1054 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as

defined by section 804 of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of

1996. This rule will not result in an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more; a major increase in cost

or prices; or significant adverse effects

on competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or

on the ability of United States-based

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and

export markets.

Executive Order 12866

This rule is not considered by the

Department of Justice, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, to be a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),

Regulatory Planning and Review.

Accordingly, the Office of Management

and Budget has waived its review

process under section 6(a)(3)(A).

Executive order 13132

This rule will not have substantial

direct effects 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, in

accordance with section 6 of Executive

Order 13132, it is determined that this

rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a federalism summary impact

statement.

Executive order 12988 Civil Justice

Reform

This proposed rule meets the

applicable standards set forth in

sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive

Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 212

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aliens, Passports and Visas.

Accordingly, part 212 of chapter I of

title 8 of the Code of Federal

Regulations is proposed to be amended

as follows:

PART 212—DOCUMENTARY

REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS;

WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN

INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE

1. The authority citation for part 212

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1102, 1103, 1182,

1184, 1187, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1252; 8

CFR part 2.

2. Section 212.1 is amended by:

a. Revising the reference to ‘‘238(d)’’

to read: ‘‘233(c)’’ in the first sentence in

paragraph (f)(1); and by

b. Revising paragraph (f)(2), to read as

follows:

§ 212.1 Documentary requirements for

nonimmigrants.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(2) Unavailability to transit. (i)

Notwithstanding the provisions of

paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the

waiver of the passport and visa

requirement is not available to an alien

who is a citizen or national of a country

designated by the Service and the

Department of State to be ineligible. The

Service and Department of State may

designate such countries based on a

variety of considerations including, but

not limited to, the following:

(A) Whether citizens or nationals of

the country have abused the transit

without visa privilege in the past;

(B) Whether citizens or nationals of

the country have a high nonimmigrant

visa refusal rate;

(C) Whether there is an insurrection

or instability in the country, such that

citizens or nationals of the country

should apply for nonimmigrant visas to

ensure that they are not intending

immigrants;

(D) Whether a significant number of

citizens or nationals of the country are

linked to terrorist activity, narcotics

trafficking, or international criminal

activity;

(E) Whether the President has issued

a proclamation under section 212(f) of

the Act suspending or restricting the

entry of citizens or nationals of the

country; or,

(F) Whether the country poses

significant security concerns.

(ii) By notice in the Federal Register,

the Service, acting jointly with the

Department of State, shall review

periodically and publish an updated list

of countries ineligible for transit

without visa privileges.

(iii) A list of countries whose citizens

or nationals are ineligible for TWOV

privileges will be maintained by the

Service’s Headquarters Office of

Inspections and is available upon

written request.

Dated: December 21, 2000.

Mary Ann Wyrsch,

Acting Commissioner, Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

[FR Doc. 01–355 Filed 1–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–284–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various

Transport Category Airplanes

Equipped With Certain Air Traffic

Control (ATC) Transponders

Manufactured by Rockwell Collins

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

various transport category airplanes

equipped with certain Mode C air traffic

control (ATC) transponders

manufactured by Rockwell Collins, Inc.

This proposal would require testing

each transponder; replacing certain

parts in any transponder which fails the

initial test and performing additional

test(s); and making repairs, as necessary

so that the transponder passes the test.

This proposal is prompted by reports

that indicate that the equipment used to

conduct earlier tests of certain

transponders did not detect certain

malfunctions. An airplane equipped

with such malfunctioning transponders

could transmit inaccurate data

concerning its altitude to a nearby

airplane equipped with the traffic alert

and collision avoidance system (TCAS

II), causing the TCAS II to issue an

erroneous resolution advisory to the

pilot. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

transmission of inaccurate data

concerning altitude from one airplane to

another, which could cause the pilot

receiving the data to change course,

either ascending or descending, and

possibly lead to a mid-air collision or

near mid-air collision.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 20, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

284–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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules 1055

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–284–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

Rockwell Collins, Inc., 400 Collins Road

NE; Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52498. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Skaves, Aerospace Engineer,

ANM–111, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056;

telephone (425) 227–2795; fax (425)

227–1320.

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 action 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

action must submit a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket Number 2000–

NM–284–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–284–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Related Rulemaking

AD 99–23–22

On November 4, 1999, the FAA issued

AD 99–23–22, amendment 39–11418 (64

FR 61493, November 12, 1999),

applicable to various transport category

airplanes equipped with Mode C air

traffic control (ATC) transponders with

single Gillham code altitude input. That

action was prompted by reports of

eleven incidents, each of which

involved an airplane equipped with

Mode C transponders and a second

nearby airplane equipped with the

traffic alert and collision avoidance

system (TCAS II). In these incidents, the

airplane equipped with the Mode C

transponders transmitted inaccurate

data regarding its altitude to the other

airplane. AD 99–23–22 required

repetitive tests to detect discrepancies of

the transponders and other equipment

associated with transmission of an

airplane’s altitude—aincluding the air

data computer and certain wiring

connections. The AD also required

repairs, if necessary, and reports of the

findings (both positive and negative) of

the initial and the repetitive tests to the

FAA. The actions required by that AD

were intended to prevent an airplane

equipped with one or two

malfunctioning Mode C ATC

transponders from transmitting such

inaccurate altitude data to a nearby

airplane equipped with TCAS II,

causing the TCAS II to issue an

erroneous resolution advisory to the

pilot to ascend or descend to avoid the

other airplane. Such an incident could

result in a decrease of separation

between the two airplanes, possibly

leading to a mid-air collision or a near

mid-air collision.

AD 99–23–22 R1

On December 10, 1999, the FAA

issued AD 99–23–22 R1, amendment

39–11473 (64 FR 70181, December 16,

1999), to extend certain compliance

times and limit the applicability of AD

99–23–22.

AD 99–23–22 R2

On April 7, 2000, the FAA issued AD

99–23–22 R2, amendment 39–11686 (65

FR 21133, April 20, 2000), to rescind

AD 99–23–22 R1, because test data

collected since issuance of AD 99–23–

22 R1 demonstrated that repetitive tests

of the transponders, air data computer,

and certain wiring connections were no

longer necessary. Approximately 8

percent of the tests indicated that the

Mode C transponders were transmitting

erroneous altitude data. Of the tests that

indicated a malfunction, over 50 percent

were caused by failure of the

transponders rather than failure of the

air data computer or the wiring

connections. Many of the transponders

that failed were of a particular type

manufactured by Rockwell Collins, Inc.

The FAA concluded, on the basis of

those results, that continued repetitive

tests on the subject airplane models

were unnecessary, since the corrective

actions had been accomplished on all

transport category airplanes identified

in AD 99–23–22 and AD 99–23–22 R1.

In addition, the FAA determined that

the repetitive tests required by AD 99–

23–22 R1 could result in increased or

accelerated component wear, which

could contribute to malfunctioning of

the Mode C ATC transponders, resulting

in transmission of additional inaccurate

data concerning the altitude of an

airplane.

Since Issuance of AD 99–23–22 R2

In the preamble to AD 99–23–22 R2,

the FAA indicated that the agency was

conducting further reviews to determine

whether there was a systemic failure of

the transponders. The FAA added that

it might consider further rulemaking to

address problems with the Mode C ATC

transponder. Since the issuance of AD

99–23–22 R2, Rockwell Collins, Inc., the

manufacturer of the transponders, has

advised that use of more sensitive

testing equipment is detecting a higher

malfunction rate in Mode C

transponders than had been detected

earlier. This finding suggests the need

for further testing of certain Rockwell

Collins Mode C ATC transponders,

including those which had been tested

previously and had apparently been

functioning properly.

On May 25, 2000, Rockwell Collins,

Inc. issued Service Information Letter

(SIL) 00–1, which pertained to the

621A–3 transponder (with part number

522–2703–XXX). The document,

subtitled ‘‘621A–3 Transponder

Overhaul Manual Test Equipment

Modification Recommendation,’’

indicates that some operators using ATC

ramp tester model number 601 (ATC–

1056 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules

601) to verify performance of Mode C

transponders with single Gillham

encoded altitude input were

experiencing a high reject rate of the

621A–3 transponders manufactured by

Rockwell Collins, Inc. The service letter

states that the ATC–601 ramp tester is

capable of detecting out-of-tolerance

errors in the framing pulse width,

whereas the ATC–600 ramp tester

previously used to test the transponders

did not detect these pulse width errors.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Rockwell Collins, Inc. has issued

temporary revisions to the 621A–3 ATC

Transponder Overhaul Manual with

Illustrated Parts List to provide a more

rigorous performance test of the Mode C

ATC transponders. The revisions are

Temporary Revision No. 34–44–00–38,

dated April 20, 2000, and Temporary

Revision No. 34–44–00–39, dated May

23, 2000.

Rockwell Collins, Inc. SIL 00–1 refers

to Rockwell Collins Service Bulletin

621A–3–34–21, Revision 1, dated

November 14, 1975, which provides

information on modification of the

transponder by replacing the transmitter

tube and resistor.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of the same

type design, the proposed AD would

require testing each transponder;

replacing the transmitter tube and the

resistor in any transponder which fails

the initial test and performing

additional test(s); and making repairs, as

necessary, so that the transponder

passes the test. Accomplishment of the

actions specified in the service bulletin

is intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 800

airplanes with transponders with the

affected part in the worldwide fleet. The

FAA estimates that approximately 400

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 4 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

test, and that the average labor rate is

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the proposed

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$96,000, or $240 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is 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 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 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.

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 the

following new airworthiness directive

(AD):

Transport Category Airplanes: Docket

2000–NM–284–AD.

Applicability: Transport category airplanes,

certificated in any category, equipped with

Rockwell Collins Mode C 621A–3 Air Traffic

Control (ATC) transponder(s), part number

(P/N) 522–2703–XXX (where XXX is any

series number).

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 (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 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 transmission of inaccurate data

concerning altitude from one airplane to

another, which could cause the pilot

receiving the data to change course, either

ascending or descending, and possibly lead

to a mid-air collision or near mid-air

collision, accomplish the following:

Testing

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD: Perform a pulse width test to

detect malfunctions of any Mode C 621A–3

ATC transponder(s) equipped with P/N 522–

2703–XXX, where XXX is any part number,

in accordance with Rockwell Collins Air

Transport Systems Overhaul Manual with

Illustrated Parts List, Temporary Revision

No. 34–44–00–38, dated April 20, 2000.

Replacement

(b) If the pulse width test required by

paragraph (a) of this AD detects malfunction

of a transponder: Prior to further flight,

replace the transmitter tube and resistor, in

accordance with Rockwell Collins Service

Bulletin 621A–3–34–21, Revision 1, dated

November 14, 1975, and repeat the pulse

width test specified in paragraph (a) of this

AD.

Repair

(c) If the follow-up pulse width test

required by paragraph (b) of this AD detects

malfunction of a transponder: Prior to further

flight, repair the transponder, air data

computer, or wiring connections between

them, in accordance with the applicable

Mode C transponder component maintenance

manual and airplane maintenance manual. If

the repair information is not available in the

applicable manual, prior to further flight,

repair the transponder in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager, Airplane

and Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: The airplane may be operated in

accordance with the provisions and

limitations specified in the FAA-approved

Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL),

provided that only one Mode C transponder

on the airplane is inoperative.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules 1057

Reporting Requirements

(d) Submit a report of the results (both

positive and negative) of the tests required by

paragraph (a) and (b) of this AD to: Peter

Skaves, Aerospace Engineer, ANM–111,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; fax (425) 227–1320. The report

must be submitted within 60 days from the

time of the transponder test. It must include

the part number of the Mode ‘‘C’’

transponder(s) and whether corrective action

was required. Information collection

requirements contained in this regulation

have been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

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, Airplanes

and Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

or Avionics Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Airplane and Flight Crew Interface Branch,

ANM–111.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Manager, Airplane and

Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111.

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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

December 29, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–341 Filed 1–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–371–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier

Model DHC–8–100, –200, and –300

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This document revises an

earlier proposed airworthiness directive

(AD), applicable to certain Bombardier

Model DHC–8–100, –200, and –300

series airplanes, that continues to

require a one-time detailed visual

inspection to detect damage of the

ladder plates and access cover areas of

the upper surface of the wings, repair,

if necessary, and installation of new Oring seals. That proposal was prompted

by issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. This new

action revises the inspection

requirements of the proposed rule by

correcting a reference to a repair

manual. The actions specified by this

new proposed AD are intended to

prevent damage of the upper wing

ladder plates, which could result in

displacement of the adjacent channel

seals and consequent reduced lightning

strike protection of the fuel tanks.

DATES: Comments must be received by

January 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

371–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–371–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

Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional

Aircraft Division, 123 Garrett Boulevard,

Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada.

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 FAA,

New York Aircraft Certification Office,

10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley

Stream, New York; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James E. Delisio, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–

171, FAA, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street,

Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York

11581; telephone (516) 256–7521; fax

(516) 568–2716.

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 action 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 action

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 99–NM–371–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.

99–NM–371–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to add an airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Bombardier Model DHC–8–100, –200,

and –300 series airplanes, was