Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 181 / Thursday, September 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 48961

(2) All requests for written agreement

under this section must be submitted to us

on or before the sales closing date and

include, by crop, the number of acres of all

crops for which insurance is offered under

the authority of the Act that you intend to

plant in the county.

(3) The total number of acres requested for

all crops cannot exceed the number of acres

of cropland in your farming operation for the

crop year.

(4) The number of acres determined in

section 14(e)(1)(i)(B) may be increased by

multiplying it by the ratio of the total

cropland acres that you are farming this year

(if greater) to the total cropland acres that you

farmed in the previous year, provided that

you submit proof to us on or before the sales

closing date for the insured crop that you

have purchased or leased additional land,

that acreage will be released from any USDA

program which prohibits harvest of a crop, or

that the additional acreage has not been

cropped in any of the four most recent crop

years. Such acreage must have been

purchased, leased, released from the USDA

program, or intended to be brought into

production in time to plant it for the current

crop year.

(5) The result of section 14(e)(1) or 14(e)(4),

whichever is applicable, will be reduced by

subtracting the number of acres of the crop

that are timely and late planted.

(f) Regardless of the number of eligible

acres determined in section 14(e), prevented

planting coverage will not be provided for

any acreage:

(1) That does not constitute at least 20

acres or 20 percent of the insurable crop

acreage in the unit, whichever is less (We

will assume that any prevented planting

acreage within a field that contains planted

acreage would have been planted to the same

crop that is planted in the field, unless the

prevented planting acreage constitutes at

least 20 acres or 20 percent of the insurable

acreage in the field and you can prove that

you intended to plant such acreage to another

crop);

(2) For which the Actuarial Table does not

designate a premium rate unless a written

agreement designates such premium rate;

(3) Used for conservation purposes or

intended to be left unplanted under any

program administered by the USDA;

(4) On which the insured crop is prevented

from being planted, if you or any other

person receives a prevented planting

payment for any crop for the same acreage in

the same crop year, unless you have coverage

greater than that applicable to the

Catastrophic Risk Protection Plan of

Insurance and have records of acreage and

production that are used to determine your

approved yield that show the acreage was

double-cropped in each of the last 4 years in

which the insured crop was grown on the

acreage;

(5) On which the insured crop is prevented

from being planted, if any crop from which

any benefit is derived under any program

administered by the USDA is planted and

fails, or if any crop is planted and harvested,

hayed or grazed on the same acreage in the

same crop year (other than a cover crop

which may be hayed or grazed after the final

planting date for the insured crop), unless

you have coverage greater than that

applicable to the Catastrophic Risk Protection

Plan of Insurance and have records of acreage

and production that are used to determine

your approved yield that show the acreage

was double-cropped in each of the last 4

years in which the insured crop was grown

on the acreage;

(6) Of a crop that is prevented from being

planted if a cash lease payment is also

received for use of the same acreage in the

same crop year (not applicable if acreage is

leased for haying or grazing only);

(7) For which planting history or

conservation plans indicate that the acreage

would have remained fallow for crop rotation

purposes;

(8) That is in excess of the number of acres

eligible for a prevented planting payment or

the number of eligible acres physically

available for planting;

(9) For which you cannot provide proof

that you had the inputs available to plant and

produce a crop with the expectation of at

least producing the yield used to determine

the production guarantee or amount of

insurance;

(10) Based on an irrigated practice

production guarantee or amount of insurance

unless adequate irrigation facilities were in

place to carry out an irrigated practice on the

acreage prior to the insured cause of loss that

prevented you from planting; or

(11) Based on a price election, amount of

insurance or production guarantee for a crop

type that you did not plant in at least one of

the four most recent years. Types for which

separate price elections, amounts of

insurance, or production guarantees are

available must be included in your APH

database in at least one of the most recent

four years, or, crops that do not require yield

certification (crops for which the insurance

guarantee is not based on APH) must be

reported on your acreage report in at least

one of the four most recent crop years.

(g) The prevented planting payment for any

eligible acreage within a unit will be

determined by:

(1) Multiplying the liability per acre for

timely planted acreage of the insured crop

(the amount of insurance per acre or the

production guarantee per acre multiplied by

the price election for the crop, or type if

applicable) by the prevented planting

coverage level percentage you elected, or that

is contained in the Crop Provisions if you did

not elect a prevented planting coverage level

percentage;

(2) Multiplying the result of section

14(g)(1) by the number of eligible prevented

planting acres in the unit; and

(3) Multiplying the result of section

14(g)(2) by your share.

15. Written Agreements.

Terms of this policy which are specifically

designated for the use of written agreements

may be altered by written agreement in

accordance with the following:

(a) You must apply in writing for each

written agreement no later than the sales

closing date, except as provided in section

15(e);

(b) The application for written agreement

must contain all terms of the contract

between you and us that will be in effect if

the written agreement is not approved.

(c) If approved, the written agreement will

include all variable terms of the contract,

including, but not limited to, crop type or

variety, the guarantee, premium rate, and

price election;

(d) Each written agreement will only be

valid for one year. (If the written agreement

is not specifically renewed the following

year, insurance coverage for subsequent

crops years will be in accordance with

printed policy); and

(e) An application for written agreement

submitted after the sales closing date may be

approved if, after a physical inspection of the

acreage, it is determined that no loss has

occurred and the crop is insurable in

accordance with the policy and written

agreement provisions.

Signed in Washington, D.C., on September

11, 1997.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–24769 Filed 9–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–08–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–SW–29–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky

Aircraft Corporation Model S–61A, D,

E, L, N, NM, R, and V Helicopters

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

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky)

Model S–61 A, D, E, L, N, NM, R, and

V helicopters. This proposal would

require a nondestructive inspection

(NDI) for cracks in the main rotor shaft

(shaft), and require removal of any shaft

with a crack and replacement with an

airworthy shaft. This proposal would

also require appropriate marking of

shafts and log book entries by the

operator to determine the shaft

retirement life, and would establish a

new retirement life for the shaft. This

proposal is prompted by four reports of

cracks occurring in helicopters that

were utilized in repetitive external lift

(REL) operations. The actions specified

by the proposed AD are intended to

detect a fatigue crack in the shaft, that

could result in shaft structural failure,

loss of power to the main rotor, and
48962 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 181 / Thursday, September 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter.

DATES: Comments must be received by

November 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 96–SW–29–AD, 2601

Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,

Texas 76137. Comments may be

inspected at this location between 9:00

a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn:

Manager, Commercial Tech Support,

6900 Main Street, P.O. Box 9729,

Stratford, CT 06497–9129. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Frank Walsh, Aerospace Engineer,

ANE–150, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803, telephone

(781) 238–7158, fax (781) 238–7199.

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

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 96–SW–29–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, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–SW–29–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,

Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

Discussion

This document proposes the adoption

of a new AD that is applicable to

Sikorsky Model S–61 A, D, E, L, N, NM,

R, and V helicopters. This proposal

would require a NDI of the shaft, part

number (P/N) S6135–20640–001,

S6135–20640–002, or S6137–23040–

001, used in REL operations within the

next 1,000 hours time-in-service (TIS),

or at the next main gearbox overhaul.

The NDI would be required to be

performed in accordance with Sikorsky

Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 61B35–

68, dated July 19, 1996. This proposal

would also establish retirement lives for

certain shafts utilized in REL

operations. Therefore, for shafts

installed on helicopters utilized in REL

operations that have not been modified

in accordance with Sikorsky Customer

Service Notice (CSN) 6135–10, dated

March 18, 1987, and Sikorsky ASB No.

61B35–53, dated December 2, 1981, the

retirement life would be 1,500 hours

time-in-service (TIS). For shafts

installed on helicopters utilized in REL

operations that have been modified in

accordance with Sikorsky CSN 6135–10,

dated March 18, 1987, and Sikorsky

ASB No. 61B35–53, dated December 2,

1981, the retirement life would be 2,000

hours TIS. This proposal is prompted by

four reports of cracks occurring in

helicopters that were utilized in REL

operations. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to detect a

fatigue crack in the shaft, that could

result in shaft structural failure, loss of

power to the main rotor, and subsequent

loss of control of the helicopter.

The FAA has reviewed Sikorsky ASB

No. 61B35–68, dated July 19, 1996. That

ASB describes procedures for

determining the TIS during which the

helicopter was utilized in REL

operations; performing a NDI of the

shaft; marking the shafts that have no

crack; and acid-etching the letters

‘‘REL’’ on airworthy shafts prior to their

installation on a helicopter that will be

used in REL operations. The ASB also

establishes new life limits for the shaft.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other Sikorsky Model S–61

A, D, E, L, N, NM, R, and V helicopters

of the same type design, the proposed

AD would require determining and

recording on the component log or

equivalent record the number of hours

TIS during which the helicopter was

utilized in REL operations, as well as

the number of external lifts conducted

during each hour TIS in which external

lifts were conducted; performing a NDI

of the shaft; marking the shafts that have

no crack; and acid-etching the letters

‘‘REL’’ on airworthy shafts prior to their

installation on a helicopter that will be

used in REL operations. The proposed

AD would also establish a new

retirement life for the shaft. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletins

described previously.

The FAA estimates that 30 helicopters

of U.S. registry that are involved in REL

operations would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2.2 work hours per

helicopter to accomplish the proposed

actions during the next scheduled

overhaul, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts for

the inspection would cost

approximately $50 per helicopter. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $5,460, assuming that no

shafts will need to be replaced as a

result of this AD.

The regulations proposed herein

would 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 Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

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.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 181 / Thursday, September 18, 1997 / Proposed Rules 48963

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive to

read as follows:

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No.

96–SW–29–AD.

Applicability: Model S–61 A, D, E, L, N,

NM, R, and V helicopters, with main rotor

shaft (shaft), part number (P/N) S6135–

20640–001, S6135–20640–002, or S6137–

23040–001, installed, certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

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

helicopters that have been modified, altered,

or repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (d) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition, or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any helicopter

from the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To detect a fatigue crack in the shaft, that

could result in shaft structural failure, loss of

power to the main rotor, and subsequent loss

of control of the helicopter, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within the next 30 calendar days or 240

hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs first,

determine if the shaft has been used in

repetitive external lift (REL) operations. REL

operation is defined as operation during

which the average number of external lifts

equals or exceeds six per flight hour for any

250 hour TIS period during the main gearbox

overhaul interval. An external lift is defined

as a flight cycle in which an external load is

picked up, the helicopter is repositioned

(through flight or hover), and the helicopter

hovers and releases the load and departs or

lands and departs. Record the total number

of hours TIS during which external lifts have

been conducted, as well as the number of

external lifts conducted during each hour, on

the component log card or equivalent record.

If the number of external lifts cannot be

determined, assume 6 external lifts were

conducted during each hour TIS in which

external lifts were conducted. If the hours

TIS of external lift operations cannot be

determined, assume REL operations were

conducted.

(b) For shafts used in REL operations,

within the next 1,000 hours TIS after the

effective date of this AD, conduct a nondestructive inspection (NDI) for cracks in the

shaft in accordance with the Overhaul

Manual. If a crack is discovered in a shaft,

remove the shaft and replace it with an

airworthy shaft. Mark the removed airworthy

shafts and the replacement shafts in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions in paragraphs 2E and 2F of

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation ASB No.

61B35–68, dated July 19, 1996. Once a shaft

has been designated and marked as an REL

shaft, it is life-limited accordingly for the

remainder of that shaft’s airworthy service

life.

(c) Retire all shafts that have been used in

REL operations as follows:

(1) Shafts that have been modified in

accordance with Sikorsky Customer Service

Notice 6135–10, dated March 18, 1987, and

Sikorsky ASB No. 61B35–53, dated December

2, 1981 (modified REL shafts), must be

removed from service on or before attaining

2,000 hours TIS.

(2) Shafts that have not been modified in

accordance with Sikorsky Customer Service

Notice 6135–10, dated March 18, 1987, and

Sikorsky ASB No. 61B35–53, dated December

2, 1981 (unmodified REL shafts), must be

removed from service on or before attaining

1,500 hours TIS.

(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, Boston

Aircraft Certification Office. Operators shall

submit their requests through an FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

concur or comment and then send it to the

Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Boston Aircraft

Certification Office.

(e) This AD revises the Limitations section

of the maintenance manual by establishing

new retirement lives of 1,500 hours TIS for

unmodified REL shafts and 2,000 hours TIS

for modified REL shafts.

(f) 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 helicopter

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September

12, 1997.

Eric Bries,

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–24795 Filed 9–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

20 CFR Parts 404 and 416

RIN 0960–AE74

Federal Old-Age, Survivors, and

Disability Insurance Benefits;

Supplemental Security Income for the

Aged, Blind, and Disabled;

Organization and Procedures;

Application of Circuit Court Law

AGENCY: Social Security Administration

(SSA).

ACTION: Proposed rules.

SUMMARY: These proposed regulations

would revise the current regulations

governing how we apply holdings of the

United States Courts of Appeals that we

determine conflict with our

interpretation of the Social Security Act

or regulations in adjudicating claims

under title II and title XVI of the Social

Security Act (the Act). The regulations

explain the new goal we have adopted

to ensure that Acquiescence Rulings

(ARs) are developed and issued

promptly and the new procedures we

are implementing to identify cases

pending in the administrative process

which might be affected by ARs.

DATES: To be sure your comments are

considered, we must have them no later

than November 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

submitted in writing to the

Commissioner of Social Security, P.O.

Box 1585, Baltimore, Maryland 21235,

sent by telefax to (410) 966–2830, sent

by E-mail to ‘‘regulations@ssa.gov,’’ or

delivered to the Division of Regulations

and Rulings, Social Security

Administration, 3-B–1 Operations

Building, 6401 Security Boulevard,

Baltimore, MD 21235, between 8:00 a.m.

and 4:30 p.m. on regular business days.

Comments may be inspected during

these same hours by making

arrangements with the contact person

shown below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harry J. Short, Legal Assistant, Division

of Regulations and Rulings, Social

Security Administration, 6401 Security

Boulevard, Baltimore MD 21235, (410)

965–6243 for information about these

rules. For information on eligibility or

claiming benefits, call our national toll

free number, 1–800–772–1213.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 11, 1990, (55 FR 1012) we

published final regulations to

implement a revised policy for applying

circuit court holdings that conflict with

our interpretation of the Act or

regulations to subsequent claims within

that circuit involving the same issue.