Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 31527

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 (e)

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 you have not

eliminated the unsafe condition, specific

actions you propose to address it.

(f) Where can I get information about any

already-approved alternative methods of

compliance? You can contact Mr. Gunnar

Berg, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown

Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone: (770) 703–

6074; facsimile: (770) 703–6097; e-mail

address: ‘‘Gunnar.Berg@faa.gov’’.

(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to

another location to comply with this AD? The

FAA can issue a special flight permit under

sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and

21.199) to operate your airplane to a location

where you can accomplish the requirements

of this AD. Use of flaps for this flight is

prohibited.

(h) Are any service bulletins incorporated

into this AD by reference? Actions required

by this AD must be done in accordance with

Piper Service Bulletin No. 1062, dated May

11, 2001. The Director of the Federal Register

approved this incorporation by reference

under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You

can get copies from The New Piper Aircraft,

Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida

32960. You can look at copies at FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Regional

Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,

Missouri, or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite

700, Washington, DC.

(i) When does this amendment become

effective? This amendment becomes effective

on June 29, 2001.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 1,

2001.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14450 Filed 6–11–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–118–AD; Amendment

39–12260; AD 2001–12–05]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–100, 747–200, 747–300, and

747SR Series Airplanes Powered by

General Electric CF6–45/50 and Pratt &

Whitney JT9D–70 Series Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain Boeing Model 747–

100, 747–200, 747–300, and 747SR

series airplanes powered by General

Electric CF6–45/50 and Pratt & Whitney

JT9D–70 series engines. This action

requires a detailed visual inspection of

the outboard diagonal brace for heat

damage and cracking; and follow-on

repetitive inspections or corrective

actions, if necessary. This action also

provides an optional terminating action

for the requirements of this AD. This

action is necessary to detect and correct

heat damage to the diagonal brace,

which could cause cracking or fracture

of the diagonal brace, and possible loss

of the diagonal brace load path and

consequent separation of the strut and

engine from the airplane.

DATES: Effective June 27, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 27,

2001.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

August 13, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

118–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 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-anmiarcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–118–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

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 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tamara L. Anderson, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S,

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2771; fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

has received reports from two operators

who found heat damage to the forward

end of the diagonal brace on the

outboard struts of two Model 747 series

airplanes powered by General Electric

CF6–50 series engines. Both airplanes

had previously accomplished the strut/

wing modification required by AD 95–

13–07, amendment 39–9287 (60 FR

33336, June 28, 1995), which requires

the accomplishment of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–54A2158.

One operator reported that the sealant

backup plates were not reinstalled

during the accomplishment of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–54A2158. In

that case, the airplane had accumulated

approximately 371 flight cycles and

1,781 flight hours since the

accomplishment of the service bulletin.

Another operator reported using BMS

5–95 sealant to seal the area, instead of

using the higher heat-resistant BMS 5–

63 sealant. In that case, the airplane had

accumulated approximately 591 flight

cycles and 2,653 flight hours since

accomplishment of the service bulletin.

Further investigation revealed that the

use of BMS 5–95 sealant was specified

by Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

54A2158, whereas BMS 5–63 sealant

was specified by Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–54A2117.

The manufacturer reports that

operating temperatures at the firewall

openings exceed the maximum service

temperature of BMS 5–95, which causes

that sealant to harden and disintegrate

at those operating temperatures. Heat

damage to the diagonal brace, if not

corrected, could result in cracking or

fracture of the diagonal brace, and

possible loss of the diagonal brace load

path and consequent separation of the

strut and engine from the airplane.

31528 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

The nacelle struts for General Electric

CF6–45 and Pratt & Whitney JT9D–70

series engines are similar in design to

the nacelle struts for General Electric

CF6–50 series engines. Therefore, the

FAA has determined that airplanes with

any of these engines may be subject to

the same unsafe condition.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

54A2208, dated March 29, 2001, which

describes procedures for a detailed

visual inspection of the outboard

diagonal brace for heat damage and

cracking; and follow-on repetitive

inspections or corrective actions, if

necessary. The inspection for signs of

heat damage includes looking for

discoloration or changes in primer

color, and using the primer color at the

aft end of the diagonal brace as a

reference point. Corrective actions

include replacing the diagonal brace,

installing the backup plates, and

replacing the existing sealant with heatresistant BMS 5–63 sealant.

Accomplishment of certain inspections

of the backup plate and diagonal brace

and corrective actions if necessary, and

replacement of the sealant with heatresistant sealant would constitute

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections.

Explanation of the Requirements of the

Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other Model 747–100, 747–

200, 747–300, and 747SR series

airplanes powered by General Electric

CF6–45/50 and Pratt & Whitney JT9D–

70 series engines of the same type

design, this AD is being issued to detect

and correct heat damage to the diagonal

brace, which could cause cracking or

fracture of the diagonal brace, and

possible loss of the diagonal brace load

path and consequent separation of the

strut and engine from the airplane. This

AD also provides an optional

terminating action for the requirements

of this AD. This AD requires the

accomplishment of the actions specified

in this AD in accordance with Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–54A2208, as

described previously, except as

discussed below.

Differences Between the Service

Information and This AD

Operators should note that, although

Model 747–100 series airplanes are not

listed in the effectivity of the previously

referenced service bulletin, that model

airplane is included in the applicability

of this AD. The nacelle struts of General

Electric CF6–45/50 and Pratt & Whitney

JT9D–70 series engines on Model 747–

100 series airplanes are similar in

design to the nacelle struts on Model

747–200, 747–300, and 747SR series

airplanes. Therefore, Model 747–100

series airplanes may be subject to the

same unsafe condition revealed on

Model 747–200, 747–300, and 747SR

series airplanes.

Operators also should note that the

previously referenced service bulletin

specifies that the manufacturer may be

contacted for disposition of certain

replacement instructions. However, this

AD requires the accomplishment of

such action per a method approved by

the FAA, or in accordance with data

meeting the type certificate basis of the

airplane approved by a Boeing Company

Designated Engineering Representative

who has been authorized by the FAA to

make such findings.

Interim Action

The FAA is considering further

rulemaking action to supersede this AD

to require removal of the existing

sealant and replacement with heatresistant sealant, which would

constitute terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required by this

AD action. However, the planned

compliance time for these actions is

sufficiently long so that prior notice and

time for public comment will be

practicable.

Determination of Rule’s Effective Date

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this 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

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

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 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 rule that might suggest a need to

modify the 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 that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2001–NM–118–AD.’’

The postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

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.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 31529

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:

2001–12–05 Boeing: Amendment 39–12260.

Docket 2001–NM–118–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–100, 747–200,

747–300, and 747SR series airplanes,

certificated in any category, powered by

General Electric CF6–45/50 series engines, or

Pratt & Whitney JT9D–70 series engines.

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 detect and correct heat damage to the

diagonal brace, which could cause cracking

or fracture of the diagonal brace, and possible

loss of the diagonal brace load path and

consequent separation of the strut and engine

from the airplane, accomplish the following:

Verification

(a) Within 90 days after the effective date

of this AD, do the actions required by

paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, as

applicable.

(1) If an operator’s maintenance records

verify that, during the accomplishment of AD

95–13–07, amendment 39–9287, the seal

backup plates were restored and BMS 5–63

high-temperature sealant was used in that

restoration, no further action is required by

this AD.

(2) If an operator’s maintenance records do

not verify that the actions specified in

paragraph (a)(1) were accomplished, do the

actions required by paragraph (b) of this AD.

Inspections and Corrective Actions

(b) Within 90 days after the effective date

of this AD, do the inspections and applicable

corrective actions specified by paragraphs

(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD per the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–54A2208, dated March

29, 2001. Thereafter, repeat the inspections at

intervals not to exceed 6 months, except as

provided by paragraph (c) of this AD.

Outboard Strut Diagonal Brace

(1) Do a detailed visual inspection of the

forward 20 inches of the outboard strut

diagonal brace, including all areas of the

forward clevis lugs and brace body, for signs

of heat damage or cracks, per Part 1 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin.

(i) If no sign of heat damage or cracking is

found, repeat the detailed visual inspection

at intervals not to exceed 6 months per the

service bulletin, until accomplishment of

paragraph (c) of this AD.

(ii) If any primer discoloration is found,

before further flight, do a non-destructive test

(NDT) inspection of the area to determine if

the diagonal brace has heat damage per Part

1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the

service bulletin.

(A) If no heat damage is found during the

NDT inspection, and no cracking is found

during the detailed visual inspection, repeat

the detailed visual inspection specified by

paragraph (b)(1) of this AD at intervals not to

exceed 6 months.

(B) If any heat damage is found during the

NDT inspection, or any cracking is found

during the detailed visual inspection, before

further flight, do the action specified in

paragraph (c)(2) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat

the detailed visual inspection specified by

paragraph (b)(1) of this AD at intervals not to

exceed 6 months.

Firewall Openings of the Strut Aft Bulkhead

(2) Do a detailed visual inspection of the

firewall openings of the strut aft bulkhead to

verify installation of seal backup plates and

condition of the sealant application per Part

1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the

service bulletin.

(i) If no discrepancy (including damaged or

missing seal backup plates, or damaged or

missing sealant) is found, repeat the detailed

visual inspection specified by paragraph

(b)(1) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 6

months.

(ii) If the seal backup plates are not

installed, before further flight, install the seal

backup plates and apply heat-resistant

sealant, BMS 5–63, per Part 2 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin. Accomplishment of this action

terminates the repetitive inspections required

by this AD.

(iii) If the seal backup plates are installed,

but the sealant application is damaged or

missing, before further flight, remove any

existing sealant and apply heat-resistant

sealant, BMS 5–63, per Part 3 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin. Accomplishment of this action

terminates the repetitive inspections required

by this AD.

Note 2: Because it is difficult to distinguish

between BMS 5–95 and BMS 5–63 sealants,

removal and replacement of the existing

sealant is required to ensure that the correct

heat-resistant sealant, BMS 5–63, is used.

Optional Terminating Action

(c) Accomplishment of the inspections

required by paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of

this AD and the actions specified by

paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD,

as applicable, constitutes terminating action

for the requirements of this AD.

(1) Before further flight following the

inspections required by paragraphs (b)(1) and

(b)(2) of this AD, if no cracking or heat

damage is found and the seal backup plates

are installed, remove any existing sealant and

apply heat-resistant sealant, BMS 5–63, per

Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–54A2208,

dated March 29, 2001.

(2) If any sign of heat damage or cracking

is found during the inspections required by

paragraph (b) of this AD, before further flight,

do the actions specified by either paragraph

(c)(2)(i) or (c)(2)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Replace the diagonal brace per Part 4 of

the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–54A2208, dated

March 29, 2001; or

(ii) Repair per a method approved by the

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA; or per 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. For a repair method to

be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as

required by this paragraph, the Manager’s

approval letter must specifically reference

this AD.

(3) If the seal back-up plates are missing,

before further flight, do the actions required

by paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this AD.

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 Permits

(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.

Incorporation by Reference

(f) Except as provided by paragraph

(c)(2)(ii) of this AD, the actions shall be done

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–54A2208, dated March 29,

2001. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

31530 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. 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.

Effective Date

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

June 27, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 4,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14533 Filed 6–11–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 926

[SPATS No. MT–020–FOR]

Montana Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

approving a proposed amendment to the

Montana regulatory program

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Montana program’’)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).

Montana proposed revisions to, and

additions of statutes about, the notice

requirements for alternate reclamation

plans; the use of introduced species on

lands mined, disturbed, or redisturbed

after May 2, 1978, and reseeded prior to

January 1, 1984; subsidence; a definition

of operator for uranium mining; and

other editorial revisions. Montana

revised its program to be consistent with

SMCRA, provide additional safeguards,

clarify ambiguities, and improve

operational efficiency.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 12, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy

Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261–6550,

Internet address: gpadgett@osmre.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Montana Program

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

III. Director’s Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director’s Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Montana Program

On April 1, 1980, the Secretary of the

Interior conditionally approved the

Montana program. You can find

background information on the Montana

program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and conditions of approval in the April

1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 21560).

You can also find later actions

concerning Montana’s program and

program amendments at 30 CFR 926.15,

926.16, and 926.30.

II. Submission of the Proposed

Amendment

By letters dated July 20 and August

17, 2000, Montana sent us an

amendment to its program

(Administrative Record No. MT–17–01)

under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.).

Montana sent the amendment in

response to a June 5, 1996, letter

(Administrative Record No. MT–17–03)

that we sent to Montana in accordance

with 30 CFR 732.17(c) and to present

changes made at its own initiative by

the 1997 State legislature. The full text

of this program amendment is available

for you to read at the locations listed

above under ADDRESSES.

In this amendment, Montana

unnecessarily included revisions from

the 1995 State legislature which OSM

approved in the January 22, 1999,

Federal Register (64FR3604;

Administrative Record No. 14–13.)

Those revisions are not rediscussed in

this rule notice.

The provisions of the Montana Code

Annotated (MCA) that Montana

proposed to revise, or add, are: 82–4–

203(1) and (21)(d), MCA (Definitions);

82–4–232(1), (7) and (8), MCA (Area

mining required-bond-alternative plan);

82–4–233(1) and (4), MCA (Planting of

vegetation following grading of

disturbed area); 82–4–243, MCA

(Subsidence); 82–4–253(1), (2) and (3),

MCA (Suit for damage to water supply);

and 82–4–254(1), (2), (3), (4) and (9),

MCA (Violation-Penalty-Waiver).

We announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the September

25, 2000, Federal Register (65 FR

57583). In the same document, we

opened the public comment period and

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing or meeting on the amendment’s

adequacy (Administrative Record No.

MT–17–05). We did not hold a public

hearing or meeting because no one

requested one. The public comment

period ended on October 25, 2000.

During our review of the amendment,

we identified one concern about lack of

a definition of ‘‘permittee’’ in the

Montana program. We notified Montana

of this concern by letter dated December

4, 2000 (Administrative Record No.

MT–17–06). Montana responded in a

letter dated December 18, 2000

(Administrative Record No. MT–17–07),

that it would not submit a revision to

the amendment at this time. In the

letter, Montana stated that it would

write a definition of ‘‘permittee’’ for the

State program and submit it to OSM.

III. Director’s Findings

Following are the findings we made

concerning the amendment under

SMCRA and the Federal regulations at

30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We are

approving the amendment.

1. Minor Revisions to Montana’s

Statutes

Montana proposed minor wording,

editorial, punctuation, grammatical, and

recodification changes to the following

previously-approved statutes. The

corresponding Federal regulations or

SMCRA provisions are listed in

parentheses.

82–4–203, MCA, subsection (1), (30

CFR 842.11(e)), Definitions;

82–4–232, MCA, subsections (1), (7)

and (8), (SMCRA Sections 507(b)(6)

and 515(b)(3)), Area mining

require—bond—alternative plan;

82–4–253, MCA, subsections (1), (2)

and (3), (SMCRA Section 717(a)),

Suit for damage to water supply;

and

82–4–254, MCA, (1), (2), (3) and (9),

(SMCRA Sec. 518), Violation—

penalty—waiver.

Because these changes are minor, we

find that they will not make Montana’s

statutes less stringent than SMCRA.

2. MCA 82–4–203(21)(d), Definition of

‘‘Operator’’

Montana proposed to expand the

definition of ‘‘operator’’ to include a

person engaged in ‘‘uranium mining’’

using in situ methods. Montana

currently applies its coal mining

regulations in the Administrative Rules

of Montana (ARM) 26.4, Subchapter 9,

to the uranium industry. However, there

is no definition of what constitutes a

uranium mining ‘‘operator’’ in ARM. By

adding this definition, Montana is

adding clarity and consistency to the

State program.

There is no Federal equivalent statute

or rule to the definition of a uranium

mining operator, as OSM’s regulations

apply to coal mining exclusively.

Therefore, OSM finds that Montana’s

revised definition of ‘‘operator’’ is not

inconsistent with the requirements of

SMCRA, the Federal regulations, and

Montana’s currently approved program.