Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically under PART 39 - 105, establishes a framework for ensuring the safety of civil aviation through various regulations, including the issuing of Airworthiness Directives (ADs). This legislative instrument was enacted to address the need for stringent safety measures and compliance in the operation of aircraft. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), as the regulatory body, issues these directives to mandate actions necessary to correct unsafe conditions identified in aircraft, thus ensuring adherence to safety standards and protecting the public. In this context, AD/B767/116 is an example of such a directive issued in response to a reported issue with engine thrust linkage end cap bolts in Boeing 767 series aircraft powered by specific engine models, aiming to prevent potential engine separation due to improper installation-induced fatigue cracking. This directive, effective from 20 April 2000, exemplifies the policy objective of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 to maintain the highest safety standards in civil aviation through timely and precise regulatory measures. The directive mandates compliance with specific inspection and repair protocols as outlined by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), reflecting a collaborative approach to aviation safety between Australian and international regulatory bodies.

Scope and Application

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) applies specifically to Boeing 767 series aeroplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney Model JT9D or Model PW 4000 series engines, which are identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-71A0087 dated 10 October 1996. The directive mandates actions aimed at correcting an unsafe condition identified in the engine primary thrust linkage, specifically addressing fatigue cracking of the engine thrust linkage end cap bolts due to improper installation. This unsafe condition could potentially lead to the separation of the engine from the aircraft in the event of a primary thrust linkage failure. The directive requires compliance with the technical requirements outlined in FAA AD 99-26-09 Amendment 39-11468, including specific instructions for initial and repetitive inspections with a revised effective date of 20 April 2000. The AD becomes effective on the same date, ensuring that all relevant aircraft meet the specified safety standards to mitigate the identified risks.

Key Provisions

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 – 105, includes Airworthiness Directives (ADs) which mandate corrective actions for certain aircraft to address safety concerns. One such AD is AD/B767/116 issued on 4 April 2000. This directive applies to Boeing 767 series aircraft powered by Pratt & Whitney Model JT9D or Model PW 4000 series engines, as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-71A0087 dated 10 October 1996. The requirement under this directive mandates that corrective action be taken in accordance with the technical specifications of FAA AD 99-26-09 Amdt 39-11468, and compliance must be achieved in line with the initial and repetitive inspection schedule, with a revised effective date of 20 April 2000. This AD imposes obligations on the operators of Boeing 767 series aircraft with specified engines to ensure that they adhere to the technical requirements outlined in FAA AD 99-26-09 Amdt 39-11468. The directive mandates that the corrective actions be performed to rectify the identified unsafe condition, which pertains to fatigue cracking of the engine thrust linkage end cap bolts, potentially caused by improper installation. These actions are necessary to prevent the risk of engine separation from the aircraft due to a primary thrust linkage failure. Operators must follow the specified inspection and maintenance schedules to ensure compliance with the directive. Failure to comply with the AD can result in significant consequences. The AD is legally binding, and non-compliance may lead to the aircraft being deemed unairworthy. This could result in grounding of the aircraft, which would prevent it from being operated until the required actions are completed. In more severe cases, non-compliance could result in enforcement actions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The potential penalties for non-compliance are not explicitly stated in the AD but may include fines, enforcement orders, or other regulatory actions as prescribed by relevant aviation laws and regulations.