{"id":"F2006B03902","name":"AD/BEECH 36/46 - Firewall Sealant","slug":"ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":43511,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B03902-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE","sectionType":"part","heading":"AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE","content":"# AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE\n\n![](image.002.png)\n\n![](image.002.png)  \nFor the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below issues the following Airworthiness Directive (AD) under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CAR 1998. The AD requires that the action set out in the requirement section (being action that the delegate considers necessary to correct the unsafe condition) be taken in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product mentioned in the applicability section: (a) in the circumstances mentioned in the requirement section; and (b) in accordance with the instructions set out in the requirement section; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"AD/BEECH 36/46 Firewall Sealant 13/2000","sectionType":"part","heading":"AD/BEECH 36/46 Firewall Sealant 13/2000","content":"# AD/BEECH 36/46 Firewall Sealant 13/2000\n\n| Applicability: | Model | Serial Number                                                                                            |\n| -------------- | ----- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n|                | A36   | E-3113 through E-3231, E-3233 through E-3263, E-3265 through E-3267, E-3269, E-3271, E-3273, and E-3277. |\n|                | B36TC | EA-594 through EA-644.                                                                                   |\n\nRequirement: Inspect in accordance with Raytheon Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 53-3375.\n\nNote: FAA AD 2000-20-14 Amdt 39-11925 refers.\n\nCompliance: Within 50 hours time in service after 28 December 2000, unless already accomplished.\n\nThis Airworthiness Directive becomes effective on 28 December 2000.\n\nBackground: The FAA received a report of firewall sealant found missing during a routine production process inspection.\n\n![](image.003.png)  \n\nDavid Alan Villiers\n\nDelegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 8 November 2000\n\n![](image.002.png)  \n\nThe above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 22 November 2000.","sortOrder":1}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This AD maintains its original narrow scope — addressing a specific manufacturing defect in firewall sealant on particular Beechcraft models. It has not expanded beyond this original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (approximately 300 words)","Only 2 defined applicability criteria (specific aircraft models and serial numbers)","Single requirement with clear cross-reference to manufacturer service bulletin","Simple compliance condition (time-based: 50 hours time in service)","No nested exceptions or conditional logic","Minimal legislative cross-referencing (only mentions CAR 1998 subregulation 39.1(1) as enabling power)"],"plain_english_summary":"This AD requires owners/operators of specified Beechcraft A36 and B36TC aircraft to inspect the firewall sealant per Raytheon Service Bulletin 53‑3375, addressing missing sealant that could allow an engine fire to breach the cabin. It’s legally required to be done within 50 flight hours after 28 December 2000 (unless already completed) and adopts the FAA’s equivalent AD for coordinated safety compliance."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This AD remains narrowly tailored to correct a single technical issue (missing firewall sealant) on specific Beechcraft model/serial-number aircraft. It does not broaden regulatory reach beyond that immediate corrective inspection and remedial work. The instrument aligns with the original safety-focused intent: verify and, if necessary, restore firewall sealant per the manufacturer’s service bulletin."},"complexity_factors":["Short, single-page AD with one clear requirement","Applicability limited to specific airframe models and narrow serial-number ranges (simple scope restriction)","One external mandatory reference (Raytheon Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 53-3375) — requirement depends on an external document","Single compliance deadline (50 hours from 28 December 2000) — no staged or conditional timelines","Minor cross-reference to FAA AD 2000-20-14 (informational)","No nested exceptions or multiple compliance options"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanics)**\n\n- This Airworthiness Directive (AD) requires owners/operators of specific Beechcraft Model A36 and B36TC aircraft to have an inspection carried out that follows the instructions in Raytheon Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 53-3375. (See: Requirement.)\n- The AD applies only to certain serial-number ranges of the A36 and B36TC listed in the Applicability table. (See: Applicability.)\n- The inspection must be done within 50 hours time-in-service after 28 December 2000 unless it has already been done. (See: Compliance.)\n- The AD was issued by a CASA delegate under subregulation 39.1(1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 and becomes effective on 28 December 2000. (See: header and Compliance.)\n\n**Why it was issued (official rationale)**\n\n- The stated reason is that the FAA reported a production inspection finding where firewall sealant was missing. The AD directs inspection to confirm the sealant is present and correct. (See: Background and Note referencing FAA AD 2000-20-14.)\n\n**Who it affects and what they must do**\n\n- Affected parties: owners/operators and maintainers of the listed Beechcraft A36 and B36TC aircraft by serial number.\n- Required action: perform the inspection exactly as specified by Raytheon Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 53-3375; if the service bulletin identifies corrective work, that work must be carried out to address the unsafe condition.\n- Timing: inspection within the 50 flight-hour window from 28 December 2000 (unless already performed).\n\n**Who pays, who decides, and what behaviour changes**\n\n- Who pays: the aircraft owner/operator pays for the inspection and any remedial work that follows from it (inspection labour, parts, possible docking/grounding costs). (See: Requirement referencing the Raytheon service bulletin.)\n- Who decides: CASA, through the delegate, required the action under CAR 1998 subreg 39.1(1); the manufacturer's service bulletin specifies the inspection steps and corrective actions to be used. (See: header and Requirement.)\n- Behaviour change: operators must schedule and complete the mandated inspection within the short compliance window, and, where missing sealant is found, carry out repairs per the manufacturer's instructions; this may require maintenance downtime and record updates.\n\n**Costs, incentives and implementation trade-offs**\n\n- Direct costs: inspection labour and any corrective work; potential short-term aircraft unavailability while the inspection/repairs occur.\n- Incentives: the short compliance window (50 hours) creates an incentive to prioritise scheduling of affected aircraft for inspection to remain compliant and airworthy.\n- Reliance on manufacturer instructions: the AD mandates compliance with Raytheon SB 53-3375, so the practical inspection standard and permitted fixes depend on the details in that service bulletin rather than being spelled out fully in the AD. (See: Requirement.)\n- Enforcement and compliance risk: CASA enforcement applies if the inspection is not done; incorrect or incomplete adherence to the Raytheon bulletin may leave the unsafe condition uncorrected.\n\n**Implementation risks and opportunity costs**\n\n- Implementation depends on availability of qualified maintenance personnel and access to the Raytheon service bulletin.\n- Opportunity costs include diverting maintenance slots from other work and possible short-term loss of aircraft availability for revenue flights or private use.\n\n**Notes and cross-reference**\n\n- The AD explicitly notes FAA AD 2000-20-14, indicating the action mirrors an FAA directive on the same issue. (See: Note.)"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant","history":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-beech-36-46-firewall-sealant/documents"}}