{"id":"F2006B08294","name":"AD/CESSNA 400/107 - Outflow Safety Valve","slug":"ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":115623,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B08294-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/CESSNA 400/107 - Outflow Safety Valve","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\nmeta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 22.10.0\n---\n\n?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\nCOMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n \n\n![](image.001.png)  Cessna 400 Series Aeroplanes\n\n \n\nAD/CESSNA 400/107 Outflow Safety Valve 5/96\n\nApplicability: All Cessna 441 series aircraft.\n\n \n\nRequirement: Unless previously carried out, action in accordance with Allied Signal Service Bulletin 103576-21-4054.\n\n \n\nNote: FAA AD 95-25-10 Amdt 39-9456 refers.\n\n \n\nCompliance: Within 200 hours time in service from 25 April 1996 or prior to 31 July 1996, whichever occurs first.\n\n \n\nBackground: The manufacturer has advised that cracking has been found in two valve poppets of a particular batch. This cracking may cause failure of the outflow safety valve which could result in rapid decompression of the aircraft.\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The directive retains the original, narrowly-targeted scope: it applies to all Cessna 441 series aircraft and requires compliance with Allied Signal Service Bulletin 103576-21-4054 within the stated timeframe. The instrument does not expand or narrow the class of affected aircraft or the required action beyond what is set out (Applicability; Requirement; Compliance)."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow applicability limited to a single aircraft type (Cessna 441 series) (Applicability)","Mandated action references an external service bulletin for technical details rather than prescribing technical steps in the AD itself (Requirement)","Short, definite compliance window (200 hours from a reference date or a fixed calendar date) which imposes scheduling constraints (Compliance)","Safety-critical nature (risk of rapid decompression) raises implementation urgency though not legal complexity (Background)","Regulator-issued directive format leaves enforcement and payment arrangements unspecified in the text (CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY; Requirement)"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does, mechanically:\n\n- It is an airworthiness directive issued under the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Part 39 schedule) that requires a specific maintenance action be carried out on a defined fleet. (CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY; Requirement)\n- The directive mandates that operators carry out the work described in Allied Signal Service Bulletin 103576-21-4054 for the affected aircraft. (Requirement)\n- The work must be completed within 200 hours time in service from 25 April 1996 or before 31 July 1996, whichever comes first. (Compliance)\n\nWho it affects:\n\n- All owners and operators of Cessna 441 series aircraft are within the directive’s scope. (Applicability)\n\nWhy it matters (stated purpose and immediate mechanical effect):\n\n- The manufacturer reported cracking in two valve poppets from a particular batch. That cracking can cause failure of the outflow safety valve. If the valve fails, the aircraft could experience rapid decompression; the directive requires the service-bulletin action to address that failure risk. (Background; Requirement)\n\nPractical implications, incentives and costs:\n\n- Who pays and who decides: the directive compels operators to have the required work done; the AD itself does not allocate payment responsibility. In practice, that means owners/operators must arrange and pay for the service unless they have a separate commercial or warranty arrangement (not specified in the directive). (Applicability; Requirement)\n- Compliance burden and scheduling: the directive imposes a hard compliance window (200 hours or a fixed calendar date). Operators must schedule maintenance within that window, which can create aircraft downtime and force reallocation of flight hours or revenue-generating operations to meet the deadline. (Compliance)\n- Implementation mechanics: the AD delegates the technical details of what to do to the Allied Signal Service Bulletin. Compliance requires following that bulletin’s procedures; the AD does not itself describe the technical steps. That creates reliance on the bulletin as the operational instruction set. (Requirement)\n- Enforcement and discretion: the directive is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority as part of the airworthiness directives schedule; enforcement and any exceptions would be handled under the regulator’s usual oversight processes (the AD text directs compliance but does not itself state enforcement mechanisms). (CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY)\n\nTrade-offs and opportunity costs:\n\n- The stated safety benefit is reduction of the risk of outflow valve failure and rapid decompression. The trade-off for operators is time and expense to perform the service within the mandated timeframe. Time spent on this mandated maintenance is time those aircraft cannot be used for other operations during the compliance window. (Background; Compliance)\n\nMarket effects and consequences for private enterprise:\n\n- The measure is narrow in scope (one aircraft model), so effects on broader competition, prices or market structure are limited. The requirement may generate demand for parts and maintenance labour among independent providers and authorised shops that service Cessna 441s. (Applicability; Requirement)\n- The AD does not change ownership, operating rules, or contract freedom beyond imposing a maintenance obligation; operators retain freedom to choose a qualified maintenance provider so long as the work follows the specified service bulletin and the compliance timing is met. (Requirement; Compliance)\n\nNotes and cross-references:\n\n- The AD references FAA AD 95-25-10 (Amdt 39-9456) for related action. (Note)\n\nSource citations: Applicability; Requirement; Compliance; Background; Note; CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a discrete, time-bound safety directive addressing a specific manufacturing defect in a specific aircraft component. It has not expanded beyond its original purpose of mandating a one-time inspection/repair."},"complexity_factors":["Single, specific applicability (one aircraft series: Cessna 441)","Single requirement referencing an external technical document (Allied Signal Service Bulletin)","Simple binary compliance condition (time-in-service OR calendar date, whichever first)","No defined terms section, no cross-references to other legislation beyond the note about the FAA AD","No exceptions, exemptions, or conditional logic","Extremely short document (under 200 words of substantive content)"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) that requires aircraft owners and operators to fix a specific mechanical problem.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Targets:** All Cessna 441 series aircraft (a type of twin-engine turboprop plane).\n- **The problem:** Cracks have been found in \"valve poppets\" (small moving parts inside a pressure-release valve) from a particular manufacturing batch. If these cracks cause the outflow safety valve to fail, the aircraft could lose cabin pressure suddenly — a \"rapid decompression\" that endangers everyone on board.\n- **The fix:** Aircraft owners must follow a specific repair procedure laid out in an Allied Signal Service Bulletin (essentially, the manufacturer's official repair instructions).\n- **The deadline:** Complete the repair within 200 flight hours after 25 April 1996, or before 31 July 1996 — whichever comes first.\n\n**Why it matters:** This directive prevents a potentially catastrophic failure. The outflow safety valve helps regulate cabin pressure at high altitude. If it fails, passengers and crew could face oxygen deprivation, extreme cold, and possible loss of consciousness. The directive makes the fix legally mandatory — not optional.\n\n**Key reference:** This aligns with a similar US safety order (FAA AD 95-25-10), showing this was an internationally recognised defect."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve","history":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-cessna-400-107-outflow-safety-valve/documents"}}