AD/B747/392 Amdt 2 - Fuselage Upper Lobe Doubler

Applicability: The AD applies to a defined set of Boeing 747 models as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 (dated 12 June 2008, or later FAA-approved revision). The instrument lists the models explicitly: 747-100, -100B, -100B SUD, -200B, -200C, -200F, -300, -400, -400D, -400F, 747SR and 747SP series aircraft. That list, and the cross-reference to the Boeing Alert SB, determine the pool of aircraft to which the AD’s requirements attach.

Incorporation by reference / reliance on non‑Australian documents: The AD requires action "in accordance with the requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08" and treats the inspections and corrective actions in Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1 as an AMOC to the original Boeing SB dated 12 June 2008. It therefore incorporates technical content from an FAA AD and a Boeing service bulletin into CASA’s requirements. The AD also references paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08 as the approval route for repair instructions when the SB calls for contacting Boeing.

Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC): The AD explicitly creates an AMOC pathway: the inspections and corrective actions in the Revision 1 service bulletin are "an Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) to the inspections and corrective actions" in the earlier bulletin as required by paragraphs (f) and (g) of FAA AD 2009-09-08. The AD clarifies that this AMOC does not require an exclusion from CASA.

Acceptance of FAA-approved repairs: The AD permits other corrective actions (repairs) that are on FAA Form 8100-9 and approved under the paragraph (j) procedures of FAA AD 2009-09-08 to be carried out without a CASA exclusion. That means certain FAA-formalised repair approvals are accepted by CASA under this AD as compliant repair methods.

No CASA exclusion required for these AMOCs and repairs: The AD repeats that "There is no requirement to obtain an exclusion from CASA for this AMOC" and that FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs, as AMOCs, "may be carried out without the need to obtain an exclusion from CASA from this airworthiness directive."

Compliance timing and content: The AD defers specific compliance times and the inspection/corrective steps to paragraph 1.E "Compliance" (Tables 1 and 2) of Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1, and where applicable to FAA AD 2009-09-08. The AD itself does not reproduce the tables or timing; it incorporates them by reference.

Safety rationale: The stated safety hazard is cracking in the radius detail of the fuselage upper lobe doubler. The AD asserts that undetected and uncorrected cracking could lead to significant structural degradation, reduce ability to carry flight loads from the vertical stabiliser, and thereby adversely affect controllability of the aeroplane.

Amendments: The document states that Amendment 2 corrects wording in Requirement 1, without changing the intent of requirements or compliance. The instrument records an amendment history (original AD effective 2 July 2009; Amendment 1 effective 20 May 2011; Amendment 2 effective 25 May 2011).

Delegation and signature: The AD is signed by a CASA delegate, Mike Higgins, indicating the AD was issued under delegated CASA authority. The effective date and signature together create the operative regulatory step.

Aircraft operators and owners: The primary economic actors who are affected are operators and owners of the listed Boeing 747 models. The AD explicitly lists the covered models and cross-references Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 for applicability identification. If an aircraft is of one of the stated models and is identified in the referenced service bulletin, the operator must follow the inspections and corrective actions as consolidated into FAA AD 2009-09-08 and Boeing SB Rev 1.

Maintenance organisations and repair providers: Maintenance organisations performing the inspections and repairs will be directly affected. The AD requires compliance with the inspection procedures and corrective actions in the referenced SB and FAA AD; when the service bulletin instructs "contact Boeing for repair instructions", those instructions must be approved per paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08. Repairs documented on FAA Form 8100-9 and approved under the FAA AD paragraph (j) may be carried out without CASA exclusion, meaning FAA-approved repair documentation becomes an accepted route to compliance for these entities.

Boeing and the FAA: Boeing determines the content of its service bulletin (including Rev 1), and the FAA issues AD 2009-09-08. The AD binds Australian operators to those FAA/Boeing technical determinations by making them the operative compliance path. The FAA’s paragraph (j) approval process for repairs and Boeing’s repair instructions therefore act as decision nodes that affect what repairs can be lawfully carried out under this CASA AD.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA): CASA (through its delegate, Mike Higgins) is the issuing authority. The AD explicitly reduces one administrative step by stating that CASA exclusions are not required for the specified AMOCs and FAA Form 8100-9 repairs. CASA retains the power to issue ADs; here it has chosen to accept FAA/Boeing methods as AMOCs and FAA-approved repairs without a parallel CASA exclusion.

Pilots and flight operations: The AD is a maintenance/airworthiness instrument and does not itself direct flightcrew behaviour, but the operational safety risk identified,reduced ability to carry vertical stabiliser loads leading to potential controllability issues,affects pilots indirectly through the aircraft’s airworthiness state. Ensuring the inspections and repairs are carried out influences whether an aircraft remains fit for flight.

Regulatory compliance officers, auditors and insurers: These groups have compliance monitoring and liability interests tied to adherence to ADs. The AD’s cross-reference structure affects how compliance evidence is recorded: maintenance entries will need to reference FAA AD 2009-09-08, Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1, and where applicable the FAA Form 8100-9 repair approvals.

Stakeholders not directly mentioned: The AD does not reference passengers, lessors, financiers, or other commercial counterparties, but those parties’ economic interests (aircraft availability, maintenance cost, downtime) will be affected through the obligations imposed on operators and maintenance organisations.

Duties to perform specified inspections and corrective actions: The AD imposes a duty on operators of the applicable Boeing 747 models to "Action in accordance with the requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08" and to perform the inspections and corrective actions as set out in Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1 paragraph 1.E (Tables 1 and 2). The AD makes the inspection and corrective requirements mandatory by reference.

Duty to obtain FAA paragraph (j) approvals for certain repairs: When Boeing SB Rev 1 specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions, the AD requires that "the repair instructions must be approved in accordance with paragraph (j) of the FAA AD." That creates a duty to secure FAA paragraph (j) approval for those repair instructions before carrying them out as compliant repairs.

Duty to accept AMOC or use FAA‑approved repairs without a CASA exclusion: The AD removes the prior administrative duty to obtain a CASA exclusion for the particular AMOC created by Boeing SB Rev 1 and for FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs. The AD states explicitly "There is no requirement to obtain an exclusion from CASA for this AMOC" and that FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs "may be carried out without the need to obtain an exclusion from CASA from this airworthiness directive." The operational duty now is to ensure the repair or AMOC is one of those described and approved under the FAA AD procedures.

Duty to comply with all other FAA AD 2009-09-08 requirements: The AD stipulates "All other requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08 remain fully applicable and must be complied with." This preserves the remainder of the FAA AD as part of the compliance obligations.

Compliance timing duty: The AD defers to paragraph 1.E "Compliance" (Table 1 and 2) of Boeing SB Rev 1 for compliance times. Operators therefore have a duty to consult those tables and meet the deadlines and intervals specified there.

Right to use the Rev 1 service bulletin as an AMOC: Operators have the right, under this AD, to use Revision 1 of Boeing SB 747-53A2651 as an AMOC to the prior SB requirements (as required by paragraphs (f) and (g) of FAA AD 2009-09-08) without obtaining a CASA exclusion. That changes the compliance pathway open to operators and MROs.

Right to use FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs as AMOCs: Operators and maintainers have the right to perform repairs that appear on FAA Form 8100-9 and are approved per paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08, without further CASA exclusion, and have those repairs accepted under this AD.

Right to refer to FAA AD and Boeing SB: The AD explicitly makes FAA AD 2009-09-08 and Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1 the operative technical documents. Operators have the right/obligation to rely on those documents to determine the required tasks and to evidence compliance.

Administrative rights and duties implied by silence: The AD does not set out CASA processing rules, recordkeeping prescriptions, or penalty clauses within the text provided; therefore, any additional administrative or evidentiary duties arise from the wider regulatory framework (not reproduced in this instrument) and from the incorporated FAA AD and service bulletin provisions themselves.

Text provided: The AD text supplied does not specify particular penalties, monetary fines, or enforcement mechanisms within its content. The instrument identifies compliance obligations and states that "All other requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08 remain fully applicable and must be complied with." It also records effective dates and the delegate’s signature. The AD therefore functions as a mandatory airworthiness directive, but this document does not set out sanctioning provisions.

Who enforces compliance as evidenced in the document: The issuer is the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), with the AD signed by a CASA delegate (Mike Higgins). Enforcement activity, inspection, oversight and any sanctions for non-compliance would ordinarily fall within CASA’s regulatory competence, but the instrument itself does not enumerate enforcement procedures or penalties.

Effect of making FAA AD and Boeing SB mandatory: By incorporating FAA AD 2009-09-08 and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 Rev 1 as the compliance pathway, the AD ties Australian regulatory compliance to the content and structure of those documents. Any corrective mandates, inspection intervals, or repair approvals specified therein become the operative obligations. If FAA AD 2009-09-08 contains any enforcement or compliance consequences (not reproduced here), those requirements are preserved by the AD’s statement that "All other requirements ... remain fully applicable."

Absence of CASA exclusion requirement and enforcement implications: The AD expressly removes the need to obtain a CASA exclusion for the specified AMOC and for FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs. Practically, that reduces administrative steps and potentially reduces delay between FAA-approved repair instruction and carrying out the work in Australia. However, the AD states repairs still must be approved per paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08. The AD does not specify whether CASA will audit or request proof of FAA paragraph (j) approvals; the text does not set record-keeping or inspection protocols.

No penalty text in the AD: Because the supplied text contains no explicit penalty or sanction clauses, readers should not infer particular fines or criminal penalties from this instrument alone. Any civil or administrative penalties that might apply for failure to comply would arise from the broader statutory regime under which CASA operates and from other instruments or regulations. Those are not reproduced in this document.

Incorporation of FAA AD and Boeing service bulletin: The AD explicitly requires action "in accordance with the requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08" and adopts Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 Rev 1 as an AMOC to the prior service bulletin. Functionally, this AD imports technical mandates from a foreign regulator (the FAA) and a manufacturer-issued service document (Boeing SB) into the Australian airworthiness regime. The AD thereby establishes an interaction between CASA’s regulatory instrument and the FAA/Boeing documents: compliance with the FAA AD and Boeing SB Rev 1 becomes the method by which Australian obligations are satisfied.

Paragraph (j) approvals and FAA Form 8100-9: The AD cross-references paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08 as the approval mechanism for repair instructions and accepts FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs without CASA exclusion. That creates an operational reliance on FAA repair-approval processes to satisfy CASA’s airworthiness directive obligations.

CASA exclusions: Historically, CASA exclusions could be used to allow deviations from CASA ADs or particular compliance routes. This AD removes the need for a CASA exclusion in two specific cases: the AMOC based on Boeing SB Rev 1 and FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs. The instrument therefore narrows the role of CASA exclusions in these specific technical circumstances, while not addressing exclusions in other cases.

Compatibility with other CASA obligations: The AD states that "All other requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08 remain fully applicable and must be complied with." The implication is that any obligations in FAA AD 2009-09-08 that are not replaced by the AMOC path continue to apply under CASA’s AD, preserving interoperability between the FAA and CASA requirements. The AD does not, however, specify how conflicts or incongruities between CASA domestic regulations and the FAA AD would be resolved; it simply imposes the FAA AD requirements as the operative standard for this safety issue.

Interaction with maintenance approval regimes: By accepting FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs as AMOCs without a CASA exclusion, the AD integrates FAA maintenance-approval artefacts into Australian compliance procedures for this issue. That makes the FAA’s maintenance repair approval process a recognised decision node for Australian operators and maintenance organisations in respect of these repairs.

Jurisdictional reach and extrinsic documents: The AD’s practical effect is to bind Australian-regulated aircraft to actions derived from extrinsic FAA and Boeing documents. The AD’s text creates a legal obligation to follow those extrinsic documents for the particular structural issue identified. The AD does not, in the text provided, purport to amend other CASA ADs or broader aviation statutes, but it does create a cross-reference web that operationally ties compliance to foreign and manufacturer-issued material.

No express conflict-resolution clause: The AD does not state a mechanism for resolving any potential inconsistencies between FAA AD 2009-09-08, Boeing SB Rev 1, and other CASA directives. The directive’s wording,"All other requirements ... remain fully applicable",suggests that the FAA AD’s requirements coexist with the AMOC permission, but the AD does not specify how discrepancies should be treated.

Original AD: The document records that the "original issue of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 2 July 2009." That establishes the initial imposition of mandatory measures for this safety concern in the CASA AD timeline.

Amendment 1: The AD states "Amendment 1 of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 20 May 2011." The content of Amendment 1 is not reproduced line-by-line here, but the background notes indicate that changes involving the AMOC and compliance were already introduced across the amendment sequence.

Amendment 2 (this instrument): The instrument is AD/B747/392 Amdt 2. The AD text states that "This Amendment becomes effective on 25 May 2011." In the Background the AD explains that "Amendment 2 is to correct some wording in Requirement 1. There is no change to the intent of the requirements or compliance." The cover heading also records the AD as AD/B747/392 Amdt 2 and dates the AD line as 11/2011 in the header block.

Sequence and purpose of changes summarised in the AD: The Background traces the sequence of regulatory adjustments: the FAA received reports of cracking and issued its AD; the CASA AD was originally issued and later amended to allow the use of Boeing Service Bulletin Revision 1 as an AMOC and to permit FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs without CASA exclusions. The AD identifies that some changes to requirements and compliance times are specified in paragraph 1.E of Boeing SB Rev 1. Amendment 2, the current amendment, is limited in scope to correcting wording in Requirement 1, without altering the substantive intent or compliance obligations.

Signatory dates: The AD bears the signatory endorsement "Mike Higgins, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority" with the date 20 May 2011 shown at the signature block. The instrument separately states the amendment effective date as 25 May 2011.

Administrative labelling: The AD header uses the cataloguing line "AD/B747/392 Amdt 2 | Fuselage Upper Lobe Doubler | 11/2011" and duplicates the subject heading several times. Those label entries provide administrative metadata: AD identifier, subject, amendment number and a coding of the month/year (11/2011) for the AD’s listing, while the text sets out effective dates and sequence.

No further historical amendments recorded in this text: Within the supplied extract, there are only the original issue (effective 2 July 2009), Amendment 1 (effective 20 May 2011) and Amendment 2 (effective 25 May 2011) explicitly recorded. The AD notes the change in content that Rev 1 of the Boeing SB introduces in paragraph 1.E but does not set out earlier drafts or additional amendment steps beyond those named.

No litigation recorded in the text: The supplied AD contains no record of legal proceedings, court decisions, appeals, or tribunal matters concerning the AD, the amendments, or the matters it addresses. The document does not cite any judicial decisions or administrative appeals.

Absence of litigation does not equal lack of disputes generally: The AD’s text simply does not reference any litigation or challenges. Any litigation that may have occurred elsewhere or at other times is not documented in this instrument. Within the material given, there are no named cases, no citations to judicial authorities, and no history of legal contestation.

Implication for practitioners: Because the AD does not set out litigation history, lawyers and compliance professionals must treat the instrument as a regulatory requirement without accompanying judicial interpretation or precedent provided here. Any legal questions about enforcement, interpretation of the incorporated FAA AD or Boeing service bulletin, or the scope of the AMOC would need to be researched outside this instrument; the instrument itself contains no guidance from courts or tribunals.

No mention of disputes over AMOC or repair approvals: The AD expressly allows the AMOC via Boeing SB Rev 1 and FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs without CASA exclusion, but it does not report disputes, appeals, or litigation over those choices. The absence of such a record in this document should not be read as evidence that no disputes have occurred elsewhere; it simply is not addressed here.

Dependence on external documents for substantive obligations: The AD does not include the inspection procedures, repair instructions or compliance times itself; it defers to FAA AD 2009-09-08 and paragraph 1.E (Tables 1 and 2) of Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1. A practical risk for operators is that the operative details are located in those external documents. The AD’s compliance requirement therefore requires correct identification and retrieval of the exact FAA AD and the correct revision of Boeing SB. The AD states that applicability is as identified in Boeing Alert SB dated 12 June 2008 "or later FAA approved revision." Operators must therefore confirm whether the revision they hold is the relevant, FAA-approved revision.

When the service bulletin requires "contact Boeing": The AD requires that "when this service bulletin specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions, the repair instructions must be approved in accordance with paragraph (j) of the FAA AD." Practitioners should note that contacting Boeing is only one procedural step; the repair instructions obtained thereby are not self-executing. They must be approved under paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08 before being used as a compliant repair solution.

AMOC acceptance but limited scope: The AD accepts Boeing SB Rev 1 as an AMOC to the earlier SB for the inspections and corrective actions specified in Tables 1 and 2 under paragraph 1.E of Rev 1, but the AD also says "All other requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08 remain fully applicable." In practice, this means parts of the FAA AD that are not replaced by the AMOC still bind operators. Failure to identify which parts are displaced by the AMOC and which remain may lead to incorrect compliance choices.

No CASA exclusion needed, but approvals still required: While the AD removes the need for a CASA exclusion for the specified AMOCs and FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs, it does not remove the need for FAA paragraph (j) approvals for certain repairs. Parties must not confuse "no CASA exclusion required" with "no approval required." The AD makes that distinction clear: FAA paragraph (j) approval is still required for repairs that originate from Boeing instructions when SB Rev 1 tells operators to contact Boeing.

Potential for misreading the effective dates and amendment timing: The AD shows multiple dates: original effective date 2 July 2009, Amendment 1 effective 20 May 2011, the delegate’s signature dated 20 May 2011, and this Amendment 2 effective 25 May 2011. Administrative metadata in the header lists "11/2011" as well. Practitioners should not assume the AD’s header code supplies the operative compliance date; instead, rely on the AD’s explicit effective dates and the compliance timing specified in the external Boeing SB tables.

Scope limited to specified models and SB identification: The AD’s applicability hinges on the models listed and identification in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 (dated 12 June 2008) or later FAA-approved revision. A Boeing 747 not listed, or a variant not identified in the referenced SB, falls outside the AD’s scope. Operators must carefully check the SB applicability matrix rather than rely on model-name heuristics.

Amendment 2 corrects wording only: The AD says Amendment 2 "is to correct some wording in Requirement 1. There is no change to the intent of the requirements or compliance." In practice, wording corrections can nevertheless affect interpretation; practitioners should compare Amendment 1 and Amendment 2 texts to ensure the corrected wording does not alter procedural expectations in practice, even if the AD asserts no change in intent.

Record-keeping and proof of FAA approvals not specified: The AD does not set out specific recordkeeping or evidence requirements for demonstrating that repairs were approved under paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08 or that FAA Form 8100-9 approvals were used. Operators should not assume particular evidentiary protocols from this AD alone; other CASA instruments or standard maintenance record practices would govern that.

No penalty clauses in the AD text: The AD does not state penalties for non-compliance in the supplied text. Practitioners should avoid assuming exemption from enforcement; CASA retains enforcement authority under its broader statutory remit, but this AD does not spell out enforcement mechanisms.

Step 1 , Identify affected aircraft: Confirm whether the aircraft is one of the specified models (747-100, -100B, -100B SUD, -200B, -200C, -200F, -300, -400, -400D, -400F, 747SR, 747SP) and whether it is identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 (dated 12 June 2008) or a later FAA-approved revision. The AD ties applicability to the SB identification; only aircraft identified in that SB fall within the AD’s scope.

Step 2 , Obtain the operative documents: Acquire FAA Airworthiness Directive 2009-09-08 and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651 Revision 1 (dated 2 September 2010). The AD requires action "in accordance with the requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08" and treats the inspections and corrective actions in SB Rev 1 paragraph 1.E (Tables 1 and 2) as the AMOC. Accurate compliance requires those exact documents (or later FAA-approved revisions where the AD permits).

Step 3 , Review paragraph 1.E (Tables 1 and 2): The AD defers timing and specific inspection/corrective steps to paragraph 1.E "Compliance" (Table 1 and 2) of Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1 and, as applicable, FAA AD 2009-09-08. Follow the specified initial inspection windows, repetitive inspection intervals, and any corrective-action thresholds in those tables, as they define when and how tasks must be completed.

Step 4 , Execute inspections per the SB and FAA AD: Have qualified maintenance organisations conduct the inspections to the procedures set out in the SB/FA A AD. Record the inspections in the maintenance log and reference FAA AD 2009-09-08 and Boeing SB 747-53A2651 Rev 1 in the maintenance entries to evidence compliance with the CASA AD.

Step 5 , Implement corrective actions and repairs: If inspections reveal cracking or other damage that requires repair, apply the corrective actions detailed in the Boeing SB Rev 1 Tables and/or the FAA AD. Where the SB directs contacting Boeing for repair instructions, secure those instructions and ensure they are approved per paragraph (j) of FAA AD 2009-09-08 before execution, as required by the CASA AD.

Step 6 , Use FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs where appropriate: Repairs listed on FAA Form 8100-9 and approved under the paragraph (j) process of FAA AD 2009-09-08 may be carried out without seeking a CASA exclusion. Ensure the repair appears on an FAA Form 8100-9 and that the approval process under paragraph (j) has been satisfied; maintain documentary evidence of the FAA Form 8100-9 approval and reference it in maintenance records.

Step 7 , Do not assume CASA exclusion is necessary for the listed AMOCs: The AD explicitly states "There is no requirement to obtain an exclusion from CASA for this AMOC." Do not delay work under the misapprehension that you must apply for a CASA exclusion for the Boeing SB Rev 1 AMOC or for FAA Form 8100-9 approved repairs. Ensure, however, that FAA paragraph (j) approvals and the SB’s procedural steps are completed as required.

Step 8 , Maintain records and traceability: Although the AD does not prescribe detailed recordkeeping in the supplied text, standard airworthiness practice requires operators to keep maintenance records referencing the AD, the FAA AD, the Boeing SB, and any FAA Form 8100-9 repair approvals used. Given the AD’s reliance on external approvals, retain documentary evidence of paragraph (j) approvals and any communications with Boeing.

Step 9 , Confirm continuing applicability of FAA AD requirements: The AD states "All other requirements of FAA AD 2009-09-08 remain fully applicable and must be complied with." Make sure that compliance actions cover the full set of FAA AD obligations, not only those replaced by the AMOC, to avoid inadvertent non-compliance.

Step 10 , Note effective dates and amendment corrections: The AD became effective 25 May 2011 for Amendment 2; earlier versions had other effective dates (original AD 2 July 2009; Amendment 1 effective 20 May 2011). Use the Amendment 2 text and check Amendment 1 and the original AD for any transitional measures that may affect administrative timelines or previously scheduled inspections.

Step 11 , Coordinate with qualified authority contacts as necessary: If the Boeing SB instructs to contact Boeing for repair instructions, follow that pathway and then secure FAA paragraph (j) approval. Ensure the maintenance organisation has access to FAA approval records and the capability to implement the repair per the approved instructions.

Step 12 , Review for subsequent FAA or CASA updates: The AD accepts FAA AD 2009-09-08 and Boeing SB Rev 1 as the current compliance path at the time of Amendment 2. Practitioners should monitor for any further FAA ADs, FAA approvals, or CASA ADs that alter the inspection intervals, repair instructions or AMOC status. The AD’s language permits later FAA-approved revisions to the SB as relevant to applicability ("or later FAA approved revision"), so track FAA approvals and Boeing SB revisions.

By following the above steps and documenting all inspections and repair approvals in maintenance records, operators and maintenance organisations will align their processes with the obligations described in this AD.