AD/ERJ-170/18 Amdt 1 - Electrical Wiring and ARINC 429 Data Bus

The Directive operates through a small set of interlocking technical and procedural concepts stated in its text.

Applicability and scope. The Directive applies to specific ERJ-170 model variants , ERJ 170-100 STD, LR, SU, SE, and ERJ 170-200 STD, LR and SU , but only to aeroplanes with serial numbers identified in the three Embraer Service Bulletins referenced in the Directive. That is, applicability is not by model alone but by model plus serial numbers as listed in SB 170-24-0019, SB 170-24-0020 and SB 170-31-0020, original issues. The Directive therefore ties regulatory effect to serial-numbered aircraft inventories, rather than all airframes of a nominal model.

Prescriptive technical compliance. The Directive prescribes three specific modification packages. Each package is identified to a specific SB (SB 170-24-0019; SB 170-24-0020; SB 170-31-0020) and is described at a technical level in the instrument. The three tasks cover (a) overhead-panel electrical wiring modification; (b) rerouting of a power-supply bus for an Air Data Smart Probe channel B; and (c) duplication of ARINC 429 airspeed signal beyond a rotor-burst impact area, changing the primary power source for MAU 2, and rewiring actuator control electronics. The Directive requires following the original SBs but allows later SB revisions when approved by ANAC.

Compliance interval and metric. The Directive sets a compliance deadline in aircraft utilisation terms, namely "within the next 6000 hours time in service after the effective date of the original issue of this Directive." This uses flight hours rather than calendar time as the compliance metric, which makes the compliance deadline variable across operators and aircraft depending on utilisation rates.

Inter-jurisdictional acceptance. The Directive recognises and defers to the Brazilian ANAC in two ways. First, it states that later revisions of the referenced SBs are acceptable if approved by ANAC. Second, it references ANAC AD 2008-09-01 as related material. The instrument therefore makes CASA compliance contingent, in part, on ANAC approvals for alternative SB revisions.

Amendment mechanics. The specific Amendment at hand corrects SB date information from the original issue; it does not otherwise alter the technical requirements. The Amendment was prompted by information from an Australian operator identifying incorrect SB dates in the original CASA Directive, and the Amendment states that no other changes were made.

Safety rationale. The background records the safety assessment: ANAC re-assessed rotor burst analysis and identified a possibility that loss of electrical power supply could affect systems (air data, ailerons, multifunction spoilers and rudder) and therefore could cause loss of pitch and yaw control. The Directive frames the three corrective actions as responses to that risk.

Authority and signature. The printed instrument is signed by James Coyne as "Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" and dated 28 November 2008. The Amendment lists its own effective date, 15 January 2009.

Each of these concepts appears explicitly in the Directive text; no external regulatory powers, sanctions or enforcement mechanisms are set out in the instrument itself.

The Directive’s text identifies the affected parties narrowly and concretely. Primary affected parties are operators and owners of Embraer ERJ-170 series aeroplanes that match both the model descriptions and the serial numbers listed in the referenced service bulletins. The Applicability table states: "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, with serial numbers (S/N) identified in Embraer Service Bulletins (SB) 170-24-0019 original issue, dated 6 December 2006, 170-24-0020 original issue, dated 30 November 2006, and 170-31-0020 original issue, dated 20 July 2007."

In concrete terms:

• Aircraft-level impact: Only those airframes whose serial numbers are listed in the named SBs are subject to this AD. An operator with an ERJ-170 model not listed by serial number in the SBs is not covered by this instrument, according to the text.
• Operator obligations: The Requirements impose technical modification tasks that the operator or a contracted maintenance organisation must carry out in accordance with the named SBs. The operator therefore bears the direct cost of carrying out the required modifications, the scheduling burden to meet the 6000 hours time-in-service compliance window, and any aircraft downtime associated with performing the work.
• Manufacturer and maintenance providers: The SBs are Embraer documents, and compliance requires following Embraer SB procedures. Embraer, its authorised maintenance organisations, and parts suppliers will therefore be engaged in executing or supporting the modifications. The Directive permits later SB revisions provided they are approved by ANAC, so Embraer or ANAC-certified service providers may supply revised SBs as alternatives when ANAC approval is shown.
• Regulators: The instrument is issued by CASA and signed by its delegate, and it cross-references ANAC material. While the Directive contains no enforcement clauses in its text, CASA is the issuer and thus the actor that has promulgated the AD and set the compliance terms in the document.
• Third parties: The Directive’s technical changes (for example changes to wiring of ARINC 429 data buses and actuator control electronics) implicate avionics suppliers and engineers who maintain or certify the modified systems pursuant to the SBs. Those parties will be engaged where the operator contracts out the work.

The Directive also addresses process interplay: it permits "later revision of the above SBs, approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)," as acceptable, so ANAC acts as an approver of alternative SB revisions that affect who may deliver compliant work. The instrument also includes the note "ANAC AD 2008-09-01 refers," directing readers to related ANAC material.

Finally, the Amendment notes that it resulted from information provided by "an Australian operator" pointing out incorrect SB dates in the original Directive. That indicates that Australian operators have an informational role in the lifecycle of the AD; the Amendment corrected the dates and said "no other changes are made."

All these attributions and allocations of effect are taken directly from the Directive’s Applicability, Requirements, Compliance, Background and Amendment statements.

Duties imposed by the Directive are narrowly specified and tied to the three listed Requirements. Rights are limited to the acceptance of later revisions of the SBs when approved by ANAC and the legal fact of amendment correction.

Key duties

• Execute specified modifications. The Directive sets out three discrete duties, one per Requirement:
  1. Modify the electrical wiring on the overhead panel in the cockpit in accordance with SB 170-24-0019 original issue.
  2. Change the Air Data Smart Probe 3 channel B power supply bus from ESS2 to ESS3, in accordance with SB 170-24-0020 original issue.
  3. Duplicate the ARINC 429 airspeed signal for an extension longer than the rotor burst impact area; change the primary power source for MAU 2 from DC BUS 2 to DC ESS BUS 2; and change the wiring of SF-ACE 1 and 2 to P-ACE 1, 2 and 3, all in accordance with SB 170-31-0020 original issue.
• Meet the compliance window. For Requirements 1, 2 and 3, compliance must occur "within the next 6000 hours time in service after the effective date of the original issue of this Directive." The original issue effective date is stated elsewhere in the Directive and the Amendment notes that the original issue became effective on 20 November 2008.
• Use SB procedures. The Directive mandates that work be performed "in accordance with" the specified Embraer SBs. The original issue SB dates are corrected by the Amendment, but the requirement to follow the SBs remains.

Recognised rights or permissions in the Directive

• Acceptance of later SB revisions. The Directive provides a clear procedural permission: "Later revision of the above SBs, approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC), are acceptable for compliance with the relevant requirements of this Directive." This creates a conditional right for operators to comply with later SB revisions, but only if those later revisions carry ANAC approval.
• Amendment correction. The Amendment corrects the SB dates used in the original issue. The Amendment states this correction and explicitly says "no other changes are made." That preserves operators’ expectations about the substance of the requirements while correcting documentary errors.

Matters not addressed as duties or rights in the Directive

• The Directive does not specify any administrative process for approval of equivalent methods of compliance, nor does it set out any appeal rights, inspection regimes, or record-keeping obligations in its text. The only procedural mechanism addressed in the Directive text is the allowance for later SB revisions if approved by ANAC.
• The Directive likewise does not include explicit cost-recovery rules, compensation or subsidy rights for operators who must perform the work.

Who pays, and who decides

• Who pays. The Directive imposes the technical tasks on the aircraft subject to the AD; in practice, the economic burden falls on the operators or owners of those aircraft who must arrange and pay for the work required by the SBs. That follows from the Directive’s prescriptive obligations to modify aircraft in accordance with SB procedures.
• Who decides. CASA, via its delegate, issued the Directive; ANAC is the recognised approver for later SB revisions. Embraer authored the SBs that specify the technical method. Operators decide scheduling and contracting choices to implement the mandated changes.

All of the above is drawn directly from the Directive’s Requirements, the clause on later SB revisions, the Compliance clause, and the Amendment text.

The Directive text itself does not include express penalty provisions, enforcement processes, or detailed compliance monitoring provisions. The instrument specifies the required modifications, the SB references, and a compliance interval ("within the next 6000 hours time in service after the effective date of the original issue of this Directive"), but it does not state sanctions for non-compliance, procedures for notice or rectification, or an inspection regime in this text.

What is stated in the instrument about formalising obligations

• The Directive sets mandatory requirements by model/serial number and SB reference. This makes the technical obligations clear in the instrument.
• It establishes a compliance metric, namely flight hours in service counted from the original issue effective date, which is a traceable parameter for assessing if the work has been performed within the stated interval.

What the instrument does not state

• There are no penalty clauses, monetary fines, or criminal sanctions set out in the Directive text.
• The Directive does not specify enforcement mechanisms such as audits, mandatory reporting of compliance to CASA, certification of work completion to CASA, or documentary evidence that must be held in aircraft records within the text provided.
• The instrument does not provide a process for CASA acceptance of alternative methods of compliance other than acceptance of later SB revisions "approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)." It does not say how ANAC approval will be communicated or evidenced to CASA.

Implications drawn from the text

• Because the Directive specifies the technical measures and a compliance window but does not specify enforcement measures within its own text, assessing compliance will require reference to relevant operational or regulatory practices outside the instrument if an operator needs to know how to demonstrate compliance. The Directive’s allowance for ANAC-approved later SB revisions indicates that ANAC approvals are a recognised compliance variable within the AD’s architecture.
• The Directive’s lack of internal penalty language does not mean enforcement is absent; it means that any enforcement mechanism is not set out in this instrument. The instrument does, however, clearly set the obligation and the compliance metric that would be relevant to any compliance assessment.

Statements above are constrained to what the Directive text contains, and do not assert external CASA powers or penalty processes not present in the instrument itself. The Directive’s text, as provided, is silent on explicit penalties and enforcement steps.

The Directive, as drafted, situates itself in a regulatory and technical network rather than operating in isolation. The text explicitly references related regulatory outputs and authoritative technical documents, but it does not purport to be a general law or to restate other legal provisions.

Direct references contained in the Directive

• Embraer Service Bulletins. The Directive makes compliance conditional on following three Embraer SBs: SB 170-24-0019 (original issue, dated 6 December 2006 as corrected by the Amendment), SB 170-24-0020 (original issue, dated 30 November 2006 as corrected by the Amendment), and SB 170-31-0020 (original issue, dated 20 July 2007 as corrected by the Amendment). Those SBs are the technical means by which the obligations in the Directive are to be discharged.
• Brazilian ANAC. The Directive states that "Later revision of the above SBs, approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC), are acceptable for compliance with the relevant requirements of this Directive." It also notes "ANAC AD 2008-09-01 refers." Those references embed ANAC processes into the compliance architecture: ANAC approval is a recognised mechanism for accepting later SB revisions, and an ANAC AD is indicated as related material.

Consequences of those interactions according to the Directive

• Reliance on SBs means that technical compliance is performed according to manufacturer-authored procedures. This implies that the Directive interacts operationally with Embraer’s maintenance and modification documentation.
• Reliance on ANAC approvals for later SB revisions places some regulatory decision-making (approval of later revisions) in ANAC’s domain, at least for the purpose of determining acceptability of later SB revisions within the context of this CASA AD.

What the Directive does not address about broader legal interactions

• The Directive does not itself specify how compliance is to be recorded, certified or enforced in relation to other statutory instruments, or how it fits into aircraft certification or continuing airworthiness record-keeping, within the text provided.
• The Directive does not attempt to restate or summarise the statutory bases for CASA’s authority to issue ADs, nor does it quote or cross-reference domestic aviation statutes in this text.
• The Directive does not explicitly describe how ANAC approvals are to be demonstrated to CASA, or how a person relying on a later SB revision approved by ANAC should document that approval for domestic regulatory purposes.

Operational interaction mechanics implied by the text

• The most concrete interaction the Directive creates is a tripartite chain: CASA issues the AD; Embraer publishes SBs containing the technical work instructions; ANAC may approve later SB revisions which CASA will accept for compliance under this AD. Practically, that means operators will coordinate with Embraer and ANAC-approved SB revisions to satisfy CASA’s AD requirements.
• The Directive’s background references and cross-reference to ANAC AD 2008-09-01 suggest that the technical risk assessment and corrective action originated with the Brazilian regulator and manufacturer, and CASA’s AD accepts and implements those measures in the Australian regulatory context.

All interaction points above are limited to what the Directive text expressly states, namely references to the named SBs and ANAC approvals and the ANAC AD referral.

The text supplied includes both the original issue and this Amendment (Amdt 1) and sets out the reason and effect of the Amendment as stated by CASA.

Original issue

• The original issue of the Directive "became effective on 20 November 2008," as stated in the Amendment's explanatory text.
• The original Directive mandated the corrective actions now repeated in Requirements 1, 2 and 3, as formulated in the named Embraer SBs.

Trigger for the Amendment

• The Amendment states: "This Amendment results from advice from an Australian operator that the dates associated with the service bulletins referenced in the original issue of this Directive were incorrect." That identifies the immediate cause of the Amendment as correction of documentary errors in SB dates brought to CASA's attention by an operator.

Substantive effect of the Amendment

• The Amendment corrects the dates associated with the Embraer Service Bulletins referenced in the original Directive. The Amendment states expressly: "The dates used were based on those in the original ANAC Directive and are corrected by this Amendment, no other changes are made." Therefore the Amendment is limited in scope to correcting SB dates and does not change the substance of the technical requirements, the compliance interval, or the models/serial numbers to which the AD applies.

Timing and formalities

• The Amendment is labelled AD/ERJ-170/18 Amdt 1 and is dated 28 November 2008, signed by James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. The Amendment information block records that the Amendment becomes effective on 15 January 2009.
• The SB original issue dates are set out in the Applicability table as: SB 170-24-0019 original issue dated 6 December 2006; SB 170-24-0020 original issue dated 30 November 2006; and SB 170-31-0020 original issue dated 20 July 2007. These dates appear as corrected and stated in the Directive as amended.

Relationship to ANAC

• The Amendment states that the dates in the original CASA instrument had been based on dates in the original ANAC Directive, and that the Amendment corrects those dates. This describes a documentary linkage between the original ANAC AD and CASA’s AD and explains the provenance of the erroneous dates.

Record-level details

• The supplied instrument reproduces the Amendment header and some formatting elements (title line repeated, table format). The Amendment content is limited and precise. There is no further amendment history recorded in the text provided beyond the original issue and this Amendment 1.

All the assertions above are taken from the Amendment text and the Directive material as supplied.

The Directive text contains no litigation history, no references to judicial decisions, and no mention of legal challenges. The supplied material does not record any court cases, administrative appeals, or other disputes relating to the Directive or its subjects.

What the instrument does record

• The Directive notes administrative provenance and signature. It is signed by James Coyne as "Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" and dated 28 November 2008. It records the effective date of the Amendment as 15 January 2009 and states the original issue effective date as 20 November 2008.
• It records that the Amendment was prompted by information from an Australian operator regarding incorrect SB dates in the original Directive and that the Amendment corrected those dates and made no other changes.

What the instrument does not record

• There is no text in the instrument documenting any litigation or appeal brought against CASA regarding the AD, nor does it note any judicial pronouncements about the AD’s validity, scope, or enforcement.
• There are no citations to legal cases, tribunal determinations or administrative appeal outcomes in the supplied text.

Practical implication

• For a reader or practitioner seeking precedent or case law interpreting this specific AD, the Directive itself contains no such material, and the supplied text provides no signposted route to judicial or tribunal decisions. Any search for litigation history would therefore need to go beyond the instrument text to court databases or administrative review records, but such searches fall outside the document’s content.

All of the above is an accurate statement of the presence or absence of litigation references in the supplied Directive text.

This Directive contains several features and documentary points that can create practical pitfalls for operators, maintainers and compliance teams if not observed carefully. Each of the following is anchored in the instrument’s text.

1. Applicability depends on serial numbers listed in SBs, not model alone. The Applicability table ties the AD to ERJ-170 models "with serial numbers (S/N) identified in Embraer Service Bulletins (SB) 170-24-0019 original issue, dated 6 December 2006, 170-24-0020 original issue, dated 30 November 2006, and 170-31-0020 original issue, dated 20 July 2007." That means an operator cannot rely on model designation alone to determine applicability; the exact S/N list in those SBs controls applicability. Confirming whether an individual airframe appears on the SB S/N list is an essential early step.

2. Compliance metric is flight hours, not calendar time. The Compliance clause states "Within the next 6000 hours time in service after the effective date of the original issue of this Directive." Because the clock is in hours, aircraft with higher utilisation will reach the deadline sooner. Operators must therefore translate this into scheduling benchmarks for each individual airframe, rather than apply a uniform calendar deadline to a fleet.

3. The Directive mandates following "original issue" SBs but permits later revisions only if approved by ANAC. The Requirements refer to the SBs by "original issue" and the instrument permits later revisions "approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)." Practically, this means that if an operator wishes to comply using a revised SB, it must ensure those revisions carry ANAC approval. The instrument does not state how ANAC approval will be evidenced domestically, so operators must secure documentary proof of ANAC approval before relying on a later revision for compliance.

4. The Amendment corrected SB dates and made no other changes. The Amendment states it corrected incorrect SB dates that appeared in the original issue and that "no other changes are made." That corrects a documentary error but leaves the technical content and compliance interval unchanged. Operators reviewing older copies of the AD must ensure they refer to the amended instrument to avoid confusion about SB dates.

5. The Directive does not include enforcement or penalty text. The instrument sets obligations but contains no penalty clauses or enforcement procedure in the text provided. This absence can create uncertainty about how CASA will require proof of compliance or what documentary evidence the regulator will expect. Operators should not assume the absence of enforcement language means less risk; rather, they should treat the AD as a clear technical obligation and be prepared to demonstrate compliance.

6. Interdependence of technical tasks. Requirement 3 bundles multiple changes: ARINC 429 signal duplication for an extension longer than the rotor burst impact area, change of primary power source for MAU 2, and rewiring of SF-ACE units to P-ACE units 1, 2 and 3. These are integrated avionics and power-system changes. Misunderstanding the full scope of Requirement 3 could lead to incomplete compliance if, for example, only the ARINC replication is done but power-source or actuator-control rewiring is omitted. The AD text requires all listed elements in Requirement 3 be completed in accordance with SB 170-31-0020 original issue.

7. The Directive cross-references ANAC AD 2008-09-01. The Note "ANAC AD 2008-09-01 refers" indicates related overseas regulatory material that may contain further detail on the safety assessment or technical measures. Ignoring the ANAC AD without checking it may miss relevant contextual information about the underlying risk and recommended mitigation steps.

8. Documentary chain of command matters. The AD ties compliance to manufacturer SBs and ANAC approvals. If an operator engages a maintenance organisation to perform the work, they must ensure the maintenance provider follows the specified SB revisions and holds any required approvals or parts certificates. The AD does not itself describe acceptable means for recording completed work, so operators should plan to retain relevant SB work cards, signatures, and any ANAC approval documentation.

9. Timing confusion between original issue effective date and Amendment effective date. The Compliance clock is measured from "the effective date of the original issue of this Directive," which the Amendment says is 20 November 2008. The Amendment itself becomes effective on 15 January 2009. Operators must therefore calculate the 6000-hour window from 20 November 2008, not from the Amendment effective date.

10. Potential for misreading of the Amendment’s limited scope. Because the Amendment was prompted by incorrect SB dates, one might infer other substantive changes were made; the Amendment explicitly states "no other changes are made." Practitioners must note the Amendment is corrective only, and not a re-evaluation of the technical measures.

Each of the above points is grounded in the AD text: the Applicability table, the three Requirements, the Compliance clause, the ANAC-related clauses, and the Amendment explanatory paragraphs. Operators should treat these as documentary facts to be checked against their own aircraft records and maintenance planning.

The Directive sets a concise path for compliance; operators should follow the textual steps in sequence and ensure documentary evidence is retained. The following is a practical, source-grounded checklist drawn from the Directive’s text.

1. Verify applicability for each airframe

• Consult the three Embraer Service Bulletins referenced: SB 170-24-0019 original issue (dated 6 December 2006), SB 170-24-0020 original issue (dated 30 November 2006), and SB 170-31-0020 original issue (dated 20 July 2007) as corrected by the Amendment. Determine whether each aircraft’s serial number appears in the S/N lists in those SBs. The AD applies only to ERJ-170 models with S/Ns identified in those SBs, per the Applicability table.

2. Interpret the compliance window

• The AD requires compliance "within the next 6000 hours time in service after the effective date of the original issue of this Directive." The original issue effective date is stated in the Directive and the Amendment notes it became effective on 20 November 2008. Each operator must compute, for each affected airframe, when that airframe will reach 6000 hours since 20 November 2008 and plan work before that point.

3. Select the applicable SB revision

• The Requirements reference the SBs by "original issue" but the Directive allows "later revision of the above SBs, approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)," to be used for compliance. If you intend to use a revised SB, obtain and retain ANAC approval documentation for that revision. If using the original issue SBs, ensure you have the correct original-issue documents reflecting the corrected dates as per the Amendment.

4. Implement the three Requirements, per SB procedures

• Requirement 1: Carry out the electrical wiring modification on the overhead panel in the cockpit exactly "in accordance with SB 170-24-0019 original issue." Ensure maintenance records capture the SB revision used, the signature of authorised personnel, and the work-order references.
• Requirement 2: Re-route the Air Data Smart Probe 3 channel B power supply bus from ESS2 to ESS3 "in accordance with SB 170-24-0020 original issue." This is a specific power distribution change; ensure appropriate checks and tests required by the SB are completed and recorded.
• Requirement 3: Perform the ARINC 429 airspeed-signal duplication beyond the rotor-burst impact area; change MAU 2 primary power source from DC BUS 2 to DC ESS BUS 2; and change the wiring of SF-ACE 1 and 2 to P-ACE 1, 2 and 3, all "in accordance with SB 170-31-0020 original issue." This task bundles avionics signal routing and actuator control electronics reconfiguration; follow the SB’s test and verification procedures.

5. Document compliance thoroughly

• Although the Directive does not itself list documentary requirements, standard airworthiness practice is to retain records of the SB used (including revision and approval status), work cards, signatures of authorised maintenance personnel, and test reports demonstrating the modifications were completed and systems function as intended. If a later SB revision is used, retain ANAC approval evidence as the Directive conditions acceptability on ANAC approval.

6. Coordinate with manufacturer and ANAC if necessary

• If there is any technical ambiguity or if an operator wishes to use an alternative means of compliance, consult Embraer for technical clarification and obtain ANAC approval for any revised SB, as the Directive requires ANAC approval for later SB revisions to be acceptable.

7. Maintain scheduling and logistics

• Because the compliance interval is in hours in service, ensure maintenance planning teams track accumulated hours per airframe and schedule dockings so the work can be completed without exceeding the 6000-hour limit. Arrange for parts, certified personnel and test equipment in advance.

8. Review related ANAC AD material

• The Directive notes "ANAC AD 2008-09-01 refers." Review the ANAC AD for additional contextual or technical detail that may assist in executing the modifications and in establishing documentary chains for ANAC approvals.

9. Use the amended AD text as the authoritative CASA instrument

• The Amendment corrected SB dates used in the original issue; the Amendment states "no other changes are made." Ensure compliance references the amended AD (AD/ERJ-170/18 Amdt 1) and its corrected SB dates, not an earlier unamended version, to avoid confusion over SB dates.

10. Retain evidence for regulatory review

• Although the Directive does not establish enforcement procedures in the text provided, practitioners should keep records that a regulator could reasonably request: airframe S/N checks against the SB list, SB editions used, ANAC approval documents for revised SBs (if any), maintenance work orders, signed compliant checks, and post-modification system test results. These materials will demonstrate that the technical measures were performed "in accordance with" the referenced SBs within the 6000-hour compliance window.

These steps are a practical distillation of the Directive’s Requirements, the compliance clause, the SB revision acceptance clause, the note referring to ANAC AD 2008-09-01, and the Amendment statement correcting SB dates. All actions recommended above should be documented in a manner consistent with an operator’s continuing airworthiness records and the requirements of the SBs used.