{"id":"F2006B06935","name":"AD/SEATS/7 Amdt 1 - Flight Equipment and Engineering Seats Model 121","slug":"ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":114824,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B06935-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/SEATS/7 Amdt 1 - Flight Equipment and Engineering Seats Model 121","content":"COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 \\- 107 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n![](image.001.png)  \nSeats and Berths\n\nAD/SEATS/7\n\nAmdt 1\n\n  \nFlight Equipment and Engineering Seats Model 121 8/93\n\nApplicability: Model 121 seats with the Part Numbers listed in the Requirement Document.\n\nRequirement: Action in accordance with Flight Equipment and Engineering Service Bulletin 25-20- 1294 Revision 1.\n\nNote: UK CAA AD 017-03-93 refers.\n\nCompliance: Prior to 22 December 1993. The compliance date of the initial issue was 30 June 1993. This amendment is effective 22 July 1993.\n\nBackground: Cracking of the backrest and tray stop spindle bosses has been found in the aisle section of the seats and there is evidence that the cracking affects the structural integrity of the seat. These seats are normally fitted to SAAB 340 aircraft.\n\nAmendment 1 requires terminating action for the repetitive inspections of the original issue.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The amendment changes the original AD’s scope of required activity by replacing repetitive inspections with a terminating action (Amendment 1). The original issue required repeated inspections (Compliance date of initial issue noted); Amendment 1 requires a one-off corrective/terminating action according to the indicated Service Bulletin, thereby altering the ongoing maintenance obligation into a terminating remedy (Amendment 1; Requirement; Compliance)."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow technical scope limited to Model 121 seats with specified part numbers (Applicability)","Single required remedial document (Service Bulletin 25-20-1294 Revision 1) reduces procedural complexity but creates dependence on an external document (Requirement)","Fixed compliance deadline and effective date provide clear timing but reduce flexibility (Compliance)","Change in compliance regime from repetitive inspections to a terminating action alters maintenance planning and cost profile (Amendment 1)","Reference to an external Requirement Document for part numbers means implementers must obtain and cross-check another document (Applicability)","Cross-reference to a UK AD indicates related international action but does not complicate the Australian requirement materially (Note)"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does (mechanically)\n\n- Requires operators of certain Flight Equipment and Engineering Seats Model 121 to carry out work in accordance with Flight Equipment and Engineering Service Bulletin 25-20-1294 Revision 1 (Requirement).  The affected parts are those Model 121 seats with the Part Numbers listed in the Requirement Document (Applicability).\n- Sets a firm compliance deadline: the required action must be completed prior to 22 December 1993, and this amendment became effective on 22 July 1993 (Compliance).\n- Replaces the original directive’s repetitive inspection regime with a requirement for “terminating action” — i.e. a one-off corrective measure that ends the need for the repeated inspections mandated by the initial issue (Amendment 1).\n\nWhy the rule was made (stated reason)\n\n- The directive records that cracking was found in the backrest and tray stop spindle bosses in the aisle section of these seats, and that the cracking affects the structural integrity of the seat. The seats are normally fitted to SAAB 340 aircraft (Background).  The Requirement cites a specific service bulletin to implement the corrective measure.\n\nWho is affected, who pays, and who decides\n\n- Affected: operators/aircraft owners and maintenance organisations responsible for SAAB 340 aircraft fitted with the listed Model 121 seat part numbers (Applicability).\n- Who pays: the entity that decides to comply (typically the aircraft operator or its maintenance provider) will incur the costs of carrying out the Service Bulletin work, parts, labour and any out-of-service time. The instrument itself does not specify funding or reimbursement (Requirement; Compliance).\n- Who decides: the Civil Aviation Safety Authority issues the directive and sets the compliance deadline; the operator or approved maintenance organisation decides how and when to carry out the specified Service Bulletin action so long as it meets the stated compliance date (Requirement; Compliance).\n\nConcrete behavioural changes and timing\n\n- Operators who have the affected seat part numbers must implement the Service Bulletin procedure by the stated date. Where the original directive required periodic inspections, Amendment 1 replaces that recurring inspection requirement with a terminating action (Amendment 1). That changes maintenance planning from repeated checks to completing the corrective measure.\n\nCosts, incentives and trade-offs (mechanisms, not judgments)\n\n- Direct compliance cost: performing the service-bulletin action will consume labour, parts and aircraft downtime; those costs fall on operators/maintenance organisations because the AD obliges them to perform the work (Requirement; Compliance).\n- Incentive structure: completing the terminating action removes the need for ongoing inspections, converting a recurring compliance cost (repetitive inspections) into a likely one-time cost (Amendment 1). Operators will weigh a one-off repair/part replacement cost against continuing inspection costs and associated operational impacts (Amendment 1; Requirement).\n- Implementation risk and compliance burden: the AD delegates technical detail to an external document (the Service Bulletin and the Requirement Document that lists part numbers). Operators must obtain and follow that material to comply, creating administrative steps and reliance on the bulletin’s instructions (Requirement; Applicability).\n- Limited discretion: the AD specifies the remedial document to follow and sets a hard compliance date, so regulatory discretion for alternative measures is limited unless the operator seeks specific approval outside the AD text (Requirement; Compliance).\n\nInteraction with other instruments\n\n- The AD notes a parallel instrument from the UK Civil Aviation Authority (UK CAA AD 017-03-93). That reference signals related regulatory action elsewhere but does not change the Australian AD’s obligations (Note)."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a targeted safety directive addressing a specific mechanical defect in a specific seat model. The amendment simply refines the compliance approach (from repetitive inspections to a terminating action) without expanding beyond the original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (approximately 150 words)","Only 1 defined term implicitly referenced (the 'Requirement Document' containing part numbers)","Single, clear compliance pathway (follow the Service Bulletin)","No nested exceptions or conditional logic","Straightforward applicability criteria (specific seat model on specific aircraft type)","Simple amendment structure — replaces one deadline and inspection regime with another"],"plain_english_summary":"This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — essentially a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Think of it like a compulsory recall notice, but for aircraft parts rather than cars.\n\n**What it does:**\n- Orders airlines and aircraft operators to inspect and fix a specific type of seat (Model 121, made by Flight Equipment and Engineering) installed on SAAB 340 aircraft.\n- The problem: The seat backrests and tray stop spindle bosses (metal parts that hold the seat structure together) have been cracking. This compromises the seat's structural integrity — meaning the seat could fail in an emergency.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Airlines and operators flying SAAB 340 aircraft with these specific seats.\n- Maintenance crews who must carry out the inspections and repairs.\n\n**What must be done:**\n- Follow the manufacturer's Service Bulletin (technical repair instructions) numbered 25-20-1294 Revision 1.\n- This amendment (Amdt 1) replaces repetitive ongoing inspections with a permanent fix — \"terminating action\" means do this repair once and you're done, rather than checking repeatedly.\n\n**Why it matters:**\n- Passenger and crew safety. Cracked seats could collapse during turbulence or emergency landings.\n- Legal compliance: Operating an aircraft without following this directive violates civil aviation law.\n\n**Key dates:**\n- The fix must be completed before 22 December 1993.\n- This amended version took effect on 22 July 1993."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121","history":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-seats-7-amdt-1-flight-equipment-and-engineering-seats-model-121/documents"}}