6370 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

for pet birds imported into the United

States under the provisions of

§ 93.101(c)(1) or § 93.101(c)(2) and for

performing or theatrical birds imported

under the provisions of § 93.101(f).

Section 93.203(d) contains a list of

limited ports of entry that are

designated as having inspection

facilities for the entry of poultry and

poultry products such as poultry test

specimens, or hatching eggs and day-old

chicks which do not appear to require

restraint and holding inspection

facilities.

This rule will amend § 93.102(d) and

§ 92.203(d) in accordance with the

procedures explained below under

‘‘Dates.’’ The amendments will remove

Boston, MA, from both lists of limited

ports of entry. Very few pet birds,

performing birds, theatrical birds,

poultry, or poultry products are

currently imported through the port of

Boston, MA. Importers are opting to use

other limited ports of entry to bring

these commodities into the United

States, so we do not believe that

removing Boston, MA, as a limited port

for the entry of pet birds, performing or

theatrical birds, and poultry and poultry

products will have any negative effects

on U.S. importers of these animals and

products.

Dates

We are publishing this rule without a

prior proposal because we view this

action as noncontroversial and

anticipate no adverse public comment.

This rule will be effective, as published

in this document, on April 15, 2002,

unless we receive written adverse

comments or written notice of intent to

submit adverse comments that are

postmarked, delivered, or e-mailed by

March 14, 2002.

Adverse comments are comments that

suggest the rule should not be adopted

or that suggest the rule should be

changed.

If we receive written adverse

comments or written notice of intent to

submit adverse comments, we will

publish a document in the Federal

Register withdrawing this rule before

the effective date. We will then publish

a proposed rule for public comment.

As discussed above, if we receive no

written adverse comments or written

notice of intent to submit adverse

comments that are postmarked,

delivered, or e-mailed within 30 days of

publication of this direct final rule, this

direct final rule will become effective 60

days following its publication. We will

publish a document in the Federal

Register, before the effective date of this

direct final rule, confirming that it is

effective on the date indicated in this

document.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. For this action,

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process required

by Executive Order 12866.

This rule will remove Boston, MA, as

a limited port of entry for the

importation into the United States of pet

birds, performing or theatrical birds,

and poultry and poultry products. Very

few of these animals or products are

imported through the port of Boston,

MA, as importers most often use other

limited ports of entry to bring these

animals and products into the United

States. Therefore, we expect that this

action will have no economic impact on

any entities, large or small.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State

and local laws and regulations that are

inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no

retroactive effect; and (3) does not

require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court

challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no information

collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, 9 CFR part 93 is

amended as follows:

PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN

ANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY,

AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND

POULTRY PRODUCTS;

REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF

CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING

CONTAINERS

1. The authority citation for part 93

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;

21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b,

134c, 134d, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31 U.S.C.

9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.

§ 93.102 [Amended]

2. In § 93.102, paragraph (d) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Boston, MA;’’.

§ 93.203 [Amended]

3. In § 93.203, paragraph (d) is

amended by removing the words

‘‘Boston, Massachusetts;’’.

Done in Washington, DC, this 6th day of

February 2002.

W. Ron DeHaven,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 02–3343 Filed 2–11–02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–153–AD; Amendment

39–12635; AD 2002–02–07]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A330 and A340 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Airbus Model A330

and A340 series airplanes, that requires

repetitive inspections and operational

checks of the spring function of the

emergency exit door slider mechanism,

and corrective action if necessary. This

action is necessary to prevent failure of

the spring locking function of the slider

mechanism due to corrosion, which

could result in the escape slide

detaching from the airplane in an

emergency evacuation. This action is

intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective March 19, 2002.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 19,

2002.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 6371

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Backman, Aerospace Engineer,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2797;

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to all Airbus Model

A330 and A340 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

October 12, 2001 (66 FR 52068). That

action proposed to require repetitive

inspections and operational checks of

the spring function of the emergency

exit door slider mechanism, and

corrective action if necessary.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were submitted in response

to the proposal or the FAA’s

determination of the cost to the public.

Explanation of Change to Final Rule

The FAA’s intention is for the followon actions in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)

of this AD (application of corrosion

inhibitor to the sliders, and repair or

replacement of the slider, if necessary)

to be accomplished before further flight

after accomplishment of the detailed

visual inspection and operational check

in paragraph (a) of this AD. However,

the words ‘‘before further flight’’ were

inadvertently omitted from paragraphs

(a)(1) and (a)(2) of the proposal. The

FAA finds that our intent in those

paragraphs is clear based on the fact that

the All Operators Telexes referred to in

this AD clearly include the application

of corrosion inhibitor as part of the

inspection procedures, and also

explicitly indicate that repair or

replacement of the slider, if necessary,

must be accomplished before further

flight. However, for further clarification,

the FAA has revised paragraphs (a)(1)

and (a)(2) of this AD to state that the

actions in those paragraphs are required

‘‘before further flight.’’

Conclusion

The FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

described previously. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 9 Model A330

series airplanes of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD. No Model A340

series airplanes affected by this action

are currently on the U.S. Register.

It will take approximately 3 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

required inspection, at the average labor

rate of $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

inspection required by this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,620, or

$180 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted. The cost impact

figures discussed in AD rulemaking

actions represent only the time

necessary to perform the specific actions

actually 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 necessitated by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have a substantial direct effect on

the States, on the relationship between

the national Government and the States,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, it is

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (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, February 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

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

2002–02–07 Airbus Industrie: Amendment

39–12635. Docket 2001–NM–153–AD.

Applicability: All Model A330 and A340

series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent failure of the spring locking

function of the slider due to corrosion, which

could result in the escape slide detaching

from the airplane in an emergency

evacuation, accomplish the following:

Inspection

(a) Within 18 months since date of

manufacture, or within 550 flight hours after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Perform a detailed visual

inspection and an operational check of the

spring function of the emergency exit door

slider mechanism, in accordance with Airbus

All Operators Telex (AOT) A330–52A3063

(for Model A330 series airplanes) or A340–

52A4075 (for Model A340 series airplanes),

as applicable, both Revision 01, both dated

January 3, 2001.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

(1) If all sliders lock properly: Before

further flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to the

sliders, in accordance with the applicable

6372 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 12, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

AOT. Thereafter, repeat the inspection and

operational check at least every 18 months.

(2) If any slider does not lock properly:

Before further flight, repair the slider or

replace it with a new part, and apply

corrosion inhibitor to the sliders; in

accordance with the applicable AOT.

Thereafter, repeat the inspection and

operational check at least every 18 months.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport

Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall

submit their requests through an appropriate

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(d) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Airbus All Operators Telex A330–

52A3063, Revision 01, dated January 3, 2001;

or Airbus All Operators Telex A340–

52A4075, Revision 01, dated January 3, 2001;

as applicable. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be

obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,

France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directives 2001–

053(B) and 2001–052(B), both dated February

7, 2001.

Effective Date

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

March 19, 2002.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

31, 2002.

Ali Bahrami,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 02–2929 Filed 2–11–02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–332–AD; Amendment

39–12636; AD 2002–02–08]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 737–200, –200C, –300, and –500

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 737–

200, –200C, –300, and –500 series

airplanes, that requires replacement of

the bolt and self-locking nut on the

primary support pin of the main landing

gear (MLG) support beam with a new

bolt, castellated nut, washer, and cotter

pin. This action is necessary to prevent

the loosening and loss of the support

pin retaining bolt on the MLG, which

could result in the loosening and

movement of the support pin and

consequent cracked support fittings and

collapse of the MLG. This action is

intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective March 19, 2002.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 19,

2002.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. This

information may be examined at the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Blilie, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2131; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Boeing

Model 737–200, –200C, –300, and –500

series airplanes was published in the

Federal Register on July 25, 2001 (66 FR

38587). That action proposed to require

replacement of the bolt and self-locking

nut on the primary support pin of the

main landing gear (MLG) support beam

with a new bolt, castellated nut, washer,

and cotter pin.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Refer to New Service Information

One commenter, the airplane

manufacturer, requests that the FAA

revise the proposed AD to refer to

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57A1260,

Revision 2, dated October 18, 2001, as

the acceptable source of service

information for the proposed actions.

(The proposed AD refers to the original

issue of the service bulletin, dated June

15, 2000, and Revision 1 of the service

bulletin, dated October 12, 2000, as

appropriate sources of service

information for the proposed actions.)

The FAA concurs. Since the issuance

of the proposed AD, we have reviewed

and approved Revision 2 of the service

bulletin. This revision provides

significant detailed information on

which airplanes need the work

described in the service bulletin and

which do not. For example, the actions

in Boeing Service Bulletin 737–

57A1260, Revision 2, do not apply to

airplanes in Groups 3 and 4, as listed in

the service bulletin, if the airplane has

been modified per Boeing Service

Bulletin 737–57–1172, dated October

15, 1987; OR Boeing Service Bulletin

737–57–1216, dated December 17, 1992,

Revision 1, dated September 23, 1993,

or Revision 2, dated May 6, 1999 (but

not both of those service bulletins).

Revision 2 of the service bulletin also

provides instructions for certain

airplanes in alternative configurations.

Because these changes are relieving in

nature, we find that it is appropriate to

revise paragraph (a), as well as the

applicability statement, of this final rule

to refer to Revision 2 of the service

bulletin. We have also added a new

Note 2 to this AD (and reordered a

subsequent note accordingly) to state

that accomplishment of the actions

before the effective date of this AD per

the original issue or Revision 1 of

Boeing Service Bulletin 737–57A1260 is

acceptable for compliance with

paragraph (a) of this AD.

Another commenter reports that,

when it tried to do Boeing Service

Bulletin 737–57A1260 on an affected

airplane, it found that the bolt sizes

identified in that service bulletin did