AD/LEARJET 35/40 - Standby Fuel Pump Annunciators

The AD rests on a small set of interlocking technical and compliance concepts drawn from the aircraft maintenance and airworthiness regime set out in the document.

Applicability defines the population of aircraft subject to the directive. The AD is limited to "Learjet model 35, 35A, 36 and 36A aeroplanes identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000." That means inclusion is not simply by model number alone, but by identification in the specified SB Revision 4.

Mandatory hardware modification. Requirement 1 imposes a mandatory physical modification on both left and right standby fuel pump switches. The modification work is not described in full within the AD text, but is required to be done "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4." The referenced SB is therefore the technical compliance document; later FAA-approved SB revisions may be substituted as an AMOC.

Documentation and operational procedures. Requirement 2 requires a change to the Aircraft Flight Manual's Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections to include TFM changes TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09 (both dated 30 May 1996). The AD explicitly permits inserting a copy of the TFM changes into the AFM and permits replacing the insert with general AFM revisions when the information is identical. The relationship between AFM, TFM and the AD is operational: the AFM must contain the emergency procedures text that advises flight crew on actions if the standby fuel pump fails to shut off.

Temporal coupling of obligations. The AD sets different time requirements: the hardware modification (Requirement 1) must be accomplished within 24 months of the AD becoming effective (effective date 12 April 2007), while the AFM revision (Requirement 2) must be in place "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." That means the operator cannot return the aircraft to service after completing the modification without the AFM change in place.

AMOC mechanism. The AD explicitly recognises FAA authority in permitting "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 2007-04-18" as acceptable for compliance. The AD therefore incorporates a cross-jurisdictional, agency-based route to alternative compliance documentation.

Safety rationale. The Background section sets out the failure mode to be mitigated: "inadvertent operation of a standby fuel pump due to an electrical system malfunction" leading to "inadvertent fuel transfer" and "over-limit fuel imbalance" which "could affect lateral control of the aeroplane" and "result in reduced controllability." The AD is therefore targeted at preventing an electrical fault that could create a fuel imbalance and consequent handling degradation.

Record and insertion rules. The AD states practical rules for documenting the AFM change: the operator may insert the TFM changes into the AFM, and when general AFM revisions include the same information, those general revisions may be used provided the relevant information is identical to the TFM changes. That provides a specific, limited pathway for AFM document control.

Authority and issuance. The paper bears the signature of "David Punshon, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" and includes an effective date of 12 April 2007. The AD references FAA AD 2007-04-18 (Amdt 39-14950) in a Note, indicating coordination or parallel action with the FAA.

Together, these concepts define a compliance architecture that ties a specific technical SB to mandatory hardware work, links immediate operational documentation changes to the hardware work, allows FAA-approved AMOCs to serve as substitutes, and frames the action as preventing a documented safety hazard relating to fuel imbalance and lateral control.

The AD directly affects owners, operators, maintainers and, indirectly, crews of Learjet model 35, 35A, 36 and 36A aeroplanes that are identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000. The Applicability clause limits the set of aeroplanes to those specifically identified in that SB Revision 4, so presence on an operator's register does not automatically make every model 35/36 variant subject to the AD unless the aircraft is identified in the SB Revision 4 list.

Aircraft owners/operators. Owners and operators of affected aeroplanes are the primary duty-holders, because Requirement 1 forces them to have the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches modified "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4." Practically, they will pay for parts, labour and aircraft downtime to complete the modification within the 24-month compliance window. The AD requires operators to ensure the AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures are revised (Requirement 2), which affects procedures, training materials and operational manuals.

Maintenance organisations and engineers. Maintenance providers and licensed engineers who perform the modification must use the Accomplishment Instructions in the referenced SB Revision 4, or a later SB revision that has been accepted by the FAA as an AMOC to FAA AD 2007-04-18. Those organisations must ensure the work is authorised, documented and traceable to the AD and the relevant SB instructions.

Flight crew. Pilots will be affected operationally because Requirement 2 requires the AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures to include the TFM changes (TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09). Flight crews will need to be familiar with the revised emergency procedures addressing failure of the standby fuel pump to shut off. The AD prescribes the mechanism for updating the AFM and allows the TFM insert or identical general AFM revisions to be used.

Regulatory authorities. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) delegated the issuance (Delegate David Punshon signed the AD), and the AD explicitly references the FAA's parallel AD and AMOC process. CASA enforcers and airworthiness inspectors will be responsible for monitoring compliance, verifying that affected aircraft have been modified and that AFM revisions are in place, subject to whatever administrative and enforcement rules CASA applies outside the text of this AD.

Aircraft documentation managers. Those responsible for AFM maintenance must insert the TFM changes (TFM 96-08 and 96-09 dated 30 May 1996) or, when equivalent information appears in a general AFM revision, may insert that revision provided the relevant information is identical. The AD lists the applicable AFM document identifiers (35/36 (FM-019), 35A/36A FC-200 (FM-102), 35A/36A FC-530 (FM-108)), so document control staff must confirm which AFM edition is in use and whether the TFM insert or general revision is the correct action.

Indirectly affected parties. Passengers and insurers are indirectly affected because the AD intends to reduce a failure mode that could impair aircraft controllability. Insurers may respond administratively to the imposition of an AD, but the text makes no statement about insurance or liability changes.

Who does not appear to be affected under this AD is any Learjet 35/36 series aeroplane not listed in Bombardier SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4, because the Applicability clause restricts the AD to aircraft "identified in" that SB. The AD also references FAA approvals for AMOCs, so aircraft for which an FAA AMOC exists for a later SB revision may comply with that AMOC-approved revision instead of Revision 4.

This AD imposes two principal duties on operators and maintenance organisations, and it establishes limited rights to use FAA-approved alternate methods of compliance. The duties are explicitly stated; rights are derived from the AD's text about later SB revisions approved by the FAA.

Duty 1 , hardware modification. Operators must "Modify the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4" (Requirement 1). The duty includes both left and right pumps, and it binds the operator to follow the SB's Accomplishment Instructions as the method of work. The compliance time is fixed: "Within 24 months after the effective date of this Directive."

Duty 2 , AFM revision. Operators must "Revise the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections of the applicable Learjet Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) to advise the flight crew of proper procedures to follow in the event of failure of the standby fuel pump to shut off by including the information in the applicable Learjet Temporary Flight Manual (TFM) changes identified below" (Requirement 2). The duty requires insertion of TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09 (both dated 30 May 1996) into the listed AFMs, and it mandates that this revision be completed "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." The AD also gives a practical method for compliance: "This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of the TFM changes into the AFM." It also allows substitution with general AFM revisions when "the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes."

Duty to verify applicability. Implicitly, operators must establish whether their aircraft are "identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000." The AD does not itself list serial numbers in the text provided, instead referencing the SB, so operators must check the SB to establish applicability.

Right to use FAA-approved AMOC SB revisions. The AD states "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 2007-04-18, is/are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." That language creates a procedural right: if an operator uses a later SB revision and that revision has FAA AMOC approval relative to FAA AD 2007-04-18, CASA accepts that later SB revision as satisfying the AD's requirements. The right is conditional on FAA approval, and the language ties the Australian AD's acceptability to an FAA administrative action.

Duty on records and installation. Although the AD text provided does not set out explicit record-keeping paragraphs, the mandatory modification and AFM change create a compliance need to document the work and the AFM insertion. The AD allows the AFM to be updated either by TFM insert or by general AFM revision, subject to identity of relevant wording, which is an administrative duty for documentation managers.

No explicit penalty clauses or enforcement procedures are set out in the AD text provided. The AD does, however, become effective on a stated date, and it is issued by an authorised delegate of CASA, indicating the AD forms part of the regulatory airworthiness framework. Where operators exercise the AMOC right, the AD requires the AMOC to be an FAA-approved AMOC to the FAA's AD. That cross-recognition is a right limited to FAA-validated alternate compliance methods.

In summary, the AD creates binding operational and maintenance duties to modify hardware and update manuals, gives a time-limited compliance schedule, and confers a conditional right to adopt FAA-AMOC-approved later SB revisions instead of the Revision 4 SB.

The text of the AD as supplied contains no express penalties, fine schedules, or enforcement procedures within its body. The document records the issuing authority, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and it is signed by a delegate, but it does not set out enforcement mechanisms or sanctions for non-compliance in the text provided. The AD does, however, set out compliance deadlines and effective dates which are the operative standards to be met.

What the AD does state that is relevant to enforcement are the concrete compliance triggers and timelines to be met. Requirement 1 must be done "Within 24 months after the effective date of this Directive," and Requirement 2 must be completed "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." The AD became effective on 12 April 2007. Those dates and the express linkage between modification and restriction on further flight are the standards an inspector would verify. Because the AD mandates that the AFM be revised prior to further flight after the modification, the text creates a clear pre-flight compliance condition.

The AD also contains a Note referencing FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950, indicating parallel regulatory activity by the FAA. The AD gives operators the ability to comply using later SB revisions only if those revisions are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2007-04-18." That cross-agency recognition shapes the universe of permissible compliance methods; inspectors checking compliance would need to verify that any substituted SB revision has the stated FAA AMOC approval.

Because the AD itself does not set out civil or criminal penalties, those consequences (if any) must be inferred from the broader regulatory framework under which CASA issues ADs. The AD authorisation and signature by a CASA delegate shows administrative issuance; practical enforcement would be through CASA's ordinary airworthiness and safety oversight mechanisms, which typically include inspection, grounding orders, and administrative enforcement measures, but these measures are not specified in the text of the AD provided here.

For day-to-day operational enforcement, the AD specifies the documented means of compliance: adherence to SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 Accomplishment Instructions, or an FAA-approved AMOC to the FAA AD for later SB revisions, and insertion of TFM changes into the AFM or equivalent general AFM revisions when identical. Demonstrating compliance therefore requires documentary proof , maintenance release records showing the work was completed in accordance with the SB, and AFM pages or revision records showing the TFM insertion or equivalent general revision. The AD does not itself prescribe the format of those records.

In short, the AD sets binding technical and procedural obligations and compliance deadlines, but it does not enumerate penalties within its text. Enforcement will depend on CASA's airworthiness oversight mechanisms outside the specific wording of this AD. The AD does create verifiable requirements that an inspector can check: the modification performed as per the SB, the AFM updated with the specified TFM changes, and adherence to the specified timelines, including the prohibition on further flight after the modification until the AFM revision is in place.

The AD explicitly references and is cross-linked to a parallel FAA airworthiness action. The document includes a Note: "FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950 refers." Further, the AD accepts "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 2007-04-18" as acceptable for compliance with the equivalent requirements of this Directive. That textual link sets up a specific inter-agency interaction: CASA's AD permits substitution of later SB revisions only when the FAA has approved those revisions as AMOCs relative to the FAA AD. The AD does not reference any other domestic legislation or regulations within its text.

The AD binds its requirements to Bombardier Service Bulletin 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000. The SB therefore functions as the technical instrument implementing the AD's hardware requirement. Because the AD limits applicability to aeroplanes "identified in" that SB Revision 4, operators must consult the SB to determine whether their aircraft fall within the AD's scope. The AD further permits AFM changes by inserting a copy of the prescribed Temporary Flight Manual (TFM) changes, or by inserting general AFM revisions if they contain identical relevant information. That creates a document-control and operational interaction between the AD and the operator's AFM maintenance processes.

The AD's acceptance of FAA-approved AMOCs also creates an administrative interaction between CASA and FAA documents: CASA's AD defers to FAA administrative approval of alternate methods of compliance relative to FAA AD 2007-04-18. The AD is therefore not a standalone instrument but part of a transnational pattern of airworthiness directives and service bulletin updates, at least insofar as FAA AMOCs are recognised.

The AD does not expressly reference Australian statutes, regulations, or more general airworthiness regulation in the supplied text. It is issued by a CASA delegate and dated, and therefore exists within CASA's broader regulatory framework, but the AD does not itself quote the enabling statutory provisions or enforcement powers for CASA. The AD also does not discuss insurance, contractual warranties, or liability law; those interactions are outside the AD's text.

In practice, operators must act at the intersection of their contractual obligations (for maintenance and manufacturer service), compliance with the AD, and any reciprocal FAA actions. Where an operator seeks to rely on a later SB revision, the AD requires FAA AMOC approval of that later revision to be treated as an acceptable compliance method under this AD. That creates a conditional interaction between the operator's choice of technical method and FAA administrative approvals.

Because the AD requires AFM revisions, it interacts with operators' document-control obligations and potentially with operations regulations that require the AFM to be carried onboard and followed. The AD's demand that the AFM reflect specific TFM changes means that AFM content and the operator's operational procedures must be aligned with the AD; the AD permits method of insert via TFM changes or identical general AFM revisions, creating a specific document-management rule.

No other external statutes or pieces of Australian legislation are cited in the AD text provided. The principal inter-law interaction present in the AD is the conditional recognition of FAA AMOCs and the direct reference to the Bombardier Service Bulletin as the technical compliance instrument.

The AD text provided does not include any formal amendment history entries for the Australian directive itself. The document records the effective date as 12 April 2007 and the signature date as 23 February 2007, but it does not list prior versions of this Australian AD or any subsequent amendments to it within the supplied text. There is no schedule of revisions or version numbering in the AD text as presented.

The AD does, however, reference the revision history of the technical service bulletin it relies upon: the Applicability is tied to "Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000." The AD further contemplates later revisions of that SB, stating 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 2007-04-18, is/are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." That clause creates an implicit amendment pathway: if Bombardier issues a later SB revision and the FAA approves it as an AMOC to its AD, CASA will accept that later revision as compliant with the Australian AD. The AD text therefore contemplates changes in the SB made subsequent to SB Revision 4 and allows those SB revisions to operate as the technical compliance document when an FAA AMOC exists.

The AD also points operators to Temporary Flight Manual changes that are dated 30 May 1996 (TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09). The AD allows insertion of those TFM changes into the AFM and allows use of later general AFM revisions when "the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes." This is an internal AFM amendment pathway rather than an amendment to the AD itself, but it gives operators a method to incorporate the required procedural changes when their AFM is updated.

There is a Note in the AD that "FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950 refers," indicating the AD sits alongside or references FAA amendment 39-14950. The Australian AD does not itself contain an amendment log, subsequent amendment dates, revocations, or supersession statements in the text provided.

Because the AD ties acceptable later SB revisions to FAA AMOC approvals, any change in practice for acceptance of AMOCs or any future FAA AD changes could effectively alter compliance options for Australian operators without this AD being reissued. That is a point of administrative interdependence rather than an amendment to this AD text.

In sum, the supplied AD contains no domestic amendment history entries. It does, however, anchor domestic compliance to a specific SB revision and explicitly permits later SB revisions,but only where those later revisions are FAA-approved AMOCs to the FAA's AD,thereby creating a conditional, de facto amendment channel for compliance procedures.

The AD as supplied contains no reference to litigation, legal challenges, or judicially determined matters. There are no cases, judicial decisions, or dispute-resolution outcomes cited within the text. The only external instrument cited is FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950 in a Note, and the AD references Bombardier Service Bulletin 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 and specific TFM changes; none of these references in the supplied text indicate judicial proceedings.

Because the AD contains direct technical and compliance requirements and an effective date (12 April 2007), any litigation related to compliance, enforcement, or interpretation would appear outside the AD text and is not recorded here. The AD also indicates that later SB revisions approved as FAA AMOCs to FAA AD 2007-04-18 are acceptable for compliance; if any dispute arose about whether a particular later SB revision had the requisite FAA AMOC or whether a particular work order complied with the SB's Accomplishment Instructions, such a dispute could give rise to administrative review or litigation. None of that is documented in the provided text.

For practitioners seeking litigation history, the supplied AD provides no entries and no pointers to cases. It does not identify prior adjudications about the effect of the AD, nor any challenges to CASA's issuance of this AD or to Bombardier's service instructions. The AD's Note that the FAA action "refers" to FAA AD 2007-04-18 suggests parallel regulatory work by the FAA, but it does not provide any indication that that FAA AD has been litigated. The AD makes no declaratory statements about the legal consequences beyond the operational compliance requirements.

If legal questions arise in practice , for instance, over the proper interpretation of "identified in" the SB, the sufficiency of an FAA AMOC in respect of a particular later SB revision, or the meaning of "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions" , those questions will need to be resolved in administrative proceedings or court actions beyond the text of this AD. The AD text supplied does not record any such proceedings.

Therefore, the AD, as provided, has no litigation history recorded within its text. Any search for cases or legal disputes would have to be conducted using external records outside this AD document.

This AD contains a number of concrete operational and administrative traps for implementers, arising from its dependence on external documents, its timing rules and the precise phrasing used.

Applicability dependency. The Applicability clause ties the AD to aircraft "identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000." That means an operator cannot assume all Learjet 35/36 models are covered; they must check the SB Revision 4 list. Failure to verify whether an airframe is "identified in" that SB could lead either to unnecessary work or to non-compliance if the aircraft actually falls within the SB list but the operator assumed otherwise.

Reference to external SB Accomplishment Instructions. Requirement 1 demands the modification "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4." The AD does not reproduce those instructions. Operators must obtain the SB Revision 4 document and ensure the maintenance organisation follows it exactly. A common gotcha is incorrectly assuming that any modification to the standby pump switches suffices; the AD requires the specific SB Accomplishment Instructions be followed.

Conditional AMOC acceptance. The AD allows later SB revisions only if they are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2007-04-18." That is a narrow path: later SB revisions not having an FAA AMOC will not be accepted under this AD. Operators who procure later SB revisions must verify FAA AMOC approval, not merely the existence of a later SB. Misunderstanding the acceptance criteria could lead to using a later SB revision that CASA will not accept for compliance.

Timing interactions between Requirements 1 and 2. Requirement 1 must be done within 24 months after the AD becomes effective (effective 12 April 2007), while Requirement 2 must be completed "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." A practical pitfall is carrying out the hardware modification but returning the aircraft to flight without inserting the TFM changes into the AFM. The AD precludes further flight in that state; failure to observe that nexus could create regulatory non-compliance.

AFM insertion and identity of content. The AD permits insertion of the TFM changes "into the AFM" and allows use of general AFM revisions when "the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes." The gotcha here is the word "identical." Operators replacing the TFM insert with a general AFM revision must ensure the relevant information is identical; mere equivalence in meaning might not meet the AD's phrasing. Document control systems must be able to show identity or a precise match.

TFM and AFM document identifiers. The AD lists specific AFM identifiers (35/36 (FM-019), 35A/36A FC-200 (FM-102), 35A/36A FC-530 (FM-108)). Operators using alternate or superseded AFM document numbering must confirm that their AFM corresponds to one of the listed identifiers, or else demonstrate that the TFM insert is placed in the correct AFM. Mismatches in document identifiers can cause confusion during audits.

Dates and retroactivity. The AD is signed 23 February 2007 and effective 12 April 2007. Requirement 1 is due within 24 months after the effective date. Operators who delay implementation until the last minute risk compressed scheduling and availability issues with maintenance providers. There is no grace period beyond the 24 months stated.

No penalty language in the AD text. The AD does not specify enforcement sanctions or penalties in its body; implementers should not interpret that absence as meaning compliance is optional. The AD establishes technical obligations that CASA will monitor pursuant to its airworthiness oversight, but operators should be aware that enforcement mechanisms exist in the broader regulator framework even if not in the AD text.

Reliance on FAA AD. The AD's acceptance of FAA AMOCs connects CASA compliance to FAA administrative action. If an operator relies on an FAA AMOC, they must ensure that the FAA has indeed approved the SB revision as an AMOC to FAA AD 2007-04-18. If the FAA later changes its stance, the operator's previously relied-on AMOC could be called into question. Operators should document the FAA approval at the time of compliance.

Limited scope of the hazard description. The AD describes the safety issue as an "inadvertent operation of a standby fuel pump due to an electrical system malfunction" that could cause fuel imbalance and reduced controllability. Operators and maintenance providers should not read extra obligations into that description; the AD's requirements are specific. However, the hazard description also implies that other electrical system failures might produce different failure modes; this AD addresses a defined failure mode only.

In short, the principal gotchas are: verifying applicability against SB Revision 4; using the exact SB Accomplishment Instructions or an FAA-AMOC-approved later revision; ensuring AFM insertion is completed before further flight after modification; documenting identity of general AFM revisions if used instead of TFM insert; obtaining and retaining proof of FAA AMOC approval where relied upon; and careful scheduling relative to the 24-month compliance window.

Complying with this AD requires a sequence of administrative, logistical and technical steps anchored to the specified documents. The AD sets two explicit requirements and conditions for alternative compliance methods; steps below follow directly from the AD text.

Step 1 , Determine applicability. Obtain Bombardier Service Bulletin 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000 and confirm whether the specific airframe(s) are "identified in" that SB. The AD's Applicability clause makes the SB the definitive list generator: only aircraft identified in SB Revision 4 fall under the AD as written. Document the applicability determination for each aircraft.

Step 2 , Plan and schedule the hardware modification. If the aircraft is applicable, plan to "Modify the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4" (Requirement 1). Schedule the work within the compliance window: "Within 24 months after the effective date of this Directive." Because the AD effective date is 12 April 2007, ensure completion by the 24-month deadline calculated from that date. Use qualified maintenance personnel and follow the SB's Accomplishment Instructions precisely. Retain maintenance records showing the work was performed in accordance with the SB.

Step 3 , Confirm acceptable alternative compliance if not using SB Revision 4. If you intend to use a later revision of the referenced SB, verify that the later revision has been "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2007-04-18." Only FAA-AMOC-approved later SB revisions are considered acceptable for compliance with this AD. Obtain and retain the FAA AMOC approval documentation and a clear statement that the later SB revision is an AMOC to FAA AD 2007-04-18.

Step 4 , Update the AFM before returning to flight. The AD requires that you "Revise the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections of the applicable Learjet Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) ... by including the information in the applicable Learjet Temporary Flight Manual (TFM) changes identified below" (Requirement 2). The AD sets TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09 (both dated 30 May 1996) as the required inserts, and lists the applicable AFM identifiers (35/36 (FM-019), 35A/36A FC-200 (FM-102), 35A/36A FC-530 (FM-108)). Insert the TFM pages into the AFM or, if a general AFM revision contains identical relevant information, insert that general revision. Critically, this AFM revision must be completed "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." Do not return the aeroplane to flight after the modification until the AFM change is in place.

Step 5 , Document the AFM change and the insertion method. Keep copies of the TFM changes inserted or copies of the general AFM revision used, and document where they were inserted. If you relied on a general AFM revision replacing the TFM insert, explicitly document that "the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes," as the AD requires identity of relevant information.

Step 6 , Retain linkage to the SB and AD. Maintain records linking the modification work to the SB Accomplishment Instructions or the FAA-AMOC-approved later SB revision, and link the AFM change to the TFM pages or identical AFM revision. This documentation will be the primary evidence of compliance when reviewed by CASA or other regulators.

Step 7 , Check cross-jurisdictional approvals if operating internationally. Because the AD accepts later SB revisions only when the FAA has approved them as AMOCs to FAA AD 2007-04-18, operators with multi-jurisdictional operations or maintenance performed in other countries must confirm FAA AMOC approvals and ensure CASA acceptance of the FAA-AMOC pathway is documented.

Step 8 , Train crew on updated procedures. Once the AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures contain the TFM text or an identical general AFM revision, ensure flight crews are briefed and trained on the updated procedures addressing the possibility that the standby fuel pump will not shut off. The AD's Requirement 2 exists to ensure crews have the correct procedural guidance in this specific failure mode.

Step 9 , Retain effective date and compliance timing. The AD became effective 12 April 2007; Requirement 1 must be done within 24 months after that date. If compliance is questioned, be prepared to show evidence of the date the modification was completed and the date the AFM was updated. The AFM update must be completed prior to first flight after the modification.

Step 10 , Maintain readiness to show FAA AMOC documentation when used. If a later SB revision is relied upon, retain the FAA AMOC approval documentation that ties that SB revision to FAA AD 2007-04-18. The AD's acceptance of later SB revisions is explicitly conditioned upon that FAA AMOC approval.

Following these steps aligns an operator with the AD's explicit requirements: modification as per the SB's Accomplishment Instructions, AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures updated by the specified TFM changes (or identical general AFM revisions), and adherence to the time limits in the AD. Keep maintenance release paperwork, AFM revision logs, and any FAA AMOC approvals as the documentary trail required to demonstrate compliance.

(Note: the AD text provided contains no domestic amendment log; this section restates the AD's references that create de facto amendment pathways.)

The AD as supplied does not record any domestic amendments, supersessions or subsequent reissuances within its text. It is dated and signed (David Punshon, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, 23 February 2007) and shows an effective date of 12 April 2007. There is no list of prior Australian AD versions, nor are there entries indicating later Australian amendments to this specific directive in the text provided.

However, the AD does create a specific mechanism by which later revisions of the technical compliance document may be treated as the operative method for compliance. The AD states: "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 2007-04-18, is/are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." That clause establishes that Bombardier may issue later revisions of SB 35/36-28-11, and that those later revisions, if approved by the FAA as AMOCs in relation to FAA AD 2007-04-18, will be acceptable under this Australian AD. That is an administrative acceptance path rather than a formal amendment to the AD text itself. Practically, it permits operators to comply with later SB revisions that have FAA AMOC approval without waiting for an Australian AD amendment.

The AD also references TFM changes dated 30 May 1996 (TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09) and allows those TFM inserts to be used until general AFM revisions containing identical relevant information are available. The AD therefore provides an AFM change pathway: the TFM insert can be replaced in the AFM by a later AFM revision, but only if the relevant information is identical. That effectively allows AFM revisions to supersede the TFM insert without changing the AD itself.

There is a Note referring to FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950, indicating coordination with the FAA's amendment activity. If the FAA amends its AD or issues new AMOCs, that could change which SB revisions acceptable to the FAA count as acceptable for Australian compliance per this AD's AMOC acceptance clause. Consequently, while the Australian AD text itself shows no amendment record, developments in FAA ADs and SB revisions produce de facto changes in compliance options for operators.

Because the provided text does not supply a formal amendment log, practitioners should assume no recorded domestic amendments exist within this document and should instead monitor Bombardier SB revisions, FAA AD actions (including AMOCs to FAA AD 2007-04-18), and CASA publications for any later formal amendments or notices that explicitly change or supersede this AD.

The AD text supplied does not include any litigation history, references to judicial decisions, or administrative appeals. There are no cited cases, no recorded disputes and no mention of legal challenges to the issuance or content of this AD within the document. The AD contains a cross-reference note to FAA AD 2007-04-18 Amdt 39-14950, but that reference does not indicate litigation.

Because the AD is an administrative airworthiness directive, disputes that might give rise to litigation would typically concern scope (for example, whether an aircraft is "identified in" the referenced SB), sufficiency of the chosen method of compliance (for example, whether a later SB revision truly is an FAA-approved AMOC), or the adequacy of the work done "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions" of the SB. None of those disputes are documented in the AD text provided.

Practitioners seeking any related litigation would need to consult external legal databases, CASA enforcement records, and court or tribunal decisions for any challenges or appeals arising from this AD. The AD itself contains no record of such proceedings and does not point to any prior adjudications.

Accordingly, the supplied AD stands without any litigation history recorded in its text. Any legal or administrative proceedings relevant to this AD are outside the document and would have to be researched through regulator records and case law databases.

(Second listing to ensure operational emphasis; text repeats critical practical pitfalls with emphasis on implementation avoidance.)

1. Confirm applicability via SB Revision 4. The AD’s applicability is not simply model-based; it applies only to those Learjet 35/36-series aeroplanes "identified in Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000." Operators must obtain SB Revision 4 and verify whether their airframe is listed. Assuming applicability by model alone is a common mistake.

2. Use the exact SB Accomplishment Instructions or an FAA-AMOC-approved later revision. Requirement 1 mandates modification "in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4." If using a later SB revision, confirm it has FAA AMOC approval relative to FAA AD 2007-04-18. Do not substitute a different repair method without that FAA AMOC approval, because the AD explicitly ties acceptability to FAA AMOC status.

3. Do not return to service without the AFM update. Requirement 2 states the AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures must be revised "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification." Practically, that means you cannot complete the hardware work and then fly the aeroplane before inserting the required TFM changes into the AFM or ensuring an identical AFM general revision is in place.

4. Ensure identity if replacing TFM insert with general AFM revision. The AD allows general AFM revisions to substitute for the TFM insert only when "the relevant information in the general revisions is identical to that in the TFM changes." Confirm and document identity; similarity or paraphrase may not be sufficient under the AD’s language.

5. Retain FAA AMOC documentation. If you rely on an FAA AMOC for a later SB revision, retain the FAA approval documentation. CASA accepts later SB revisions only if they are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2007-04-18."

6. Timing risk with the 24-month window. Requirement 1 must be satisfied "Within 24 months after the effective date of this Directive," effective 12 April 2007. Scheduling, parts availability, and maintenance slots can compress if deferred until late; plan proactively.

7. Document control precision. The AD lists AFM document identifiers (35/36 (FM-019), 35A/36A FC-200 (FM-102), 35A/36A FC-530 (FM-108)). Ensure the AFM that receives the TFM insert corresponds to one of the listed AFMs and that maintenance records show the insert location and date.

8. Do not conflate this AD’s absence of penalty language with an absence of enforcement. The AD text includes no sanction language, but it prescribes mandatory actions and timelines that CASA will verify under its airworthiness oversight.

9. Beware cross-jurisdictional changes. Because the AD defers to FAA AMOC approvals for later SB revisions, changes in FAA policy or AMOC status could affect whether a previously used later SB revision is still acceptable for compliance. Maintain contemporaneous FAA documentation.

10. Do not infer broader obligations beyond the specified requirements. The AD targets the standby fuel pump standby-switch modification and specific AFM changes for this failure mode. It does not mandate broader electrical system changes. Any further actions beyond the AD should be based on separate directives or maintenance programmes.

This final section summarises a compact compliance checklist, grounded in the AD’s text, suitable for maintenance teams, operators and compliance officers.

1. Obtain the AD and referenced documents. Secure the full text of this AD, Bombardier SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4 dated 4 December 2000, and TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09 dated 30 May 1996. These are the operative documents referenced by the AD.

2. Establish applicability. Confirm whether the specific Learjet 35/36-series airframe is "identified in" SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4. Record the serial number check and retain a dated copy of the SB page showing the aircraft identification.

3. Schedule and perform the hardware modification. Arrange for licensed maintenance personnel to "Modify the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SB 35/36-28-11 Revision 4" and complete that work within 24 months after the AD's effective date. Produce and retain the maintenance release and the work-order trace linking the work to the SB Accomplishment Instructions.

4. If using a later SB revision, verify FAA AMOC approval. Before relying on a later SB revision, obtain and retain documentation that the later SB revision has been "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2007-04-18." Without that FAA AMOC, the AD requires compliance via SB Revision 4.

5. Update the AFM prior to flight. Insert TFM 96-08 and TFM 96-09 into the applicable AFM (35/36 (FM-019), 35A/36A FC-200 (FM-102), 35A/36A FC-530 (FM-108)) as the method for revising the Emergency and Abnormal Procedures sections. If a later general AFM revision contains identical relevant information, insert that general revision instead, but document the identity and the insertion. Crucially, this must be completed "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification."

6. Record-keeping. Maintain a compliance file including: the AD, the SB Revision 4 Accomplishment Instructions or FAA-AMOC-approved later SB revision, maintenance records showing the modification completion date and sign-off, copies of the TFM inserts or general AFM revision pages as inserted, and any FAA AMOC approval documents used. These records are the primary evidence of compliance.

7. Crew familiarisation. After the AFM is updated, brief flight crew and update training materials or checklists, so flight crews are familiar with the new Emergency and Abnormal Procedures relating to the standby fuel pump failing to shut off, as required by the AFM change mandated in Requirement 2.

8. Audit readiness. Prepare for CASA or other regulator inspection by ensuring all records are available and that the AFM contains the TFM changes (or identical general AFM revisions) and that the left- and right-hand standby fuel pump switches have been modified per the SB.

9. Monitor FAA and Bombardier updates. Because the AD allows FAA-AMOC-approved later SB revisions as acceptable alternatives, keep track of Bombardier SB releases and FAA AMOC announcements that could alter acceptable compliance methods.

10. Maintain the operational constraint. Do not operate the aeroplane after completing the hardware modification without completing the AFM amendment required by Requirement 2, because the AD requires the AFM revision "Before further flight after accomplishing the Requirement 1 modification."

Following these steps will align operator action with the AD’s explicit requirements: hardware modification per the SB, AFM Emergency and Abnormal Procedures updated by the TFM inserts or equivalent general AFM revisions, and adherence to the AD’s timing constraints and AMOC conditions. Keep documentary evidence of each step as the primary compliance demonstration.