60124 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 10, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552,

Attention Docket No. 2000–57.

Delivery: Hand deliver comments to

the Guard’s Desk, East Lobby Entrance,

1700 G Street, NW., from 9:00 a.m. to

4:00 p.m. on business days, Attention

Docket No. 2000–57.

Facsimiles: Send facsimile

transmissions to FAX Number (202)

906–7755, Attention Docket No. 2000–

57; or (202) 906–6956 (if comments are

over 25 pages).

E-Mail: Send e-mails to

‘‘public.info@ots.treas.gov’’, Attention

Docket No. 2000–57, and include your

name and telephone number.

Public Inspection: Interested persons

may inspect comments at the Public

Reference Room, 1700 G St. NW., from

10:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. on Tuesdays

and Thursdays or obtain comments and/

or an index of comments by facsimile by

telephoning the Public Reference Room

at (202) 906–5900 from 9:00 a.m. until

5:00 on business days. Comments and

the related index will also be posted on

the OTS Internet Site at

‘‘www.ots.treas.gov’’.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David A. Permut, Counsel (Business and

Finance) (202) 906–7505, Business

Transactions Division, Chief Counsel’s

Office; Timothy P. Leary, Counsel

(Banking and Finance) (202) 906–7170,

Regulations and Legislation Division,

Chief Counsel’s Office; Mary Jo Johnson,

Project Manager, (202) 906–5739,

Supervision Policy, Office of Thrift

Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20552.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed rule and interim final rule,

published in the Federal Register on

July 12, 2000 (65 FR 43092 and 43088),

indicated that public comments were to

be submitted to the OTS no later than

October 10, 2000. OTS has received a

request for an extension of the comment

period to accommodate the views of a

number of mutual institution managers

who will be meeting in the next 30 days.

In order to afford the public adequate

time to comment, the OTS has

determined to extend the comment

period for 30 days to accommodate this

request. Therefore, the comment period

is hereby extended until November 9,

2000.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Ellen Seidman,

Director.

[FR Doc. 00–25943 Filed 10–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–157–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes Powered

by General Electric or Pratt & Whitney

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 767 series

airplanes powered by General Electric

or Pratt & Whitney engines. This

proposal would require repetitive

inspections to detect discrepancies of

the aft-most fastener holes in the

horizontal tangs of the midspar fitting of

the strut, and corrective actions, if

necessary. This proposal also provides

for optional terminating action for the

repetitive inspections. This action is

necessary to prevent fatigue cracking in

primary strut structure and reduced

structural integrity of the strut, which

could result in separation of the strut

and engine. This action is intended to

address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

157–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–157–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2783; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2000–NM–157–AD.’’

The postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

2000–NM–157–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 10, 2000 / Proposed Rules 60125

Discussion

The FAA has received a report

indicating fatigue cracking of an inboard

midspar fitting on the number two

pylon of a Boeing Model 767 series

airplane powered by General Electric

engines. The crack was detected during

replacement of a midspar fitting

bushing, and the airplane had

accumulated 21,375 total flight hours

and 11,563 total flight cycles. A cracked

midspar fitting could result in a

fractured fitting and drooping of the

strut at the strut-to-wing interface.

Structural assessment indicates that the

actual operational loads applied to the

nacelle strut and wing structure are

higher than the analytical loads that

were used during the initial design.

Subsequent analysis and service history,

which includes numerous reports of

fatigue cracking on certain strut and

wing structure, indicate that fatigue

cracking can occur on the primary strut

structure before an airplane reaches its

design service objective of 20 years or

50,000 total flight cycles. Analysis also

indicates that such cracking, if it were

to occur, would grow at a much greater

rate than originally expected. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in reduced structural integrity of the

strut and separation of the strut and

engine.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54A0101,

Revision 1, dated February 3, 2000,

which describes procedures for

accomplishment of either repetitive

detailed visual or high frequency eddy

current inspections to detect

discrepancies (cracking, incorrect

fastener hole diameter), of the aft-most

fastener holes in the horizontal tangs of

the midspar fitting of the strut, and

corrective actions. The corrective

actions consist of rework of the aft-most

fastener holes or replacement of the

midspar fittings of the strut. The service

bulletin references the strut

improvement program (SIP) for

accomplishment of the replacement.

The service bulletin also specifies

contacting the manufacturer for

accomplishment of certain repairs.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Bulletin

Operators should note that, although

the service bulletin describes

procedures for inspections of the two

aft-most fastener holes of the midspar

fitting to detect cracking, this proposed

AD would require inspections of the

four aft-most fastener holes of the

midspar fitting. The FAA has

determined that this is necessary due to

the service history of cracking on the

Model 747 series airplane midspar

fittings, which are made of the same

material as the midspar fittings on the

Model 767 series airplane and are also

subject to similar loading conditions.

Operators also should note that,

although the service bulletin specifies

that the manufacturer may be contacted

for disposition of certain repair

conditions; this proposed AD would

require the repair of those conditions to

be accomplished in accordance with a

method approved by the FAA, or in

accordance with data meeting the type

certification basis of the airplane

approved by a Boeing Company

Designated Engineering Representative

who has been authorized by the FAA to

make such findings.

This proposed AD also would allow

operators the option, if cracking is

detected, of either repair of the midspar

fitting or replacement with a serviceable

fitting in accordance with a method

approved by the FAA. This is due to the

fact that parts are not always readily

available and operators required to

accomplish the strut improvement

program before further flight could have

a problem obtaining these parts.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 636 Model

767 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 235 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

It would take approximately 1 work

hour per airplane to accomplish the

proposed detailed visual inspection, at

an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of the proposed inspection on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$14,100, or $60 per airplane, per

inspection cycle.

It would take approximately 3 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

proposed eddy current inspection, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed inspection on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $42,300, or

$180 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this proposed 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 proposed herein

would 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 proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, 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 copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend 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.

60126 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 10, 2000 / Proposed Rules

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Boeing: Docket 2000–NM–157–AD.

Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes,

certificated in any category, as listed in

Boeing Service Bulletin 767–54A0101,

Revision 1, dated February 3, 2000.

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 (d) 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 fatigue cracking in primary

strut structure and reduced structural

integrity of the strut, which could result in

separation of the strut and engine,

accomplish the following:

Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Actions

(a) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total

flight cycles, or within 600 flight cycles after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Accomplish the inspections

required by paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this

AD, as applicable.

(1) Perform a detailed visual inspection of

the four aft-most fastener holes in the

horizontal tangs of the midspar fitting of the

strut to detect cracking, in accordance with

Part 1, ‘‘Detailed Visual Inspection,’’ of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 767–54A0101, Revision 1,

dated February 3, 2000. If no cracking is

detected, repeat the inspection thereafter at

the applicable intervals specified in Table 1,

‘‘Reinspection Intervals for Part 1—Detailed

Visual Inspection’’ included in Figure 1 of

the service bulletin.

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.’’

(2) Perform a high frequency eddy current

inspection of the four aft-most fastener holes

in the horizontal tangs of the midspar fitting

of the strut to detect discrepancies (cracking,

incorrect fastener hole diameter), in

accordance with Part 2, ‘‘High Frequency

Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspection,’’ of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin. Accomplish the requirements

specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of

this AD, as applicable; and repeat the

inspection thereafter at the applicable

intervals specified in Table 2, ‘‘Reinspection

Intervals for Part 2—HFEC Inspection’’

included in Figure 1 of the service bulletin.

(i) If no cracking is detected and the

fastener hole diameter is less than or equal

to 0.5322 inch, rework the hole in accordance

with Part 3 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin.

(ii) If no cracking is detected and the

fastener hole diameter is greater than 0.5322

inch, accomplish the requirements specified

in either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD.

(b) If any cracking is detected after

accomplishment of any inspection required

by paragraph (a) of this AD, before further

flight, accomplish the requirements specified

in either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Accomplish the terminating action

specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767–

54A0101, Revision 1, dated February 3, 2000.

Accomplishment of this paragraph

terminates the requirements of this AD.

(2) Replace the midspar fitting of the strut

with a serviceable part, or repair in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA. Repeat the applicable

inspection thereafter at the applicable time

specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this

AD.

(c) If any discrepancies (cracking, incorrect

fastener hole diameter) are detected after

accomplishment of any inspection required

by paragraph (a) of this AD, for which the

service bulletin specifies that the

manufacturer may be contacted for

disposition of those repair conditions: Before

further flight, accomplish the corrective

actions (including fastener hole rework and/

or midspar fitting replacement) in accordance

with a method approved by the Manager,

Seattle ACO; or in accordance with data

meeting the type certification basis of the

airplane approved by a Boeing Company

Designated Engineering Representative who

has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle

ACO, to make such findings.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(d) 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, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permit

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October

3, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–25968 Filed 10–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–127–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes Powered

by General Electric Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 767 series

airplanes powered by General Electric

engines. This proposal would require

modification of the nacelle strut and

wing structure. This proposal is

prompted by reports indicating that the

actual operational loads applied to the

nacelle are higher than the analytical

loads that were used during the initial

design. Such an increase in loading can

lead to fatigue cracking in the primary

strut structure prior to an airplane

reaching its design service objective.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent fatigue

cracking in the primary strut structure

and consequent reduced structural

integrity of the strut.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

127–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm–nprmcomment@faa.gov.

Comments sent via fax or the Internet

must contain ‘‘Docket No. 99–NM–127–

AD’’ in the subject line and need not be

submitted in triplicate. Comments sent