AD/ERJ-170/17 - Aircraft Maintenance Plan

The AD operates through a small set of technical and procedural concepts that change the maintenance obligations on operators and maintenance organisations for the affected Embraer ERJ‑170 models. These concepts appear as discrete elements in the AD text:

• Applicability: The AD specifies the covered fleet by model series, listing seven model variants of the Embraer ERJ‑170 family. That restricts who must apply the AD; only operators or owners of those listed models are in scope (Applicability).

• Maintenance‑plan alteration: The AD requires a formal alteration to the existing maintenance plan to add three tasks and to change intervals for two tasks. The AD identifies tasks by MRBR task numbers (27‑11‑03‑003; 27‑41‑01‑005; 27‑81‑01‑002; and interval revisions for 27‑11‑00‑002 and 27‑11‑11‑001) and references Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR dated 15 December 2004 as the source of the new tasks/intervals (Requirement).

• Alternative Means of Compliance (AMOC): The AD recognises that adopting revision 2 to the MRBR, or later ANAC‑approved MRBR revisions, counts as an alternate means of compliance. The AD therefore delegates a measure of equivalence to the MRBR revision approved by ANAC rather than mandating only the specific Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance).

• Timing and deferment: The AD sets a defined calendrical compliance window , within 30 calendar days after the AD’s effective date unless previously performed , and includes a deferment clause that allows postponement of a maintenance action required in less than 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005 to within the next 700 flight hours after that date (Requirement; Compliance). These timing provisions alter scheduling choices for operators.

• Safety rationale: The AD is rooted in a post‑type‑certification review of flight control system safety assessments. The Background explains that certain assumptions about dormant faults did not strictly meet the safety assessment criteria, and that persistent dormant faults plus other evident faults could reduce safety margins. The Background also ties the requirement to the incorporation of a new horizontal stabilizer actuator that necessitates new maintenance tasks.

• Interaction with foreign regulator material: The AD explicitly incorporates, as alternatives, materials approved by AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DE AVIAÇÃO CIVIL (ANAC), including ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 and MRBR revisions, reflecting cross‑recognition of regulatory materials and amendments (Requirement; Note 1; Note 2).

Each of these concepts converts into operational effects: adjustments to maintenance programmes, scheduling and potential postponement of specific actions, and the ability to rely on ANAC‑approved MRBR revisions as satisfying the AD. The AD does not itself reproduce the technical content of the MRBR tasks and intervals; it refers operators to those MRBR documents (Requirement).

The AD identifies three immediate categories of stakeholders by operation or role, as implied by its text and structure:

• Operators and owners of the applicable Embraer ERJ‑170 models. The Applicability section lists the specific models in scope: ERJ 170‑100 STD, 170‑100 LR, 170‑100 SU, 170‑100 SE, 170‑200 STD, 170‑200 LR and 170‑200 SU. Owners or operators of those aircraft have the primary duty to ensure their maintenance plans are altered as required (Applicability; Requirement).

• Maintenance organisations and engineers who prepare, revise and carry out maintenance plans and MRBR tasks. The Requirement compels an alteration of the Maintenance Plan, and the listed MRBR task numbers and intervals will typically be implemented by maintenance planners and licensed engineers. Those parties will need to update task libraries, planning software, and workscopes to incorporate the newly required tasks and interval changes (Requirement).

• Regulatory and oversight entities. The AD is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), as evidenced by the signature block: "James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" (signature block dated 25 August 2008). The AD also recognises ANAC (Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil) material as an alternate means of compliance, meaning that ANAC‑approved MRBR revisions form part of the compliance architecture the CASA AD is relying on or defers to (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance; Notes).

Secondary or consequentially affected parties include:

• Airlines’ operations and engineering departments, scheduling and dispatch, which will need to fit the added or revised maintenance tasks into operational schedules in the 30‑day compliance window or under the deferment clause (Compliance; Requirement).

• Lessors and financiers, to the extent their leases require compliance with airworthiness directives and maintenance‑plan changes; the Applicability and Compliance sections create duties that may trigger lessor notifications or lease‑related work under financiers’ covenants.

• Third‑party maintenance providers, who may perform the new tasks and will need access to the Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR dated 15 December 2004 or to MRBR revision 2 (as an AMOC) to plan and price work.

The AD’s text does not mention passengers, insurers, or explicit commercial consequences; the stakeholders above are the actors the AD directly changes by imposing the maintenance‑plan alteration and timing requirements (Applicability; Requirement; Compliance).

The AD sets out duties and recognises an alternate compliance path; it does not articulate explicit rights or remedies. The key duties and the available compliance pathway are:

Duties

• Alter the Maintenance Plan. Operators of applicable aircraft must alter the Maintenance Plan to include tasks Nos. 27‑11‑03‑003, 27‑41‑01‑005 and 27‑81‑01‑002, and to revise the interval of tasks Nos. 27‑11‑00‑002 and 27‑11‑11‑001 in accordance with Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR dated 15 December 2004. This is the principal positive duty imposed by the AD (Requirement).

• Timing obligation. The Maintenance Plan alteration must be made "within the next 30 calendar days after the effective date of this AD unless previously accomplished" (Compliance). The AD becomes effective on 23 October 2008, so that effective date triggers the 30‑day window (Compliance).

• Optional postponement under a specific condition. If a maintenance action derived from the maintenance plan alteration would otherwise be required in less than 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005, the action may be postponed and accomplished within the next 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005 (Requirement). This creates a narrowly framed scheduling concession relating to an earlier baseline date.

Rights / recognised alternatives

• Alternate means of compliance. The AD recognises that adoption of MRBR revision 2 for the Embraer ERJ 170 aircraft, or later MRBR revisions approved by ANAC, is "considered as an alternate mean of compliance with this AD" (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance). This gives operators a defined route to compliance by using ANAC‑approved MRBR revisions rather than strictly following Temporary Revision No. 1‑3.

• Prior accomplishment exception. The Compliance text provides that if the required alterations have already been accomplished prior to the effective date, the 30‑day compliance window is not additional; completion beforehand satisfies the timing duty (Compliance). This functions as a right to avoid redundant work.

Matters not specified

• The AD text does not set out administrative or civil penalties, enforcement processes, record‑keeping provisions, or technical detail of the MRBR tasks themselves. The AD is directive about the maintenance‑plan changes and timing, and it references MRBR documents for technical content, but it does not itself include enforcement mechanisms or precise task content (Compliance; Requirement).

In sum, the AD places a concrete procedural duty on operators to alter maintenance plans and offers an AMOC through ANAC MRBR revisions. The duty is time‑limited and contains a narrowly specified postponement rule referencing a 20 April 2005 baseline. The AD does not specify statutory penalties or steps for contesting the directive within its text.

The AD text supplied does not include express provisions on penalties, sanctioning measures, or enforcement procedures. The instrument contains a signature block showing it is issued by a CASA delegate, "James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority", dated 25 August 2008, and states that the AD "becomes effective on 23 October 2008" (Compliance; signature block). Beyond that, the AD itself confines its content to the maintenance‑plan alteration, timing, alternative compliance route and background.

Consequences and enforcement implications that can be read from the document are limited to these observable points:

• Mandatory language. The AD uses prescriptive language , "Alter the Maintenance Plan" and "Include tasks ... and revise the interval of tasks ..." , indicating a mandatory requirement on operators of the listed aircraft (Requirement). The AD therefore functions as a regulatory instrument that imposes a material maintenance requirement.

• Reliance on external documents for technical compliance. The AD references Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR dated 15 December 2004 and recognises ANAC MRBR revision 2 or later approved revisions as alternate means of compliance (Requirement). Enforcement of compliance will therefore involve verifying that the maintenance plan has been altered consistent with those MRBR materials.

• No penalties specified in the AD text. The document contains no clauses describing fines, licence suspensions, or other penalties for non‑compliance. It also does not specify administrative processes for notices, appeals, or waivers beyond the alternative compliance route and the 700‑flight‑hour postponement clause (Requirement; Alternative Means of Compliance).

• Implicit role of CASA. The AD is issued by a delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. That identifies CASA as the issuing authority; however the AD does not set out CASA’s enforcement steps within the text. The signature block indicates the AD’s provenance and the issuing authority’s identity (signature block).

Practically, enforcement of an AD typically involves the regulator verifying that maintenance programmes and aircraft records reflect required changes and that maintenance actions were performed in accordance with applicable technical data. The supplied AD does not itself describe those procedures or penalties, so stakeholders must look to CASA’s general regulatory framework outside this text to identify formal enforcement mechanisms, record‑keeping obligations and sanctions. The AD does include a compliance deadline and alternative compliance pathways, which define the standard against which compliance would be judged (Compliance; Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance).

The AD situates its requirements in relation to external regulatory documents and previous airworthiness directives, but it does not purport to amend or repeal primary statutes. The text explicitly references and interacts with the following regulatory materials and instruments:

• Manufacturer’s MRBR (Manufacturer’s Maintenance Review Board Report). The AD’s substantive technical requirements require alterations to the Maintenance Plan "as shown at the Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR, dated 15 December 2004" (Requirement). The AD therefore operates by mandating that operators align their maintenance plans with specified MRBR material. The AD does not reproduce MRBR content, so compliance requires cross‑reference to that MRBR revision.

• ANAC documents and ADs. The AD acknowledges regulatory material from ANAC, Brazil’s civil aviation authority. It explicitly states that "The adoption of revision 2 to the MRBR for the Embraer ERJ 170 aircraft, or later approved revisions by the AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DE AVIAÇÃO CIVIL (ANAC), is considered as an alternate mean of compliance with this AD" (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance). The AD also notes ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 dated 11 August 2008 and states that ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 supersedes ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02, and that for the purposes of AD/ERJ‑170/2 the original ANAC AD is no longer applicable (Notes 1 and 2). This shows cross‑recognition and interaction with foreign regulator materials and prior ADs.

• Temporal interaction with earlier dates. The postponement clause refers to "less than 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005" and allows postponement to "within the next 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005" (Requirement). This ties the AD’s scheduling mechanics to an earlier baseline date (20 April 2005), creating an operational interaction with any maintenance scheduling already anchored to that date.

• Relationship to other ADs. The AD contains a specific note saying ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 supersedes AD 2005‑03‑02 and that the original issue is no longer applicable for purposes of AD/ERJ‑170/2 (Note 2). Although this AD (AD/ERJ‑170/17) does not expressly repeal other CASA ADs, it references the standing of ANAC ADs relative to prior ADs and MRBR revisions, indicating a layered AD environment where this instrument interacts with and relies on prior ADs and regulatory materials.

What the AD does not do

• The AD does not modify primary aviation statutes or preempt other laws within its text. It operates as a directive requiring maintenance‑plan alterations, and it relies on MRBR materials and ANAC approvals to specify technical details and alternative compliance.

• The AD does not set enforcement processes or penalties in the text, so interaction with enforcement law and procedures is implied rather than spelled out; stakeholders must consult CASA’s wider enforcement framework to understand legal consequences of non‑compliance.

In short, the AD interacts directly with MRBR material and ANAC‑issued revisions and ADs, creating an interlocking compliance regime that requires operators to align their maintenance plans with the specified MRBR revisions or ANAC‑approved alternatives.

The AD text itself captures a limited amendment history relevant to the MRBR and ANAC ADs. The explicit amendment‑related statements in the AD are:

• Reference to Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR, dated 15 December 2004. The AD’s operative Requirement instructs operators to make maintenance‑plan changes "as shown at the Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR, dated 15 December 2004." That identifies a specific MRBR amendment as the technical source for the tasks to be added and the interval changes to be made (Requirement).

• Alternative Means of Compliance referencing MRBR revision 2. The AD states that "The adoption of revision 2 to the MRBR for the Embraer ERJ 170 aircraft, or later approved revisions by the AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DE AVIAÇÃO CIVIL (ANAC), is considered as an alternate mean of compliance with this AD." This records that MRBR revision 2 (and later ANAC‑approved revisions) are formally recognised as satisfying the AD’s requirements (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance).

• ANAC AD supersession. Note 1 and Note 2 refer to ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 dated 11 August 2008. Note 1 simply refers to it, while Note 2 states that ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 supersedes ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02 and that, for purposes of AD/ERJ‑170/2, the original ANAC AD is no longer applicable. Although these notes relate primarily to ANAC ADs rather than to this specific CASA AD’s textual amendments, they document the contemporaneous regulatory amendment context (Notes 1 and 2).

• Dates indicating the AD’s issuance and effect. The document shows a delegate’s signature dated 25 August 2008 and states that the AD becomes effective on 23 October 2008. The AD’s heading indicates "11/2008" (top table). These dates form part of the AD’s own lifecycle and effective period (signature block; Compliance).

The AD text does not contain an internal record of prior versions of this particular CASA AD being amended. It does not itself list prior CASA AD numbers being superseded or amended by AD/ERJ‑170/17. The only explicit amendment relationships recorded are to MRBR revisions and to the ANAC AD (Notes).

Where amendment tracking is required in practice, operators will need to consult the referenced MRBR Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 (15 December 2004) and MRBR revision 2 (ANAC) documents, and the ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 (11 August 2008) to understand which technical revisions the AD recognises or supersedes. The AD text signals reliance on those external amendments rather than reproducing their amendment histories inside this instrument.

The supplied AD text contains no information on litigation, disputes, judicial challenges, or appeals relating to AD/ERJ‑170/17. The instrument does not reference any court decisions, case law, or contested proceedings. It does reference ANAC ADs and MRBR revisions, but those are regulatory documents rather than judicial outcomes (Notes; Requirement).

Therefore, based solely on the text provided:

• There is no recorded litigation history, challenge or court decision noted within the AD (text contains none).

• No instructions or summaries about review rights, appeal procedures or internal administrative challenges to this AD are contained in the text. The AD sets mandatory technical and timing requirements but does not itself describe a mechanism for judicial or administrative review within the instrument.

Practitioners seeking litigation history or disputes about this AD will need to search external sources (regulatory records, judicial databases or CASA administrative records) because the AD text itself contains none. The AD’s internal notes and references to ANAC materials do not equate to litigation or judicial content.

This AD contains several potential practical pitfalls and timing quirks that can create ambiguity or scheduling difficulty if not carefully managed. These "gotchas" derive directly from the AD text:

• Temporal anomaly: 700‑flight‑hour postponement tied to 20 April 2005. The AD permits postponement of a maintenance action that "would be accomplished in less than 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005" to within the next 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005 (Requirement). The effective date of the AD is 23 October 2008, yet this deferment clause references a much earlier baseline date (20 April 2005). Operators must interpret whether that clause applies to actions that, in their maintenance‑planning chronology, were scheduled from the 20 April 2005 baseline. This creates a potential for confusion when reconciling maintenance histories and schedules spanning multiple years.

• Reliance on external MRBR revisions for technical content. The AD mandates inclusion of specific task numbers and interval changes "as shown at the Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR, dated 15 December 2004" but does not reproduce the technical instructions. Operators must obtain and apply the exact MRBR temporary revision or MRBR revision 2 (as an AMOC) to understand the task content and intervals; failure to reference the correct MRBR revision could produce non‑conformance (Requirement).

• Alternative compliance via ANAC MRBR revision 2. While the AD accepts adoption of MRBR revision 2 (or later ANAC‑approved revisions) as an alternate means of compliance, operators must ensure the ANAC revisions are indeed "approved" by ANAC and correspond to the CASA AD’s requirements. The AD’s text does not spell out any administrative certification process for accepting ANAC documents as AMOC; operators must confirm equivalence and acceptance in practice (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance).

• Short compliance window. The AD requires the maintenance‑plan alteration to be done "within the next 30 calendar days after the effective date of this AD unless previously accomplished" (Compliance). The effective date is 23 October 2008; this short window means operations must update maintenance planning promptly or already have completed the changes. The AD does not define how to document "previously accomplished" within this text.

• No enforcement or penalty language in the AD. The absence of explicit penalties or enforcement mechanisms in the AD text does not mean there are none under broader regulatory law; however, for practitioners relying only on the AD text, there is no internal guidance on consequences of non‑compliance, making it necessary to consult CASA’s wider regulatory framework outside this document (Compliance).

• Scope limited to listed models. The Applicability lists specific ERJ‑170 variants. Aircraft of closely related types or other Embraer families are not included in this AD; operators should avoid assuming broader applicability without confirming model coverage (Applicability).

• Cross‑referenced ANAC ADs and supersessions. Note 2 states ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 supersedes ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02 and that the original issue is no longer applicable for AD/ERJ‑170/2. Practitioners must be careful when cross‑checking multiple CASA and ANAC ADs to ensure they are using the latest applicable versions (Notes 1 and 2).

• Lack of record‑keeping instruction within the AD. The AD does not specify how to record compliance actions in aircraft logs or maintenance records. While standard aviation practice will require records, the AD itself does not set that out, so operators must apply normal record‑keeping standards independent of the AD text.

Each of these points derives from the AD’s language. Operators should explicitly map their maintenance histories, MRBR revision versions, and scheduling logic to the AD’s requirements to avoid misapplication or inadvertent non‑compliance.

The AD describes a narrow compliance pathway and one recognised alternative. The following steps, grounded in the AD text, are the concrete actions an operator should follow to comply:

1. Confirm applicability. Check whether the specific aircraft are listed in the Applicability: ERJ 170‑100 STD, ERJ 170‑100 LR, ERJ 170‑100 SU, ERJ 170‑100 SE, ERJ 170‑200 STD, ERJ 170‑200 LR and ERJ 170‑200 SU. If an aircraft is not one of these listed models, the AD does not apply to that airframe per this instrument (Applicability).

2. Obtain the referenced MRBR documents. The AD requires alterations "as shown at the Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR, dated 15 December 2004" for the addition and interval changes to specified tasks (Requirement). Alternatively, adoption of MRBR revision 2, or later ANAC‑approved MRBR revisions, is acceptable as an alternate means of compliance (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance). Operators must secure the precise MRBR revision(s) referenced to ensure technical compliance with the tasks and intervals cited by task number.

3. Alter the Maintenance Plan. Update the Maintenance Plan documentation to:

   • Include tasks Nos. 27‑11‑03‑003, 27‑41‑01‑005 and 27‑81‑01‑002.
   • Revise the interval of tasks Nos. 27‑11‑00‑002 and 27‑11‑11‑001 as per Temporary Revision No. 1‑3 to the MRBR (Requirement).

4. Apply the timing rule. Make the maintenance‑plan alteration within the next 30 calendar days after the AD’s effective date unless those changes have already been accomplished prior to the effective date (Compliance). The AD’s effective date is 23 October 2008 (Compliance). Document whether the alteration was previously accomplished so the “unless previously accomplished” clause is demonstrable.

5. Consider the postponement clause for specific scheduling conflicts. If a maintenance action derived from the alteration would be required in less than 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005, the action may be postponed to be accomplished within the next 700 flight hours after 20 April 2005 (Requirement). Operators needing to use this postponement should map the action to the 20 April 2005 baseline to confirm applicability.

6. If electing ANAC MRBR revision 2 as AMOC, verify ANAC approval. The AD accepts MRBR revision 2 or later ANAC‑approved revisions as alternate compliance. Ensure that the MRBR revision chosen is indeed ANAC‑approved and that the revision’s technical content satisfies the task inclusions and interval changes required by the AD (Requirement: Alternative Means of Compliance).

7. Implement workscopes with maintenance providers. Once the Maintenance Plan is altered, coordinate with internal or third‑party maintenance organisations to schedule and perform the tasks. Ensure that the MRBR task numbers and intervals are reflected in work orders, planning systems and maintenance control documentation (Requirement).

8. Document completion. Although the AD does not state record‑keeping procedures, completion of the maintenance‑plan alteration and any maintenance tasks should be documented in accordance with standard maintenance record practices to evidence compliance with the AD’s requirements. The AD’s "unless previously accomplished" clause makes contemporaneous documentation important (Compliance).

9. Cross‑check related ADs and MRBR notes. The AD includes two notes referencing ANAC AD 2005‑03‑02R1 dated 11 August 2008 and that it supersedes a prior ANAC AD (Notes 1 and 2). Confirm whether additional ANAC or CASA ADs interact with this AD for your fleet, particularly if you maintain multiple ERJ‑170 variants or follow ANAC MRBR revisions (Notes).

10. Engage CASA if uncertain. The AD is issued under CASA authority (signature block). If there is doubt about whether a chosen MRBR revision qualifies as an alternate means of compliance or about interpreting the 700‑flight‑hour postponement tied to 20 April 2005, liaise with CASA or the relevant delegate to obtain confirmation or to record an agreed position, recognising the AD’s issuance by a CASA delegate (signature block; Requirement).

These steps stick to the AD’s text. The AD does not itself provide enforcement, record‑keeping or certification procedures, so operators must integrate this AD’s requirements into their existing maintenance governance, records and regulatory compliance processes.