An Airbus A330-300 operated by Thai Airways International suffered a runway excursion accident upon landing at Bangkok-Suvarnabhumi International Airport (BKK), Thailand. Initial media reports indicate there were 288 passengers and 14 crew members on board. At least twelve were injured. Flight TG-679 landed on runway 19L at 23:26 following a flight from Guangzhou, China. It apparently went off the right side of the runway, causing the nosegear to fail. The airplane was evacuated on the left hand side of the plane. Reportedly a fire erupted in the right hand engine, which was put out by airport fire services. Causes This accident caused by the fragmentation of the RH MLG bogie beam, made the aircraft veered off the runway. The aircraft fuselage and both engines were damaged, the right engine was on fire. However, the cause of damaged MLG bogie beam could not be found due to the cracks were damaged while the aircraft was scraping the runway surface. Contributing Factors 1 Errors occurred during the overhaul of the RH MLG bogie beam. 2 Errors occurred during the inspection of the RH MLG bogie beam pivot pin bore. 3 Errors occurred during the repetitive inspection of the RH MLG bogie beam internal surfaces, as per the EASA AD No. 2007-0314R1, issued on 31 January 2008, the EASA AD No. 2008-0093, issued on 20 May 2008, the EASA AD No. 2011-0141, issued on 25 July 2011 and the EASA AD No. 2012-0015, issued on 23 January 2012, due to misinterpretation. 4 The DCA has the power to regulate the six-monthly maintenance report form, as prescribed in Section 41/80 (2) of the Air Navigation Act B.E.2497. However, the maintenance review checklist did not specify what items had been performed, only a clause mentioned that the maintenance had been completed. The air operator then had no guidance to create maintenance list of items that had completely and correctly been performed. 5 The content in the EASA ADs firstly states that unless already accomplished or required as indicated, unless accomplished previously which might cause confusion among the operators. 6 Airbus S.A.S has the data on which MLG bogie beam had the internal surfaces inspection done before the designated time frame prescribed in new ADs. However, the company did not notify those air operators