AD/B737/202 Amdt 2 - Centre Fuel Tank Limitations

The Directive rests on three linked technical and operational concepts set out in its background and requirements.

1. Physical hazard from pump dry-running and overheating: The background records that the FAA received reports of extreme localized overheating in the priming and vapour pump section of fuel pumps on Model 747 series aeroplanes, and that the pumps installed on the affected Boeing 737 series are “almost identical in design.” The overheating can occur during dry running and provides an ignition source inside the fuel tank which could result in fire or explosion of the fuel tank. The Directive therefore seeks to prevent dry running or exposure of pump hot parts to fuel vapour as an ignition mechanism.

2. Preventive operational controls via AFM limitations: Mechanically, the Directive prescribes AFM limitations that keep the pump inlet covered when the pumps are operating. By requiring centre pumps to be OFF at certain centre-tank quantities (OFF for takeoff if centre tank fuel < 5,000 lb; OFF during climb/cruise at ~1,000 lb; OFF during descent/landing at 3,000 lb; OFF at first indication of low pressure), the Directive aims to prevent vapour contact and dry running. The AFM revision is the primary compliance mechanism, and the Directive explicitly states these limitations “supersede any conflicting basic Aircraft Flight Manual limitations.”

3. Fleet-differentiated mitigations and transitional measures: The Directive recognises two different technical states across the fleet. Line numbers 1494 and subsequent have an automatic fuel pump shut-off system installed, which is treated as a terminating design change for the operational limitation. For mixed fleets, the AD requires a placard on aircraft without automatic shut-off systems so crews can apply the AFM procedures on the affected aeroplanes, and it allows alternative FAA-approved AMOCs and cross-reference wording to FAA AD 2011-18-03.

Other operational concepts embedded in the Directive:

• Dispatchability: The centre tank fuel quantity indication system must be operative when carrying centre tank mission fuel; i.e., the Directive creates a dispatch requirement tied to an instrument’s operability.
• Exception handling: A narrowly drawn “low fuel situation” exception allows both centre pumps to be ON and all centre fuel to be used; pump failures with fuel present are to be handled via the established FUEL PUMP LOW PRESSURE non-normal procedure.
• Weight/CG accommodation: The Directive explicitly permits the combined weight of zero fuel gross weight plus centre tank fuel to exceed the maximum zero fuel gross weight by specified margins for specified phases (5,000 lb allowance for takeoff/climb/cruise and 3,000 lb for descent/landing) if main tanks are not full, provided centre-of-gravity effects are considered. This is a specific safety/operational trade-off mechanism that the Directive permits to reduce the need to burn or offload centre fuel before takeoff in some circumstances.

The Directive is framed as an interim operational control pending further rule-making and references FAA documents for technical alignment. It changes crew behaviour (pump switch selection, monitoring of fuel quantity and low-pressure annunciations), maintenance/defuelling practices (monitor lights and avoid defuelling with passengers), documentation (AFM insertion/placard), and dispatch decision-making (fuel quantity indication system operability), while allowing certain FAA AMOCs and recognising hardware retrofits (automatic shutoff) as a route out of the AFM limitations.

The Directive lists the applicability as Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series aeroplanes with line numbers prior to 1494. That identifies a discrete set of airframes in an operator’s fleet that must comply with the requirements. Parties and functions directly affected by the Directive text include:

• Aircraft operators/airlines that operate affected Boeing 737 series aeroplanes (line numbers < 1494). These operators must revise their AFM for each affected aircraft and incorporate the specified fuel pump operating limitations. They must also adopt any required procedural and dispatch changes set out in the AFM revision, and ensure crew training and awareness of the new limitations.

• Flight crew (pilots, flight engineers where applicable). Flight crew are directly constrained by language inserted into the AFM (the Directive uses the AFM as the legal compliance instrument). The crew must monitor centre tank fuel levels, select centre fuel pump switches OFF or ON according to the prescribed thresholds, respond to fuel pump low pressure indications by switching pumps OFF, and comply with the CONFIG cautions. The Directive’s low-fuel exception and guidance on pump failure or defuelling impose specific actions crew must know and execute in-flight or during ground operations.

• Maintenance personnel and ground handling staff. Maintenance and ground crews must follow the defuelling directions in the Directive: monitor Fuel Pump Low Pressure indication lights during defuelling, position pumps OFF at first indication of low pressure, and prohibit defuelling with passengers onboard. Maintenance organisations must also ensure the centre tank fuel quantity indication system is operative before dispatch when centre tank mission fuel is to be carried.

• Fleet managers and compliance officers. Where operators have mixed fleets that include airframes with and without automatic fuel pump shut-off systems, placarding obligations apply. Operators must install the correct placard wording on affected flight decks and ensure that the AFM limitations are applied only where appropriate. The Directive explicitly allows placards already required by AD/B737/198 or its amendment to fulfil Requirement 2 where present, so fleet managers must cross-check existing placarding to determine sufficiency.

• Regulators and auditors. CASA and potentially the FAA are signalled in the Directive: the AD is issued by CASA and references FAA ADs and AMOCs. The Directive accepts FAA-approved AMOCs for FAA AD 2002-24-51 as acceptable compliance, so international oversight and cross-recognition are relevant for operators subject to both CASA and FAA oversight.

• Passengers indirectly affected. Although passengers are not the target of the Directive, their transport is indirectly constrained: the Directive prohibits defuelling with passengers onboard and may affect payload/fuel choices because operators must manage centre tank usage and adhere to the AFM restrictions.

• Aircraft with automatic shut-off retrofit (line numbers ≥ 1494 or aircraft on which the terminating actions per FAA ADs have been accomplished). For these, the operational AFM limitations may not be required, subject to the Directive’s interaction with other AD requirements and termination conditions. However, the Directive states that accomplishment of the terminating actions of certain earlier ADs “does not allow removal of the AFM revisions required by this Directive,” so operators must carefully reconcile modification status and AFM content.

Notably, the Directive is limited in applicability to the listed models and line number range; it does not directly apply to 737s of those models with line number 1494 and subsequent unless other ADs or instructions apply. The Directive also expressly continues any prior exclusions or AMOCs that were in force before this amendment.

The Directive imposes specific duties primarily through AFM revision and placarding. It also grants narrowly framed rights or alternatives. Key duties and rights, as stated in the Directive, are:

Duties

• AFM revision duty (Requirement 1): Operators must revise the AFM Limitations section to insert the precise certificate limitations and notes provided in the Directive, unless they have previously accomplished the original AD/B737/202 or AD/B737/202 Amdt 1 compliance actions. The Directive states this may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this Directive into the AFM.

• Crew operational duties (embedded in the AFM revision): Flight crew must select centre tank pumps OFF under defined circumstances (takeoff with centre tank < 5,000 lb; at approximately 1,000 lb in climb/cruise; at 3,000 lb in descent/landing) and must set pumps OFF at the first fuel pump low pressure indication. The crew must not undertake the CONFIG procedural steps under specified fuel conditions.

• Dispatch condition duty: The centre tank fuel quantity indication system must be operative to dispatch when centre tank mission fuel is planned. This creates a pre-flight airworthiness/dispatch condition.

• Defuelling duty: When defuelling centre or main wing tanks, the Fuel Pump Low Pressure lights must be monitored and pumps positioned OFF at first indication; defuelling with passengers onboard is prohibited. Maintenance staff and ground handlers have this operational duty.

• Placarding duty in mixed-fleet operations (Requirement 2): Operators with mixed fleets (some aircraft < line number 1494 without automatic shutoff, and some ≥ 1494 with automatic shutoff) must install a flight-deck placard on aircraft lacking the automatic shut-off system using one of the two permitted wordings provided. Existing placards required by AD/B737/198 or its amendment may satisfy this requirement.

Rights and alternatives

• Right to use FAA-approved AMOCs: The Directive accepts Alternate Methods of Compliance for FAA AD 2002-24-51 that have FAA approval, as acceptable means of compliance with this CASA AD. This provides an operator the right to comply via an FAA-authorised pathway rather than repeating the CASA-mandated AFM changes, assuming the AMOC addresses the hazard equivalently.

• Right to retain pre-existing exclusions or AMOCs: The Directive explicitly states that “an exclusion or an alternate method of compliance that was in force before the coming into effect of AD/B737/202 Amdt 2 continues to be in force.” This preserves existing rights to operate under previously granted exclusions/AMOCs.

• Limited exceptions in operational procedure: The Directive grants an operational exception in low-fuel situations where both centre pumps may be selected ON and all centre tank fuel may be used; this is a defined tactical right to exceed the usual pump-OFF prescriptions under constrained circumstances.

Other key legal notes in the Directive that affect duties and rights:

• Supersession of conflicting AFM limitations: The Directive states that its limitations “supersede any conflicting basic Aircraft Flight Manual limitations,” which places CASA’s AD content as the controlling operational limitation where there is a conflict.

• Termination actions nuance: The Directive allows compliance credit for actions required by prior AD/B737/198 (Requirement 2 of AD/B737/198 or Requirement 1.b. of AD/B737/198 Amdt 1) but clarifies that completing terminating actions in those ADs “does not allow removal of the AFM revisions required by this Directive.” Operators therefore do not automatically gain the right to remove AFM text upon doing certain terminating modifications under other ADs.

• Effective date: The Amendment is effective from 30 September 2011. The Directive keeps the compliance date unchanged from Amendment 1, as stated.

The Directive text does not itself specify penalties, enforcement mechanisms, or prosecution procedures. It is an AD issued by CASA and includes operational and documentation duties; the Directive preserves existing AMOCs and cross-recognition with FAA approvals where stated.

The Directive text does not set out penalties, fines, civil or criminal sanctions, or specific enforcement procedures. The document is an Airworthiness Directive issued by CASA, signed by the CASA Delegate, and the Directive’s operative content prescribes AFM revisions, placarding and operational procedures. The Directive states compliance mechanics (AFM insertion, placard installation, operational limits, dispatch conditions) and the effective date (30 September 2011). Beyond these operative requirements, the Directive contains no explicit enforcement provisions or penalty schedules within the text presented.

Given the absence of explicit penalty language in the AD text, the Directive leaves enforcement to the framework in which CASA issues ADs. The Directive does reference FAA documents and accepts FAA-approved AMOCs as compliant alternatives, which indicates a recognition of FAA regulatory processes for alternative compliance methods and suggests that CASA will treat FAA AMOCs as effective for CASA purposes in these specific cases. The Directive also preserves pre-existing exclusions or AMOCs that preceded this amendment.

Operational compliance is enforced practically because the duties are expressed as AFM limitations (i.e., crew procedures and dispatch conditions) and placard/maintenance practices (physical markings and defuelling procedures). Non-compliance can therefore manifest as deviations from AFM content, incorrect dispatch with inoperative equipment (centre tank quantity indication system), absence of required placarding for mixed-fleet aircraft, or failing to follow the defuelling monitoring requirements. While the AD text does not describe the enforcement mechanisms, in practice regulators typically verify compliance through oversight, audits, continuing airworthiness inspections, ramp checks and, where applicable, certification or audit of maintenance organisations and operations manuals. Those enforcement mechanisms are not described in this Directive text.

The Directive does create compliance interplay with FAA approvals and prior AMOCs: it expressly accepts FAA-approved AMOCs for FAA AD 2002-24-51, and it preserves exclusions/AMOCs that were in force before the amendment. This produces an enforcement implication: operators who hold FAA-approved AMOCs or previously granted exclusions may maintain their operating basis without repeating the CASA-mandated mechanical steps, subject to the continuing validity of the FAA documents and CASA’s acceptance described in the Directive text.

Finally, the Directive does include operational dispatch criteria: the centre tank fuel quantity indication system must be operative for dispatch with centre tank mission fuel. This is a clear airworthiness precondition in the text. The Directive provides no internal appeal mechanism, review process, or penalty mitigation language. Any further enforcement or penalty processes would therefore arise from CASA’s broader regulatory framework and enforcement instruments, which are not reproduced in the Directive text.

The Directive explicitly interacts with earlier CASA ADs and with FAA regulatory actions, producing both cross-reference and hierarchy effects. The Directive text specifies several interactions:

• Interaction with AD/B737/198 and its amendment(s): The Directive states that accomplishment of Requirement 2 of AD/B737/198 or Requirement 1.b. of AD/B737/198 Amdt 1 is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this Directive, meaning that operators who have carried out those actions have compliance credit. However, the Directive also states that accomplishing the terminating actions specified in Requirement 6 of AD/B737/198 or Requirement 3 of AD/B737/198 Amdt 1 “does not allow removal of the AFM revisions required by this Directive.” That creates a one-way interaction: certain actions under AD/B737/198 satisfy this AD, but completing terminating hardware modifications under those ADs does not automatically remove the AFM operational limitations required here. Operators must therefore retain AFM changes unless and until CASA issues a formal removal or further amendment.

• Cross-recognition of FAA ADs and AMOCs: The Directive references FAA Emergency AD 2002-24-51, FAA AMOC Letter 140S-04-105 (dated 28 May 2004) and FAA AD 2011-18-03. It specifically allows “Alternative Methods of Compliance for AD 2002-24-51 that are approved by the FAA” to be acceptable as a means of compliance with this CASA AD. It also allows alternate placard wording to facilitate cross-referencing FAA AD 2011-18-03. These references mean CASA is explicitly aligning certain compliance pathways with FAA decisions, thereby reducing duplicate regulatory processes for operators that are subject to both regimes.

• Supersession of conflicting AFM limitations: The Directive contains the explicit statement that “The limitations contained in this Directive supersede any conflicting basic Aircraft Flight Manual limitations.” That places this AD’s requirements as the controlling operational limitations where there is a conflict with previously published AFM material. This creates a hierarchical effect in operational documentation for the affected aeroplanes.

• Preservation of pre-existing exclusions/AMOCs: The Directive states that “Despite the new AD/B737/202 Amdt 2, an exclusion or an alternate method of compliance that was in force before the coming into effect of AD/B737/202 Amdt 2 continues to be in force.” That interacts with any previously issued CASA approvals or exclusions, preserving their validity unless separately revoked.

• Relationship to technical modification/termination actions: By recognising that the automatic fuel pump shut-off system is installed on line number 1494 and subsequent, the Directive creates a nexus between aircraft serial number/modification status and the need to comply with AFM limitations. However, the Directive also contains the caveat about removal of AFM revisions even after terminating actions of other ADs, so the net effect is that physical modification status does not automatically equal AFM freedom to remove limitations.

The Directive’s text does not reference other Commonwealth statutes, civil penalties, criminal offences, or administrative law appeal rights. It remains within the airworthiness/continuing airworthiness regulatory toolset by amending AFM content, prescribing flight-deck placarding, and accepting referenced FAA AMOCs. Any further interaction with broader statutory enforcement mechanisms must be inferred from CASA’s general regulatory powers, but such broader instruments are not specified within this AD’s text.

The Directive includes a concise amendment chronology in its text which establishes its lifecycle:

• Original issue: The Directive’s original issue became effective on 26 November 2002. That initial AD required AFM revision to maintain minimum centre tank fuel levels and other operational controls as an interim measure in response to reported pump overheating.

• Amendment 1: Amendment 1 of AD/B737/202 became effective on 23 June 2005. The current Amendment 2 states that the compliance date “remains unchanged to that detailed in Amendment 1,” indicating Amendment 1 set a compliance timetable that Amendment 2 leaves intact.

• Amendment 2 (this document): AD/B737/202 Amdt 2 becomes effective on 30 September 2011. Amendment 2 introduces specific changes: recognition that automatic fuel pump shut-off systems were incorporated on Boeing line number 1494 and subsequent, a placard requirement for mixed-fleet operations for aircraft lacking automatic shutoff, and allowance of alternate placard wording to cross-reference FAA AD 2011-18-03. Amendment 2 also reiterates acceptance of FAA AMOCs for FAA AD 2002-24-51 as acceptable compliance means, and it preserves pre-existing exclusions or AMOCs in force before this amendment.

Other references in history and background:

• The AD text references FAA Emergency AD 2002-24-51 (the FAA action that underpinned the original emergency response), and FAA AMOC Letter 140S-04-105 (dated 28 May 2004), which the Australian Directive notes in the body. Amendment 2’s note also cross-references FAA AD 2011-18-03 for terminating actions addressing the hazard.

• The background states the original AFM-revision action was considered an interim measure and that “further rule making is anticipated.” Amendment 2’s recognition of automatic shut-off systems and placarding for mixed fleets can be seen in that light as a subsequent stage in the rule-making sequence.

The Directive’s amendment history therefore shows an initial emergency response followed by iterative modifications that: (a) clarified compliance pathways and cross-recognised FAA documentation, (b) accommodated fleet heterogeneity by using placards for mixed-fleet operations, and (c) preserved earlier compliance credits and exclusions while updating the AFM obligations. The text explicitly notes that even when terminating hardware modifications are accomplished under related ADs, the AFM text required by this Directive must remain in place until CASA provides otherwise.

The Directive text as provided does not report any litigation history. There are no judicial decisions, administrative reviews, or legal challenges referenced in the Directive document. The document references FAA actions and AMOC letters but contains no mention of legal proceedings relating to the AD or to enforcement actions taken under it.

Because the Directive is an administrative safety instrument (an AD), typical disputes arising from ADs could include legal challenges to CASA enforcement, appeals regarding the validity of ADs, disputes over whether a particular modification constitutes terminating action, or contestation of enforcement outcomes. None of those are recorded in the Directive text supplied.

The Directive does, however, create points at which litigation or administrative review could theoretically be triggered, for example:

• Disputes over whether an AFM revision is required for a particular airframe if a modification was performed, given the Directive’s statement that terminating actions in related ADs do not allow removal of the AFM revisions. The Directive leaves space for interpretive questions about when AFM content may be removed.

• Disputes about whether particular FAA AMOCs qualify as acceptable compliance under CASA, although the Directive explicitly accepts FAA AMOCs approved for FAA AD 2002-24-51; differences in interpretation could still arise in particular circumstances.

• Disputes over dispatchability when the centre tank fuel quantity indication system is inoperative but centre tank mission fuel is planned, given the Directive’s clear dispatch condition.

Any litigation history specific to AD/B737/202 would be found in regulatory records or court files external to this Directive. The Directive itself records no cases, appeals, or enforcement litigation.

The Directive contains several practical traps and subtle points that can affect compliance, operations, and fleet management. The following items are drawn directly from the Directive text and explain how they can create operational or compliance risks if overlooked.

1. AFM revisions cannot be removed simply by doing terminating actions under related ADs: The Directive permits certain prior actions (e.g., Requirement 2 of AD/B737/198) to satisfy this AD, but it explicitly states that accomplishment of terminating actions specified in AD/B737/198 or its amendment “does not allow removal of the AFM revisions required by this Directive.” Operators may assume that hardware modifications that address the pump hazard would let them delete AFM limitations, but the Directive prohibits that assumption unless CASA issues further direction. This is a source of potential operational inconsistency if crews refer to differing AFM versions.

2. Dispatch condition tied to centre tank quantity indication system: The Directive requires that the centre tank fuel quantity indication system be operative to dispatch when centre tank mission fuel is to be carried. Operators must therefore ensure that a single instrument/system fault can prevent dispatch with centre tank fuel unless an accepted AMOC or exclusion applies. Oversight or miscommunication in pre-flight checks could lead to inadvertent dispatch contrary to the Directive.

3. CONFIG indicator behaviour and non-normal procedure restrictions: The Directive notes that the CONFIG indicator will annunciate when the centre tank fuel exceeds 1,600 lb and the centre tank pump switches are OFF, and it instructs crews to not accomplish the CONFIG non-normal procedure prior to or during takeoff with less than 5,000 lb of centre tank fuel or during descent and landing with less than 3,000 lb. Misreading or misunderstanding the CONFIG annunciation could lead to inappropriate use of procedures at critical flight phases.

4. Narrowly worded low-fuel exception: The Directive allows in a low fuel situation both centre tank pumps to be selected ON and all centre tank fuel used. That narrow operational exception requires crews to make a flight-safety judgement; training and clear SOPs are needed to ensure the exception is correctly applied and not used routinely, which could negate the AD’s safety intent.

5. Defuelling constraints and passenger carriage: The Directive prohibits defuelling with passengers onboard and requires monitoring of Fuel Pump Low Pressure lights during defuelling and selection of pumps OFF on first indication. Ground operations planning must account for this constraint; failure to segregate defuelling operations from passenger handling can create delays or regulatory breaches.

6. Mixed-fleet placarding nuance: Requirement 2 applies only to mixed fleet operations and only to aircraft without the automatic fuel pump shut-off system. Operators must determine line number and modification status for each airframe. The Directive allows two alternative wordings for the placard and accepts existing placards required by earlier ADs as fulfilling the obligation. Operators must therefore verify the sufficiency of placard wording and placement relative to the exact aircraft configuration.

7. Weight/CG allowance is conditional: The Directive permits exceeding maximum zero fuel gross weight by up to 5,000 lb for takeoff/climb/cruise and up to 3,000 lb for descent/landing if main tanks are not full, but only if balance/CG effects have been considered. Operators must retain evidence or documentation demonstrating CG evaluation and compliance with structural and performance limits. Misapplication of the allowance without appropriate weight and balance checks could create flight-safety and regulatory issues.

8. AMOC and exclusion continuity: The Directive preserves exclusions and AMOCs in force before the amendment, and accepts FAA-approved AMOCs for FAA AD 2002-24-51. Operators must track their AMOCs and ensure those remain valid under CASA. Relying on expired or superseded AMOCs, or on AMOCs not accepted by CASA for this AD, could leave an operator non-compliant.

9. Supersession of AFM material: Because the Directive explicitly supersedes conflicting basic AFM limitations, operators must ensure the AFM content is not contradictory. This creates an administrative task to reconcile AFM material, company operations manuals, and training syllabi with the AD text.

10. No penalties or enforcement detail in the text: The AD does not set out penalties or enforcement steps in the Directive itself. Operators cannot rely on the AD text for enforcement expectations and should assume CASA’s standard oversight mechanisms apply; failure to verify enforcement implications could be a missed compliance risk.

Operators should treat these “gotchas” as operational and record-keeping risks. They require attention to AFM document control, crew training, ground handling coordination (defuelling and placarding), weight-and-balance procedures, and AMOC tracking. The Directive’s combined technical and procedural controls create many interlocking requirements where an oversight in one area (e.g., failure to install placard or missing AFM insertion) can have knock-on effects for operational legality and safety.

Compliance requires coordinated action across operational, documentation, maintenance, and records functions. The Directive provides specific prescriptions; the following stepwise plan maps those prescriptions to practical compliance steps grounded in the Directive text.

1. Determine applicability

   • Identify all Boeing 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 aircraft in the fleet and determine each aircraft’s line number. The AD applies to aircraft with line numbers prior to 1494. Document aircraft serials and line numbers to confirm which airframes are affected.

2. Insert AFM limitations (Requirement 1)

   • For each affected aircraft, revise the Limitations section of the AFM by inserting the exact certificate limitations and notes provided in the Directive, or insert a copy of the Directive into the AFM as permitted by the AD text. The AFM insertion must include:

     • OFF pump requirement for takeoff with centre tank fuel < 5,000 lb (2,300 kg)
     • Both pumps OFF at ~1,000 lb during climb/cruise and at 3,000 lb during descent/landing
     • Pumps OFF on first Fuel Pump Low Pressure indication
     • Centre tank fuel quantity indication system must be operative to dispatch with centre tank mission fuel
     • CONFIG indicator note and CONFIG non-normal procedure caution
     • Low fuel exception allowing both pumps ON and use of all centre fuel in a low fuel situation
     • Zero fuel gross weight allowance specifics and the CG consideration requirement
     • Requirement to accomplish FUEL PUMP LOW PRESSURE non-normal procedure if a centre pump fails with fuel present
     • Defuelling monitoring and passenger prohibition
     • Supersession clause for conflicting AFM limitations

   • Ensure the AFM revision insertion is recorded in the aircraft’s documentation and maintenance records.

3. Train flight crew and update SOPs

   • Deliver focused training (refresher and synoptic briefing) to all flight crew operating affected aircraft covering the new AFM limitations, CONFIG annunciation behaviour and restrictions, the low-fuel exception, and procedures to be followed on Fuel Pump Low Pressure indications.
   • Update company SOPs and quick-reference handbooks to reflect the new AFM procedures and dispatch conditions.
   • Ensure crew checklists include fuel pump switching guidance appropriate for all flight phases and cross-reference with the AFM insertion.

4. Ensure dispatchability criteria are met

   • Update pre-flight dispatch checklists to verify that the centre tank fuel quantity indication system is operative before dispatch when centre tank mission fuel is to be carried.
   • Implement a procedure for flight release/dispatch staff to prevent dispatch if the centre tank fuel quantity indication system is inoperative and centre tank mission fuel is planned, unless an accepted AMOC or exclusion applies.

5. Implement placarding for mixed-fleet operations (Requirement 2)

   • For operators with mixed fleets (airframes both before and after line number 1494), install a flight-deck placard on aircraft that do not have the automatic fuel pump shut-off system.
   • Placard wording may be either “AD/B737/202 fuel usage restrictions required” or “AD 2002-24-51 fuel usage restrictions required,” as permitted.
   • If aircraft already have a placard installed under AD/B737/198 or AD/B737/198 Amdt 1, confirm whether that placard satisfies Requirement 2; if so, document the cross-acceptance.
   • Record placard installation in the maintenance log and company compliance register.

6. Update maintenance and ground procedures

   • Amend maintenance instructions and ground handling SOPs to ensure:
     • Fuel Pump Low Pressure lights are monitored during defuelling.
     • Pumps are positioned OFF at the first indication of fuel pump low pressure.
     • Defuelling is not carried out with passengers onboard.
   • Ensure mechanics and ground staff are trained on these defuelling requirements.

7. Manage weight and balance implications

   • Where operators plan to make use of the explicit zero fuel gross weight allowances (up to 5,000 lb for takeoff/climb/cruise and up to 3,000 lb for descent/landing), ensure procedures for weight and balance calculation and CG consideration are in place and documented for each flight where the allowance is applied.
   • Update load control and flight planning systems to account for permitted exceedances and to record the CG analysis showing compliance.

8. Track AMOCs, exclusions and FAA approvals

   • Compile and maintain a register of any existing exclusions or AMOCs that predate AD/B737/202 Amdt 2 and confirm their continuing validity.
   • Where operators rely on FAA-approved AMOCs for FAA AD 2002-24-51 as their CASA-accepted compliance pathway, keep copies of the FAA AMOC approvals and verify CASA acceptance consistent with the AD text.
   • Where an operator seeks an AMOC from CASA rather than relying on an FAA AMOC, initiate the CASA AMOC process and maintain documentation of approval.

9. Record-keeping and auditability

   • Keep demonstrable records of:
     • AFM insertion(s) for each affected aircraft, including date and signature/authority.
     • Placard installations, with placard text and installation date.
     • Crew training records showing dates, syllabus, and attendees.
     • Maintenance procedure updates and defuelling event logs.
     • Dispatch checks verifying centre tank quantity indication system operability and any instances of non-dispatch or deviation.
     • Weight and balance calculations for flights using the allowed ZFW-plus-centre-fuel exceedance.
     • Copies of FAA AMOCs relied upon and any CASA correspondence regarding AMOCs/exclusions.

10. Monitor modifications and future ADs

• Track the modification status of aircraft relative to the automatic fuel pump shut-off retrofit (line number 1494 and subsequent). For airframes modified to incorporate automatic shut-off systems after the AD, retain AFM revisions until CASA confirms removal is permitted; do not remove AFM text solely because a terminating action was accomplished under another AD, per the Directive text.
• Monitor CASA and FAA for any further rule-making or termination guidance that would allow removal of the AFM revisions or further modify operational requirements.

11. Implement internal compliance assurance

• Integrate the AD requirements into the organisation’s continuing airworthiness management system and operator’s compliance monitoring programme. Include periodic checks that AFM inserts are present and intact, placards remain legible and correctly placed, and crew and maintenance training remain up-to-date.

12. Timing and effective date

• Note that Amendment 2 is effective 30 September 2011 and that the compliance date “remains unchanged to that detailed in Amendment 1” (the operative compliance timeline in Amendment 1 must be consulted). Ensure all actions are implemented on the schedule required by Amendment 1 and reflected in operators’ compliance plans.

Following these steps will align operational and documentation practice with the Directive’s explicit requirements and the practical obligations those requirements create. The Directive allows use of FAA-approved AMOCs in certain circumstances; if relying on that route, the operator must procure and retain the relevant FAA documentation and confirm CASA acceptance per the AD text.