AD/CESSNA 340/36 - Deice System Electrical Power

This AD rests on a few tightly articulated technical and administrative concepts drawn from the source text. The first is applicability by serial number. The AD applies only to Model 340A aeroplanes with serial numbers 340A0901 through 340A0994 and 340A1002 (Applicability). The serial‑number limitation is definitive in the source; aircraft outside this numeric set are not captured by this AD as written.

The second main concept is the “paragraph B” compliance test. The AD instructs an inspection of aeroplane maintenance records to determine whether paragraph B of FAA AD 80‑19‑10 was complied with before the aeroplane’s arrival in Australia (Requirement 1). The AD spells out what paragraph B involves in the immediate text: a wiring inspection and wiring change in accordance with Cessna Multi‑engine Customer Care SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 (Requirement 1). The AD therefore uses an evidentiary approach: documentary proof of a specific prior maintenance action suffices to avoid further work.

The third concept is the conditional physical-remedial path. If the maintenance records cannot be relied upon to make a “positive determination” that paragraph B was complied with, the AD requires that the wiring inspection and wiring change be performed in accordance with Cessna SIL ME80‑31 (Requirement 2). The word “positive” establishes a standard , the source does not define a documentary threshold, but it makes record sufficiency the gating criterion.

The fourth concept is timing and certification linkage. Compliance is required “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). Mechanically, this AD therefore attaches to the certification process for entry on the Australian register: it constrains the issuance of the CofA until the record check and, where necessary, the physical work are complete.

The fifth concept is provenance and international harmonisation. The AD explicitly reflects a United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) AD: it “reflects the terminating requirement of FAA AD 80‑19‑10” and contains a note referring to FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922 (Background; Note). The AD records CASA’s institutional rationale for doing so, namely an obligation to issue an AD that reflects the State of Design’s AD because an affected aeroplane may be imported into Australia and might not be in compliance with FAA AD 80‑19‑10 (Background). Thus, the AD is an instance of regulatory alignment: it imports a safety treatment from the State of Design as a pre‑condition for national certification.

Finally, the safety rationale is stated succinctly in the source: the FAA AD was originally issued to prevent flight in adverse weather conditions without a means of supply of electrical power to the deice system (Background). The procedural and technical measures required by paragraph B and SIL ME80‑31 are therefore framed as terminating actions for that safety risk.

These concepts interact: serial-numbered applicability constrains which aeroplanes must be checked; the documentary positive‑determination standard governs whether additional maintenance work is mandated; and the timing linkage to CofA issuance creates a practical enforcement mechanism for CASA without setting out sanctioning language in the AD itself.

The AD affects a narrow set of actors by design. Primary affected parties are owners, prospective registrants, sellers and importers of Cessna Model 340A aeroplanes with serial numbers 340A0901 through 340A0994 and 340A1002 (Applicability). Those parties must ensure that the aircraft either has documentary evidence of compliance with paragraph B of FAA AD 80‑19‑10, or else that the wiring inspection and wiring change required by Cessna SIL ME80‑31 are carried out before an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness is issued (Requirement; Compliance). Because the compliance timing is tied to CofA issuance, importers and those seeking initial Australian registration are especially affected.

Maintenance organisations and engineers performing maintenance and records review are also directly affected. The AD requires inspection of maintenance records to determine whether paragraph B was complied with prior to arrival in Australia (Requirement 1). Where records are insufficient, technicians must perform the wiring inspection and carry out any wiring change in accordance with Cessna SIL ME80‑31 (Requirement 2). The SIL is the operative technical instruction for the necessary wiring work, and the AD makes compliance with that SIL an enforceable requirement for the subset of aircraft listed.

Regulatory decision‑makers within CASA are implicated operationally. The Background explicitly records CASA’s obligation to issue an AD reflecting the State of Design’s AD because an affected aeroplane may be imported into Australia and might not be in compliance with FAA AD 80‑19‑10. The AD’s Compliance paragraph establishes the procedural effect: CASA (or its delegate) will not issue an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness for the listed aeroplanes until the AD’s requirements are met.

Other affected parties include aircraft registrars and surveyors involved in initial certification, who must check the presence of the required documentation or evidence of the AD/SIL work before completing certification. Insurers and buyers may be indirectly affected because non‑compliance would delay registration and therefore practical use of the aeroplane. The source notes that “currently there are no 340A model aeroplanes from the affected serial number range on the Australian register of aircraft” but also points to the possibility of importation at any time (Background). That statement identifies importers and prospective buyers as potentially the next cohort of affected parties if an aircraft in the specified serial range is imported.

The AD is signed by a CASA delegate, James Coyne, who exercised delegated authority to issue the Directive (signature block). That indicates the decision‑maker for issuing the AD within CASA, though it does not create duties beyond those set out in the AD text. The AD does not specify penalties or enforcement actions in the instrument itself; therefore, the text implies that the practical effect is certification gating (Compliance), and parties left to enforce or demonstrate compliance are the registrant, maintenance organisations, and CASA certification officers.

The AD creates a narrow set of duties and a corresponding limited set of rights or reliefs, as expressed in the Requirement and Compliance boxes.

Duties:

• Inspect maintenance records: Operators, owners or prospective registrants must inspect the aeroplane maintenance records to determine whether paragraph B of FAA AD 80‑19‑10 was complied with prior to the aeroplane’s arrival in Australia (Requirement 1). The AD therefore imposes a duty to review historical maintenance documentation as part of the certification process.
• Perform inspection and wiring change if records are inadequate: If compliance with paragraph B cannot be positively determined from the records, the operator must perform the wiring inspection and carry out the wiring change, if required, in accordance with Cessna SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 (Requirement 2). This is a remedial duty that attaches when records are silent or ambiguous.
• Timing duty: Both the records inspection and any requisite wiring inspection/changes must be completed “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). The AD makes these duties a precondition to certification.

Rights or reliefs:

• No further action if records show paragraph B compliance: The AD explicitly provides that “If paragraph B of AD 80‑19‑10 was complied with no further action is necessary” (Requirement 1). That is the principal right created: validated evidence of a prior specific maintenance action terminates any further obligations under this Directive.
• Use of existing evidence: The AD allows reliance on historical maintenance records, rather than mandating automatic physical work; where records are clear, the operator avoids intervention. The AD therefore recognises documentary proof as a method to satisfy the safety condition.

Operational features and qualifications of the duties:

• The AD ties the documentary test to a specific paragraph of an FAA AD and a specific Cessna SIL (Requirement 1). The precise technical content of paragraph B is not reproduced in full in this AD; instead, the AD describes paragraph B as “wiring inspection and wiring change, in accordance with Cessna Multi‑engine Customer Care Service Information Letter (SIL) ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980” (Requirement 1). Therefore, the duty to determine compliance requires knowledge of what paragraph B and SIL ME80‑31 require.
• The AD uses an evidentiary standard , “positive determination” , without defining that term. The absence of a definition means the burden is on the party presenting the records to demonstrate compliance to the satisfaction of the certification authority.

Procedural consequences:

• The Compliance paragraph links completion of the tasks to certification: “For Requirement 1 and 2 - Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). Practically, this places the onus on applicants for a CofA and on CASA certification staff to ensure the AD’s duties are discharged before registration.

What the AD does not do:

• The Directive does not set out remedial standards in the event of disputed documentary sufficiency, nor does it set out appeal, variation, or penalty mechanisms within the AD text. It likewise does not provide additional timeframes beyond the CofA linkage, nor a process for CASA to accept alternative means of compliance. Those procedural flexibilities, if available, are not described in the AD itself.

In short, the core duty is a records check followed by a conditional physical inspection/modification; the key right is avoidance of further work when compliance is positively shown in maintenance records. The timing condition , CofA issuance , serves as the enforcement nexus.

The text of this AD does not articulate specific penalties, fines or enforcement procedures within the instrument itself. The Directive states the operative requirements (Requirement 1 and 2) and the compliance timing (“Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness”) and records the effective date (Compliance). It does not, in the source text, set out criminal or civil penalties, infringement notices, or administrative sanction pathways linked to non‑compliance.

Mechanically, the AD embeds an enforcement lever in the certification system: compliance is required before the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness (Compliance). That makes completion of the AD’s requirements a gating condition for certification rather than a standalone punitive measure described in the AD itself. The gatekeeping effect means that owners/importers who do not perform the record check or necessary wiring work cannot obtain an Australian CofA and therefore cannot place the aircraft on the Australian register for operation domestically, at least insofar as CASA adheres to the CofA precondition articulated in this AD.

The source also records CASA’s institutional rationale for issuing the AD , it “is obliged to issue an AD reflecting the requirements of an AD issued by the State of Design” because an affected aeroplane “may be imported into Australia at any time and that aeroplane may not be in compliance with FAA AD 80‑19‑10” (Background). This explains the regulatory chain rather than specifying an enforcement mechanism. The AD further notes that the Directive “follows an internal review of Australian Airworthiness Directives (AD) which indicated an Australian AD was not issued in response to FAA AD80‑19‑10, as there were no aircraft in the affected serial number range in Australia at that time” (Background). The AD therefore responds administratively to an identified gap.

Because the AD is silent about sanctions, readers should not infer additional enforcement detail from this text alone. Any penalties, compliance enforcement instruments, or certification refusal mechanisms beyond the CofA linkage would arise from the broader regulatory framework governing aviation safety and airworthiness in Australia, but such mechanisms are not described in this AD and therefore are outside the explicit text supplied here. The AD contains a Note referencing FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922 (Note), which likely contains further instructions in the FAA material, but that material is not reproduced in this source.

In sum, the AD imposes a mandatory pre‑CofA compliance action and leaves the practical enforcement to the certification process. It does not specify penalty types or monetary sanctions within the instrument.

The AD expressly interfaces with two external instruments referenced in the source: FAA AD 80‑19‑10 (and its amendment Amdt 39‑3922) and Cessna Multi‑engine Customer Care Service Information Letter (SIL) ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 (Requirement; Note). The Directive is presented as an instrument that “reflects the terminating requirement of FAA AD 80‑19‑10” (Background). That language establishes a hierarchical or coordinating relationship: CASA, as the Australian regulator, is adopting the FAA’s terminating requirement for that FAA AD into Australian certification practice for a defined serial‑number subset.

Operationally, the AD requires a records review against a specific paragraph of the FAA AD (paragraph B), which the AD summarises as wiring inspection and wiring change to be carried out in accordance with Cessna SIL ME80‑31 (Requirement 1). When records are insufficient, compliance requires performing the wiring actions specified by the SIL (Requirement 2). Therefore, this AD imports the FAA AD/SIL technical content by reference, turning the foreign authority’s safety measure into a domestic certification precondition.

The AD also interacts procedurally with Australian certification law through its linkage to the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness: the compliance requirement is expressly timed “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). That creates a point of contact between the AD’s technical requirements and the domestic administrative process for certifying imported or re‑registered aircraft.

The Background explains CASA’s rationale for the interaction: when no affected aircraft existed on the Australian register at the time the FAA AD was issued, CASA had not previously issued an equivalent AD, but CASA “is obliged to issue an AD reflecting the requirements of an AD issued by the State of Design, as an aeroplane from the affected serial number range may be imported into Australia at any time” (Background). Thus, the AD demonstrates a policy of mirroring State of Design directives to ensure consistent handling of imported aircraft that may not already meet the State of Design AD.

The AD’s “Note” specifically points to FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922. That cross‑reference suggests that the FAA material contains amendment or clarification material relevant to paragraph B. The source AD, however, does not reproduce the FAA AD text or the SIL in full. Therefore, in practice, operators and maintainers will need to consult FAA AD 80‑19‑10 and SIL ME80‑31 to know the precise technical content and any amendment history associated with them; the AD makes those documents the operative technical standard without embedding them.

The AD does not reference other Australian statutes, regulations or administrative rules in its text, nor does it articulate how disputes, differing means of compliance, equivalent methods of compliance, or appeals are to be handled. Those procedural matters likely fall within CASA’s broader regulatory framework but are not set out here. From the source alone, the interaction is a direct adoption-by-reference of an FAA AD’s terminating requirement and Cessna SIL into the Australian CofA process for the listed serial numbers.

The source provides limited amendment history, consisting primarily of the dates and identifiers of the instrument itself and its references. The AD is identified in header material as AD/CESSNA 340/36, titled “Deice System Electrical Power”, with a date code 6/2008 shown in the header (header lines). The Compliance paragraph states that “This Airworthiness Directive becomes effective on 5 June 2008” (Compliance). The signature block shows that the instrument is dated 21 April 2008 and signed by James Coyne, a CASA delegate. The Requirement section refers to Cessna SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980, and a Note says “FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922 refers” (Requirement; Note).

Beyond those dates and cross‑references, the source contains no subsequent amendments, revocations or consolidated versions. The Background explains why CASA is issuing the AD at that time: an internal review identified that Australia had not previously issued an AD in response to FAA AD 80‑19‑10 because there were no aircraft in the affected serial number range on the Australian register at that time; however, because affected aircraft might be imported in future, CASA decided to issue an AD reflecting the FAA requirement, and because of the time since the FAA AD was issued and the absence of affected aircraft in Australia, CASA set the compliance timing as “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Background). That explains the AD’s provenance and timing rather than documenting any amendment to prior Australian instruments.

The AD does not record any later amendments, successor AD numbers, or revocation dates in the supplied text. It also does not indicate whether the Directive replaces, supplements or supersedes any earlier Australian AD. The only external amendment reference is to FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922 (Note), which would be the FAA’s amendment history, not Australia’s.

Therefore, inside this source, the amendment history is limited to:

• Cessna SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 (technical service document referenced);
• FAA AD 80‑19‑10 and its amendment Amdt 39‑3922 (external FAA reference);
• CASA AD issuance dated 21 April 2008, effective 5 June 2008, recorded as AD/CESSNA 340/36 (6/2008) and signed by James Coyne.

Any further amendment history, superseding ADs, or subsequent CASA actions would have to be sourced from other records, because they are not present in this text.

The source contains no references to litigation, court proceedings, administrative appeals, protests, or legal challenges. The AD is an administrative safety directive and the supplied text does not record any disputes or judicial consideration of this particular instrument.

Given the absence of litigation references, there is no case law, appeal history, or tribunal determinations recorded in the AD itself that would clarify contested points such as the evidentiary standard for a “positive determination” of prior compliance, disputes over the adequacy of maintenance records, or challenges to CASA’s decision to require the SIL work prior to CofA issuance. The AD’s Background notes CASA’s internal review that prompted issuance, but that is an administrative explanation, not a record of contested proceedings.

Accordingly, from the text provided, researchers or practitioners looking for litigation or precedent involving this AD will not find any within this document. Any litigation history would have to be sought in external judicial or administrative records, which are not part of the source. The AD itself contains no statements about dispute resolution mechanisms, appeals processes, or legal challenges to its requirements.

Several practical traps, ambiguities and pitfalls arise from the AD’s text; these are concrete items drawn from the source wording that can affect compliance and certification outcomes.

Exact serial‑number capture: The AD applies only to serial numbers 340A0901 through 340A0994 and 340A1002 (Applicability). That specific numeric range contains an apparent gap between 340A0994 and 340A1002 (i.e. 340A0995-340A1001 are not included). Users should not assume the AD applies to all 340A models, nor to all 340A serials. The AD’s applicability language is the determinative criterion.

Dependence on an external paragraph: The AD requires inspection of records to determine whether “paragraph B of FAA AD 80‑19‑10” was complied with (Requirement 1). The content of paragraph B is not reproduced in full in this AD; the AD summarises paragraph B as “wiring inspection and wiring change, in accordance with Cessna ... SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980” (Requirement 1). Operators must therefore obtain FAA AD 80‑19‑10 and SIL ME80‑31 to know exactly what paragraph B required. Failure to consult those documents risks an incorrect determination.

Undefined “positive determination”: The AD requires a “positive determination” from maintenance records as the alternative to the physical inspection/wiring change (Requirement 1). The AD does not define what documentary evidence suffices as a positive determination. That absence creates an evidentiary ambiguity: different certification officers or surveyors may reach different conclusions about whether records are sufficient, which could lead to inconsistent outcomes. The AD provides no process for resolving those differences within the text.

Timing anchored to CofA issuance: Compliance must take place “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). For an importer or buyer, that means that any uncertainty about records will likely delay certification, because the wiring inspection/wiring change must be completed before the CofA is issued. The AD does not provide alternative timeframes or interim permissions for operations pending completion.

Reference to older service information: The SIL cited is dated 18 July 1980 (Requirement 1). Depending on the versioning, there may be later editions or additional service bulletins not referenced in this AD. The AD expressly relies on that particular dated SIL as the operative technical instruction. Practitioners should be careful to use the correct dated SIL referenced in the AD; assuming a later or earlier SIL is automatically compliant may be unsafe without verification.

Nota: FAA amendment reference: The AD includes a Note referencing FAA AD 80‑19‑10 Amdt 39‑3922 (Note). That amendment may change the content or applicability of the FAA AD; the AD does not reproduce the amendment, so operators must check that material.

No penalties specified in the AD text: The AD does not set out sanctions, fines or appeal rights (Penalties and enforcement). While the CofA gating effect is clear, the absence of explicit enforcement language in the AD can create uncertainty as to remedies for contested determinations or late compliance.

Current register statement could be misread: The Background notes that “currently there are no 340A model aeroplanes from the affected serial number range on the Australian register of aircraft” at the time of the internal review (Background). That is a snapshot statement about the register at the time the AD was considered and does not nullify the AD; it is possible to misinterpret this to mean the AD is irrelevant. The AD explicitly anticipates future imports and therefore remains binding if an affected aeroplane is imported.

Who must bridge the records gap: The AD places the onus on the maintenance record inspection being performed to establish a positive determination. It does not specify who within the import or repair chain must do this work; practitioners should therefore ensure that the person or organisation that completes the CofA application also ensures the records inspection or physical work is completed and documented.

In short, the main gotchas are precise serial‑number applicability, the need to consult the external FAA AD and dated SIL, the undefined “positive determination” standard, the CofA timing linkage, and reliance on older service information. Each of these matters is explicitly present in the AD text and can create practical uncertainty unless addressed early in the import/certification process.

The AD’s Requirement and Compliance boxes supply a compact, two‑step compliance pathway. The following stepwise procedure tracks the Directive’s text and highlights practical points that flow from the AD.

Step 1 , Records inspection (Requirement 1):

• Obtain and review the aeroplane’s maintenance records to determine whether paragraph B of FAA AD 80‑19‑10 was complied with prior to the aeroplane’s arrival in Australia. The AD defines paragraph B as the wiring inspection and wiring change “in accordance with Cessna Multi‑engine Customer Care Service Information Letter (SIL) ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980” (Requirement 1). Therefore, obtain a copy of FAA AD 80‑19‑10 and the Cessna SIL ME80‑31 (dated 18 July 1980) to know exactly what content and findings must appear in the records.
• Assess whether the records show, positively, the work specified by paragraph B/SIL ME80‑31 was completed prior to arrival in Australia. The AD uses the term “positive determination”; the AD does not define how that determination is made. Good practice is to have a person authorised by the applicant for the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, or an appropriately qualified maintenance organisation, certify in writing that the records show compliance with paragraph B. Document the basis for the positive determination (e.g. maintenance release entries, stamped work orders, copies of the specific SIL work card, signatures of appropriately authorised technicians, dates and serial/part references).

If the records support a positive determination:

• No further action is necessary under this AD (Requirement 1). Keep the documentary evidence on file and present it to CASA or the authorised certifying authority when applying for the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, because the Compliance paragraph requires that the AD’s requirements be satisfied prior to issuance of the CofA (Compliance).

If the records are insufficient or no positive determination can be made: Step 2 , Physical inspection and wiring change (Requirement 2):

• Arrange for the wiring inspection and carry out the wiring change, if required, in accordance with Cessna Multi‑engine Customer Care SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 (Requirement 2). The AD does not reproduce the technical steps; therefore, the work must follow the SIL’s instructions precisely.
• Ensure the inspection and any wiring change are performed by appropriately qualified and authorised maintenance personnel and that all work is documented in the aircraft maintenance log and records, with references to the SIL actions performed, signatory details, and dates.
• After completing the required work, retain and present the maintenance records and work releases as proof of compliance when applying for the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness.

Timing:

• All of the above must be completed “Prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness” (Compliance). Therefore, plan the records review and any required maintenance early in the importation and certification schedule to avoid delays in CofA issuance.

Documentation and evidence management:

• Because the AD permits a documentary path to compliance, invest effort in producing clear, traceable records. The AD’s “positive determination” standard is evidence‑based; therefore, the party seeking the CofA should ensure that records are complete, legible and signed by authorised personnel. Present those records to CASA or the certifying authority as part of the CofA application package.

Reference materials:

• The AD points to FAA AD 80‑19‑10 and Cessna SIL ME80‑31 dated 18 July 1980 as the operative technical documents (Requirement; Note). Obtain current copies of those documents and of the FAA AD amendment Amdt 39‑3922 referenced in the Note to ensure that the correct revision and any subsequent clarifications are considered.

Practical considerations:

• If there is uncertainty about whether a particular recorded action equates to paragraph B compliance, seek early advice from CASA or an authorised surveyor. The AD itself does not define dispute or appeal processes; addressing uncertainty with the certifying authority before scheduling work can avoid wasted labour or unnecessary interventions.
• If an aeroplane is being sold or transferred, ensure that the seller provides the required records or completes the inspection/wiring change before physical transfer, because the CofA process will ultimately require the purchaser to demonstrate compliance.
• Keep a copy of the AD and the supporting FAA/SIL documents with the aircraft’s maintenance records to show to future certifying authorities.

By following these steps, an owner, importer or maintenance organisation will meet the Directive’s requirements as stated in the AD’s Requirement and Compliance sections. The key practical tasks are obtaining the relevant FAA and Cessna documents, performing a thorough records review, undertaking the SIL work where necessary, documenting the results, and ensuring that all of this is complete before the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness is issued.