Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 5753

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 an APU compartment fire,

accomplish the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 91–20–

07, Amendment 39–8041

Repetitive Inspections

(a) Within 100 hours time-in-service after

October 7, 1991 (the effective date of AD 91–

20–07, amendment 39–8041), and thereafter

at intervals not to exceed 400 hours time-inservice: Perform a dye penetrant inspection

to detect cracks, rupture or fuel leaks at the

weld of the fuel feedline adapter, in

accordance with Airbus Industrie All

Operators Telex (AOT) 49–01, Issue 3, dated

April 25, 1991. If cracks, rupture, or fuel

leaks are found, replace the adapter with an

improved, non-welded one-piece-body

adapter prior to the next APU operation, or

placard the APU inoperative until the

adapter is replaced with the improved

adapter, in accordance with Airbus Industrie

Service Bulletin A300–49–0049, A300–49–

6009, or A310–49–2012; all dated July 12,

1991; as applicable.

(b) Within 100 hours time-in-service after

October 7, 1991, verify the correct torque

values of the starter motor cable terminals

and the generator cable terminals in

accordance with Airbus Industrie All

Operators Telex (AOT) 49–01, Issue 3, dated

April 25, 1991. Correct any torque value

discrepancies prior to further flight, in

accordance with the AOT.

New Requirements of This AD

Installation

(c) Within 15 months after the effective

date of this AD, install an improved APU fuel

feedline adapter in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–49–0049, Revision 1

(for Model A300 series airplanes); A300–49–

6009, Revision 1 (for Model A300–600 series

airplanes); or A310–49–2012, Revision 1 (for

Model A310 series airplanes); all dated

November 28, 1991; as applicable. Such

installation constitutes terminating action for

the requirements of this AD.

Note 2: Although the service bulletins

referenced in paragraph (b) of this AD specify

installation of an APU fuel feedline adapter

having part number P/N A4937021700200,

installation of an adapter having P/N

A4937021700400 is also acceptable for

compliance with the requirements of that

paragraph.

Spares

(d) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install an APU fuel feedline

adapter, P/N A4937021700000 (welded

configuration), on any airplane.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(e) 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, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. 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

(f) 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

(g) The actions shall be done in accordance

with the following Airbus All Operators

Telex (AOT) and Airbus service bulletins:

Service information referenced and date Page No. Revision level shown on

page Date shown on page

AOT 49–01, Issue 3, April 25, 1991 ................................... 1–3 ..................................... 3 ......................................... April 25, 1991.

A300–49–0049, July 12, 1991 ............................................ 1–11 ................................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

A300–49–0049, Revision 1, November 28, 1991 ............... 1–4, 7, 8, 11 ....................... 1 ......................................... November 28, 1991.

5, 6, 9, 10 ........................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

A300–49–6009, July 12, 1991 ............................................ 1–9 ..................................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

A300–49–6009, Revision 1, November 28, 1991 ............... 1–6, 9 ................................. 1 ......................................... November 28, 1991.

7, 8 ..................................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

A310–49–2012, July 12, 1991 ............................................ 1–11 ................................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

A310–49–2012, Revision 1, November 28, 1991 ............... 1–4, 7, 8, 11 ....................... 1 ......................................... November 28, 1991.

5, 6, 9, 10 ........................... Original ............................... July 12, 1991.

(1) The incorporation by reference of

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–49–0049,

Revision 1, dated November 28, 1991; Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–49–6009, Revision 1,

dated November 28, 1991; and Airbus

Service Bulletin A310–49–2012, Revision 1,

dated November 28, 1991; is approved by the

Director of the Federal Register in accordance

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

(2) The incorporation by reference of

Airbus All Operators Telex (AOT) 49–01,

Issue 3, dated April 25, 1991; Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–49–0049, dated July 12, 1991;

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–49–6009,

dated July 12, 1991; and Airbus Service

Bulletin A310–49–2012; dated July 12, 1991;

was approved previously by the Director of

the Federal Register as of October 7, 1991 (56

FR 47672, September 20, 1991).

(3) 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 directive 98–480–

269(B), dated December 2, 1998.

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

March 13, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

31, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–2469 Filed 2–4–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–88–AD; Amendment

39–11558; AD 2000–03–01]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–100 and Ø200 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 747–

100 and ¥200 series airplanes, that

requires repetitive inspections of the

5754 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

upper and lower chords of the wing

front spar for cracks, and corrective

action, if necessary. For airplanes on

which no cracking is detected, this AD

also provides an optional terminating

action in lieu of repetitive inspections.

This amendment is prompted by reports

of cracks in the upper chord of the wing

front spar. The actions specified by this

AD are intended to detect and correct

fatigue cracking of the upper and lower

chords of the wing front spar, which

could result in reduced structural

capability and possible fuel leakage onto

an engine and a resultant fire.

DATES: Effective March 13, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 13,

2000.

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:

Tamara L. Anderson, Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2771; 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 747–100 and ¥200 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on August 20, 1999 (64 FR

45481). That action proposed to require

repetitive inspections of the upper and

lower chords of the wing front spar for

cracks, and corrective action, if

necessary.

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.

Request to Allow Alternative Inspection

Method

One commenter requests that the FAA

revise paragraph (a) of the proposal to

allow accomplishment of an open hole

high frequency eddy current (HFEC)

inspection in lieu of the ultrasonic

inspection that is specified in paragraph

(a) of the proposal. The commenter

asserts that accomplishment of an HFEC

inspection ‘‘equals or exceeds the

capability of surface ultrasonic

inspections’’ for detecting cracking of

the upper and lower chords of the wing

front spar. The commenter states that

the HFEC inspection should be

accomplished in accordance with Figure

6 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57–

2305, Revision 1, dated January 21, 1999

(which was referenced in the proposal

as the appropriate source of service

information for accomplishment of the

proposed actions).

The FAA concurs with the

commenter’s request to approve the

alternative inspection method.

However, the FAA finds that, rather

than revising paragraph (a) of this AD,

it is more appropriate to add a NOTE

stating that accomplishment of an HFEC

inspection in accordance with Figure 6

of the service bulletin is acceptable for

compliance with the requirements of

paragraph (a) of this AD. NOTE 2 has

been added to this final rule

accordingly.

Request to Reference Alternative

Terminating Action

One commenter requests that the FAA

revise paragraph (b) of the proposed rule

to reference accomplishment of certain

strut and wing modifications or certain

other terminating actions as terminating

action for the requirements of this AD.

The commenter states that

accomplishment of certain

modifications meets the intent of the

terminating action described in the

proposed rule, provided that an HFEC

inspection of affected fastener holes has

been accomplished (in accordance with

Boeing 747 Non-Destructive Test

Manual D6–7170, Part 6, Subject 51–00–

00, Figure 16) prior to oversizing of the

holes, and the holes were found to be

free of cracks, corrosion, or damage.

The FAA infers that the commenter is

referring to the terminating action

specified in paragraph (c) of this AD.

The FAA concurs with the commenter’s

request. The FAA finds that the strut

and wing modifications and terminating

action referenced by the commenter are

already required by certain other AD’s,

which are described below.

• AD 95–10–16, amendment 39–9233

(60 FR 27008, May 22, 1995), applies to

certain Boeing Model 747 series

airplanes, and requires, among other

things, modification of the nacelle strut

and wing structure in accordance with

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

54A2159, dated November 3, 1994.

• AD 95–13–07, amendment 39–9287

(60 FR 33336, June 28, 1995), applies to

certain Boeing Model 747 series

airplanes, and requires modification of

the nacelle strut and wing structure in

accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 747–54A2158, dated November

30, 1994.

• AD 99–10–09, amendment 39–

11162 (64 FR 25194, May 11, 1999),

applies to certain Model 747–100, –200,

and 747SP series airplanes, and military

type E–4B airplanes. That AD provides

for replacement of the wing front spar

web with a new shot-peened wing front

spar web, in accordance with Boeing

Service Bulletin 747–57A2303, Revision

1, dated September 25, 1997, as an

optional terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

that AD.

The FAA has determined that

accomplishment of the wing and strut

modification specified in AD 95–10–16

or AD 95–13–07, or the optional

terminating action specified in AD 99–

10–09, constitutes terminating action for

the repetitive inspections required by

paragraph (a) of this AD, provided that

an HFEC inspection of subject fastener

holes has been accomplished (in

accordance with Boeing 747 NonDestructive Test Manual D6–7170, Part

6, Subject 51–00–00, Figure 16) prior to

oversizing of the holes, and the holes

were found to be free of cracks,

corrosion, or damage. The FAA has

added NOTE 3 to this final rule

accordingly.

Request to Delete Certain Supplemental

Structural Inspection Document

Inspections

One commenter requests that the FAA

revise the proposal by adding a

paragraph that eliminates the

requirement for certain inspections to be

accomplished in accordance with the

Supplemental Structural Inspection

Document (SSID). The commenter

justifies its request by saying that

oversizing the web-to-chord fastener

holes, as described in the optional

terminating action in Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–57–2305, Revision 1, will

‘‘zero time’’ the fastener holes, renewing

the fatigue life. The commenter states

that, if this optional terminating action

is accomplished, SSID inspections W–

24B at the front spar web-to-chord

fastener holes between the upper link

fittings and W–24C at the front spar

web-to-chord fastener holes at the

outboard upper link fittings would no

longer be necessary.

The FAA partially concurs with the

commenter’s request. The FAA

acknowledges that, following

accomplishment of the optional

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 5755

terminating action, fatigue life will be

renewed in the affected web-to-chord

fastener holes. However, the SSID

inspections that the commenter

references are required, along with

various other inspections, by AD 94–15–

12, amendment 39–8983 (59 FR 37933,

July 26, 1994), and AD 94–15–18,

amendment 39–8989 (59 FR 41233,

August 11, 1994). The FAA finds that

deleting SSID inspections required by

other AD’s is not an appropriate action

to take in this AD. Therefore, no change

to the final rule is necessary in this

regard.

Request to Allow Use of Original Issue

of Service Bulletin

One commenter requests that the FAA

revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of the

proposal to reference the original issue

of Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57–2305,

dated October 8, 1998, in addition to

Revision 1 of the service bulletin, as

appropriate sources of service

information for the actions required by

this AD. The commenter states that

there is no substantial difference

between the two versions of the service

bulletin, and the inspection methods

and procedures for terminating action

are the same. The commenter states that

Revision 1 adds missing fastener codes

and revises grip lengths of fasteners.

Further, the commenter states that

operators that accomplished inspections

or terminating action in accordance

with the original issue of the service

bulletin should not be required to

perform the inspections or terminating

action in accordance with Revision 1,

nor should they be required to apply for

an alternative means of compliance.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request. The FAA

considers the grip length of fasteners

(one of the items changed between the

original issue and Revision 1) important

for proper clamp-up, and the FAA has

been advised that certain fasteners

specified in the original issue of the

service bulletin had grip lengths that

were too long. In addition, the FAA

considers the fact that certain fastener

codes were missing from the original

issue of the service bulletin to be

significant, in that it could result in

installation of fasteners that are not

structurally satisfactory. Also, Revision

1 of the service bulletin deleted

inspections of the fasteners in the upper

and lower chords between the upper

link fittings. For these reasons, the FAA

does not find that accomplishment of

the actions required by this AD in

accordance with the original issue of the

service bulletin is acceptable for

compliance with this AD. No change to

the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request to Revise Statement of Unsafe

Condition

One commenter, the airplane

manufacturer, requests that the FAA

revise the reason for issuing the

proposed rule. The proposed rule states

that ‘‘the actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to detect and

correct fatigue cracking of the upper and

lower chords of the wing front spar,

which could result in reduced structural

capability and possible fuel leakage onto

an engine and a resultant fire.’’ The

commenter states that the correct reason

for issuing the AD is that cracks

addressed by Boeing Service Bulletin

747–57–2305 are subject to Item W–24A

and W–24B in Boeing Document D6–

35022, ‘‘Supplemental Structural

Inspection Document.’’ The commenter

also states that the service bulletin was

issued to address undetected cracks in

the front spar chords that could result

in extensive labor hours and downtime

if the cracks propagate to the extent that

replacement of a section of chord is

necessary. The commenter concludes

that there are no safety-of-flight issues

associated with such cracking, and that

fuel leakage due to undetected cracks is

very unlikely because, for leakage to

occur, cracks in the chord would have

to grow through the thickness of the

chord, beyond the upper or lower edges

of the front spar web, and beyond the

fillet seal.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request. The statement of

unsafe condition, as stated in the

proposal, specifies what could happen if

the inspections of the front spar upper

and lower chords that will be required

by this AD are not accomplished. The

fact that fuel leaks have not been

detected to date does not preclude leaks

from occurring in the future. For

example, even though an operator may

have accomplished the strut and wing

modification required by another AD (as

discussed previously), if an HFEC

inspection to detect cracking of the

fastener holes was not accomplished, a

crack may still be present and could

grow to the point that fuel leakage

occurs. The FAA finds no justification

for revising the statement of unsafe

condition as the commenter suggested.

Therefore, no change to the final rule is

necessary in this regard.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the 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

of the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 332 Model

747–100 and ¥200 series airplanes of

the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 137

airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected

by this AD, that it will take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

inspection, and that the average labor

rate is $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 $16,440, or

$120 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.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the optional terminating

action rather than continue the

repetitive inspections, it will take

approximately 37 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the modification,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts will cost

approximately $5,000 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of this optional terminating action is

estimated to be $7,220 per airplane.

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.

5756 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

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:

2000–03–01 Boeing: Amendment 39–11558.

Docket 99–NM–88–AD.

Applicability: Model 747–100 and –200

series airplanes, listed in Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–57–2305, Revision 1, dated

January 21, 1999; 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 (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 fatigue cracking of

the upper and lower chords of the wing front

spar, which could result in reduced

structural capability and possible fuel

leakage onto an engine and a resultant fire,

accomplish the following:

Inspections and Corrective Action

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 12,000 total

flight cycles, or within 24 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, accomplish an ultrasonic inspection for

cracking of the upper and lower chord of the

wing front spar, in accordance with Boeing

Service Bulletin 747–57–2305, Revision 1,

dated January 21, 1999.

Note 2: Accomplishment of an open hole

high frequency eddy current inspection in

accordance with Figure 6 of Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–57–2305, Revision 1, dated

January 21, 1999, is acceptable for

compliance with the inspection requirement

of paragraph (a) of this AD.

(1) If no cracking is found, repeat this

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 6,000 flight cycles, until the

requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD have

been accomplished.

(2) If any cracking is found, prior to further

flight, accomplish ‘‘Part 2—Terminating

Action’’ of the Accomplishment Instructions

of the service bulletin, except as provided by

paragraph (b) of this AD. Accomplishment of

this action constitutes terminating action for

the requirements of this AD.

(b) During accomplishment of the

terminating action required by paragraph

(a)(2) of this AD, if any crack is found in the

upper chord that is outside the limits

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747–57–

2305, Revision 1, dated January 21, 1999; or

if any crack is found in the lower chord; prior

to further flight, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate; 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. For a repair method to be approved

by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by

this AD, the Manager’s approval letter must

specifically reference this AD.

Optional Terminating Action

(c) Accomplishment of ‘‘Part 2—

Terminating Action’’ of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747–

57–2305, Revision 1, dated January 21, 1999,

constitutes terminating action for the

requirements of this AD.

Note 3: Accomplishment of the wing and

strut modification specified in AD 95–10–16,

amendment 39–9233, or AD 95–13–07,

amendment 39–9287, or the optional

terminating action specified in AD 99–10–09,

amendment 39–11162, constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, provided that an HFEC inspection of

subject fastener holes has been accomplished

in accordance with Boeing 747 NonDestructive Test Manual D6–7170, Part 6,

Subject 51–00–00, Figure 16, prior to

oversizing of the holes in accordance with

AD 95–10–16, AD 95–13–07, or AD 99–10–

09, and the holes were found to be free of

cracks, corrosion, or damage.

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 4: 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) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

747–57–2305, Revision 1, dated January 21,

1999. 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 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.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

March 13, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

31, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–2468 Filed 2–4–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–16–AD; Amendment

39–11557; AD 2000–02–39]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 Series Airplanes

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 Airbus Model

A300 series airplanes. This action

requires either a one-time ultrasonic

inspection, or repetitive visual

inspections and eventual ultrasonic

inspection, to detect cracking of the

longitudinal skin splice above the midpassenger door panels, and corrective

actions, if necessary. This amendment is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified in this AD are

intended to detect and correct cracking

of the longitudinal skin splice above the

mid-passenger door panels, which could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the fuselage pressure vessel.

DATES: Effective February 22, 2000.