75582 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

opportunity for public comment are

contrary to the public interest and that

there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553

for making this rule effective less than

30 days after publication in the Federal

Register.

We will consider comments that are

received within 60 days of publication

of this rule in the Federal Register.

After the comment period closes, we

will publish another document in the

Federal Register. The document will

include a discussion of any comments

we receive and any amendments we are

making to the rule as a result of the

comments.

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.

Cattle moved interstate are moved for

slaughter, for use as breeding stock, or

for feeding. Changing the brucellosis

status of South Dakota from Class A to

Class Free will promote economic

growth by reducing certain testing and

other requirements governing the

interstate movement of cattle from this

State. Testing requirements for cattle

moved interstate for immediate

slaughter or to quarantined feedlots are

not affected by this change. Cattle from

certified brucellosis-free herds moving

interstate are not affected by this

change.

The groups affected by this action will

be herd owners in South Dakota, as well

as buyers and importers of cattle from

this State.

There are an estimated 18,300 cattle

herds in South Dakota that will be

affected by this rule. About 99 percent

of these are owned by small entities.

Test-eligible cattle offered for sale

interstate from other than certified-free

herds must have a negative test under

present Class A status regulations, but

not under regulations concerning Class

Free status. If such testing were

distributed equally among all animals

affected by this rule, Class Free status

would save approximately $4 per head.

Therefore, we believe that changing

the brucellosis status of South Dakota

will not have a significant economic

effect on the small entities affected by

this interim rule.

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 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12988

This interim rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12988, Civil

Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts

all State and local laws and regulations

that are in conflict 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 interim 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 78

Animal diseases, Bison, Cattle, Hogs,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements,

Transportation.

Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR

part 78 as follows:

PART 78—BRUCELLOSIS

1. The authority citation for part 78

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 111–114a–1, 114g,

115, 117, 120, 121, 123–126, 134b, and 134f;

7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.

§ 78.41 [Amended]

2. Section 78.41 is amended as

follows:

a. In paragraph (a), by adding ‘‘South

Dakota,’’ in alphabetical order.

b. In paragraph (b), by removing

‘‘South Dakota,’’.

Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of

November 2000.

Bobby R. Acord,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 00–30764 Filed 12–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–377–AD; Amendment

39–12014; AD 2000–24–07]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747 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

series airplanes, that requires

inspections to detect cracking of the

frame web, doubler, and inner chord of

the forward edge frame of main entry

door number 1, and various follow-on

actions. This amendment is prompted

by reports of cracking in the frame web,

doubler, inner chord, and strap of the

forward edge frame of main entry door

number 1. The actions specified by this

AD are intended to prevent cracks in the

frame web and doubler of the forward

edge frame of main entry door number

1, which could result in inability of the

edge frame to react door stop loads, and

consequent rapid depressurization of

the airplane.

DATES: Effective January 8, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of January 8,

2001.

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: Rick

Kawaguchi, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–1153; 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 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 75583

June 15, 2000 (65 FR 37497). That action

proposed to require inspections to

detect cracking of the frame web,

doubler, and inner chord of the forward

edge frame of main entry door number

1, and various follow-on actions.

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.

Support for the Proposal

Three commenters support the

proposed rule.

Request to Reference New Service

Information

One commenter requests that the FAA

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

proposed rule to reference Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–53A2417, Revision

2, dated August 10, 2000, as an

acceptable means of compliance for the

actions required by those paragraphs.

(Certain paragraphs of the proposed rule

reference Boeing Service Bulletin 747–

53A2417, Revision 1, dated July 23,

1998, as the appropriate source of

service information for accomplishment

of the actions required by those

paragraphs.)

Because paragraph (a) of the proposed

rule does not reference a service bulletin

but only specifies compliance times, the

FAA infers that the commenter is

requesting that the FAA revise

paragraphs (b) and (c), as well as

paragraphs (d) and (e), of the proposed

rule. The FAA concurs with the

commenter’s request. Since the issuance

of the proposed rule, the FAA has

reviewed and approved Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 747–53A2417, Revision

2. The procedures in that service

bulletin are substantially similar to

those in Boeing Service Bulletin 747–

53A2417, Revision 1. Thus, paragraphs

(b), (d), and (e) of this final rule have

been revised accordingly to reference

Revision 2 of the service bulletin, in

addition to Revision 1, as an acceptable

source of service information.

Also, Revision 2 of the service

bulletin expands the area of inspection

specified in Revision 1 of the service

bulletin, to include detailed visual

inspections of the aft side of the frame

web (referred to as ‘‘Area 3’’ in the

service bulletin), an area which is

specified in paragraph (c) of the

proposed rule and this final rule.

Accordingly, paragraph (c) of this AD

has been revised to note that Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2417,

Revision 2, dated August 10, 2000, may

be used to accomplish the inspections

specified in that paragraph. Also, ‘‘Note

5’’ of the proposed rule has been

amended to clarify that the inspections

in paragraph (c) of this AD are described

in Revision 2 of the service bulletin.

Difference Between Revision 2 of the

Service Bulletin and This AD

Operators should note that, in

addition to the detailed visual

inspections of Area 3, the aft side of the

frame web, that are specified in this AD,

Revision 2 of the service bulletin also

specifies detailed visual inspections of

an ‘‘Area 2,’’ which comprises the

forward and aft sides of the frame web

and chord. The FAA has determined

that, because inspections in this area

were not specified in the proposed rule,

to require inspections of this area would

expand the scope of this AD,

necessitating additional notice to the

public and reopening of the comment

period. Due to the criticality of the

unsafe condition addressed in this AD,

the FAA finds that to delay issuance of

this final rule in this way would be

inappropriate. Therefore, this AD does

not require inspections of ‘‘Area 2,’’ as

defined in the service bulletin.

However, the FAA may consider further

rulemaking to require inspections in

this area.

Requests to Correct Typographical

Error, Remove Doorstop Locations

One commenter, who otherwise

supports the proposed rule, requests

that the FAA revise paragraph (c) of the

proposed rule to correct a typographical

error in a reference to a doorstop

location. In the Federal Register version

of the AD, the sentence that is the

subject of the commenter’s request

reads, ‘‘Perform a detailed visual

inspection to detect cracking of the aft

side of the forward edge door frame web

of main entry door number 1 in the

exposed area from doorstop #2

[approximately water line (WL) 218] to

doorstop #2 (approximately WL 245) at

body station 434.’’ Another commenter

suggests that the references to doorstop

locations be removed entirely from the

paragraph.

The FAA acknowledges the

typographical error pointed out by the

first commenter. The FAA has

determined that the WL references in

the subject sentence of the proposed

rule are correct, and the references to

the doorstop locations are not necessary

to adequately define the area that needs

to be inspected. Therefore, the FAA

concurs with the second commenter’s

suggestion to remove the references to

doorstop locations. The affected

sentence of paragraph (c) of this final

rule has been revised to read, ‘‘Perform

a detailed visual inspection to detect

cracking of the aft side of the forward

edge door frame web of main entry door

number 1 in the exposed area from

approximately [WL] 218 to

approximately WL 245 at body station

434.’’

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 685 Model

747 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 211 airplanes of U.S.

registry will be affected by this AD.

For Group 1 airplanes (approximately

191 U.S.-registered airplanes), it will

take approximately 3 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

inspections, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of these

inspections on U.S. operators of Group

1 airplanes is estimated to be $34,380,

or $180 per airplane, per inspection

cycle.

For Group 2 airplanes (approximately

20 U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

inspections, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of these

inspections on U.S. operators of Group

2 airplanes is estimated to be $2,400, or

$120 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

For Group 1 airplanes (approximately

191 U.S.-registered airplanes), it will

take approximately 128 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

repair, at an average labor rate of $60

per work hour. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of this repair on U.S.

operators of Group 1 airplanes is

estimated to be $1,466,880, or $7,680

per airplane.

For Group 2 airplanes (approximately

20 U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take

approximately 64 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

repair, at an average labor rate of $60

per work hour. Based on these figures,

the cost impact of this repair on U.S.

operators of Group 2 airplanes is

estimated to be $76,800, or $3,840 per

airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

75584 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

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.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the reinforcement of the

door frame on a Group 1 airplane, it

would take approximately 9 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the

reinforcement, at an average labor rate

of $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

reinforcement on a Group 1 airplane is

estimated to be $540 per airplane.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the reinforcement of the

door frame on a Group 2 airplane, it

would take approximately 5 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the

reinforcement, at an average labor rate

of $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the

reinforcement on a Group 2 airplane is

estimated to be $300 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.

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:

2000–24–07 Boeing: Amendment 39–12014.

Docket 99–NM–377–AD.

Applicability: Model 747 series airplanes,

line numbers 1 through 685 inclusive,

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 (g) 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 of the frame

web and doubler of the forward edge frame

of main entry door number 1, which could

result in inability of the edge frame to react

door stop loads, and consequent rapid

depressurization of the airplane, accomplish

the following:

Initial Inspection: Compliance Time

(a) At the time specified in paragraph

(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(4) of this AD; as

applicable; accomplish the requirements of

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this AD.

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated

fewer than 13,000 total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 13,000 total flight cycles, or

within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated

13,000 or more total flight cycles but fewer

than 20,000 total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 21,000 total flight cycles, or

within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(3) For airplanes that have accumulated

20,000 or more total flight cycles but fewer

than 25,000 total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 25,500 total flight cycles, or

within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(4) For airplanes that have accumulated

25,000 or more total flight cycles as of the

effective date of this AD: Inspect within 500

flight cycles after the effective date of this

AD.

Initial Detailed Visual and High Frequency

Eddy Current Inspections

(b) Perform a detailed visual inspection

and a high frequency eddy current inspection

of the frame web, doubler, and inner chord

of the forward edge door frame to detect

cracking of main entry door number 1, in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

747–53A2417, Revision 1, dated July 23,

1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

53A2417, Revision 2, dated August 10, 2000.

For Group 1 airplanes (as identified in the

service bulletin), accomplish the inspections

on the left and right sides of the airplane. For

Group 2 airplanes (as identified in the service

bulletin), accomplish the inspections on the

left side of the airplane only.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, it is

not necessary to count flight cycles

accumulated at 2.0 pounds per square inch

or less differential pressure.

Note 3: Inspections, reinforcements, and

repairs accomplished prior to the effective

date of this AD in accordance with Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2417, dated

June 25, 1998, are considered acceptable for

compliance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

Note 4: 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.’’

Repetitive Detailed Visual Inspections (No

Terminating Action)

(c) Remove the cover assembly for the body

torque tube located between the door hinge

attachments. Perform a detailed visual

inspection to detect cracking of the aft side

of the forward edge door frame web of main

entry door number 1 in the exposed area

from approximately water line (WL) 218 to

approximately WL 245 at body station 434.

Pay particular attention to the row of

fasteners that attach the frame web to the

frame outer chord. After completing

inspections, replace the cover assembly.

Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals

not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2417,

Revision 2, dated August 10, 2000, may be

used to accomplish these inspections.

Note 5: The inspections required by

paragraph (c) of this AD are not described in

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2417,

Revision 1, dated July 23, 1998. However,

these inspections are described in Boeing

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2417,

Revision 2, dated August 10, 2000.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 75585

Note 6: There is no terminating action

currently available for the inspections

required by paragraph (c) of this AD.

Repetitive Inspections/Reinforcement/Repair

(No Cracks Detected)

(d) If no crack is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (b) of this

AD, prior to further flight, oversize fastener

holes in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–53A2417, Revision 1, dated July

23, 1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

747–53A2417, Revision 2, dated August 10,

2000; and accomplish the requirements of

paragraph (d)(1), (d)(2), or (d)(3) of this AD.

(1) Repeat the inspections specified in

paragraph (b) of this AD one time within

3,000 flight cycles. Within 3,000 flight cycles

after accomplishment of the repeat

inspection, accomplish paragraph (d)(2) or

(d)(3) of this AD.

(2) Reinforce the door frame, in accordance

with Figure 5 of the service bulletin.

Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 3,000

flight cycles, perform a detailed visual

inspection to detect cracks of the forward and

aft side of the frame, in accordance with

Figure 6 of the service bulletin. Within

10,000 flight cycles after the reinforcement,

accomplish the requirements of paragraph

(d)(3) of this AD.

(3) Accomplish the web replacement repair

(‘‘Terminating Action’’) in accordance with

the service bulletin. Such repair constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of paragraphs (d)(1)

and (d)(2) of this AD.

Repair (Cracks Detected)

(e) If any crack is detected during any

inspection required by paragraph (b), (d)(1),

or (d)(2) of this AD, prior to further flight,

accomplish the repair (‘‘Terminating

Action’’) in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 747–53A2417, Revision 1, dated July

23, 1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

747–53A2417, Revision 2, dated August 10,

2000. Such repair constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspection

requirements of paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2)

of this AD.

Repair

(f) If any cracking is detected during the

inspection required by paragraph (c) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office

(ACO), FAA; or in accordance with data

meeting the type certification basis of the

airplane approved by a Boeing Company

Designated Engineering Representative (DER)

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 approval letter must

specifically reference this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g) 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 7: 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

(h) 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

(i) Except as provided in paragraph (f) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

747–53A2417, Revision 1, dated July 23,

1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–

53A2417, Revision 2, dated August 10, 2000.

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.

Effective Date

(j) This amendment becomes effective on

January 8, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

November 22, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–30399 Filed 12–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–363–AD; Amendment

39–12013; AD 2000–24–06]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 707, 727C, and 727–100C Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 707,

727C, and 727–100C series airplanes,

that currently requires repetitive

inspections to detect cracking of the

main cargo door skin and frames, and

repair, if necessary. The existing AD

also provides optional terminating

modifications. This amendment requires

follow-on repetitive inspections of

repaired or modified areas for certain

airplanes. This amendment is prompted

by reports of cracking and/or tearing of

the main cargo door outer skin and

subsequent failure of the door frame.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to detect and correct such

cracking and/or tearing, which could

result in failure of the door frame and

consequent rapid decompression of the

airplane.

DATES: Effective January 8, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of January 8,

2001.

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: Walt

Sippel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2774;

fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 83–02–09,

amendment 39–4549 (48 FR 6953,

February 17, 1983); which is applicable

to certain Boeing Model 707, 727C, and

727–100C airplanes; was published in

the Federal Register on April 19, 2000

(65 FR 20924). The action proposed to

continue to require repetitive

inspections to detect cracking of the

main cargo door skin and frames, and

repair, if necessary, and to continue to

provide for optional terminating

modifications. The action also proposed

to require new follow-on repetitive

inspections of repaired or modified

areas for certain airplanes.

Explanation of Change in the Final Rule

Paragraph (e)(2) of the proposed rule

states that it applies to airplanes on

which the modification specified in Part

II, Option 2 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin

727–52A0079, Revision 4, dated June

19, 1981, Revision 5, dated June 17,