AD/B767/245 - Passenger Oxygen Masks

The Directive rests on a handful of tightly specified technical and procedural concepts.

• Applicability: The AD applies to Boeing 767-200, -300 and -400ER series aeroplanes as identified in Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006. That SASB is the primary work instruction for the inspection and any corrective action mandated by the AD.

• Identification task: The core inspection is a general visual inspection to determine two data points for oxygen masks: the manufacturer and the manufacture date. The inspection locations are the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, where applicable. The AD does not prescribe detailed special inspection methods beyond "general visual inspection"; instead it links to the SASB for the Accomplishment Instructions.

• Investigative and corrective actions: The AD requires "all the related investigative and corrective actions as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 767-35-0054", except the text refines the replacement outcome where the service bulletin directs installation of a new mask. The AD therefore delegates the specific investigative tasks and corrective action steps to the SASB, making the AD a rule that imports procedural content by reference.

• Replacement constraint: Where the service bulletin specifies installing a new oxygen mask, the AD constrains the acceptable replacement: either a mask not manufactured by B/E Aerospace during the period 1 January 2002 to 1 March 2006, or a modified oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator. The AD thus targets masks produced within a specific date range by a particular supplier, and it allows a technical fix alternative comprising a modified flow indicator.

• Cross-referenced service information and approvals: The AD recognises B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 (6 February 2006) and its Revision 1 (1 May 2006) as additional information sources for the modification by replacing the flow indicator. It also accepts later revisions of Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 provided they have FAA approval as an Alternate Method of Compliance to FAA AD 2008-13-21. The AD therefore establishes a mechanism for using updated procedural documents, constrained by FAA AMOC approval.

• Timing and operational constraint: The AD separates the tasks into a scheduled inspection with a long-date deadline (Requirement 1 before 6 August 2013) and a mandatory corrective action prior to further flight (Requirement 2). Requirement 2 creates an operational condition that must be satisfied before an aircraft departs after the inspection.

• Safety rationale: The explicit hazard addressed is fracturing and separation of in-line flow indicators in passenger oxygen masks, which could reduce or block oxygen flow and cause hypoxia for passengers and cabin crew after depressurisation. The AD cites actual reports received by the FAA as the initiating event.

These concepts show the AD operates by mandating a fact-finding inspection, importing detailed procedures by reference to a manufacturer service bulletin, mandating corrective actions where required, and constraining acceptable replacement parts by supplier and manufacture dates or by an approved modification. The AD creates a pathway for later procedural updates via FAA AMOC approvals to FAA AD 2008-13-21.

The Directive directly affects holders and operators of Boeing 767-200, -300 and -400ER series aeroplanes as those aeroplanes are identified in Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006. In practice, that identifies airline operators, aircraft lessors that control maintenance, maintenance organisations contracted to perform inspections and corrections, and engineering personnel responsible for airworthiness compliance. The AD’s obligations fall on the operator or the approved maintenance organisation that signs for accomplishment of the SASB tasks, because the AD requires the inspection and the specified investigative and corrective actions.

The AD also affects parts suppliers and manufacturers. The replacement requirement expressly distinguishes masks manufactured by B/E Aerospace within the period 1 January 2002 to 1 March 2006. That creates a directed demand: operators must verify whether installed masks were manufactured by B/E Aerospace within that date range and, if so, either replace them with masks from other manufacturers or install modified masks with improved flow indicators. B/E Aerospace and other mask manufacturers, and distributors of approved replacement masks or modified assemblies, therefore have a commercial interest in providing compliant replacement parts.

Regulators and certified engineers are affected in the sense that the Directive imports Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 and, through Note 1, B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 and its Revision 1. Engineers must follow the Accomplishment Instructions in those documents when performing the mandated tasks. Additionally, because the AD accepts later revisions of Boeing SASB provided they are approved by the FAA as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-13-21, FAA certification and AMOC processes become relevant to operators seeking to rely on updated service information.

Passengers and cabin crew are an indirect affected class: the AD aims to mitigate a safety hazard that could expose them to hypoxia after a depressurisation event. The AD’s technical changes alter the composition and modification status of installed masks in the cabin.

Finally, maintenance planners and fleet managers are affected by the timing. Requirement 1 must be accomplished before 6 August 2013, and Requirement 2 must be done before further flight after the inspection. Those timing constraints impose scheduling and parts-procurement tasks on operators and maintenance organisations.

Duties

• Perform the inspection. The AD requires a "general visual inspection to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable, in accordance with SASB 767-35-0054" (Requirement 1). The AD does not specify alternate inspection techniques; it specifies the SASB as the procedural reference.

• Perform investigative and corrective actions. The AD requires operators to "carry out all the related investigative and corrective actions as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 767-35-0054" (Requirement 2), except where the service bulletin specifies installing a new oxygen mask, in which case the replacement must satisfy the AD’s specific constraints.

• Replacement constraint. Where the Boeing service bulletin calls for installing a new oxygen mask, operators must replace the mask either with one "that was not manufactured by B/E Aerospace between 1 January 2002, and 1 March 2006", or "with a modified oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator." This imposes a duty to check the manufacturer and manufacture date and to ensure replacements conform to the discrete alternatives the AD permits.

• Timing obligations. Requirement 1 must be completed "Before 6 August 2013." Requirement 2 must be completed "Before further flight after the Requirement 1 inspection." The AD is effective from 23 October 2008, so operators must plan inspections and any replacement action within those windows.

• Use of referenced documents. The AD imports Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006 as the primary instructional document and recognises B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 and Revision 1 as additional sources for modification by replacing the flow indicator (Note 1). Operators therefore have a duty to consult and apply the referenced Accomplishment Instructions.

Rights and procedural levers

• Use of FAA-approved AMOC revisions. The AD states that "Later revisions of SASB 767-35-0054, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-13-21, are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." That gives operators a pathway to rely on later versions of the SASB that have received FAA AMOC approval as satisfying the AD. It creates a procedural right to use updated service information where that information has FAA approval as an AMOC to the FAA AD.

• Reliance on additional manufacturer SBs. Note 1 identifies B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 and its Revision 1 as additional sources for the modification option. While the AD does not say those documents by themselves satisfy the AD, it indicates operators can use them as part of the modification process identified in Boeing SASB.

• No express waiver provision in the text. The AD does not itself provide an explicit CASA waiver or alternative compliance route other than the acceptance of FAA-approved AMOCs relating to the SASB. The AD therefore channels operators primarily to the SASB and the FAA AMOC process for procedural alternatives.

Who decides compliance outcomes

• The AD ties compliance to the content of Boeing SASB 767-35-0054; the Accomplishment Instructions in that SASB define the investigative and corrective actions. Where an operator seeks to rely on later SASB revisions, the FAA’s AMOC approval status is determinative for acceptance under this Directive. The AD is signed by the Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, which is the issuing authority for the AD.

Documentation and record-keeping

• The AD itself does not set explicit record-keeping requirements, but by importing the SASB Accomplishment Instructions it implies that operators must complete the inspection and related corrective steps and retain evidence of compliance sufficient to demonstrate that the Requirement 1 inspection occurred before 6 August 2013 and that Requirement 2 actions were completed before further flight after the inspection.

The Directive is an Airworthiness Directive issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) delegate and is effective on 23 October 2008. The document sets mandatory technical and temporal requirements: Requirement 1 must be completed before 6 August 2013, and Requirement 2 must be completed before further flight after the Requirement 1 inspection. Those temporal constraints function as operational limits because the AD links corrective actions to the permissibility of further flight after inspection.

The text of this AD does not enumerate monetary fines, criminal sanctions, or administrative penalty schedules. The Directive is framed as a mandatory safety requirement and is signed by the CASA delegate, but the AD itself contains no express description of enforcement mechanisms beyond the mandated requirements and timings. Practically, Requirement 2 contains an explicit operational constraint by stating the corrective actions must be completed "Before further flight after the Requirement 1 inspection", thereby creating a direct pre-flight condition embedded in the AD.

The AD refers to external documents and approvals in a way that affects enforcement discretion. It accepts later revisions of SASB 767-35-0054 when those revisions are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-13-21". That acceptance allocates some implementation discretion to FAA AMOC approvals insofar as they will be considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent requirements of this Directive.

Because the Directive does not itself set out the administrative enforcement procedures or sanctions, operators or authorised maintenance organisations should treat the AD as a mandatory requirement that must be demonstrably accomplished in accordance with the referenced SASB and its Accomplishment Instructions, or via an FAA-approved AMOC where applicable. The AD’s operational phrasing , particularly that corrective actions must be completed before further flight , is the clearest enforcement lever contained in the text.

If an operator requires clarity about formal enforcement mechanisms, penalties, audit or certification consequences, or the processes for CASA acceptance of alternative methods other than FAA AMOCs, those questions are outside the text of the Directive and should be addressed to CASA or in subsequent CASA policy material.

This AD cites and depends on non-Australian regulatory and technical materials, and it creates cross-jurisdictional linkages with FAA processes.

• Link to FAA AD: The Directive references FAA AD 2008-13-21 Amdt 39-15584 (Note 2). It treats FAA action as the originating regulatory parallel by referring to the FAA AD and by accepting later revisions of the Boeing SASB that have FAA approval as an Alternate Method of Compliance to the FAA AD. That creates a compliance path where FAA-approved changes to the SASB can be relied on to meet CASA’s AD requirements. The AD thus interacts operationally with FAA regulatory approvals.

• Acceptance of FAA AMOCs: The AD expressly states that "Later revisions of SASB 767-35-0054, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-13-21, are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive." The effect is that an operator who obtains or already has an FAA AMOC for an SASB revision can use that AMOC-approved revision to satisfy the CASA AD requirements. This ties CASA’s acceptance to FAA's AMOC decisions for the specific FAA AD referenced.

• Reliance on manufacturer service bulletins: The AD requires compliance "in accordance with SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006" and notes that Boeing’s SASB references B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 and Revision 1. The AD imports private-sector service documents as the detailed technical content for the mandated tasks. The AD’s legal effect therefore depends on the content and revision status of those manufacturer service bulletins.

• No explicit interaction clauses with Australian aviation statutes in the text: The AD does not quote or paraphrase specific provisions of the Civil Aviation Act or Civil Aviation Safety Regulations. It does, however, operate within the regulatory architecture by being issued by a CASA delegate. The AD’s authority and enforceability within Australia are implied by its status as an Airworthiness Directive; however that statutory scaffolding is not reproduced in the text.

• International supply and parts law: By mandating replacements that exclude oxygen masks manufactured by a named supplier during specific dates, the AD creates a requirement that may interact with supply chains governed by commercial contracts and import/export rules. The Directive itself does not address procurement, customs, warranty, or contractual issues that operators will face when sourcing compliant replacement masks; those are governed by commercial law and other statutory regimes outside the AD.

• Interplay with maintenance approvals: The AD imports procedural content and therefore presumes maintenance work will be performed in accordance with applicable maintenance organisation approvals and licence requirements. The AD does not itself modify licensing or maintenance approvals but requires specified tasks be accomplished according to the SASB, which maintenance organisations must integrate with their regulatory approvals.

In sum, the AD creates direct operational interconnections with FAA regulatory outcomes for this safety issue and imports manufacturer service bulletins as the technical instrument for compliance. Operators should therefore coordinate compliance within both the CASA and FAA-related documentation frameworks and consider supply-chain and maintenance-licensing interactions that the AD does not detail.

The AD itself carries internal references that amount to an amendment and update mechanism for the technical content it imports. The instrument accepts later revisions of Boeing SASB 767-35-0054, provided those revisions are approved by the FAA as an Alternate Method of Compliance to FAA AD 2008-13-21. That language creates an explicit, limited amendment pathway: the technical Accomplishment Instructions and investigative/corrective steps required by the AD can evolve, and CASA will accept those later SASB revisions if the FAA has approved them as AMOCs to the linked FAA AD.

Documented historic sources in the AD include:

• Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin (SASB) 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006. This is the operative service bulletin referenced in Requirement 1 and Requirement 2 as the document containing the Accomplishment Instructions and the method for performing the general visual inspection and related actions.

• B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 dated 6 February 2006, and Revision 1 dated 1 May 2006. Note 1 states that Boeing’s SASB refers to these B/E Aerospace SBs as additional sources of service information for modifying the oxygen mask assembly by replacing the flow indicator. The AD thus records an internal cross-reference chain between Boeing’s SASB and B/E Aerospace’s service instructions.

• FAA AD 2008-13-21 Amdt 39-15584. Note 2 records that this FAA AD is relevant. The CASA AD mirrors the FAA action in both technical scope and by allowing FAA-approved AMOC-linked SASB revisions to satisfy CASA’s requirements.

The AD was issued with signatures and dates:

• Signed by Charles Lenarcic, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, dated 9 September 2008.

• The AD states it "becomes effective on 23 October 2008."

• The AD is catalogued as AD/B767/245, with the print date or document identifier shown as 11/2008.

There is no text in the Directive that records any prior versions of AD/B767/245, nor does it list subsequent CASA amendments to this AD within the instrument. The AD’s explicit acceptance of FAA AMOCs to the linked FAA AD functions as the principal amendment route for the technical procedures embedded by reference. Any formal CASA amendment or revocation is not contained in this text.

Practical effect of the amendment mechanism

• Where Boeing issues a later revision of SASB 767-35-0054, operators can adopt that later revision to comply with the CASA AD only if the FAA has approved that revision as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-13-21. This means that FAA AMOC approvals mediate which later SASB revisions are acceptable for CASA compliance.

• Because the AD accepts B/E Aerospace SB 174080-35-01 and Revision 1 as additional sources, any future revisions to those B/E SBs would need to be integrated via Boeing SASB updates or by FAA AMOCs if operators are to rely on them under this AD.

The AD does not itself provide a CASA AMOC clause or other amendment procedure beyond the FAA AMOC acceptance. Operators seeking other kinds of amendments or exemptions should seek guidance from CASA; such processes and any subsequent CASA amendments are not recorded in this Directive.

The text of the Directive does not record any litigation or legal challenges. It is an administrative safety instrument comprising an applicable fleet scope, inspections and corrective actions, specific replacement constraints, and references to manufacturer service bulletins and the FAA AD. There is no litigation history, case law references, judicial challenge, or administrative appeal record contained within the AD text.

Because the AD is an administrative regulatory instrument issued by a CASA delegate, any disputes about interpretation, compliance, or enforcement that might lead to litigation would not be recorded in the Directive itself. The document contains no indication of appeals mechanisms, dispute resolution procedures, or historical litigation record.

Practically, operators wishing to know whether any litigation, judicial interpretation, or administrative rulings have affected the legal status or interpretation of this AD must consult external legal records or CASA administrative files. The AD itself provides the operational requirements and references but does not catalogue any subsequent legal contestation.

The AD contains a number of details that can trip up practitioners if read cursorily.

• Long deadline for Requirement 1. The AD sets Requirement 1 to be done "Before 6 August 2013," despite the AD being effective on 23 October 2008. That is a multi-year compliance window for what is a general visual inspection. Practitioners must not assume the inspection was intended to be immediate; the AD’s explicit date must be observed in scheduling. However, Requirement 2 requires corrective actions "Before further flight after the Requirement 1 inspection", which creates an operational constraint that can ground an aircraft pending corrective action following inspection. The combination of a long initial deadline and an immediate pre-flight corrective requirement after inspection can create scheduling complexity if operators carry out inspections close to the deadline.

• Scope of inspection locations. The AD specifies inspections of oxygen masks "in the passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable." Operators must ensure they identify all locations applicable to their fleet variant. Missing an applicable location because of variant differences in cabin configuration could leave an aircraft non-compliant.

• Manufacturer and manufacture date identification burden. Requirement 1 is to determine "the manufacturer and manufacture date" of masks. In practice, that may require disassembly or careful record checks. The AD gives no alternative identification method; operators must ensure procedures or maintenance records allow determination of the manufacturer and manufacture date. If a mask label has been removed or is illegible, the AD provides no prescribed alternative method; operators must refer to the SASB for specific Accomplishment Instructions.

• Replacement options are narrow and date-specific. Where the SASB specifies installing a new oxygen mask, the AD requires either a mask not manufactured by B/E Aerospace between 1 January 2002 and 1 March 2006, or a modified oxygen mask with an improved flow indicator. That requires operators to check both manufacturer and manufacture date, and to avoid inadvertently installing a replacement that falls inside the restricted B/E Aerospace date window.

• Reliance on external AMOC approvals. The AD accepts later SASB revisions only if they are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-13-21." Operators must not assume that later SASB revisions are automatically acceptable to CASA. They must verify FAA AMOC approval status for any later SASB revision before relying on it for CASA compliance.

• Multiple service bulletin cross-references. Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 refers to B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 and Revision 1. Operators must ensure they are using the correct versions of all cross-referenced service bulletins, because the AD imports the SASB and the SASB itself relies on the B/E SBs for modification information. Incomplete or mismatched versions may lead to non-compliance with the AD’s requirement that actions be performed "in accordance with SASB 767-35-0054."

• Unstated enforcement details. The AD does not set out penalties or enforcement processes. Operators must not rely on the absence of explicit sanctions in the document as an indicator of leniency. The AD prescribes mandatory actions and operative timings; failure to comply risks regulatory exposure even though the AD text does not list enforcement mechanisms.

• Supply and modification availability. The AD’s replacement alternatives may be limited by market availability of non-B/E Aerospace masks or modified masks with improved flow indicators. The AD itself does not provide a time-limited allowance or alternative if compliant replacements are unavailable. Operators must plan procurement and modification logistics before carrying out inspections that might trigger the need for immediate corrective action prior to further flight.

• Interplay with maintenance planning. Because Requirement 2 must be completed before further flight after an inspection, conducting the inspection in revenue-service conditions without parts or capability to remedy identified masks could lead to operational disruption. Operators must coordinate inspections with parts availability or perform risk assessments before inspection to avoid unplanned operational restrictions.

These points should be checked against the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 767-35-0054 and any FAA AMOC approvals relied upon, because the AD ties compliance to those documents.

To comply with AD/B767/245 using only the mechanisms recognised in the Directive, an operator should follow these concrete steps.

1. Confirm applicability. Verify whether each aeroplane in the fleet is a Boeing 767-200, -300 or -400ER series aeroplane "as identified in Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006." Only aeroplanes identified in that SASB fall within the AD’s applicability.

2. Obtain the required documents. Secure Boeing SASB 767-35-0054 dated 6 July 2006, and the referenced B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 dated 6 February 2006 and Revision 1 dated 1 May 2006 for information on replacing the flow indicator. If planning to rely on later revisions of the Boeing SASB, confirm whether the later revisions have FAA approval as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-13-21; the AD only accepts such FAA-approved revisions for CASA compliance.

3. Schedule and perform Requirement 1 inspection. Perform a general visual inspection, in accordance with SASB 767-35-0054, to determine the manufacturer and manufacture date of the oxygen masks in passenger service units and the flight attendant and lavatory oxygen boxes, as applicable. Complete Requirement 1 no later than 6 August 2013. Make sure inspectors are briefed on what constitutes a sufficient general visual inspection and on how to document manufacturer and manufacture date findings, using the Accomplishment Instructions for any detailed steps that the SASB specifies.

4. Plan for immediate corrective capability. Because Requirement 2 requires corrective actions to be completed "Before further flight after the Requirement 1 inspection", plan inspections at a time and place where parts and technical capability are available to perform required corrective actions identified by the inspection. Avoid inspecting an aeroplane in a revenue environment without an immediate remediation plan that complies with the AD.

5. Execute investigative and corrective actions. For any masks identified by the inspection as falling within the affected category, carry out "all the related investigative and corrective actions as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 767-35-0054". If the SASB specifies installing a new oxygen mask, ensure the replacement complies with the AD constraint: replace the mask with one that "was not manufactured by B/E Aerospace between 1 January 2002, and 1 March 2006", or install a modified oxygen mask having an improved flow indicator. Use B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 174080-35-01 (and its Revision 1) where those documents are cited in the SASB for modification detail.

6. Document compliance. Record the inspection results, parts checked, manufacturer and manufacture date findings, and the corrective actions taken. Where replacements are made, record part numbers, manufacturer, manufacture date and any modification certificates or documentation showing the mask has an improved flow indicator. Retain documentation in a manner consistent with standard airworthiness record-keeping practices so that compliance can be demonstrated.

7. If considering alternative procedures or later SASB revisions, confirm FAA AMOC status. The AD allows later revisions of SASB 767-35-0054 only if they are "approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-13-21." Before relying on a later SASB revision for CASA compliance, verify FAA AMOC approval specific to FAA AD 2008-13-21.

8. Coordinate with maintenance organisations and parts suppliers. Given the AD’s replacement constraints, confirm the availability of compliant replacement masks (non-B/E Aerospace within the specified dates, or modified masks with improved flow indicators). Engage with approved parts suppliers and the maintenance organisation to ensure the correct parts are used in accordance with the SASB and the AD.

9. Implement operational controls. Because Requirement 2 requires completion of corrective actions before further flight after inspection, put in place maintenance release and flight release controls that prevent departure until corrective actions are completed and recorded.

10. Seek clarifications from CASA where necessary. The AD contains no explicit enforcement or penalty schedule and does not set out CASA processes for AMOCs beyond the FAA AMOC acceptance clause. If operators need clarity on CASA acceptance of alternative methods or on enforcement expectations, seek direct guidance from CASA. Any such guidance will be outside the text of this AD.

Following these steps aligns with the AD’s text. The operator should ensure that all work is performed by appropriately authorised maintenance personnel and that documentation satisfies both the Accomplishment Instructions in the SASB and the AD’s temporal conditions.