Federal Register I Vol 66, No. 19! Monday, January 29, 2001! Rules and Regulations 8085

1500 l),s. for I'W 11 e I'ngincs

1544 lbs. ror PW 11 SA End 118B Engines

c'lnp"15-

IIll;rea~" approach climb ~pe~d by 10 KIAS

(Vo+101:

D"cr""so upprOJch climb grJdient by:

8.0% forPW lIB Enf,ine8

2,9')l. for PW 118,\ o;'d 11 SB Engines

Flups 25-lncrea"" lunding dimb ,peed by

10 KIAS [V~EF.l.,+lOJ

FIJps'4~-ll\crease landing climb speed by 5

KI!\S (V"~I'+5)

CAUTION, The ice protection system,

must be turned on immediately [exc\lpt

I~adinf\ \ldg\l d\l-iC\lrs during tBkeOff) when

the ICE CONDITION light illuminales un th~

IlHl.IUple alarm pand Or wILen allY ice

accrelion is delecled by vi~ual observotion or

other cues.

CAUTION: Do nol intmrupt the ,mtomatic

sequence or operalioll orlbe leadillg edge de·

ice boots once il is turned ON. The system

should be turned 01'1' unly ~ftef le~ving the

icing <:ondiliun~ and "fLer the protected

surfaces of lhe Willg 8re free of ic~"

New Requirements of this AD

Ice Detector Installation

(b) For airpl~nog identified in any of Parts

1,11.111, IV, V, ~nd VI ofEMBRAERSorvice

Bulleti.n ] 20-3G--DiJ27, Changp, 02, daled

December 3, 1997; Change 03, dated JUlle 26,

199B; or Change 0'1, dated July 13, ] 999:

Witllin 30 claw aft~rth~ ~fJective date of this

AD, inslall an ic~ det~clor system in

accordarlce with the s~rvicu buJlctill.

Allernative Methods of Compliance

(cJ[l) An allernalive method of compliance

or adjustmcnL of lhu compliance Lime that

provide$ an acceptahle level of safety may be

used iJappwved by the Manng~r, Allanl"

Aircraft Cel'tificcllion omc~ (!\CO). FAi\.

Operators shall ~\Ibmit Lheir I·equests through

'ill ~pjlJ'OpriJle FAA Principal Maintenance

InspQctor, who mijY ndd commAnlS and th"n

send it t() the Manager. Atlanta ACO,

(2) Alternative methods of Gompliance.

approved pr~viou5ly in accordance with !\D

9/-26--{)6, omendmenl 39-10249, are

appr(]ved as all~mative methods of

compliance with this AD,

Nole 2: Infonnalion concerning the

exislence of approved slternalive methods of

cmupliance with this AD, if any. may be

obl~ined from the ALl:mta !\CO.

Special Flight PermiLs

(dJ Speci~l flight permit~ may b" is~ued in

accordance with sections 21197 and 21.199

of the Federal Avialion Reglllalillns (14 CFR

21..197 ~nd 21.199J to operale the airplane lo

a loc~lion where llle reqlliremenl~ of l,hi$ P,D

C~n be acco:np]j~hed.

Incnrporatiun by Rellm,nce

(e) Th~ ic" dulector syslem illSl"lIation

snail be donB;n uc~ordanc" wilh EMBRA]"'"R

Servir;e Bulletin 12(}-30-{]027. ChangB 02.

dated December 3, 19R7; EMIJI-UIER Service

Bulletin 120-30-0027, Change 0:>, daled Jun(,

26. 199B: or EMBRAER Servi~e [Julletin 120-

30-0027, Ch~nge 04. dflterl July 1:l, 19!)9.

EMBRAER Service !Jul1elin 120-30-0027,

Change 04, daled July 13, 1909, cul\laifl~ the

following lisl ",feffective pegos:

Page No. Change level

shown on page

Date shown on

page

1-4,27-40,43,44,67,68,93,94 ..

5-26, <11,42, 45-66, 69-92, 95-108

This incorpomli()Il by ",feren(~<J W3~

apPf()ved by lho DirecLor of th" Fad"ral

Register in ~c"ordanCl' with 5 U.S.c. 552(n)

andl (;FR pari 51. Copies may be ohlained

from Emp'·aS3 fJrBsileira de Aeronaut,ca S.A.

(EMllRAER1. 1'.0 Box J43-CEP 12.225, Sao

JQ~e dos C"mp[Js-SP. Bra?l!. Copies msy be

in~peclRd fll the FAA. Trflll'iporl AirpJ~nB

Directorate, 1601 Liud Avenue. SW .. Renton,

WashinglLJn; Or ul llw FAA. Allanla AircrafL

Certification otnce, Onc Crown Center, 18015

Phof;lnix Boulel'~rd, ~1Iit\! 4.~0, Atl~nlJ.

Ceorgi,,; or at the Orfice of the ~"Bderal

Regist"r. BOONonh Capiwl Street. NW . suite

700, W",hington, DC.

Note :): The subject of th.i~ AD is addrsosad

ii' I:lr~y.iliarl "invOrlhirlCs~ dil"l~Clive 97-013-

03Rl daled December 15,1[197.

Effcctivc Dat"

[[] This aJllendm~nlllac(jmes effective on

March 5, 2001

!sslH.d in R"nlu!l. Wa"hingLon. nn JanlLary

17,2001

Dorem];, D. Baker.

/lclingA1"Iil(lgor. Tran.l"POr/ltil'pirrIJn

Dirac/om/a, Ain:;rujl Cor/lj'ico/ioll Sorvice,

[1'\1.[Joe. 01-20001 Filed 1-26-01: 8:43 ami

elUINa CODE'9H)-13-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFA Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-365-AD; Amendment

39-12091; AD 2001-02-07]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes Powered

by Pratt & Whitney Engines

AGENCY: federal Aviation

AciTninistration, DOT

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new flirworthiness directive (AD).

applicable to cerlain Boeing Model 767

series flirpLmes powered by Pratt &

Whitney engines, thaLrequires

modification orthe nacelle strut and

wing slructure. The aclions specified by

this AD are intended to pre,'ent fatiguCl

cracking in primary strul structure and

consequent reduced structural integrity

of the strut.

OATES: E1Tective March 5, 2001,

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Dircctor

of the Federal Register as of March 5,

2001

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may bo oblained

04 July 13, 1999.

03 June 26. 1998.

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Wa,hington \18124-2207. This

information may be examiLteo al the

Fcderal Aviation Adminislration (FAA),

Transport Airplane DirectorOlte, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenu{], SW.,

R()nlon, Washington; or al the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 Nort}l Capitol

Street. NW., suite 700, Wasllington, DC,

FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT:

James Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer.

Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

]60] Lind Avenue. SW .. Renton,

Washington 98055-4056; lel()phone

(4.25) 227-278:;; fax (425) 227-1181

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amcnd pari 39 of 111eFederal

Avialion Regulations (14 CPR pari 3!J) to

include an airworthiness direr.tive (AD]

thal is applicable 10 certain Boeing

Modcl 767 scries airplflIles powen,d by

Pratt & Whitney engines was published

in the Federal Register on July 10, 2000

[65 FR 42306). That action proposed to

require modiflcaliol1 of the naceJ]e slruI

and wing stJ"llclurc.

Comments

lntere~ted persOlis have been affordeu

all opportunity to purticip<ltu in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to tIle

comments received,
8086 Federal Register IVol. 66, No. 19! Monday, January Z9, ZOOl!Rules and Regulations

Change the Word "Damage" Used in

Paragmph (cJ

One commenter requests that the

word "damage" specified in paragraph

(cl of the proposed rule be changed to

;'cracking or con:osion," to avoid

unnecessary work and delays_ Tbe

commenter states that, during

accomplishment of the repair specified

in paragraph (c) of the proposal, it

encountered several conditions when

approval was required for using

oversized fasteners, tooling damage,

tolel"allce changes, anuminur trimming

of parts.

The FAA concurs with lhe

commenter's request. The definition of

"damago," as described in this AD, is

cracking or corrosion, But. with respect

to the deviations specified. only the

deviations that exceed currently

published limits (Stfllctural Repair

Manual. process specifications defined

in the service bulletin) would need an

alternative method of compliance

(AMOC). Paragraph (c) of this AU has

been Ievised to add the words "cracking

or corrosion" i.n parenthesis aftDr the

word "damage'"

Approval of Repairs by Designated

Engineering Reprl]sentatil'e (DER)

One commenter requests that the

proposdl include a provision for

approval of AMOC's by a Boeing uER,

instead of by the Manager of tho Seattle

Aircmft Cerlification OHioJ (ACO). The

commenter states that this provision

will result in <1more efficient and timely

repair approval process, The FAA

partially concurs with the commcnter's

request. Ar.complishment of the repair

in accordance \Nitb a method approved

by the M;:magcr is still acceptable, but

paragraph (cJ ()fthis AD has been

revised to add the DER approval as an

option for nccompl ishment of tllB repAir.

Clarify Certain Wording in Paragraph

(oj

One commenter notes that certain

wording in paragraph (a) of the proposal

which states. in part, "* * 'the

conditions described in paragraphs 1

and 2 (interim inspection requirements)

of page 67 have been met." The

COlllmentlll' recommends that the

allditional interim inspection

n~qllirement, referrud tc! in this

pfll'agri1ph be more apparent in the

proposed AD. The FAA infers that the

cOllllllentcr 15questioning wbat is mealll

by the term "conditions" as specit'ied in

paragraph (al of the final rule. For that

rCi1S0Il,paragmph (a) of this AD has

been revised to define the word

"conditions" as, "" • * the corrosion

prevention and control program

inspections as described in paragraphs 1

and 2 of Figure 1 have been met."

Revise Paragraph (0) to Reference Figlife

1

One commenter requests paragraph

tal of the proposal be revised to

reference FigW"e 1 of Boeing Service

Bulletin 7b7-54-00BO, dated October 7,

1999. instead of page 67. Thu

commenter states that this change

wO"lJidprevent confusion if the service

bulletin is revised in the fulure. The

FAA concurs, becduse Figure 1 is on

page 67 and includes the flight cycle

threshold formula, paragraph (a) of the

final rule hus been revised to specify

Figure 1.

Revise ServJr;eInformotion References

One commenter indicates the

following:

(1) There is a typogriJphical error in

one of the service bulletin numbers

ShO\Nnin the cost impact section and in

paragraph (b) of the proposal. The

proposal refers to Boeing Service

Bulletin 767-53-0069; however, the

number should be 767-54-0069;

(2) Boeing Service 8unetin 767-54-

0069, RElvision 2, dated AUgLl~t31,

2000, is tbe latest revision orthe service

bulletin spel;:ified in paragraph (b) oflhe

proposal and sbould be referenced in

the final rule;

(::l)Information notice (IN) 02, dated

November 22, 1999, should he induded

for Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-

0053, Revision 2, specified in paragraph

(b) of the proposal:

(4) Boei.ng Service Bulletin 767-

57£\0070, dated March 2, 2000, should

be added to the list of prior or

concurrent service bulletins referenced

in paragraph (h) of the proposiJl. The

commenter notes tbat this service

bulletin corrects a potential fatigue

problem on certain early-production

airplanes by removing ,md replacing the

wing front spar outboard pitch load

fitting with an improved design,

Tile FAA partially concurs with the

cornmenLer as foliows:

(1) The FAA has verified that there is

a typographical error in the service

bulletin number referenced in the

propose I, as noted by the commcnter.

and the number bas been corrected ill

the final rule.

(2) Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-

0069, Revision 2. dated Augusl 31,

2000, has been added to the final rule

as an additional source of service

inforlllfltion for accomplishment of the

applicable actions as specified in the

final nile. Tbe actions described in

Revision 2 are essentially the saille as

those in Revision 1, which was

referenced in the proposal as the

appropriate source of service

infarmalion for accomplishment of

certain prior or concurrent actions.

(3) The FAA does not have a copy of

[N 02, dated November 22, HJ99, to

Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053,

Revision 2. The commenter can provide

this notice to the FAA with a reqnest for

an approval of an alternative method of

compli;J1lce per paragraph (d) of this

final rule.

[4) The FAA has I"Bviewed Iloeing

Alert Service Bul1etin 767-57 A0070.

dated March 2, 2000, and has

determined that, although that s(Jfvice

bulle1 In specifies replacing the outboard

pitch load fitting of the wing front spar

with an improved design, it is not

directly related to tbis finfll rule and

will be addressed at a laler time by a

sepamte rulemaking acti.on.

Reques/ To Ex/end Camp/iol1ce Time

One comml1uter re'1uests tllat the

compliance time required by paragraph

(a) of the proposed AD be revised to

allow for compliance at tho later of the

times specified, The COllllTlenterstates

that there is a concern with the

threshold based on 2.0years since the

date of manufacture or "as defined by

the flight cycle threshold formula" ill

paragraph [a} of the proposal, because

the compliance time is "whicbever

occurs first." The commenter adds tllat

it has met the I"equiremellt~ originally

agreed upoll1Jnd has planned

accomplishment of the StTut

Improvement Program (SIP) based on

the opl ional night cycle formula at the

next {20C] maintenance check.

The FAA does not concur III

d,}veloping an appropriate compliance

time 1'0]' the modification specHied in

pilwgraph (iJ]of this AD, tile FAA

considered not only the degree of

urgency associated with addressing the

subject unsafe condition, but

Rcr.omplishment of the required

modification within iJn interval of time

(tbe earlier of the times specified) that

parallels normal scheduilld maintenance

for 1118 mnjority of affected operators.

However, under the provisions of

paragraph (dl of the final rule. the FAA

may approve requests lor adjustments to

the compliance time if dflta (lre

submitted to substantiate that such an

adjustment would provide an acc,eptablo

levpl of safety, No change to the fillal

rule is necessary in this regard.

Recommend(ltjon To Add 0 Note

One COll1rnenter requests that the

illitialtime of acr.omplishrnent for the

additional interim inspection service

b"lllJetins referred to in paragraph (bl of

the proposed rule be claril'iod, Thi..'

commenter states that, at the all-
Federal Register! Vol. 66, No. 19/ Monday, Jarmary 29, 2001/ Rules and Regulations 8087

operators' SlP meeting, held in

November 1999, the manufacturer stated

that the interim inspection service

bulletins were only required prior to 20

years of age in-service, ot' within the

inuivicludl service bulletin limits.

whichever occurs later, ifthe flight

cyc1e formuia was used to exceed the

20-year calendar limil. The COl111l1eilter

further states that this is acceptable

since tllese inspections "lvould not be

required on airplanes being modified at

20 years of age, and accomplishment of

these inspections alter 20 years of age

would C'nsure continuod safety. The

commenter recommends a nole be

added after paragraph (a) of the

proposed rulfJ, as follows: "Note: If the

flight cycle formula is used to defer

modi fication accomplishment of service

lJlllletin 767-54-0080 beyond 20 years

ol'age. initial accomplishment ofthe

insper;tions per the sen'ice bulletln~

listed in paragraph 2 of service bulletin

767-54-0080, Figure 1, must begin prior

to 20 years of age, or within the

individual ,ervice bulletin limits,

whichever occuJ's later."

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter's recommendation.

Operators that want to use the fliglJt

cycle thresh01d rormula must

accomplisll the referencod service

bulletins prior to reaching 20 years

since date of manufacture of the

airplane. This means tllat by 20 years,

the oper~t.or must have done elUwr tbe

termiliatillg actioll inLbe service

bulletin, or it mu~l.have performfJd at

least the first recommended servic:e

bulletin inspection and the follow-on

actions described in the service bulletin.

No changfJ to the final rule is necessary

in this regard.

Request To I1evise Cosllmpact.

in/ormation

Two commenters reque~t the r;ost

impacL information in the proposal be

revised, One commenter states that the

prior and concurrent service bulletin

requirements referenced in the proposal

do not-match th(i hours specified in tbe

cos! imp8c! section. The commenter

adds that the cost impact is ~ignificantly

more than the cost estimate in the

proposal or Ule work hours in thA

s(~rvice bulletins, whicIJ will be

allocated for warranty reimbursement

given by the manufacturer. The

commenter gaVt; cost es!imate

comparisons of the additional ",,'ark

hours for acC[Jss and close-up as

specified in the service hulletins, and

the costs it incurred accomplishing the

actions.

A se(:ond (;ommenterslates thlll Ule

act.uallabor for accomplishment of tbe

actions specified in the proposal is

significantly higher than the estimate in

the service bulletins. The commenter

notes that it will require a minimum of

2,978 work hours for its

accnmplishmed of the actions. and the

estimate does not include non·routine

labor,

The FAA does not concur with the

conunenters' request. The economic

analysis of the AD is limited only to the

cost of actions actually required by Lhe

rule. II does not consider the costs of

"on condit.ion" actiom, such as

repairing damagfJ to the airplane

structure deter.led during a required

inspection ("repair, if necessary"), Such

"on-condition" repair actions would be

required to be accomplished-regardless

of .W direction-in order to correcl an

un~afe condition irlentified in an

airplane and to ensure operation of that

airplane in an airworthy condition. as

required by the F"ederal Aviation

Regulations, In addition, the FAA

recognizes that. in accomplishing the

requirements of any AD, operators may

incur "incidental" costs in addition to

the "direct" co~ts, The cost analysis in

AD rulemaklng actions, however,

typically does not include incidenLal

costs, such as tl18tirne 'required to gain

acce~s and d(j~e up: planning time; or

time necessitated by other

administral ive actious. Because

incidental costs may vary significantly

from operator to operator. they are

almost. impossible to calculate. No

change to the final rule is necessary in

this regard.

Conclusion

After cill"el'ulreview of tbe availabl e

daLa, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption ofthe rule with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

ofLhe AD.

Cost Impact

There are app:!'oximately 23:J

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

76 airplanes of U,S, registry wi\] be

affected by this AD, It will take

approximately 708 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the modification

of the nacelle strut ,md wing structure

described in Boeing Service Bulletin

767-54-0080, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Required parts will

be provided at no cost by the airplane

malHlfactuter. Based on Lbese figures,

the cost impact of the modification

reqLlired by this AD on U.S, operators is

estimated to be $3,228,480, or $42.480

per airplane.

It will take approximaLely 106 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

actions described in Boeing Service

Bulletin 767-54-0069. Rev-ision 1 or

Revision 2, at an average lsbor rate of

$60 per work hour. Required parts will

be provided at no cosl by the airplane

manufacturer. Based on these figures.

the cost impact of these required actions

on U,S. operators is estimated to he

$483,360, or $6,350 per airplane.

It will take approximately 1 work

hour per airplane to accomplish tbe

actions described in Boeing Service

B-<.IlIetin767-54-0083, at an avewge

labor rate of $60 per work haul'.

Required parts will be provided at no

cost by the airplane manufacturer.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of these required actions on U,S.

operators is estimated to be $4,550, or

$60 pel' airplane,

It will take approximately 2 work

hours per airpLme to accomplislJ the

actions described in BOeing Service

Bulletin 767-54--0088. Revision 1, at an

average labor rate of $60 per Wall hOlll·.

Required parts will be provided at no

cost by the airplane manufacturer,

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of these required acliom on U.S.

operiltors is estimated to be $9,120. or

$120 per airplane.

It will take approximately 20 wOll

hours per airplane Loaccomplish the

fiCtiOnsdescribed in Boehtg Service

Bulletin 767-54A0094, Revision 1. at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Raquired p<irb will be provided at no

cost by the airplane manufacturer.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of these required actions on U.S.

operaLors is estimated Lobe $91,200. or

$1.200 per airplane.

It will take approximately 5 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

actions described in Boeing Service

Bulletin 767-57-0053, Revision 2, at an

average labor rate of $80 per work hour,

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of these required actions on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $22,800, or

$:300 per airplane,

It will take approximately 16 work

hours per airplane to accompli~h the

actions described in Boeing Service

Bulletin 767-29-0057. at all average

Jabor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parLs will be provided at no

cost by the airplane manufClcturer.

Based on these figures. the cost impact

of UlesArequired actions on U.S.

operators is estlmated to be $72,960. or

$960 per airplane,

The Gost impact figures di~cllssed

above (Ire based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of
8088 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 19/ Monday, January 29, 20011 Rules and Regulations

the requirements of this AD action. and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AU

were not adopted. The cost impact

figures discussed in AD rulemaking

actions represent only the time

necessary to perform the specific actions

actual1y required by the AD. These

figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time nocessitaled by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

Tho regulations adopted herein will

nollHive a subslantiuJ direct ef!'er.l on

Iho Sli:ltes, on Lhe mlationship between

thl) national Covornmenl and the Stntes.

or on t!w distribution of power and

responsibilities among the variOll~

levels of government. Therdore, it is

determined that this final rule docs not

have federalism implicalions under

EXecutive Order 13"132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this aCllon (1) is not a

"significant regulatory action" under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

"significant rule" under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, Februan' 26, 1979}: and (3)

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative. on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has

boon prepared for this action and it is

contuined in the Rules Docket. A copy

nf it may be ohtained from the Rules

Docket aLthe loention provided under

Ihe t:nption ADDRESSES.

List OfS(liJjects in 14 Ct'R Pari 39

Air transportation, Aircrar1. Avi<Jlion

snfcty, Incorporation by refOf(mce.

SnJ'ety,

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pur~uant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator. the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part3!J ofilie

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 eFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39-AIRWORTHlNESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

contioues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(gl. 40113. 44701.

§39.13 (Amended]

2. Section 39.13 i~amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

2001--{)2...(17Bueing: Amendment 39-

12091. Oo<::ket99-NM-365-AD.

•'1.ppJicubjJjty: Model 767 series airplanes

powered by Prell & Whitney engines, line

numbers 1 through 663 inclusive. certificated

in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies 10each airplane

identified in the prllCfldingapplicability

provision. regardle5s uf whether it ha5 heen

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subjecl to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes 111~tll~ve been modified, altered. or

repaired so thatlho porfl.mn~nce of the

requirements of t.his AD is affected. the

oWCler/operator nJust reqw;/st approval for an

alternative method of (;t.lIT1pliam:e1n

ac<:ord""<:ewith paragraph (d) of this AD.

The request ShOllld illclLlde iln Hsses,ment of

the ",ffect of lhe modificatien. ~lteration. or

repair on the llnsafe cenditirm addressed by

this .''1D:and, if the unsafe condition hus not

been eliminated, thp.request shol.lld incll.lde

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, ",,-less

accomplished previously.

To prevent fatigue cracking in primary

stmt structure and consequent reduced

structural integrity of the strut. accomplish

the following:

Modifications

la) When the airplane has reached the

flight cycle threshold as defined hy the flight

cycle threshold formula describo;ldin Figura

1 of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-54-0080,

dated October 7. 1999. or withio ZO"ears

since the date of manufacture. whichever

occurs first: Modify the nacelle strut and

wing structure on both tJle left and right sides

of the airplane, in accordance with the

service bulletin. Use of the night cycle

threshold f0I111uladescribed in Figure 1 of

the service bulletin is un accept~ble

alternative to the 2U-yearthresholrl., pr<widod

the ,:orrosion prevontion 'lIId control program

inspeclions. uSdescribed in paragraphs 1 and

~ of Figure 1, have been mc\.

(bl Prior to or concurrently with the

accomplishment of the modification of the

nacelle strut and wing structllre required by

paragraph (il) of lhis t\U; as specified in

paragraph 1.D.•Table 2. on page 8 of Boeing

Service Bulletin 767-54-0060, dated October

7. 1999: accomplish thl! aClions specified in

Boeing Sen-ice Bulletins 767-54-0069.

Revision 1. dated January 29, t998. or

Revision 2. dated ".ugust 31. 2000; 767-54-

0083. dated September 17. 1996: 767-,,~-

001:16,Revision 1. dated. July 29. 199'1;767-

54:\0094. Revision 1. dala<!September 16,

}999; 767-57--G053, Revision 2. dated

September 23, 1999: and 767-29-0057. dated

December 16. 1993. including Notice of

Status Change NSC 1. dated November 23.

1994; as applicable: in accordance with tllo,se

service bulletins. Accomplishml'nt of thi~

paragraph constitutes terminating action for

the repetitive inspections required by AD 9'1-

11...(12.amendment 39--8918. and AD 99-07-

06, amendment 39-11091.

Note 2; Paragraph (bl of this AD sper:ifies

prior or concurrent accomplishment of

Boeing Service Bulletin 767-57-0053 .

Revision 2, dated September 23.1999;

however, Table 2. on page 8 of Boeing

Servic&Bulletin 767-54-0060. deled October

7, 1999, specifies prior Orconcurrent

accomplishment of the original iSSUllof the

service bullclin. Therefore. accomplishmenl

of the applicable actions 5pecified in Boeing

Service Hulletin 767-57...(1053.dflted June 27.

1996. or Rovisiun 1. daled OClober ;J1. lU91L

priol' to the ufrcctlve d~ta of thi, AD, is

considered ~c(:aptable for complinnce witli

tbo liCtiOns]'cquired by paragraph [b) of this

AD.

Repair

(c) If allYdamage [corrosion or crackinG) lO

eirplane structLlro is found during tbe

accomplishment of the modification required

by paragraph (al of this AD: and lhf'servicf'

bulletin specifics to contact Boeing for

appropriate action: Prior to further flight.

repair in accordance with a method approved

by the Manager, Seaule Aircrafi Certification

Office (ACO). FAA; or in accordance with

da!a meeting the type certification ba:;is of

the airplane approved by a Bueing Company

Designated Engineering Representative who

has been authorized by the FAA to make

such findings. For a repair method to be

appro\"ed by the Manager. SeaHle .'\CO. as

required by this paragrnph. the Manager's

approval leIter must specifically reference

this ,\D.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

acljusullont of the compliance time th~t

provides an acceptable level of safety may b"

used ifappnlved by the Manager, S",all]c

,'1CO.0plll'iltClrsshan ~llbmit their reque,ls

through an npproprinte 1"/\,\ Principal

M8intenllnc:e Inspnclor, who may add

COJIlI1H.mts "nd then send ilto the M;]n~gel·.

Seattle ACO.

Note 3; Infurmflti(ln ,;oneeming 11,()

existence of appl'oved n!teruative JlllltJlOdsof

compliance with this ."ID.iJany. mny be

obtainlld from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(el Special flight permits m~y be issued in

accordance with sections 21. t97 and 21.1(19

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.1991 to operete the airplane 10

a location where the requirnmen1.s of this AD

Cffi1be accomplished"

Incorporation by Reference

tn Except as provided. by paragraph Ie) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance wilh lhe following Boeing service

bulletins. as applicaiJle:

Service bulletin No.

767-54-<lOBO

767-54-{)069

Original

1

Revision level Date

October 7, 1999.

January 29. 199B.
Federal Regisler / Vol. 66, No. 191 Monday, January 29, 20011 Rules and Regulations 8089

Service bulletin No.

767-54-<1069 . . .

767-54-0083 .._._ .

767-54--0088 .. . .

767-54AQ094 .. . _ _ .

767-57-0053 _ .

767-29-0057 ...

767-29-0057 NSC 1

Revision level

2 .

Original

1 .

1 .

2 .

Original

Original .

Date

August 31. 2000_

September 17. 1998.

July 29, 1999_

September 16, 1999_

September 23.1999.

December 16, 1993_

November 23, 1994_

This incorporation by referenco was

ilpprovcd by the Director of 1111!Federal

Regisler in accordance with 5 V.S.C. 552(a)

and 1CFR part 51, Copies may be ohlHined

from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box P07. SealLle. Washington 98124-

2207. Copies may be inspected at LheFAA,

TnLn$port Airplane Direc:lorale, 1601 Lind

,\vullue, SW., kenlan, W[lshinglon; or "t lhe

Orfi<;eof Ihe Federal R&gistllr,!,lOONurlh

C"I.';LOI Slreet. NW . suite 700. WoshingtOIl.

DC.

r.ITcctiveDate

(g) This amendment becolllll5 effc{;ti"e on

March 5. 2001.

Issued in Renton. Washington. on January

17.2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

lIe/ing Manager. Transport Airplanl1

/)ircctoratc, Aircraft Ccrtificalian Servicc.

lFR Doc. 01-1947 Filed 1-26--01; 8:45 amI

BILtlNG COOE 4910----13--U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 777

[FHWADockl1l No. FHWA-97-2514; 96-8]

RIN2125-AD78

Mitigation of Impacts to Wetlands and

Natural Habitat

AGENCY;Federal Highway

Adillinistmtion (FHWA). DOT.

ACTION:Finnl rule; delay of el"facli ve

date.

SUMMARY:The Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) is delaying the

effeclive llate of the final rule it

published on December 29. 2000 (65 FR

82913). concerning the mitigation of

impacts to wetlands and natural habitat.

The original effective date of this final

rule was january 29. 2001. The new

effective date ofthis rule is March 30,

2001. The delayed effective date will

provide the Administration an

opportunity to review this final rule.

DATES:The effective date of the rule

amending 23 eFR part 777 published at

65 FR 82913, December 29. 2001, is

delayed fr0111january 29, 2001 until

March 30. 2001.

FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT:Mr.

Paul Garrett, Office of Natural

Environment, (303) 969-5772, ext. 332,

email address:

pau1.garrett@jhwa.dol.gov;FHWA555

Zang Street; Lakewood, CO 80228 office

hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m" m.t.,

Monday through Friuuy, except Federal

holidays; or Mr. Robert Black, Ofl'icc of

the Chid Counsel, HCC-30. (202) 366-

1:-159,email address;

robcrt.hlack@fhwa.dol,gov,400Seventh

Street. SW., Washington, DC 20590-

0001, Office hours are from 7:45 a,m. to

4:15 p.m .. e.l., Monday through Friday.

except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION:The

FHW A believes good cause exists to

publish this rule delaying the effective

date of the FHWA's December 29 final

rule on Mitigation of Impacts to

Wetlands and Natural Habitat. and

making such delay effective upon

publication ofthis rule. Because the

December 29 published final rule would

have gone into effect on January 29,

2.001, it would be impracticable to

provide prior notice and opportunity for

public commen\. In addition it would be

contrary to tha public interest to per111it

the rule to go into effect ns previously

scheduled without giving the

Administration all opportunity to

review the rule in accordance with the

me1110mndum of january 20. 2001, from

the Assistant to the Prcsident and Chief

of Staff. entiUed "Rcgulatory Review

Plan," published in the Federal Register

on January 24,2001.

lssu?d on: January 25. 2001.

Anthon)' R. Kane.

Exccutive Direr;for_

1m Doc_01-2534 Filed 1-26-01; 8:45 amI

81LUNG COO<' 4InO----22..••

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL--6940--4]

RlN 206o-AI60

Peti1ion by American Samoa for

Exemption From Anti-Dumping

Requirements for Conventional

Gasoline; Delay of Effective Date

AGENCY;Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION:Final rule; delay of effective

date.

SUMMARY:in accordance with the

memorandum of]anuary 20, 2001. from

the Assistant to the President and Chief

of Staff, entitled "Regulatory Review

Plan," published in the Federal Register

on January 24. 2001, this action

temporarily del<lYs for 60 days the

effective date of the rule entitled

Petition by American Samoa for

Exemplion from Anti-Dumping

Requirements for Conventional

Gasoline. published in the Federal

Register on November 2!-J.2000. 65 FR

71067. That rulu grants a petition by the

Territory of AmcriC<ln Samoa for

exemption from the Clean Air Act's

anti-dumping mquircments for gasoline

sold in thtl United States af!or January

1, 1995. To tl1e oxtent that 5 U.S.c. 55:1

or 42 U.S.c. 7()07(d) applies to Ihis

action, it is exempt from notice iJnrl

comment because it constitutes <lrule of

procedure under 5 U.S.c. 553(bl(A).

Alternatively. the Agency's

implementation of this rule without

opportunily for public comment,

effective immediately upon publication

today in the Federal Register. is based

on the good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B} and 553(d)(3]. in that seeking

public comment is impracticable.

unnecessary and contrary to the public

iEterest. The temporary 50-day delay in

effective dare is necessary to gh'e

Agency officials the opportunity for

further review and consideration of new

regulations. consistent with the

Assistant to the President's

memorandum of January 2.0, 2001.

Given the imminence oftlie effective

date, seeking prior public comment on