AD/B767/248 - Fuel Quantity Indicating System Wire Bundles

The Directive rests on a small set of concrete regulatory concepts and technical references. Applicability is defined not by type certificate alone but by the models and the identification given in Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2 dated 27 October 2005. The AD therefore imports the manufacturer's technical definition of which individual aeroplanes are covered. The mandatory action is precise: “Replace the wire segments of the four Fuel Quantity Indicating System (FQIS) wire bundles with new, improved wire segments,” and to do so “in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2.” That ties legal obligation directly to a manufacturer's service bulletin and the particular revision named in the Directive.

Time-limited compliance is central: compliance must be achieved “within 36 months after the effective date of this Directive,” the Directive being effective from 15 January 2009. The Directive also provides discrete acceptances for alternate means of compliance. First, work done before the effective date in accordance with earlier ASB issues (original issue dated 31 May 2001 or Revision 1 dated 21 February 2002) is explicitly “considered acceptable for compliance” with corresponding actions in the AD. Second, later revisions of the ASB are acceptable where those later revisions have FAA approval as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-22-06; the AD states those later revisions “are considered acceptable for compliance” with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive. The AD cites FAA AD 2008-22-06 Amdt 39-15701 for reference.

The safety rationale in the AD sets out a causal chain: inspections revealed corrosion at the connections between the ground wire and the shield for each of the four FQIS wire bundles; corrosion could reduce system protection of the lightning shield and result in loss of electrical grounding between the lightning shield and the airplane structure; if such loss of grounding occurred in the presence of flammable fuel vapours it could result in fuel tank explosions causing loss of the aeroplane. The recommended technical remedy , replacing wire segments with “new, improved” segments , is the engineering response established by Boeing in the referenced ASB and adopted as the required corrective action by CASA.

Interlocking reference documents are therefore essential concepts here: the CASA AD (this instrument), Boeing ASB 767-28A0064 (Rev 2), earlier ASB issues (original and Rev 1), and FAA AD 2008-22-06 (and FAA approvals of AMOCs). The AD makes compliance a function of following the Boeing ASB instructions or acceptable alternative routes approved by the FAA as AMOC to the FAA AD. This creates a compliance framework where manufacturer technical documentation, a national regulator (CASA), and a foreign regulator (FAA) are each relevant and each named as sources of acceptable compliance paths.

The Directive explicitly affects operators and owners of Boeing 767-200 and -300 series aeroplanes “as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 767-28A0064, Revision 2, dated 27 October 2005.” By specifying the ASB as the identification mechanism, the AD targets specific airframes listed or identifiable under that ASB rather than every 767-200/-300 automatically. The practical effect is that any person, entity, or organisation responsible for the continuing airworthiness and operation of an aeroplane that meets that ASB identification will be directly subject to the requirement to replace the FQIS wire segments within the stated compliance period.

The issuing authority is CASA, represented in the Directive by its delegate James Coyne, whose name and signature appear on the instrument (dated 27 November 2008). CASA therefore makes the compliance decision and imposes the airworthiness requirement; operators subject to Australian regulation will need to comply to meet CASA’s airworthiness standards. The Directive also cross-refers to FAA documentation, so entities that operate internationally will need to note the inter-jurisdictional references: later ASB revisions that are acceptable are only those “approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-22-06.”

Maintenance organisations, licensed aircraft engineers, and the personnel who perform the Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing ASB 767-28A0064 (Rev 2) are operationally affected because the Directive requires them to carry out the specific technical replacement work. Where work has already been done before the AD’s effective date in accordance with the original ASB issue or Rev 1, the Directive expressly recognises those prior actions as compliant for the corresponding actions.

Indirectly affected parties include scheduling and maintenance planners within operators, because the directive imposes a 36-month scheduling requirement from the effective date. Airline or aircraft operators that must plan for dockings, manpower, parts procurement and certification sign-off of the replacement work are the ones who will allocate resources and bear the operational disruption. The Directive’s acceptance of FAA-approved AMOCs and prior ASB compliance also affects how maintenance organisations document compliance and which technical data sets they use when planning and executing the work.

Finally, because the safety risk connects to fuel tank safety and lightning-shield grounding, any party responsible for fuel system modification records, continued operational safety assessments and the aircraft’s maintenance release will be implicated. The AD does not mention passengers, insurers, or third-party suppliers directly, but those stakeholders will be affected insofar as the Directive may change aircraft availability and maintenance records.

Duties

• Replace the wire segments of the four FQIS wire bundles with new, improved wire segments, “in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, dated 27 October 2005.” The Requirement clause is clear and prescriptive about the work to be performed and the technical document to follow.
• Complete the required replacement work within 36 months after the Directive’s effective date (the Compliance clause: “Within 36 months after the effective date of this Directive”). The AD is effective 15 January 2009, so the duty is time-bound to that start date.
• Where actions were performed prior to the effective date in accordance with ASB original issue (31 May 2001) or Rev 1 (21 February 2002), document and rely on those prior actions as acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions stated in the Directive. The AD expressly states those prior actions are “considered acceptable for compliance.”
• Where later revisions of the ASB are used, ensure that any such later revision of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, is approved by the FAA as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-22-06; such FAA-approved later revisions are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive.

Rights and procedural options

• The Directive provides an explicit right to rely on specified prior work: actions accomplished before the effective date in accordance with earlier ASB issues are accepted as compliance for corresponding work. This reduces the need for retrospective rework where covered work was already done to an earlier Boeing standard (original or Rev 1).
• The Directive permits reliance on future ASB revisions, but only where those revisions have FAA AMOC approval to FAA AD 2008-22-06. That creates a pathway for alternative technical instructions to be treated as compliant without an additional CASA-issued amendment, provided the FAA has approved them as AMOC for the related FAA AD. The AD therefore grants a limited procedural avenue to use updated manufacturer data if that data has been validated by the FAA in the form of an AMOC.
• The AD implicitly vests CASA with the power to define acceptability: the Directive lists what is “considered acceptable.” While the AD does not set out an administrative appeal route or detailed certification process in its text, operators must document compliance in a way that aligns with CASA’s acceptance criteria as spelled out in the AD text.

What the AD does not state as duties or rights

• The AD does not specify penalties, enforcement processes, or inspection regimes within its own text. It also does not specify detailed parts procurement responsibilities, manpower-hours, or downtime allowances. These operational and administrative details will need to be handled by the operator’s maintenance planning and record-keeping systems consistent with the AD’s explicit technical and timing requirements.

Overall, the core duty is operational and technical: perform the replacement of the four FQIS wire-bundle wire segments on aircraft identified by Boeing ASB 767-28A0064 (Rev 2) within 36 months, following the ASB instructions unless relying on one of the explicit alternative compliance paths named in the Directive.

The AD text supplied does not set out specific monetary penalties, administrative sanctions, or enforcement procedures. What the Directive does show concretely is the following enforcement-relevant structure:

• Issuer and authority: the Directive is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and is signed by James Coyne, a CASA delegate, on 27 November 2008. The instrument is labelled AD/B767/248 and is assigned the date 1/2009 with an effective date of 15 January 2009. These elements identify the issuing administrative authority and the effective date for the legal obligation.
• Mandatory requirement and compliance window: the AD imposes a mandatory technical requirement (“Replace the wire segments…”) and a mandatory compliance deadline (“Within 36 months after the effective date of this Directive”). That creates a clear legal obligation whose non-fulfilment would leave the aircraft without compliance to this CASA Airworthiness Directive.
• Acceptable compliance pathways: the AD specifies what counts as acceptable compliance (actions in accordance with ASB Rev 2; prior work in accordance with the original ASB or Rev 1; later ASB revisions accepted where FAA-approved as AMOC to FAA AD 2008-22-06). That reduces ambiguity about what constitutes compliance and thus what enforcement action by CASA would address.

What the AD does not specify

• The AD text does not contain express penalties, such as fines, suspension, or criminal penalties. It does not set out the enforcement steps CASA will take in the event of non-compliance, nor does it describe any inspection or audit process to verify installation of the wire segments. Those matters are governed by the broader regulatory framework for airworthiness and CASA’s enforcement policies and powers, but such provisions do not appear in the text provided.
• The AD does not describe procedures for seeking CASA approval of an alternative method of compliance directly; instead it recognises FAA-approved AMOCs for the FAA AD as acceptable for CASA compliance. The absence of an express CASA AMOC pathway in the text could be significant for operators who might otherwise have sought CASA approval of different methods.

Practical enforcement implication

• Because the Directive attaches a clear technical obligation and compliance deadline to identified aeroplanes, operators that do not achieve the replacement within the stated timeframe will be unable to demonstrate compliance with this particular CASA AD. Demonstrating compliance with CASA ADs is typically a precondition to being able to lawfully operate the affected aeroplane under Australia’s aviation regulatory regime; however, the AD text as supplied does not itself describe the linkage between non-compliance and operational prohibitions. Parties should therefore treat the AD’s mandatory text and deadline as driving operational and maintenance decisions and should consult CASA or the relevant regulatory instruments for the mechanics of enforcement and sanctions beyond the AD’s requirements.

The Directive explicitly cross-references and interacts with manufacturer technical documentation and a related FAA Airworthiness Directive. The source text makes three primary inter-jurisdictional and inter-document references:

• Manufacturer’s service bulletin: The AD ties mandatory compliance to Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, dated 27 October 2005, and recognises earlier ASB issues (original 31 May 2001 and Revision 1 dated 21 February 2002) as acceptable when the work was accomplished before the effective date. That means the legal obligation under this CASA AD is operationalised through Boeing’s technical instructions. Implementation therefore requires access to and adherence to the ASB’s Accomplishment Instructions.
• FAA Airworthiness Directive: The AD notes “FAA AD 2008-22-06 Amdt 39-15701 refers.” It also accepts “later revisions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-22-06” as acceptable for compliance with the AD’s equivalent requirements. In effect, CASA is adopting a pathway in which FAA approval of later ASB revisions as AMOC to the FAA’s AD is treated as acceptable evidence of compliance with CASA’s AD for equivalent remedial measures. This creates an inter-regulatory reliance where FAA technical acceptance can be leveraged under CASA’s regime.
• No internal CASA AMOC or enforcement text included: The AD does not include text about CASA’s own AMOC or approval processes; it simply identifies FAA AMOCs as acceptable where they relate to FAA AD 2008-22-06. Therefore, operators and maintenance organisations relying on an ASB revision that post-dates Revision 2 must ensure FAA AMOC approval exists for that ASB revision to rely on it for compliance with CASA’s AD. This is a specific legal interaction: CASA’s acceptance of FAA AMOC approval creates a cross-acceptance channel but does not remove CASA’s role as issuer of the Australian AD.

Beyond the explicit references, the AD’s stated safety rationale touches on fuel system safety and aircraft electrical bonding and lightning protection. Those subject matters are typically regulated under broader airworthiness standards and maintenance regulations administered by CASA and present in national aviation law and regulations. The AD’s text does not itself cite particular provisions of Australian aviation statutes or regulations, but by its nature an Airworthiness Directive operates within the larger legal framework that requires aircraft to be maintained in an airworthy condition.

In short, the interactions set out in the AD are concrete: compliance is achieved by following Boeing ASB 767-28A0064 Rev 2 (or earlier ASB work where done before the effective date), and later ASB revisions may be used where the FAA has approved them as AMOC to the corresponding FAA AD. Operators should document the chosen compliance instrument (which revision of the ASB, or FAA AMOC reference) when recording maintenance actions to demonstrate adherence to the CASA AD.

The AD text provides a limited but specific amendment and document history, which must be noted for compliance and audit purposes:

• Boeing ASB 767-28A0064 original issue: dated 31 May 2001. The AD expressly states that actions accomplished before the effective date of the Directive in accordance with the ASB’s original issue are “considered acceptable for compliance” with corresponding actions in the Directive. That preserves the compliance value of early manufacturer work.
• Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 1: dated 21 February 2002. Like the original issue, Revision 1 is accepted where the work was done before the effective date of the Directive.
• Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2: dated 27 October 2005. Revision 2 is the specific ASB revision named in the Applicability clause; the Directive requires replacement “in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2.” The ASB Rev 2 therefore functions as the controlling technical data for the required replacement work.
• FAA AD 2008-22-06, Amdt 39-15701: the Directive references this FAA AD and indicates that later revisions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, that have FAA AMOC approval to this FAA AD are acceptable for CASA compliance. The AD therefore ties part of its amendment acceptance approach to FAA amendment and AMOC activity.
• CASA AD specifics: the Directive itself is dated 27 November 2008 (signed by James Coyne) and “becomes effective on 15 January 2009.” It is labelled AD/B767/248 and carries the internal identifier 1/2009.

The AD does not contain a history of amendments to the AD itself or any later CASA revisions to AD/B767/248 in the supplied text. It does, however, create a mechanism for later manufacturer ASB revisions that receive FAA AMOC approval to be treated as acceptable without further CASA amendment language. That mechanism allows the legal effect of the AD to be updated indirectly through FAA actions and Boeing ASB updates that are FAA-approved as AMOCs.

Operators should retain records of which ASB issue or revision was used for compliance, and whether any FAA AMOC approval was relied upon. For audits, maintenance release paperwork should reference the ASB revision and date, or the FAA AMOC reference number, along with dates when the work was performed in relation to the AD’s effective date and the 36-month compliance window.

The supplied Directive text does not include any litigation history, case citations, or references to judicial decisions. There are no named legal proceedings in the document, and the AD does not record disputes, appeals, or prior enforcement actions connected to AD/B767/248 in the material provided. The only references are to manufacturer documents (Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, original and subsequent revisions) and to FAA AD 2008-22-06.

Because the source contains no litigation record, there are no source-grounded case names, judicial interpretations, or appeal outcomes to report. Parties seeking information on any disputes, enforcement actions, or judicial review involving this AD would need to consult CASA records, court registries, or legal databases for matters that post-date or are external to the text of the Directive.

Absent any litigation-related material in the source, this section records only that none is provided in the Directive itself.

Several practical and compliance pitfalls arise directly from the AD’s wording and the way it ties legal obligation to external technical documents and foreign regulator approvals. These are concrete, source-grounded points that can affect how operators interpret their duties.

• Applicability is defined by the ASB identification. The AD applies to “Model 767-200 and -300 series aeroplanes, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 767-28A0064, Revision 2, dated 27 October 2005.” Operators who assume the AD covers all 767-200/-300 variants without checking the ASB identification risk misapplying the requirement. The safe practice is to cross-reference the individual aircraft registration or serial number against the ASB identification criteria.
• The AD requires replacement “in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2.” That means operators must have/obtain the specific ASB Rev 2 and perform the work as described there. Using a different ASB revision for work done after the effective date is acceptable only if that later revision has FAA AMOC approval to FAA AD 2008-22-06. Relying on an unapproved or unreferenced ASB revision risks non-compliance.
• Actions done before the effective date are accepted only where done in accordance with the original ASB or Rev 1. If work was done earlier but to a different standard, or if documentation is incomplete, the operator may not be able to rely on the AD’s acceptance of prior compliance. The AD’s text says: “Actions accomplished before the effective date of this Directive in accordance with ASB 767-28A0064 original issue, dated 31 May 2001 or Revision 1, dated 21 February 2002, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this Directive.” The safe reading is that documentation showing the earlier ASB was used is required to claim that acceptance.
• The AD accepts “later revisions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, approved by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an Alternate Method of Compliance (AMOC) to FAA AD 2008-22-06” as acceptable. Two potential confusions follow: first, the text requires FAA AMOC approval to the FAA AD, not explicit CASA approval; second, the language “later revisions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2” may be read ambiguously. Practically, operators must ensure that any later ASB revision they intend to rely upon carries the specific FAA AMOC approval for FAA AD 2008-22-06; otherwise CASA will not consider it an acceptable compliance route under the terms of this AD.
• The AD does not state CASA’s own AMOC process or provide contact details for confirmation. Relying solely on this AD’s text without confirming whether CASA will accept a particular FAA AMOC or preferring to obtain CASA-specific approval could create compliance risk, even though the AD says FAA AMOCs are acceptable. Operators should document the FAA AMOC reference and retain the ASB revision that carries the AMOC approval.
• The AD prescribes replacement of “the wire segments of the four FQIS wire bundles.” The focus on the four FQIS wire bundles means the mandated work is limited in scope; however, operators and maintenance organisations must take care to interpret the ASB’s Accomplishment Instructions exactly. Substituting partial repairs, spot repairs, or different parts without documented acceptance may fail to meet the AD’s requirement.
• Timeframe management: the compliance window is 36 months from 15 January 2009. Operators should align planning with that calendar and ensure records show the replacement date. Failure to meet that window is not addressed in the AD text with penalties, but a missed deadline would leave the operator without the benefit of the AD’s accepted compliance status.
• Record-keeping and proof of compliance: because the AD allows for multiple acceptable routes (ASB Rev 2, prior ASB work, FAA AMOC-approved later revisions), maintenance records must clearly state which route was used, which ASB revision (and date) was followed, and where applicable, the FAA AMOC reference number. The AD itself relies on these documentary connections to define what is “considered acceptable for compliance.”

Those practical points are directly grounded in the AD text and are the specific areas where misunderstanding or incomplete documentation could lead to compliance failure.

The Directive is narrowly prescriptive about the compliant technical method and the timing. To comply with AD/B767/248, an operator should take the following source-grounded steps and document them:

1. Confirm applicability

   • Obtain Boeing ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, dated 27 October 2005.
   • Verify whether each aeroplane in the operator’s fleet is “identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 767-28A0064, Revision 2” as the AD states in the Applicability clause. Only those aeroplanes so identified fall within the AD’s scope.

2. Plan the replacement within the compliance window

   • Note the effective date: 15 January 2009.
   • The AD requires compliance “Within 36 months after the effective date of this Directive.” Schedule the replacement work to occur within that 36-month window. Document the planned maintenance slot, parts ordering and expected aircraft downtime so the replacement is performed in time.

3. Follow the specified technical instructions

   • Perform the replacement “in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2.” Use the Rev 2 technical procedure exactly as written, and ensure licensed maintenance personnel sign off the work per applicable maintenance regulations and organisational procedures.

4. If work was already done before the effective date

   • If the replacement or equivalent work was done before 15 January 2009, confirm the work was carried out “in accordance with ASB 767-28A0064 original issue, dated 31 May 2001 or Revision 1, dated 21 February 2002.” Retain documentation that shows the earlier ASB revision was the technical basis for the work, including job cards, parts used, and engineer sign-off. The AD states such prior actions “are considered acceptable for compliance” with the corresponding actions in the Directive.

5. If relying on a later ASB revision

   • Only rely on later revisions of ASB 767-28A0064, Revision 2, where those later revisions have been approved by the FAA as an AMOC to FAA AD 2008-22-06. Confirm the FAA AMOC approval reference and retain the FAA approval documentation alongside the ASB revision and maintenance records. The AD specifies that such FAA-approved later revisions “are considered acceptable for compliance with the equivalent Requirements of this Directive.”

6. Record and certify compliance

   • For each aeroplane, create a maintenance record that states: the ASB revision used (Rev 2, or prior original/Rev 1 if pre-effective work), the date the replacement was performed, the identification/serial of the replaced wire segments (if recorded by the ASB instructions), the names/signatures and licences of the maintenance personnel, and where applicable, the FAA AMOC reference number if a later ASB revision was used. The AD’s compliance structure relies on linking the aircraft to the named ASB revision or FAA AMOC, so precise records are essential.

7. Consider administrative confirmation with CASA (practical step)

   • Although the AD accepts FAA AMOCs for the FAA AD as acceptable for CASA compliance, operators may prefer to confirm with CASA their documentation approach,particularly where the operator is relying on an FAA AMOC or on earlier ASB work done years before the AD’s effective date. The AD does not itself set out a CASA AMOC application pathway or procedural contacts; contacting CASA for confirmation will provide administrative certainty beyond the AD’s text.

8. Maintain awareness of related FAA AD materials

   • The AD notes “FAA AD 2008-22-06 Amdt 39-15701 refers.” Operators should keep the FAA AD and any AMOC documentation available as part of the compliance file, particularly for aeroplanes that operate outside Australia or that have maintenance facilitated in jurisdictions where FAA approvals are common.

In operational terms, complying requires securing the correct parts (the “new, improved wire segments” identified in Boeing ASB Rev 2), scheduling maintenance to carry out the replacement for the four FQIS wire bundles, and retaining documentary evidence to match the AD’s explicit acceptance pathways. The AD supplies the legal requirement; the supporting maintenance system must supply the execution, paperwork and, where relied upon, FAA AMOC evidence.