanisms:

• Enabling provision. The instrument is expressly made under subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998. The instrument therefore belongs to the class of statutory instruments generated under the CASR framework and should be read and applied in light of the rights, duties and procedural rules that govern ADs under the CASR. The instrument does not quote subregulation 39.001(1), so any specific procedural or substantive constraints in that subregulation are not reproduced here.

• Relationship to earlier ADs. The instrument revokes the ADs mentioned in Schedule 1 and simultaneously re‑makes them as separate attached instruments. That revocation and re‑making changes the immediate statutory form of those ADs, even while the note claims their substantive wording matches the latest published edition. This may affect how the ADs are cited or referenced in other instruments, manuals, maintenance schedules, or contractual documents that refer to the previous AD format or composite publication.

• Administrative hierarchy. By being executed by a named delegate of CASA, the instrument reflects internal administrative delegation. The source does not show any interaction with other delegated instruments or with judicial or administrative review mechanisms; it simply records an exercise of delegated power.

• Cross‑reference implications. Because the re‑made ADs are attached as separate instruments, other regulatory documents that refer to AD numbers, amendment numbers or publication sources may need to be updated to reference the new instrument forms. For example, maintenance manuals or continuing airworthiness directives that previously referenced a consolidated AD may need to ensure their references point to the re‑made separate instrument or the attached text as the authoritative source.

• Interaction with cancellation and supersession. The Schedule contains entries annotated "CANCELLED" and "Superseded - CANCELLED." The instrument does not explain the interaction between those annotations and the revocation/remaking action; it simply lists them. The presence of cancelled entries within the Schedule suggests that some of the ADs had already been cancelled or superseded before this instrument, but the instrument nonetheless includes them in the list of items to be revoked and re‑made. Practitioners must reconcile those annotations with the texts of the attached instruments and with any prior instruments that cancelled or superseded those ADs.

• No stated interaction with enforcement law or civil remedies. The instrument does not address how the re‑making interacts with enforcement, civil liability, contractual obligations, or insurance terms. Any such interactions would have to be inferred from the content of the attached ADs and from other laws.

In sum, the instrument is an administrative device within the Civil Aviation regulatory system. Its explicit interaction is with subregulation 39.001(1) CASR 1998. It alters the immediate form and possibly the citation paths of the listed ADs by revoking and re‑issuing them as separate attached instruments; any secondary legal interactions (with contracts, insurance, or enforcement regimes) will be driven by the content of the attached ADs and the broader CASR framework rather than by this instrument’s body.

The source instrument itself effects an amendment in the sense of revocation and remaking; its signed date is 20 December 2004. The instrument includes the following amendment‑related material:

• Date and execution. The instrument is dated 20 December 2004 and bears the signature block of David Villiers as "Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority." That is the execution date for the revocation/remaking action.

• Amendments of ADs. The Schedule lists many AD entries that already carry amendment identifiers (for example "AD/BN‑2/1 Amdt 1", "AD/BN‑2/9 Amdt 4", "AD/BN‑2/25 Amdt 3", "AD/BN‑2/71 Amdt 4"). Those amendment marks indicate that individual ADs had been amended previously; the instrument re‑makes them in their latest published form. The instrument does not provide a history of those amendments, but the inclusion of amendment numbers in the Schedule records their existence as of the latest published edition reference.

• Revocation and re‑making action. Paragraph (a) revokes the Airworthiness Directives listed in Schedule 1; paragraph (b) remakes, as separate instruments, each AD mentioned in Schedule 1 "and attached." The instrument’s note clarifies that the re‑made ADs are identical to their latest published editions. Thus this instrument is itself a form of administrative amendment: it changes the form of the instruments (to separate attached instruments) while preserving substantive content as in the latest published editions.

• Cancellations and supersessions recorded. The Schedule itself marks several entries as "CANCELLED" or "Superseded - CANCELLED" (for example AD/BN‑2/4 "Pilots Safety Harness - Installation - CANCELLED", AD/BN‑2/10 "Superseded - CANCELLED", AD/BN‑2/20 "Elevator Outboard Hinge Spacers - CANCELLED", AD/BN‑2/40 "Propeller Governors - Inspection and Adjustment - CANCELLED", and AD/BN‑2/55 "Nose Wheel Steering Ring Gear - CANCELLED"). The instrument includes those cancelled entries in the list to be revoked and re‑made (or at least listed), but does not narrate when or how those cancellations or supersessions occurred. Their presence in the Schedule indicates an amendment history at the level of individual ADs, but the present instrument does not summarise those prior amendment events.

• No subsequent amendment within this instrument. The instrument does not itself amend the technical requirements of the ADs. Its declared intent is re‑making identical texts. There is no further amendment clause, no transitional amendment mechanism, nor any subsequent reversion clause in the source.

• No additional instrument numbers provided. The source does not provide new instrument identifiers for the re‑made ADs; it simply attaches them and notes they are identical to the latest published editions. Practitioners must therefore consult the attached texts and the official AD repository to determine the precise citation and publication identifiers used for the re‑made instruments.

In short, this instrument’s amendment history effect is the revocation of existing listed ADs and their republication as separate attached instruments, dated 20 December 2004, with the substantive content described as unchanged from the latest published editions. The Schedule records prior amendment markers and cancellations for individual ADs but does not elaborate their histories beyond those marks.

The source document contains no record of litigation, judicial review, appeals or proceedings in respect of this instrument or the ADs listed in Schedule 1. There are no references to court cases, tribunals, decisions, or disputes in the text. The instrument is purely administrative and declaratory in form, recording the exercise of a delegated power under subregulation 39.001(1) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.

From the document itself:

• There is no mention of legal challenges to the instrument, the revocation, or the re‑making of ADs.

• There is no indication of interlocutory or declaratory relief applications, stay orders, or enforcement proceedings related to the revocation/remaking act.

• There are no references to precedent or case law, nor any cross‑citation to tribunal determinations.

If litigation history is relevant for assessing risk or precedential interpretation, the source provides no material on that topic and practitioners would need to search judicial and tribunal databases or administrative review records for any cases touching these ADs or the revocation/remaking process. The instrument’s silence on litigation means that,within this document,no litigation context is established.

The instrument is administratively simple but contains several points that can create practical or legal friction if not attended to. The source text highlights the following potential pitfalls and attention points.

• Administrative but consequential change in form. The instrument revokes listed ADs and re‑makes each as a separate instrument attached to the revocation instrument. The note assures that the re‑made ADs are "in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive." Nevertheless, changing the instrument form from whatever prior format to separate attached instruments can disrupt citation chains, maintenance logs, contractual references, insurance wording, and audit trails. Parties relying on legacy references may inadvertently point to revoked forms rather than the re‑made attached instruments if they do not update records.

• Presence of cancelled and superseded entries in the Schedule. Several AD entries in Schedule 1 are annotated "CANCELLED" or "Superseded - CANCELLED." The instrument nevertheless lists them for revocation/remaking. That juxtaposition may be confusing: does the inclusion mean the cancelled ADs are being re‑made as null instruments, or are they included for housekeeping completeness? The instrument does not explain. Practitioners should not assume that "CANCELLED" entries are irrelevant; they must check the attached instruments and the latest published editions to confirm the operative status.

• No enforcement or transitional language included. The instrument does not address how actions taken under the now‑revoked form of an AD are to be treated for compliance purposes after remaking. There is no explicit transitional confirmation that compliance performed under the revoked instrument will be accepted as compliance under the re‑made instrument, though the identical wording note suggests continuity. Absent explicit transitional language in the instrument, record‑keeping and audit corroboration will be important.

• Attachment dependency. The operative duties and technical requirements lie in the attached ADs (stated to be identical to the latest published editions). The source provided here does not include the attached ADs’ texts. Therefore any analysis of the substantive compliance duties, inspection intervals, modification methods, parts lists, or allowable fixes requires consulting the attached ADs or the official published editions. Relying solely on the revocation instrument without retrieving the attachments is insufficient for operational compliance.

• Delegation and single‑actor execution. The instrument is executed by a named delegate of CASA. Although routine, the concentration of execution authority in named delegates can create traceability issues if additional procedural context (for example, authorising delegation instrument or internal approvals) is needed by external parties seeking to validate the instrument’s provenance. The instrument does not reproduce delegation documentation.

• No new AD numbers or metadata provided in instrument body. The instrument attaches and re‑makes ADs but does not state any new instrument identifiers beyond the AD numbers already listed. For database maintenance and cross‑referencing, users will need to verify how the re‑made instruments are recorded in the official AD repository or Gazette.

• Practical multiplicity of items. The Schedule lists 83 items, some with multiple amendments. Practically, this is a non‑trivial administrative update: operators, maintainers, auditors and regulatory record‑keepers must synchronise their systems across many entries to reflect the separate instruments.

• Potential for misalignment between "latest published edition" and local records. The instrument’s note ties the re‑made AD texts to the "latest published edition of the Directive." Parties must ensure they consult the same "latest published edition" referenced by the delegate at the time of remaking; differences in versioning between repositories (for example, printed manuals vs online registries) could cause confusion.

These are not novel legal findings in the text; they follow from the instrument’s narrow function and the way it reframes existing ADs. The practical implication is that affected parties should treat the instrument as an administrative republishing event that requires documentary housekeeping, verification of attached texts, and careful updating of compliance and audit records.

The instrument itself does not lay down operational compliance steps; it revokes the listed ADs and re‑issues them as separate attached instruments that are stated to be identical to their latest published editions. Compliance therefore requires action in two categories: administrative/documentary actions and technical/operational compliance with the underlying attached ADs.

Administrative/documentary steps

1. Obtain the attached AD texts. The instrument states each AD is "being re‑made in exactly the same form as appears in the latest published edition of the Directive." The first compliance step is to retrieve the attached re‑made instruments and confirm that they match the latest published editions referred to in the note. Do not rely solely on the Schedule; the operative obligations are in the attached ADs.

2. Update references and records. Replace references to the previously issued AD forms with references to the re‑made attached instruments in:

   • Continuing airworthiness records and maintenance control manuals.
   • Aircraft technical logs, airworthiness folders and maintenance release documentation.
   • Contracts, leases, insurance policies and audit schedules that cite ADs by number or edition.
   • Regulatory compliance registers and internal checklists.

3. Reconcile cancelled entries. For Schedule entries annotated "CANCELLED" or "Superseded - CANCELLED", confirm the actual status in the attached ADs and in the AD repository. If an AD is indeed cancelled, update records to show its cancellation effective date and any residual obligations (if any).

4. Maintain version control. Archive the pre‑remaking reference copies and note the revocation/remaking instrument date (20 December 2004). Where systems track statutory instrument identifiers, create mapping tables from old references to the re‑made attached instrument citations.

Technical/operational steps

5. Read the technical content of each relevant attached AD. The practical compliance obligations,inspections, modifications, part replacements, repetitive actions, record retention,are contained in the attached ADs. Implement the specified technical procedures exactly as prescribed, using required service bulletins, parts, methods and intervals described in the re‑made ADs.

6. Schedule required work. For ADs that require inspections or modifications, integrate the required tasks and intervals into maintenance planning, ensuring timely completion in accordance with the wording of each attached AD.

7. Ensure appropriate personnel and approvals. Assign qualified maintenance personnel or organisations to perform work in accordance with the ADs, and ensure that required regulatory approvals, maintenance release signatures, or conformity assessments are obtained as required by the attached ADs or applicable regulation.

8. Record completion and compliance evidence. For each AD action taken, retain documentation (work orders, certificates, parts serial numbers, photographs if applicable) that evidences compliance with the specific requirements of the attached AD. Because the instrument changes the operative instrument form, ensure records make clear they relate to the re‑made attached AD and include the remaking instrument date for auditability.

9. Audit and reconcile. Include the re‑made ADs in internal audits of continuing airworthiness and compliance. Verify that maintenance organisation procedures reference the attached ADs rather than revoked versions.

10. Seek clarifications where ambiguity exists. If the relationship between a cancelled/superseded entry in the Schedule and the attached AD is unclear, seek clarification from CASA or review the official AD repository to obtain the definitive status and effective dates.

Practical notes

• Treat the note about identical wording as a preservation of substantive duty, but do not bypass obtaining the attached instrument: the re‑made ADs are the operative legal texts after revocation of prior forms.

• Do not assume any leniency or transitional relief: the remaking instrument contains no transitional provisions. If timing of compliance is tight, escalate scheduling to avoid potential non‑compliance with inspection intervals or modification deadlines contained in the attached ADs.

• Centralise record updates. Because the instrument touches many ADs (83 entries), centralise the update of legal and technical reference databases to avoid inconsistent references across organisational units.

Following these steps aligns records and maintenance activity with the administrative change effected by the revocation/remaking instrument and ensures continuing operational compliance with the re‑made Airworthiness Directives as attached.