AD/SD3-30/48 - Fuel Tank Safety - Fuel Airworthiness Limitations

The Directive rests on three interlocking technical and regulatory concepts: Fuel Airworthiness Limitations, Maintenance/Inspection Tasks, and Critical Design Control Configuration Limitations (CDCCL).

Fuel Airworthiness Limitations. The AD defines Fuel Airworthiness Limitations as items that emerge from a systems safety analysis where failure modes have been identified that correspond to an “unsafe condition” as defined by the FAA memo used in SFAR 88 decision criteria. These are described as failure conditions where an unacceptable probability of ignition risk could exist if specified tasks and practices are not performed in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements. The Directive therefore turns the results of a systems safety analysis into mandatory maintenance obligations, by requiring operators to incorporate those limitations into their maintenance programmes (Background).

Maintenance/Inspection Tasks. The Directive requires concrete maintenance and inspection actions. Requirement 1a instructs operators to “accomplish the inspections including any necessary rectification action together with the installation of additional electrical bonding as specified in Bombardier Aerospace Shorts Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 dated June 2004 or later EASA approved revision.” The Service Bulletin is the technical source for the inspection content and rectification measures. The Directive additionally clarifies that completion of these tasks establishes a baseline for subsequent repeating inspections according to AMM Section 5-20-01 (Note 1).

Critical Design Control Configuration Limitations (CDCCL). CDCCLs are configuration control items that, because of the systems safety analysis, must be preserved to maintain the identified safety envelope. Requirement 2 requires operators to amend internal maintenance control documentation so that the data in AMM Section 5.20.02 is reflected and each CDCCL is explicitly highlighted. This changes internal document controls and draws attention to configuration items that must not be inadvertently modified or omitted during maintenance.

Regulatory lineage and harmonisation. The AD situates itself within a broader regulatory response to fuel tank ignition risks. The Background traces the origin to FAA SFAR 88, JAA recommendations, and EASA policy statements. It states that Type Certificate holders committed to EASA published compliance dates and that the EASA policy was revised in March 2006 setting new dates for certain actions. The AD therefore implements internationally harmonised outcomes by imposing them as mandatory local requirements for the SD3-30 fleet.

Temporal mechanics. The Directive sets tiered compliance windows: two discrete timeframes for Requirement 1 (six months and three months for parts a and b respectively) and a later hard date for CDCCL amendments (before 1 July 2007). The AD also specifies the effective date as 26 October 2006, and records the issuance date as 15 September 2006.

Document references. The AD makes mandatory reference to (a) Bombardier SB SD330-28-37 dated June 2004 or later EASA approved revisions, (b) AMM Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02, and (c) Temporary Revisions TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed. It also cross-references EASA AD 2006-0198 and the FAA memo employed in SFAR 88 decision criteria. Those documents are the technical and doctrinal sources the AD relies on.

The Directive applies on its face to "Model SD3-30 aeroplanes, all serial numbers" (Applicability). That establishes the primary legal population of aircraft to which the AD's requirements attach. Practically, the following actors are affected.

Operators of SD3-30 aeroplanes. The primary obligations fall on the operator. The Directive requires operators to carry out the specified inspections and rectification actions, to install additional electrical bonding as specified in the Bombardier Service Bulletin, to incorporate the AMM fuel system airworthiness limitations into the operator approved maintenance programme or schedule, and to amend internal maintenance control documentation to reflect and highlight CDCCLs (Requirements 1 and 2). Thus operators must allocate maintenance labour, schedule aircraft for the baseline inspections and rectifications, and update their formal maintenance programmes and control documents.

Maintenance organisations and contractors. The work specified in the Bombardier Service Bulletin and AMM will typically be performed by licensed maintenance organisations or approved maintenance personnel. Those entities must be able to perform the inspections, rectification actions, and electrical bonding installations required by Requirement 1a, and may be responsible for assisting operators to implement AMM-based limits into a maintenance programme.

Type certificate holder and manufacturer. Bombardier Aerospace is the source of the service bulletin and the AMM revisions that the Directive makes mandatory. The AD requires operators to use Bombardier’s specified technical content (SB SD330-28-37 dated June 2004 or later EASA approved revision, AMM Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 introduced by TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed). The manufacturer’s documentation therefore becomes directly enforceable through the AD.

Regulators. The AD is issued under the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and is signed by the Delegate (James Coyne). EASA and JAA processes are referenced in the Background, and EASA AD 2006-0198 is cross-referenced (Note 2), indicating international regulatory coordination. Enforcement and oversight will be through CASA’s airworthiness oversight mechanisms, since CASA issued the Directive.

Owners and financiers. While the AD addresses operators, aircraft owners and commercial financiers who rely on aircraft availability will be economically affected because of potential downtime for inspections, rectification and documentation changes. Leasing arrangements and maintenance reserves may be implicated when work is required under the AD.

Passengers and shippers. Indirectly affected parties include load-carrying customers and passengers who may experience schedule impacts if aircraft are taken out of service to comply with inspections and rectification. The Directive does not specify operational restrictions such as grounding, but compliance work may require time off-wing, affecting fleet availability.

Supply chain and parts providers. The requirement to install “additional electrical bonding” as specified in the Service Bulletin creates demand for bonding materials, fasteners and potentially other parts. Suppliers and distributors of those parts, and maintenance shops that source them, are participants in the compliance chain.

Legal and compliance professionals. In-house counsel, compliance officers and maintenance programme approvers will need to ensure that operator approved maintenance programmes are amended to include the AMM Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 introduced by the TRs, and that internal maintenance control documentation specifically records and highlights CDCCLs.

Duties

• Perform inspections and rectification, and install additional electrical bonding. Requirement 1a directs operators to “accomplish the inspections including any necessary rectification action together with the installation of additional electrical bonding as specified in Bombardier Aerospace Shorts Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 dated June 2004 or later EASA approved revision.” This is a mandatory technical duty tied to a specific service bulletin. The service bulletin is the technical normative source for scope of inspection, rectification and bonding installation.

• Incorporate AMM fuel system airworthiness limitations into the operator maintenance programme. Requirement 1b obliges operators to “incorporate the fuel system airworthiness limitations specified in Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 of the Aircraft Maintenance Manual Publications as introduced by the Temporary Revisions TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed into the operator approved maintenance programme/Schedule.” This is a duty to revise the operator’s formal documented maintenance schedule so that the AMM-required tasks and repeat intervals are enforceable at the operator level.

• Amend internal maintenance control documentation to reflect and highlight CDCCLs. Requirement 2 requires the operator to ensure internal maintenance control documentation is amended to reflect the data in AMM Section 5.20.02 and to provide “appropriate text to highlight the existence of each CDCCL.” This is a duty to create or alter document controls and to maintain configuration discipline for items identified as critical by the systems safety analysis.

• Follow established repeat intervals after baseline accomplishment. Note 1 makes clear that after the baseline inspections/checks are accomplished under Requirement 1, subsequent repeat inspections/checks are to be accomplished in accordance with AMM Section 5-20-01 at the established repeat intervals.

Rights and procedural clarity in the Directive

• Use of later EASA approved revisions. The Directive allows the use of “later EASA approved revision” of the Bombardier Service Bulletin, which gives operators and maintenance organisations the right to comply using an updated EASA approved technical revision rather than being locked to the June 2004 edition. This is an explicit concession to the normal lifecycle of service documentation.

• Specific compliance timelines. The AD sets precise deadlines: Requirement 1a within six months after the AD’s effective date, Requirement 1b within three months after the effective date, and Requirement 2 before 1 July 2007. The presence of specific timelines is itself a procedural feature that permits planning and scheduling of compliance activities.

• Baseline establishment for repeat intervals. Note 1 establishes a clear sequencing right for operators: baseline inspections/checks must be completed first and thereafter repeats follow the AMM intervals. That provides an operational sequence rather than an ambiguous recurring requirement from the AD text alone.

Matters not stated as rights or duties in the text

• The AD does not include express operational limitations such as immediate grounding or restrictions on airworthiness certificates in the text of the Directive. It also does not state explicit enforcement penalties or administrative procedures for demonstrating compliance. The AD does, however, make compliance mandatory by placing requirements on operators and linking to specific AMM and SB documentation.

• The Directive incorporates external documents by reference. Compliance requires operators to follow the technical content of the Bombardier SB and AMM sections and TRs. Where those external documents contain further procedural or technical requirements, operators must follow them in order to satisfy the AD, because the AD has made them mandatory.

The AD text itself does not specify fines, civil penalties, or criminal liabilities for non-compliance. It does, however, operate as a mandatory airworthiness instrument issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, with an effective date of 26 October 2006 and explicit compliance deadlines for its requirements. The presence of specific mandatory tasks, documented compliance windows, and the issuance by the regulator imply enforcement through the regulator’s airworthiness oversight mechanisms, but the AD text provides no procedural enforcement steps, penalty tables, or appeal processes.

What the AD does provide that bears on enforcement

• Mandatory technical obligations. The Directive identifies concrete mandatory obligations (Requirement 1a, 1b and Requirement 2) and sets compliance timeframes for each. The precision of those obligations and deadlines facilitates regulatory verification and surveillance. Inspectors and auditors can check whether the baseline inspections, rectifications, electrical bonding installations, AMM incorporation and CDCCL documentation amendments have been completed within the stated deadlines.

• Documented sources for technical compliance. Because the AD makes Bombardier Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 and specified AMM sections and Temporary Revisions mandatory, enforcement actions by a regulator can be directed at whether the operator followed those named documents. That reduces ambiguity about the substance of compliance.

• Evidence of issuance and authority. The AD records that it was signed by the CASA delegate, James Coyne, on 15 September 2006 and became effective on 26 October 2006. Those administrative facts evidence that the requirement is a regulatory instrument created under airworthiness authority, which generally carries statutory enforcement powers under aviation safety legislation. The AD does not set out those statutory powers, but their existence is implicit in the nature of an AD issued by the regulator.

Limitations in the AD as to enforcement detail

• No penalty schedule listed. The Directive does not include a schedule of penalties, nor does it specify immediate grounding or revocation consequences for non-compliance in the AD text supplied. Those enforcement consequences, if applicable, must be sought in the parent aviation statute or in CASA enforcement policies, which are not part of the provided text.

• No inspection or certification procedure specified. The AD does not describe how operators should lodge compliance evidence, obtain approval for alternative means of compliance, or appeal enforcement findings within the AD text itself. The AD references EASA coordination and EASA AD 2006-0198, but does not provide domestic procedural mechanisms.

Operational inference grounded in the AD

• Given the AD mandates specific AMM incorporation and documentation amendments, the natural enforcement method for CASA would be to check operator maintenance programmes and internal maintenance control documentation for incorporation of the AMM sections and for highlighted CDCCLs, and to verify through maintenance records that the SB inspections and rectifications were accomplished within the compliance windows. The AD creates traceable obligations that facilitate regulatory oversight, even though it does not specify enforcement sanctions in its text.

The AD explicitly positions itself in relation to international regulatory instruments, and it makes normative references to manufacturer technical publications. The interaction is of three types: (1) international harmonisation and adoption of outcomes from foreign regulatory review processes, (2) incorporation by reference of manufacturer documents, and (3) cross-referencing to other airworthiness directives.

International regulatory lineage and harmonisation. The Background traces a clear lineage from the United States Federal Aviation Administration action SFAR 88, through JAA recommendations, to EASA policy statements. The AD states that SFAR 88 required a fuel tank system safety review under FAR § 25.901 and § 25.981(a) and (b). It then notes that a similar regulation was recommended by the Joint Aviation Authorities and that EASA published a policy statement addressing instructions for maintenance and inspection of Fuel Tank System ignition source prevention. The Directive records that Type Certificate holders committed to EASA published compliance dates, and that the EASA policy statement was revised in March 2006 changing the compliance dates. By referencing those materials, the AD implements outcomes of international regulatory processes within Australia’s domestic airworthiness framework.

Incorporation by reference to manufacturer technical material. The AD makes Bombardier’s Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 dated June 2004, and the AMM Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 introduced by Temporary Revisions TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed, mandatory. Such incorporation by reference means that obligations initially expressed in manufacturer documentation are enforced through the AD. Operator compliance with domestic law therefore requires adherence to the manufacturer’s technical content as approved by EASA or as later EASA approved revisions.

Cross-references to EASA ADs and FAA memos. The AD specifically refers to EASA AD 2006-0198 in Note 2, and cites the FAA memorandum (FAA Memo 2003-112-15) used as the SFAR 88 Mandatory Action Decision Criteria. Those cross-references create an evidential and doctrinal link: the AD implements the EASA/FAA-originated safety decisions in an Australian context. The AD does not purport to amend, supersede, or otherwise alter the content of those foreign regulatory instruments; rather it mandates the corrective and maintenance actions for the domestic SD3-30 fleet that arose from those foreign processes.

Legal and administrative implications

• Operators must manage obligations that are the product of a transnational regulatory process. The AD harmonises domestic obligations with international safety policy by requiring compliance with documents and timelines that were part of the EASA and FAA processes.

• Where EASA approved revisions of the Bombardier Service Bulletin exist, the AD allows those later EASA approved revisions to be used for compliance. That creates an operational interaction between domestic compliance obligations and EASA’s document approval process.

• The AD does not purport to change other domestic laws or to provide exemptions from domestic legislative requirements. It operates as a mandatory regulatory instrument sitting within Australia’s aviation safety framework and relies on external documents and foreign regulators for technical and approval content.

No mention of collision with other domestic regimes. The AD does not identify any conflicts with other domestic laws or statutory provisions, nor does it indicate any override of commercial arrangements such as lease agreements, insurance terms, or contractual maintenance obligations. Operators will need to reconcile AD-driven obligations with these private law arrangements, but the AD text itself limits its scope to airworthiness obligations.

The text of the Directive supplies discrete points of document history and revision lineage relevant to the AD’s content and compliance mechanisms.

Dates and issuance. The Directive is identified as AD/SD3-30/48, with identifier 11/2006. The AD states that it becomes effective on 26 October 2006 and records the signature of James Coyne, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, dated 15 September 2006. Those entries establish the AD’s administrative provenance and effective date.

Referenced technical document versions. The AD mandates compliance with Bombardier Aerospace Shorts Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 dated June 2004, subject to the allowance for “later EASA approved revision.” This means the June 2004 edition is the baseline mandated edition, but EASA-approved later revisions are permitted. For AMM content, the AD refers to specific Temporary Revisions: TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed, which introduce Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 into the Aircraft Maintenance Manual.

EASA policy timeline revisions. The Background notes that EASA published a policy statement in August 2005 on instructions for maintenance and inspection of fuel tank ignition source prevention, and that the EASA policy statement was revised in March 2006 resetting the date for certain actions. The AD records that Type Certificate holders committed to the EASA published compliance dates and that the March 2006 revision reset the date of 31 December 2005 for unsafe related actions to 1 July 2006. The AD’s own compliance timelines are aligned within that overall international timetable.

Cross-reference to EASA AD. The AD includes Note 2 which states “EASA AD 2006-0198 refers.” That identifies a linked EASA airworthiness directive that is part of the same correctional package for fuel system safety. The AD does not itself append or reproduce the EASA AD, but it records that link.

Absence of subsequent domestic amendments in the provided text. The supplied AD text does not document any amendments, revocations, or superseding Australian ADs to AD/SD3-30/48. It contains the original operative text, compliance dates and cross-references. If domestic amendments were later made, they are not contained within the text supplied.

Implication for operators. Because the AD permits later EASA approved revisions of the Bombardier Service Bulletin, operators should ensure they are referencing the latest EASA-approved issue of the SB for compliance. Similarly, the AMM Temporary Revisions are the specific changes to the AMM that the AD mandates; operators must ensure their AMM material includes TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed. The AD itself does not set out an explicit mechanism for recording later amendments beyond these references.

The text supplied contains no record of litigation, appeals, judicial review, or administrative law challenges to AD/SD3-30/48. There are no cited cases, proceedings, or notices of dispute in the AD text. The Background section recounts regulatory and policy developments at FAA, JAA and EASA levels, but it does not record any legal challenges to those instruments.

Absent an internal record of litigation or appeals in the Directive, the following observations apply strictly on the basis of the supplied text:

• No domestic court decisions or tribunal findings concerning AD/SD3-30/48 are referenced. The Directive does not include or refer to any legal proceedings challenging the AD’s validity, content, or enforcement.

• No administrative appeal procedure or notice of contested determinations is set out in the Directive itself. The AD therefore stands as an executive regulatory action without recorded domestic litigation in the provided text.

• The Background references international regulatory instruments and policy statements such as SFAR 88 and EASA policy statements, but the AD does not report any litigation concerning those instruments either.

For practitioners researching legal challenge avenues or precedent, the AD text does not provide such material. Any subsequent litigation post-dating the AD would not be captured here; practitioners should search judicial and administrative records outside this document if litigation history is required.

The Directive contains several practical specifics and potential traps for operators and maintenance organisations that comply only superficially. The following points are all grounded in, and quoted or paraphrased from, the AD text.

Timing and sequencing of compliance. The AD sets multiple and non-identical deadlines: Requirement 1a within six months after the effective date, Requirement 1b within three months after the effective date, and Requirement 2 before 1 July 2007. Operators must map these discrete deadlines correctly to the corresponding duties. Requirement 1a is the inspections and rectification together with electrical bonding installations, while Requirement 1b is the incorporation of the AMM-specified fuel system airworthiness limitations into the operator approved maintenance programme. The AD’s two different short-term deadlines mean that an operator who assumes a single universal deadline could mis-prioritise actions and miss the earlier compliance window for the AMM incorporation.

Baseline versus repeat requirements. Note 1 states that accomplishing tasks in Requirement 1 “is required to ensure that baseline inspections/checks are accomplished” and that subsequent repeat inspections/checks are then to be accomplished in accordance with AMM Section 5-20-01 at the established repeat intervals. That means operators must both complete the AD-required baseline inspections and then adopt the AMM’s repeat intervals. A common error would be to treat the baseline as sufficient without updating maintenance scheduling to reflect the AMM repeat intervals.

Incorporation into operator approved programme. Requirement 1b requires incorporation of specified AMM sections into the operator approved maintenance programme or schedule. The AD makes the AMM requirements operational only upon incorporation into the operator’s approved documents. Merely holding the AMM in a documentation library without formally integrating it into the operator approved programme may fail to satisfy the AD.

CDCCL documentation detail. Requirement 2 requires internal maintenance control documentation to “reflect the data contained within Section 5.20.02 of the AMM and to provide appropriate text to highlight the existence of each CDCCL.” Highlighting existence is more than a passive reference. Operators must actively amend internal controls to draw attention to each CDCCL. Failure to provide “appropriate text” that emphasises CDCCLs may be judged non-compliant.

Reference to EASA approvals. The AD allows use of “later EASA approved revision” of the Bombardier Service Bulletin. That means operators must be able to demonstrate that a later revision used for compliance was EASA approved. Using a later Bombardier revision that is not EASA approved in the operator’s jurisdictional sense could be problematic.

Technical scope locked to referenced documents. The AD requires adherence to Bombardier SB SD330-28-37 and to AMM Sections introduced by specific TRs. If an operator’s maintenance organisation interprets or alters the technical work scope, they must ensure that any deviation is acceptable as either an EASA approved revision or in accordance with the domestic regulator’s acceptable means of compliance. The AD itself does not set out a procedure for alternatives.

Confusion over the wording of the Temporary Revisions. The AD references “TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed.” Practitioners should verify they have the correct TR identifiers, since any mismatch may lead to implementing the wrong AMM content and thereby failing to meet the AD’s mandatory text.

Documentation trail and auditability. Because the AD makes document amendments mandatory, operators should ensure their records clearly show when the baseline work was completed, when AMM content was incorporated into the approved maintenance programme, and when CDCCL text was added to internal maintenance control documents. The AD anticipates regulatory review; absence of a clear audit trail may be cited in enforcement.

International timeline differences. The AD records EASA policy changes and Type Certificate holder commitments to EASA published compliance dates. Operators that operate internationally should be aware that compliance dates and the content of required documents were influenced by EASA and FAA timelines, and that domestic compliance obligations are set by the AD’s dates. Misalignment between international expectations, operator contract obligations, and the AD’s dates may create operational friction.

No explicit enforcement or appeals procedure in the AD text. The AD does not set out the process to seek an alternative means of compliance, file a deviation request, or appeal an enforcement action. Operators should not assume the AD contains administrative procedures and should contact CASA or the relevant authority for procedural matters.

The AD identifies discrete steps and timeline milestones that an operator must achieve. The following is a practical, source-grounded checklist mapped to the AD requirements and compliance dates. Each step is grounded in the AD text and the documents it mandates.

1. Confirm applicability and effective date. Verify the aircraft are Model SD3-30 aeroplanes, all serial numbers (Applicability). Note the AD’s effective date is 26 October 2006 and that the AD was issued on 15 September 2006.

2. Acquire mandated technical documents. Obtain Bombardier Aerospace Shorts Service Bulletin SD330-28-37 dated June 2004, or a later EASA approved revision if available and approved. Obtain Aircraft Maintenance Manual Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 as introduced by Temporary Revisions TR330-AMM-35 and TR330-AMM-35detailed. These documents contain the technical and interval content the AD makes mandatory.

3. Schedule and perform baseline inspections and rectifications (Requirement 1a). Within six months after 26 October 2006, accomplish the inspections and any necessary rectification action, together with installation of additional electrical bonding as specified in the Bombardier Service Bulletin (Requirement 1a, Compliance timing). Ensure maintenance records capture the scope of inspections, rectification details, part numbers and certificates of compliance for any installed bonding hardware.

4. Incorporate fuel system airworthiness limitations into the operator approved maintenance programme (Requirement 1b). Within three months after 26 October 2006, incorporate the AMM Sections 5-20-01 and 5-20-02 introduced by the TRs into the operator approved maintenance programme or schedule (Requirement 1b, Compliance timing). Modify the formal, approved maintenance programme documents so that the AMM-required tasks and repeat intervals are included and authorised. If the operator’s maintenance programme requires regulatory or authority approval for changes, initiate that approval process promptly to meet the three month deadline.

5. Establish and document repeat intervals. After the baseline work is complete, ensure subsequent repeat inspections and checks are scheduled in accordance with AMM Section 5-20-01 “at the established repeat intervals” (Note 1). Update maintenance control systems (CMMS) and task cards to reflect those intervals.

6. Amend internal maintenance control documentation for CDCCLs (Requirement 2). Before 1 July 2007, amend internal maintenance control documentation to reflect the data in AMM Section 5.20.02 and provide “appropriate text to highlight the existence of each CDCCL” (Requirement 2). This includes updating maintenance manuals, configuration control procedures, task cards and any warnings or cautions that focus technician attention on CDCCLs.

7. Maintain an audit trail of compliance. Document completion dates, who performed the work, parts used, approval signatures, and the specific versions of the SB and AMM TRs relied upon. Where later EASA approved revisions of the Service Bulletin are used, retain documentation evidencing the EASA approval to show compliance with the AD’s allowance for such revisions.

8. Coordinate with maintenance providers and the manufacturer. Ensure Bombardier or approved maintenance providers are consulted where interpretation of the SB or AMM TRs is needed. Because the AD references manufacturer technical documents, coordination can reduce risk of incorrect implementation.

9. Verify regulatory approvals for maintenance programme changes. If the operator’s maintenance programme requires CASA acceptance or approval of amendments, initiate that approval in parallel with the incorporation step to ensure the three month deadline is met.

10. Communicate with lessors, financiers and insurers. Because the AD may require temporary removal of aircraft from service for inspections and rectifications, inform contractual stakeholders and update maintenance schedules to manage operational impacts.

11. Consider legal and procedural enquiries early. The AD does not set out appeal or alternative means of compliance procedures. If an operator believes an alternate method of compliance is appropriate, contact CASA promptly to determine the accepted process for alternatives or approvals. Maintain records of all communications with the regulator.

12. Quality assurance and training. Train maintenance personnel on any new procedures mandated by the AMM TRs and ensure quality assurance processes check that CDCCLs are not compromised by future maintenance actions. Update maintenance checklists and technician instructions to reflect any new electrical bonding installation procedures.

13. Confirm EASA AD cross-reference. Note 2 refers to EASA AD 2006-0198. Operators who also operate under or coordinate with EASA jurisdictions should ensure their compliance approach aligns with the corresponding EASA AD to maintain global operational consistency.

By following these steps tied directly to Requirement 1a, 1b and Requirement 2 and the AD’s compliance deadlines, an operator will have implemented the AD’s mandatory actions and created the documentation and scheduling changes that the AD requires.