AD/B747/396 - In-Flight Entertainment Systems

Applicability is narrowly defined and document-referenced. The AD applies to "Model 747-400 and -400D series aeroplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin (SB) 747-24-2246, dated 6 October 2005." The invocation of the particular Boeing Service Bulletin functions as a incorporation by reference; the AD does not specify individual line numbers or serial numbers itself, it delegates the detailed aircraft identification to the SB.

Required modification and sequence. The central required action is the "install[ation of] new relays to allow the flightcrew to turn off electrical power to the in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems and other non-essential passenger cabin systems through the left and right utility bus switches" and to "do all other specified actions as applicable, by accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 747-24-2246." The AD further specifies that the "other specified actions must be accomplished before further flight after installing the new relays." That creates a two-step compliance structure in the AD: the hardware change, followed immediately by other actions from the SB that are flight-limiting until complete.

Interaction with FAA and Boeing technical material. The AD expressly cross-references FAA AD 2009-15-12 and treats FAA-approved alternate methods of compliance (AMOCs) to that FAA AD as acceptable for compliance with the equivalent requirements of this Australian Directive, but only insofar as later revisions of the Boeing SB are approved by the FAA as an AMOC to the FAA AD. In short, the AD anchors acceptable technical compliance material to Boeing SB 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005, and it permits later SB revisions only if those revisions have received FAA AMOC approval relative to the FAA AD.

Timing. The AD becomes effective on 24 September 2009 and sets a compliance deadline of within 60 months after that effective date. The AD carries the administrative date of issue; it was signed by James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, dated 14 August 2009. The published header shows the AD identifier AD/B747/396 and the publication month 10/2009.

Safety rationale. The Background section provides the AD’s operational justification: removing power from the IFE and other non-essential passenger cabin systems via utility bus switches is intended to give the flightcrew a means to control sources of smoke or fumes originating in passenger systems, avoiding inability to control smoke or fumes in the flight deck or passenger cabin during non-normal or emergency situations.

Document limits and incorporated material. The AD does not reproduce the Accomplishment Instructions from Boeing SB 747-24-2246; instead it mandates those actions by reference. It also notes that later revisions of the SB will be acceptable if they have FAA AMOC approval to FAA AD 2009-15-12. The AD refers readers to the FAA AD for context.

Operational consequence. Once the modification is embodied, the flightcrew will have an electrical control interface to remove power to IFE and other non-essential passenger cabin systems via the left and right utility bus switches. The AD therefore alters the operability of non-essential loads from the flight deck, changing the set of actions available to crews in smoke or fumes scenarios.

Operators of the specified aeroplane models. The AD applies to operators or owners of Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-400D series aeroplanes that are identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005. If an aeroplane in an operator’s fleet is not listed in that Boeing SB as applicable, the AD’s applicability language suggests the AD does not apply to that individual aeroplane; the AD ties applicability to the SB identification rather than to a blanket model name alone.

Maintenance and engineering organisations. Organisations contracted or employed to carry out the required modification and the SB Accomplishment Instructions will be affected, because the AD requires installation of new relays and completion of all applicable SB actions. Maintenance organisations will need to source the relevant SB, plan for the relay installation, execute any wiring or systems changes called for in the SB, and document the work in the aircraft maintenance records in whatever way the operator and regulator require.

Flightcrew and operations personnel. Flightcrew will be affected operationally because the retrofit gives them a new capability: the ability to turn electrical power off to the IFE and certain passenger cabin systems through the left and right utility bus switches in the flight compartment. That change alters in-flight procedures relevant to smoke or fumes events, and operators will need to update operational documentation and training to reflect the new capability and any required procedural step sequence mandated by the SB or the operator’s minimum equipment lists and emergency procedures.

Regulator and certification entities. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is the issuer, identified by signature of its delegate. The AD also explicitly references FAA AD 2009-15-12 and allows FAA-approved AMOCs for later service bulletin revisions to be acceptable for compliance. That creates a cross-jurisdictional compliance pathway: FAA approvals of AMOCs to its AD are recognised here, so both CASA and FAA approval actions can determine what counts as compliant material.

Aircraft lessors and financiers. Lessors and financiers who hold interests in affected 747-400/-400D aeroplanes will be affected by the AD because retrofit obligations typically fall to the operator or owner under lease arrangements. The AD’s five-year compliance window and requirement that some actions be completed before further flight after relay installation may influence scheduling of heavy maintenance and asset utilisation.

Manufacturers and suppliers. Boeing is implicated because the AD references Boeing Service Bulletin 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005. Suppliers of relays, wiring harnesses, and line replaceable units will be involved in sourcing the parts required by the SB and the AD.

Passengers indirectly. Passengers are an indirect affected class because the AD addresses passenger safety risks arising from in-flight entertainment and other passenger cabin systems producing smoke or fumes. The document describes the safety rationale in those terms, although it does not impose direct obligations on passengers.

Other service providers. Organisations that provide technical records, continuing airworthiness management, or compliance oversight will be affected because they must track compliance against the AD’s effective date and 60-month deadline and ensure that any "other specified actions" required by the SB are completed before further flight where mandated.

In short, the AD binds operators of identified 747-400/-400D aeroplanes, their maintenance and engineering providers, flight operations and training functions, and the manufacturers and suppliers who provide the retrofit parts and instructions. The AD’s acceptance of FAA AMOCs for later SB revisions means FAA certification decisions are also consequential to parties who intend to use later SB revisions as their compliance method.

Duty to perform specified modification and follow the SB. The primary duty imposed by the AD is to "install new relays to allow the flightcrew to turn off electrical power to the in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems and other non-essential passenger cabin systems through the left and right utility bus switches" and to "do all other specified actions as applicable, by accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 747-24-2246." The AD requires completion of these actions within the specified compliance timeframe.

Pre-flight completion requirement for specified follow-on actions. The AD imposes a sequencing constraint: after installing the new relays, the operator must ensure that "the other specified actions must be accomplished before further flight." That creates an immediate groundhold risk if, after the relay installation, any of the subsequent specified actions in the SB remain incomplete.

Time-limited duty. The AD sets a compliance deadline of within 60 months after the AD’s effective date, which is 24 September 2009. This five-year window creates a planning duty for operators to schedule the work into their maintenance programmes and to resource and contract the required work within that timeframe.

Right to use FAA-approved AMOCs for later SB revisions. The AD grants a limited compliance right: "Later revisions of the above SB, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2009-15-12, are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." This provides operators and maintenance providers with a pathway to use updated Boeing SB revisions provided they have FAA AMOC approval addressing the FAA AD. The AD thereby recognises FAA AMOC decisions as determinative for acceptance of later SB revisions as compliant methods.

No penalties or enforcement mechanism stated in the text. The AD does not itself set out penalty amounts, enforcement processes, or explicit sanctions. The document is a directive requiring corrective action, with an effective date and a compliance timeframe, signed by a CASA delegate; however the AD text does not enumerate administrative penalties, criminal offences, or enforcement steps. That omission means the AD sets out the mandatory corrective steps and deadlines but does not, within the text provided, specify sanctions for non-compliance.

Duty to use the referenced SB for identification. Applicability is defined by reference to Boeing SB 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005; therefore the duty to check whether a given aeroplane falls within the AD's scope requires consulting that SB to identify whether an individual aircraft is included.

Duty to follow technical instructions. Because the AD requires "all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions" of the SB, it binds operators to procedural and technical measures set out in that incorporated document. The AD does not reproduce those instructions, but compels them by reference.

Administrative signatures and dating. The AD bears the signature of James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and is dated 14 August 2009. The AD itself states its effective date as 24 September 2009. Those administrative details indicate the issuing authority and the formal start of the compliance clock.

Duty to interpret FAA AD linkage properly. The AD’s acceptance of FAA-approved AMOCs for later SB revisions ties an operator’s right to use such revisions to the FAA’s AMOC approval status to FAA AD 2009-15-12. Operators therefore have the duty to confirm FAA AMOC approval if they intend to rely on later SB revisions rather than the SB dated 6 October 2005.

The AD text contains no express penalty provisions. The published directive sets out mandatory hardware and procedural actions, an effective date and a 60-month compliance window, but it does not state enforcement mechanisms, monetary fines, licence suspensions, or criminal penalties within the text supplied. The absence of explicit penalty language in the AD means the instrument itself is limited to prescribing required corrective action, the timing for that action, and compliance pathways via the referenced Boeing SB and FAA AMOCs.

Enforcement implications follow from the nature of the instrument. The AD is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and it carries an effective date of 24 September 2009. Although the AD text does not specify sanctions, the directive imposes duties that, if not performed, leave the aircraft in a state that the AD identifies as unsafe because the flightcrew would not have the required ability to isolate power to IFE and other non-essential passenger-cabin systems. The AD further creates a direct operational constraint by requiring that certain "other specified actions" be "accomplished before further flight after installing the new relays," which produces an operational compliance point that is binary: the aircraft should not return to service until those actions are complete. The textual mandatory nature and pre-flight requirement suggest an expectation that regulators and operators will treat the AD as binding, and that operators will schedule and document compliance accordingly.

Reference to FAA AD and AMOCs creates external compliance checks. The AD expressly refers to FAA AD 2009-15-12 and accepts FAA-approved AMOCs to that FAA AD as an acceptable compliance route for later SB revisions. That linkage implies that FAA certification or AMOC determinations can determine whether an operator’s chosen method of compliance will be treated as acceptable under this AD. Where operators propose an AMOC to the FAA AD and receive FAA approval, this AD accepts that outcome as sufficient for compliance with the equivalent requirements. The AD does not instruct how to apply for or record an AMOC in CASA records; it simply recognises FAA AMOC approval as acceptable.

What the AD does not say about enforcement. Because the AD does not include explicit enforcement or penalty language, readers should not infer from this AD text alone what sanctions might be applied by CASA for non-compliance. Any enforcement procedure that CASA may use, including administrative directions, grounded aircraft orders, or sanctions under broader aviation safety legislation, are not specified in the AD itself. The AD therefore creates a compliance obligation whose enforcement modalities and sanctions are not described in the text provided.

Documentation and proof of compliance. The AD requires the accomplishment of specified actions referenced to the Boeing SB. Operators and maintenance organisations will need to retain records showing that the hardware installation and the "other specified actions" were completed within the AD’s timeframe and prior to further flight where required. The AD does not state what documentary form is required, but the nature of the directive implies a need for records to show compliance when requested by the regulator.

Cross-reference to FAA AD 2009-15-12. The AD explicitly references FAA AD 2009-15-12 Amdt 39-15975. It states that "Later revisions of the above SB, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2009-15-12, are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." That creates a direct interaction such that FAA AMOC approvals relevant to the FAA AD can operate as an acceptable compliance method for this Australian AD. The AD thereby delegates, in part, technical judgement about later SB revisions to the FAA's AMOC process as it relates to the FAA AD.

Incorporation by reference to Boeing Service Bulletin 747-24-2246. The AD binds operators to the Boeing SB dated 6 October 2005 by incorporation. The SB defines the precise aircraft identification for applicability and contains the "Accomplishment Instructions" that the AD makes mandatory. Where the SB is updated, the AD permits reliance on later SB revisions only if those revisions have FAA AMOC approval to the FAA AD. This means the AD interacts with contractual and certification documents produced by the manufacturer, in that the SB supplies the technical specification and the AD supplies the mandatory status.

Regulatory equivalence and foreign approvals. By accepting FAA AMOCs, the AD creates a one-way recognition of FAA decisions for the limited purpose of accepting later Boeing SB revisions that have FAA AMOC approval as compliant. The AD does not state that CASA will automatically accept CASA AMOCs or approvals from other authorities; the text only identifies FAA AMOCs in relation to FAA AD 2009-15-12 as acceptable. The AD does not set out a broader mutual recognition regime or specify procedures for CASA AMOCs.

No express interaction with domestic aviation statutes in the AD text. The AD does not reference any specific Commonwealth statutes, regulations, Civil Aviation Safety Authority enforcement instruments, or administrative provisions that would describe how CASA enforces ADs or what sanctions may follow non-compliance. The AD therefore prescribes the required actions and timing but does not itself set out how the AD interacts with the enforcement powers or penalty regime that CASA may have under other instruments or statutes.

Operational documentation and procedures. The AD’s required modification changes flightcrew controls and capabilities and therefore will interact with an operator’s operational manuals, emergency procedures, and training requirements. The AD does not itself prescribe manual amendments or training, but the operational impact described in the Background section indicates that operators will need to integrate the modification into crew procedures and maintenance practices. The AD does not specify how or when those operational documents must be updated; it simply imposes the modification and the pre-flight completion requirement for certain actions.

Relationship to manufacturer’s SBs and later revisions. Because applicability is defined by reference to SB 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005, and the AD accepts later SB revisions only with FAA AMOC approval, the AD establishes an interaction where the manufacturer’s technical updates matter only if they have FAA AMOC approval. Operators cannot rely on later SB revisions that have not obtained such FAA AMOC approval to satisfy the Australian AD, based on the AD text.

Absence of stated penalties or enforcement procedures in the AD. The AD does not specify the legal consequences for non-compliance or how CASA will exercise any enforcement powers it might have under other legislation. Therefore any interaction between this AD and the enforcement regime in Australian aviation law is not documented within the AD itself and would require reference to other CASA instruments or enabling legislation to describe fully.

Document metadata and dates. The AD carries the identifier AD/B747/396 and is published with the calendar identifier 10/2009. The effective date specified in the AD is 24 September 2009. The signature on the AD is James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, dated 14 August 2009. Those dates are the only temporal metadata provided in the AD text for issue and effect.

Single-issue instrument with no in-text amendments. The text supplied contains no amendment clauses, no textual substitutions, and no schedules or later modification entries. The AD itself does not record any amendments to its provisions, and it does not reference any superseding or superseded CASA ADs within the supplied text. The AD does reference FAA AD 2009-15-12 and states that later revisions of the Boeing SB that are FAA-approved as AMOCs to that FAA AD will be acceptable for compliance; that is a forward-looking acceptance of revised technical materials, but it is not an internal amendment to this AD.

No recorded subsequent Australian amendments in the supplied text. The AD as supplied does not include any entries that indicate it has been amended by later CASA instruments. The document does not include notes such as "amended by" or "repealed" or provide a list of superseding instruments. Therefore, based solely on the text provided, there are no recorded Australian amendments or versioning events following the original publication.

Linkage to FAA AD for future revision acceptance. The AD anticipates possible future revisions to Boeing SB 747-24-2246 and provides a mechanism for those later revisions to be accepted, but only where those later revisions are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2009-15-12." That clause functions as a limited amendment pathway for the technical method of compliance, contingent on FAA AMOC approval, rather than an amendment of the AD’s core obligations or its compliance deadline.

No procedural amendment notes for compliance timeframe. The AD sets a compliance deadline of 60 months after the effective date but does not provide clauses indicating how that deadline may be extended, tolled, or amended. The AD also does not articulate a process for operators to seek extensions or relief within the AD text itself. Any relief or amendment mechanism would need to be sought via CASA processes outside this AD, however those processes are not documented within the AD text supplied.

No in-text revision history beyond issuance. The supplied document includes repeated headers and formatting lines which appear to be part of the published AD layout, but there is no content indicating subsequent alterations, corrigenda, or amendment notes. The AD therefore appears, within the provided text, as a single-issue directive issued in 2009 with no recorded domestic amendments in the included material.

No litigation is referenced in the AD. The text supplied contains no reference to court proceedings, challenges, appeals, or any litigation history. There are no case citations and no record of disputes over the AD’s validity, scope, or enforcement within the document text provided.

Absence of litigation references in the AD does not equate to absence of external disputes. The AD does not purport to be a comprehensive record of regulatory disputes or legal challenges. It is a prescriptive safety instrument. The document does not contain a section that lists appeals or dispute resolution steps related to this specific AD, nor does it record any judicial decisions.

No administrative appeal pathway described in the AD text. The AD does not set out procedures by which the recipient may challenge the AD within CASA administrative processes. The AD does, however, accept FAA AMOC approvals for later SB revisions as acceptable compliance material; that creates an external administrative dependency, but the AD does not describe an internal CASA administrative appeal mechanism in the text provided.

No recorded precedents or case law citations. The AD does not cite any legal authorities, case law, or precedents in support of its content. It is structured as a technical and safety directive tethered to Boeing SB 747-24-2246 and to FAA AD 2009-15-12 for cross-referenced compliance material.

If litigants seek to challenge the AD, they would need to do so outside the AD text; however this AD does not document whether any such challenges were taken or resolved. Based solely on the text supplied, there is no litigation history to report.

Applicability is determined by the Boeing Service Bulletin identification. The AD’s stated applicability is to "Model 747-400 and -400D series aeroplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin (SB) 747-24-2246, dated 6 October 2005." That means an aeroplane rostered as a 747-400 or 747-400D is not automatically covered; the operator must consult SB 747-24-2246 to determine whether a specific aircraft is identified in the SB. Operators who assume blanket applicability based on model designation alone risk either unnecessary retrofit or failure to retrofit when their specific aeroplane is included.

Sequence and "before further flight" constraint. The AD imposes a sequencing requirement: after installing the new relays, "the other specified actions must be accomplished before further flight." The wording means that some actions in the SB may be dependent or consequential; installing relays alone may not return the aeroplane to service. Operators must identify which SB actions are classified as "other specified actions" and ensure they are completed before the aircraft resumes flight operations. Misinterpreting the sequence could result in an aircraft being returned to service prematurely.

Reliance on the correct SB revision. The AD references SB 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005. Later revisions of that SB are only acceptable if they are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2009-15-12." Operators who attempt to use a later SB revision that does not have FAA AMOC approval for the FAA AD may not meet the AD's requirements. The AD creates an acceptance gate that requires FAA AMOC approval for later SB revisions, so operators must verify FAA AMOC status before relying on later SB versions.

Timing trap and maintenance scheduling. The AD’s compliance window is 60 months after the effective date, which is 24 September 2009. Although five years was a relatively long compliance window, operators who retired or placed aircraft into storage during that window might have scheduling or certification consequences when returning the aeroplane to service if the work had not been completed. Operators must reconcile heavy maintenance schedules and operational availability with the AD deadline.

Interplay between hardware and procedural actions. The AD requires both a hardware installation (new relays) and the accomplishment of other SB actions. Some organisations might treat the relay installation as a discrete job and delay the remaining SB tasks, but the AD requires the "other specified actions" be done before further flight. Misallocating resources or splitting the task between disparate facilities without ensuring completion of the SB instructions before the next flight could breach the AD’s ordering requirement.

AMOC dependency. The AD accepts FAA-approved AMOCs as acceptable for later SB revisions, but it does not specify how CASA will record or accept an FAA AMOC in its own regulatory records. Operators who intend to rely on FAA AMOC approval should ensure that the FAA AMOC explicitly references FAA AD 2009-15-12 and that the AMOC covers the relevant SB revision. Failure to obtain or confirm adequate FAA AMOC approval could leave an operator without an acceptable compliance method for later SB revisions.

No express enforcement or penalty language. The AD does not state penalties or enforcement steps. Some operators might interpret that absence as signalling flexibility or limited enforcement. However, the AD still imposes mandatory actions and a pre-flight completion requirement; operators should not construe the lack of penalty language as licence to defer compliance. The AD does not advise on how compliance will be verified or what records CASA expects; that lacuna is a practical gotcha for operators who rely on the AD without seeking CASA guidance on documentation.

Documentation of completed work. The AD requires compliance with the SB Accomplishment Instructions but does not specify how maintenance records should demonstrate compliance. Operators should ensure that their maintenance control systems capture the relay installation date, the identification of the SB, and the completion of any "other specified actions" so that evidence exists to show compliance with the AD’s requirements.

Dependence on FAA AD for AMOC acceptance. Acceptance of later SB revisions depends on an FAA AMOC to FAA AD 2009-15-12. If the FAA does not approve a particular SB revision as an AMOC, that revision cannot be relied upon under this AD. Operators should not assume that every later SB revision will receive FAA AMOC approval.

Identify applicability using the Boeing Service Bulletin. The first compliance step is to determine whether each aeroplane in the operator’s fleet is within the AD’s scope by consulting Boeing Service Bulletin 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005. The AD’s applicability language makes the SB the reference instrument for which specific aeroplanes are covered.

Plan the relay installation and associated SB actions. The AD requires "install[ing] new relays to allow the flightcrew to turn off electrical power to the IFE systems and other non-essential passenger cabin systems through the left and right utility bus switches" and mandates "all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 747-24-2246." Operators should obtain the SB, review the Accomplishment Instructions, identify spare parts such as the new relays and any harnesses or connectors, and schedule the work within the 60-month compliance window.

Respect the sequencing and pre-flight completion requirement. The AD states that "the other specified actions must be accomplished before further flight after installing the new relays." That requires operators to either ensure the work package includes the relay installation and all specified follow-on tasks, or to ground the aeroplane after relay installation until all the specified subsequent actions are complete. Maintenance planning should treat the relay installation and follow-on tasks as a single compliance package unless the SB makes clear which actions may be deferred without violating the AD.

Verify SB revision and AMOC status if using later revisions. If an operator intends to rely on a later revision of SB 747-24-2246 rather than the 6 October 2005 edition, the AD permits that only where the later revision has been approved by the FAA as an AMOC to FAA AD 2009-15-12. Therefore, prior to executing work in reliance on a later SB revision, obtain written confirmation that the FAA has approved that revision as an AMOC relative to FAA AD 2009-15-12. Maintain copies of the FAA AMOC approval with the aircraft records as evidence of compliance.

Document the work as supporting evidence. Although the AD does not prescribe the specific form of maintenance records, operators should document the relay installation, part numbers fitted, persons and organisations who performed the work, reference to SB 747-24-2246 (with revision/date), and the completion of all applicable Accomplishment Instructions. Include dates and sign-offs to provide an audit trail that the AD requirements were met within the compliance window and that required pre-flight actions were completed where applicable.

Coordinate operational changes and training. Once the relays and associated actions are complete, operators should update flight crew operating procedures and emergency checklists as necessary to reflect the new capability to remove power to IFE and other passenger cabin systems through the left and right utility bus switches. Ensure that relevant flightcrew training and briefings cover the new isolation capability so crews can use it appropriately in smoke or fumes events.

Engage qualified maintenance organisations. The AD requires an electrical systems modification involving relays and bus control functions. Use maintenance organisations authorised and competent to perform electrical system modifications on Boeing 747-400/-400D series aeroplanes, and ensure the work is performed to the SB Accomplishment Instructions. Confirm that the organisation’s approvals cover the work and that any necessary certification steps are followed.

Plan for parts procurement and lead times. Identify the parts specified by the SB and confirm availability. While the AD does not discuss logistics, operators must incorporate parts lead times into their execution plan to meet the AD’s 60-month deadline.

Confirm compliance deadline and monitor progress. The AD’s compliance deadline is within 60 months after the effective date, which is 24 September 2009. Operators should have established, or retrospectively can confirm, that the work was completed by the relevant deadline. Where completion occurred near the end of the window, ensure records clearly show completion dates to demonstrate compliance.

Retain evidence of AMOC reliance where used. If the operator relies on a later SB revision that has FAA AMOC approval to the FAA AD, retain a copy of that FAA AMOC and any correspondence confirming CASA acceptance or recognition, in case the regulator requests proof of the chosen compliance method.

When in doubt, seek CASA guidance. The AD does not set out penalty or enforcement procedures or explain how to obtain CASA permission for alternative compliance methods. If an operator needs relief, an extension, or wishes to rely on a different technical method that is not an FAA AMOC-approved SB revision, the operator should approach CASA through the regulator’s established procedures for seeking an alternate method of compliance or administrative advice. The AD text itself does not describe that process.

Summary checklist for compliance

• Confirm which individual aeroplanes are captured by SB 747-24-2246 dated 6 October 2005.
• Obtain the SB Accomplishment Instructions and identify required parts and tasks.
• Schedule and perform the new relay installation and all applicable SB tasks within the 60-month window.
• Ensure that any "other specified actions" required by the SB are completed before the aeroplane returns to flight after relay installation.
• If relying on a later SB revision, verify and retain FAA AMOC approval to FAA AD 2009-15-12.
• Document work thoroughly, including dates, signatures, parts, and SB revision referenced.
• Update operational documentation and crew training to reflect the modified capability.
• Retain records of compliance and any FAA AMOC approvals relied upon.

Completing those steps will implement the mandatory hardware and procedural changes that the AD prescribes and will create the documentary trail to demonstrate compliance within the AD’s terms.