U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

OCT 3 0 2015 

Mr. John Grover 

Project Administrator 

The Boeing Company 

P. 0. Box 3707, MC 03-56 

Seattle, W A 98124-2207 

Dear Mr. Grover: 

Transport Airplane Directorate 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057-3356 

Exemption No. 1 0767B 

Regulatory Docket No. F AA-20 12-1132 

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your request for an extension to time-limited 

exemption no. 10767 A. It transmits our decision and explains its basis. 

By letter dated September 24, 2015, Mr. John Grover, on behalf of The Boeing Company, 

petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an extension to time-limited 

exemption no. 10767 A, to change the conditions identified in the exemption. That exemption 

granted temporary relieffrom Title 14, Code ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.901(c) and 

25.981(a)(3) to allow The Boeing Company to complete design changes to the fuel quantity 

indication system (FQIS) and the fuel quantity processor unit (FQPU) on Boeing Model 767-

200/-300/-300F/-400ER airplanes. The following are the conditions and dates in exemption no. 

10767A: 

1. Design changes for the center fuel-tank wire separation, wire shielding, and a 750-hour 

interval fault check of the center tank FQIS on all newly produced 767-300F airplanes 

must be accomplished within one year of the granting of the exemption. 

2. Boeing must submit for FAA approval the service instructions for modifying the 767 

FQIS as requested by the FAA in accordance with [14 CFR] 21.99 and [14 CFR] 

183.69 by December 18,2015. The exemption will expire on that date unless Boeing 

has submitted approvable service instructions. 

3. The expiration date of May 17, 2016, established in the original exemption, continues 

to apply to 767-200/-300/-400ER airplanes, subject to condition 2. 
2 

4. The time-limited exemption for newly produced 767-300F airplanes expires on 

December 31 , 2019, subject to condition 2. 

The Boeing Company has requested that the FAA revise the deadline for condition 2 from 

December 18,2015, to July 29,2016. The reason cited for the extension request is the lack of 

availability of an in-service airplane on which to conduct service-instruction validation and 

compliance inspection. Boeing stated that the reason for the lack of an airplane was high usage 

of freighter airplanes during holiday seasons, prior to the year end. 

Boeing also requested that the expiration of the exemption not be dependent on submittal of 

service instructions for modifying the 767 FQIS for the existing fleet. The justification 

provided for this request is that this condition imposes "excessive hardship for both production 

and retrofit.'' 

The Basis for Our Decision 

Following years of discussion, Boeing agreed, on May 16, 2013, to provide to the FAA, by 

December 2015, service instructions for modifying 767 FQIS as reflected in condition 2. We 

have determined that the current lack of availability of an in-service airplane is not justification 

for a further extension to the requirements of condition 2. We determined that an agreement 

with an operator to complete the installation of the service instructions prior to the normal endof-year heavy freighter schedule could have been accomplished. As an alternative, Boeing 

could have made arrangements to use an in-production airplane for service-instruction 

validation and compliance inspection. 

Boeing has previously identified lack of in-service airplanes as justification for failure to 

comply with requirements to provide service instructions for retrofit of flammability-reduction 

systems on Boeing airplanes. We did not accept this justification in that instance, and our 

decision to deny this extension request is consistent with our previous decision regarding 

flammability-reduction systems. 

Regarding Boeing's request that the dependence between the exemption expiration and 

submission of service instructions be removed, the FAA's objective in including this condition 

was to ensure that Boeing does finally comply with this requirement so that we may proceed 

with issuing an airworthiness directive to address this unsafe condition in the existing fleet. 

The FAA first identified the requirement to provide service instructions in 2002. As noted 

above, we repeatedly requested of Boeing the service instructions until 2013. when Boeing 

agreed to provide them by December 2015. Therefore, we find that it is not in the public 

interest to remove this aspect of the condition. 

Our Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of extended time-limited exemption is not 

in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113 and 

44 70 I. delegated to me by the Administrator, The Boeing Company is hereby denied an 

extension to exemption no. 10767 A to permit more time for Boeing to achieve compliance for 

the Model 767-200/-300/-300F/-400ER airplanes. 
All other conditions and limitations of exemption no. I 0767 A remain the same. This letter 

must be attached to. and is a part of, exemption no. 10767 A. 

Sincerely, :?#J [. .CL.-. 

Jeffery E. Duven 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate 

Aircraft Certification Service 

3