This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

6941 

Vol. 77, No. 28 

Friday, February 10, 2012 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Credit Corporation 

7 CFR Part 1491 

[Docket No. NRCS–2009–0004] 

RIN 0578–AA46 

Farm and Ranch Lands Protection 

Program 

AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 

United States Department of 

Agriculture. 

ACTION: Final rule amendment; response 

to comments. 

SUMMARY: The Natural Resources 

Conservation Service (NRCS) published 

in the Federal Register a final rule for 

the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection 

Program (FRPP) on January 24, 2011, to 

address comments received on the 

interim rule and to publish changes to 

the entity certification requirements. At 

that time, NRCS provided an 

opportunity for the public to submit 

comments for 30 days on the 

certification requirements only. This 

rulemaking action is necessary to 

address those comments received on the 

entity certification requirements. 

DATES: Effective date: This amendment 

is effective February 10, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Parkin, Team Leader, Easement 

Programs, Easement Programs Division, 

Department of Agriculture, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, 1400 

Independence Ave. SW., Room 6807 

South Building, Washington, DC 20250; 

Telephone: (202) 720–1864; Fax: (202) 

720–9689; Email: steve.parkin@wdc.

usda.gov. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication 

(Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) 

should contact the USDA TARGET 

Center at: (202) 720–2600 (Voice and 

TDD). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Certifications 

Executive Order 12866 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this final 

rule amendment is not significant and 

will not be reviewed by OMB. The FRPP 

final rule published on January 24, 

2011, is a significant regulatory action, 

and NRCS conducted an economic 

analysis of the potential impacts 

associated with this program. NRCS 

reviewed the economic analysis 

prepared for the final rule and 

determined that the provisions of this 

amendment do not alter the assessment 

and the findings that were originally 

prepared. A copy of the economic 

analysis is available on the NRCS Web 

site at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/

portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/

farmbill/analysis. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act is not 

applicable to this final rule amendment 

because NRCS is not required by 5 

U.S.C. 553, or by any other provision of 

law, to publish a notice of proposed 

rulemaking with respect to the subject 

matter of this rule. 

Environmental Analysis 

An environmental assessment (EA) 

was prepared in association with the 

FRPP interim and final rule. The 

provisions of this amendment do not 

alter the assessment and the findings 

that were originally prepared. The 

analysis determined that there would 

not be a significant impact to the human 

environment and as a result, an 

Environmental Impact Statement was 

not required to be prepared (40 CFR 

1508.13). A copy of the EA and Finding 

of No Significant Impact may be 

obtained from the NRCS Web site at: 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/

nrcs/main/national/programs/farmbill/

analysis. 

Civil Rights Impact Analysis 

NRCS has determined through a Civil 

Rights Impact Analysis that the final 

rule discloses no disproportionately 

adverse impacts for minorities, women, 

or persons with disabilities. The 

provisions of this amendment to the 

final rule do not alter the assessment 

and the findings that were originally 

prepared. A copy of the analysis may be 

obtained from the NRCS Web site at: 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/

nrcs/main/national/programs/farmbill/

analysis. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Section 2904 of the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

(2008 Act) requires that implementation 

of programs authorized under Title II of 

the Act be made without regard to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Title 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Therefore, NRCS 

is not reporting recordkeeping or 

estimated paperwork burden associated 

with this final rule amendment. 

Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132 requires 

agencies to conform to principles of 

Federalism in the development of its 

policies and regulations. NRCS has 

determined that this final rule 

amendment conforms with the 

Federalism principles set forth in the 

Executive Order; would not have 

impose any compliance costs on the 

States; and would not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities on the various levels of 

government. Therefore, NRCS concludes 

that this final rule amendment does not 

have Federalism implementations. 

Executive Order 13175 

This final rule amendment has been 

reviewed in accordance with the 

requirements of Executive Order 13175, 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments. NRCS has 

assessed the impact of this final rule 

amendment on Indian Tribal 

Governments and concluded it will not 

negatively affect Indian Tribal 

Governments or their communities. This 

final rule amendment does not have a 

substantial direct effect on Tribes, as 

these regulatory provisions do not 

impose unreimbursed compliance costs 

nor preempts Tribal law. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This action does not compel the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any one year (adjusted for inflation) by 

any State, local, or Tribal Governments, 

or anyone in the private sector. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
6942 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Therefore, a statement under section 

202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 is not required. 

Federal Crop Insurance Reform and 

Department of Agriculture 

Reorganization Act of 1994 

The Federal Crop Insurance Reform 

and Department of Agriculture 

Reorganization Act of 1994, Title III, 

section 304, requires that for each 

proposed major regulation with a 

primary purpose to regulate issues of 

human health, human safety, or the 

environment, USDA is to publish an 

analysis of the risks addressed by the 

regulation and the costs and benefits of 

the regulation. This final rule is not a 

proposed major regulation, and 

therefore, a risk analysis was not 

conducted. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) 

This final rule amendment is neither 

major nor significant, and therefore, it is 

not subject to the SBREFA 60-day 

requirement. Accordingly, this final rule 

amendment is effective upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Background 

NRCS published in the Federal 

Register on January 16, 2009, an interim 

rule with request for comment 

amending the program regulations for 

FRPP. The interim rule implemented 

changes to FRPP made by the 2008 Act 

and made administrative improvements 

to the program. NRCS published a 

correction to the interim rule on July 2, 

2009, to clarify that the contingent right 

of enforcement is a condition placed 

upon the award of financial assistance 

and, therefore, does not constitute a 

realty acquisition. That action also 

reopened the public comment period for 

the interim rule. 

The FRPP final rule was issued on 

January 24, 2011, to address comments 

received on the interim rule and to 

publish changes to the entity 

certification requirements. At that time, 

NRCS provided the public an additional 

30 days to comment only on the changes 

made by the final rule to the entity 

certification requirements. This 

rulemaking action is necessary to 

address comments received on the 

entity certification requirements during 

that public comment period. 

Responses to Comments and 

Amendment to Final Rule 

NRCS received 27 comments from 7 

commenters on FRPP entity certification 

requirements as set forth in the January 

24, 2011, final rule. The commenters 

addressed both procedural and 

substantive topics associated with FRPP 

entity certification. This section of the 

preamble addresses these comments and 

NRCS responses. Comments that NRCS 

received on other topics were not 

considered in this rulemaking. 

Administrative Flexibility 

Comment: One commenter expressed 

support for the administrative flexibility 

certified entities could receive regarding 

NRCS oversight of FRPP-funded 

easement transactions. 

NRCS Response: NRCS believes that 

the administrative flexibility provided 

by the certification process implements 

the statutory changes made to FRPP by 

the 2008 Act. NRCS is taking this 

opportunity to identify additional 

administrative flexibility afforded to 

certified entities. A certified entity may 

avail itself of post-closing 

administrative flexibility as well. In 

particular, § 1491.22(k) of the FRPP final 

rule identifies that any changes to the 

easement deed after its recordation must 

be consistent with the purposes of the 

conservation easement and FRPP, and 

any substantive amendments will 

require NRCS approval. For certified 

entities, NRCS will deem amendments 

submitted by certified entities as 

approved and will only require the 

certified entity to provide the NRCS 

State office a copy of any recorded 

amendment within 60 days of recording 

the amendment. NRCS will consider a 

certified entity’s implementation of this 

administrative flexibility as part of its 

3-year certification review cycle and 

other quality assurance reviews. Any 

amendment that substantively adversely 

impacts the conservation values 

protected by the conservation easement 

deed may be considered a deficiency in 

terms of the certified entity’s ability to 

enforce its conservation easement deeds 

effectively. 

Comment: One commenter 

recommended NRCS not mandate 

technical reviews of all appraisals, and 

instead should conduct quality 

assurance reviews on a sampling of 

appraisals in conjunction with the title 

and easement reports for certified 

entities. 

NRCS Response: NRCS has already 

adopted a practice consistent with this 

comment in the January 24, 2011, final 

rule. In particular, § 1491.4(e)(5) states 

that NRCS will conduct quality 

assurance reviews of a percentage of the 

conservation easement transactions 

submitted by the certified entity for 

payment. The review will include 

whether the deed, title review, or 

appraisals were conducted in 

accordance with the requirements set 

forth by NRCS in its certification of the 

eligible entity or in the cooperative 

agreement entered into with the 

certified entity. 

NRCS requires industry approved 

appraisals for every FRPP easement 

transaction. NRCS performs a technical 

review to establish that the industry 

approved appraisal standard and NRCS 

requirements have been met in the 

appraisal report. For certified entities, 

NRCS will not require technical reviews 

on every appraisal because certified 

entities have shown competency in 

administering the program. However, 

NRCS has a fiduciary responsibility to 

the Nation’s taxpayers to ensure the 

program is carried out as authorized and 

that funds expended meet the program’s 

purpose. In order to ensure that Federal 

dollars have been spent appropriately, 

NRCS will conduct a sampling of 

appraisals to ensure compliance with 

appraisal standards. No changes were 

made to the final rule as a result of this 

comment. 

Certification Process 

Comment: NRCS received a 

recommendation that there should be an 

explicit step in the rule that states NRCS 

will make a certification determination 

and notify the eligible entity regarding 

that decision. 

NRCS Response: NRCS agrees that the 

certification determination and 

notification are necessary steps in the 

certification process and will notify an 

eligible entity of the NRCS certification 

determination with a letter from the 

Chief or the Chief’s designee. 

Accordingly, NRCS has amended 

§ 1491.4(e) to clarify that NRCS will 

notify entities in writing whether they 

have met the certification requirements. 

If certification is denied, an entity may 

resubmit their certification application 

after addressing the application 

deficiencies. 

Comment: NRCS received two 

comments that several of the 

certification criteria in § 1491.4(d) 

appeared redundant to the basic entity 

eligibility criteria in § 1491.4(c), 

including criteria related to the timely 

acquisition of easements and adjustment 

of procedures to meet program 

purposes. 

NRCS Response: No changes were 

made to the final rule based on this 

comment. The criteria identified in 

§ 1491.4(d) are not duplicative of the 

eligibility criteria. Certification 

requirements are designed to build upon 

basic aspects of eligibility in order to 

provide streamlined acquisition of 

conservation easements by certified 

entities. Easement transactions 

conducted by certified entities occur 

with reduced oversight by NRCS. NRCS 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 6943 

believes that additional assurance at the 

time of certification is necessary to 

ensure certified entities will handle 

FRPP-funded transactions in an efficient 

manner that adheres to FRPP 

requirements. 

Comment: One commenter stated that 

§ 1491.4(d)(9) requires a plan for 

administering easements as 

‘‘determined by the Chief.’’ This appears 

to give the Chief unlimited discretion to 

reject certification requests, suggests 

uncertainty for the program, and may 

conflict with State and local land 

preservation programs’ approvals. The 

commenter argued that there needs to be 

a way for an entity to judge whether its 

plan will be found as adequate. 

NRCS Response: Given the range of 

partners in FRPP (over 400), NRCS does 

not want to circumscribe the content of 

an entity’s plan in regulation. However, 

NRCS agrees with the commenter that 

further general guidance would be 

helpful. Accordingly, NRCS sets forth 

the following general categories that 

should be addressed by entities: 

Monitoring frequency and methodology, 

site visits, enforcement policies, policies 

related to when to notify NRCS about 

easement activities, amendment 

policies, and methods for periodic 

communication with landowners. NRCS 

believes that this flexibility works to the 

benefit of the applicant, allowing the 

applicant to demonstrate how its 

particular stewardship strategy will 

further FRPP purposes. No changes 

were made to the final rule as a result 

of this comment. 

Comment: One commenter cautioned 

that the terms ‘‘certified’’ and ‘‘eligible’’ 

need to be used carefully. The word 

‘‘qualified’’ can be confused with 

‘‘certified.’’ Under this section, the 

respondent suggests that for any entity 

to become certified, it must be eligible. 

This same commenter recommended 

that NRCS not require that a request for 

certification be submitted in 

conjunction with a request for FRPP 

funding. 

NRCS Response: NRCS agrees that the 

terms should be clear and that a 

certification request does not also 

require a funding request. Any entity 

seeking certification must meet the basic 

eligibility requirements identified in 

§ 1491.4(c) which is currently required 

under § 1491.4(d)(1). Therefore, NRCS 

has revised the introductory text to 

§ 1491.4(d) to read as follows: ‘‘To be 

considered for certification, an entity 

must submit a written request for 

certification to NRCS, and must: * * *’’ 

NRCS has removed the phrases ‘‘must 

be qualified to be an eligible entity and’’ 

and ‘‘at the time the entity is requesting 

FRPP cost-share assistance.’’ 

Comment: NRCS received three 

comments recommending that NRCS 

utilize the work of the Land Trust 

Alliance Accreditation Commission 

(LTAC) to determine whether an eligible 

entity has met some or all of the FRPP 

certification criteria, since the LTAC 

completes extensive reviews of land 

trusts to ensure that accredited land 

trusts have the ability to acquire, 

manage, and hold. 

NRCS Response: NRCS is familiar 

with the accreditation process used by 

LTAC and agrees with the commenters 

that in some instances, LTAC 

accreditation indicates a high level of 

competency in areas also required by 

NRCS. Where LTAC criteria meet or 

exceed FRPP certification requirements, 

NRCS will likely determine that an 

LTAC-accreditation will satisfy those 

FRPP requirements. However, NRCS 

also requires that an entity be proficient 

with the FRPP program and be 

knowledgeable about FRPP 

requirements in order to be certified. 

With respect to those FRPP-specific 

criteria, each entity will be evaluated by 

NRCS. No changes were made to the 

final rule as a result of this comment. 

Comments: NRCS received several 

comments expressing concern about the 

certification requirement that an entity 

hold, manage, and monitor a minimum 

of 25 agricultural land conservation 

easements and a minimum of 5 FRPP 

easements. Commenters stated that an 

entity may have stellar land 

preservation programs but not meet the 

agricultural land or numerical 

requirement because there are fewer 

farms to enroll. Accordingly, the 

commenters proposed that waivers 

should be provided for LTAC accredited 

land trusts or those entities who have 

demonstrated through their 

participation with other organizations or 

on other land types that they have 

sufficient conservation easement 

experience. 

Response: As explained in the 

preamble of the January 24, 2011, FRPP 

final rule, NRCS based the minimum 25 

agricultural land conservation easement 

requirement upon data from the Land 

Trust Alliance 2005 National Land Trust 

Census Report. In particular, NRCS 

looked at acres owned and under 

easement by land trusts, the number of 

land trusts, and the average size FRPP 

easement. This figure represents the 

average number of easements held by 

land trusts, and therefore, serves as an 

indicator of entity capacity and stability. 

NRCS recognizes that this number can 

vary widely between States and regions. 

Entities with less than 25 easements 

may be demonstrating high standards in 

easement acquisition, management, and 

monitoring. Therefore, NRCS also 

incorporated a waiver provision in 

§ 1491.4(d)(3) of the January 24, 2011, 

final rule, allowing entities to be 

certified even if they do not have the 

requisite minimum 25 agricultural land 

conservation easements. However, there 

is no waiver provision for the 

requirement that entities hold five FRPP 

easements. NRCS believes a certified 

entity should be familiar with FRPP and 

its requirements before receiving the 

benefits of certification, and the 

requirement that the certified entity 

holds a minimum of five FRPP-funded 

easements is a fair and reasonable 

threshold demonstrating such 

familiarity. 

Closing Efficiency 

Comment: NRCS received several 

comments urging NRCS to utilize as its 

closing efficiency element whether an 

entity is able to consistently close on its 

easement within 18 months of the 

signing of the cooperative agreement. 

These commenters requested 

clarification on when NRCS begins 

measuring the 18 months and asked 

NRCS to only consider the time for 

aspects of the process that are within 

the entity’s control. The commenters 

also identified that because parcel 

substitutions are allowed, adding or 

removing projects from a pending offer 

list should not affect the determination 

of closing efficiency so long as the 

majority of parcel transactions on the 

final list are completed within 18 

months. 

NRCS Response: NRCS will base 

closing efficiency upon the time from 

the execution date of the cooperative 

agreement or amendment, and the 

closing date of the easement transaction 

funded under that cooperative 

agreement or amendment. The 18- 

month closing efficiency standard for 

certification is based upon the current 

closing efficiency requirement set forth 

in the FRPP cooperative agreements. 

NRCS calculates an average completion 

time for each funding year, and then 

averages the past 5 years together. The 

5-year period of calculation provides an 

average that mitigates against concerns 

related to the timing of substitute 

parcels. NRCS will not remove 

substituted parcels from these closing 

efficiency calculations. NRCS has 

encountered situations where an eligible 

entity has allowed initial easement 

transactions to languish and then 

requested extensions to the cooperative 

agreement to conduct activities 

associated with substitute parcels. 

While allowance for substitute parcels is 

necessary, the abuse of this practice 

results in the inefficient use of Federal 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
6944 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

funds or staff resources. To ensure 

fairness in situations where NRCS may 

have contributed unnecessarily to the 

delay, NRCS will allow an entity 

seeking certification to request a waiver 

of the 18-month closing efficiency 

requirement. The NRCS State 

Conservationist will make a 

recommendation to the Chief based on 

the information in the waiver request. 

No changes were made to the final rule 

to implement this administrative 

flexibility. 

Cooperative Agreements 

Comment: NRCS received two 

comments recommending that the 

provisions for certified entities be 

applied retroactively to any cooperative 

agreements approved since adoption of 

the changes made by the 2008 Act. 

NRCS Response: NRCS is applying 

the certification provisions to 

cooperative agreements entered into by 

NRCS and the certified entity in fiscal 

year (FY) 2011 or later. The agency has 

chosen this date because in FY 2011, all 

partners were required to execute new 

agreements with the revised cooperative 

agreement template which incorporated 

2008 Act requirements. Choosing this 

date ensures that all certified entities 

will be bound by the same requirements 

when using FRPP funds. NRCS views 

this decision to be administrative; 

therefore, no changes were made to the 

final rule. 

Decertification 

Comment: NRCS received one 

comment recommending that NRCS 

change an entity’s review period to 

coincide with the renewal of the 

cooperative agreement. The commenter 

asserted that a 5-year review period will 

be more efficient and will provide NRCS 

with a more complete body of work. 

NRCS Response: Section 

1238I(h)(3)(A) of the FRPP statute 

requires NRCS to conduct a review of 

certified entities every 3 years. This 

review would occur at least once during 

the life of the 5-year cooperative 

agreement. No changes were made to 

the final rule in response to this 

comment. 

Comment: NRCS received one 

comment about certified entities that 

may close on easements without prior 

review of appraisals, deeds, and title 

commitment. The commenter asserted 

that decertification of a certified entity 

should not be based on the NRCS 

reviewer’s conclusions of deficiencies 

found in an appraisal report or other 

aspect of the easement transaction. 

Another commenter requested 

clarification regarding the appeal rights 

of a certified entity that has been decertified. 

NRCS Response: Decertification 

actions are not initiated based on NRCS 

identification of any particular 

deficiency that may be revealed in an 

appraisal or other review. Rather, 

decertification of a certified entity is 

based on the entity’s failure to remedy 

one or more of the deficiencies 

regarding the criteria in § 1491.4(d) 

within 180 days of receiving notice of 

such deficiency from NRCS. 

Additionally, NRCS will provide 

guidance to the certified entity 

regarding correcting identified 

deficiencies. The NRCS decertification 

decision is not a matter subject to a 

National Appeals Division appeal 

because it is not an adverse decision 

affecting the rights of a participant (see 

7 CFR part 11). However, the FRPP 

decertification process at § 1491.4(f)(2) 

provides entities subject to 

decertification an opportunity to contest 

such action within 20 days of a Notice 

of Decertification. Eligible entities who 

are not certified may still participate in 

FRPP. 

Dedicated Fund 

Comment: Four commenters 

requested clarification about the NRCS 

capitalization requirements for the 

dedicated fund for easement 

management, monitoring, and 

enforcement. Two of these commenters 

recommended that NRCS consider the 

capitalization guidelines provided by 

the Land Trust Alliance accreditation 

process. 

Response: NRCS does not want to 

dictate capitalization requirements for 

the land trust community. However, as 

a general guideline based upon 

standards in the farmland protection 

community, NRCS identified in the 

preamble of the final rule that the 

dedicated fund must have at least 

$50,000 for legal defense and $10,000 

per easement for management and 

monitoring. 

Comment: NRCS received several 

comments asking for clarification about 

whether certified entities must have a 

dedicated fund for each easement 

transaction. 

Response: NRCS agrees that a 

dedicated fund is not needed for each 

transaction. A certified nongovernmental entity may have funds 

reside in a pool dedicated for the 

management, monitoring, and 

enforcement of all easements. No 

changes were made to the final rule in 

response to these comments. 

Quality Assurance 

Comment: NRCS received one 

comment requesting that NRCS conduct 

all quality assurance reviews prior to 

the certified entity closing on the 

transactions since a pre-closing quality 

assurance review will allow the certified 

entity to work through any issues. 

NRCS Response: NRCS agrees that a 

pre-closing quality assurance review has 

less risk than a post-closing review. 

However, the purpose of the expanded 

flexibility available to certified entities 

under the final rule is to improve the 

efficiency of easement acquisition 

activities for those responsible entities 

with a proven track-record. Through the 

certification process, NRCS determines 

the ability of an eligible entity to 

conduct acquisition activities in 

accordance with FRPP requirements 

without pre-closing review of each 

easement transaction. Additionally, a 

certified entity may consult with NRCS 

at any time during the easement 

acquisition process, but it will not be a 

requirement. No changes were made to 

the final rule in response to this 

comment. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1491 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Agriculture, Soil 

conservation. 

For the reasons stated above, the 

Commodity Credit Corporation amends 

part 1491 of Title 7 of the CFR as set 

forth below: 

PART 1491—FARM AND RANCH 

LANDS PROTECTION PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1491 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3838h–3838i. 

■ 2. Amend § 1491.4 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (d) and 

the introductory text of paragraph (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 1491.4 Program requirements. 

* * * * * 

(d) To be considered for certification, 

an entity must submit a written request 

for certification to NRCS, and must: 

* * * * * 

(e) NRCS will notify an entity in 

writing whether they have been certified 

and the rationale for the agency’s 

decision. Once NRCS determines an 

entity qualifies as certified: 

* * * * * 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 6945 

Signed this 2nd day of February 2012, in 

Washington, DC. 

Dave White, 

Vice President, Commodity Credit 

Corporation and Chief, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3173 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0154; Special 

Conditions No. 25–457–SC] 

Special Conditions: Learjet Inc., 

Learjet Model LJ–200–1A10; 

Interaction of Systems and Structures 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Learjet Model LJ–200– 

1A10 airplane. This airplane will have 

novel or unusual design features 

associated with systems that, directly or 

as a result of failure or malfunction, 

affect structural performance. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards for these design 

features. These special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: The effective date of these 

special conditions is February 3, 2012. 

We must receive your comments by 

March 26, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2012–0154 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 

8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at (202) 493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov/, 

including any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at http:// 

DocketsInfo.dot.gov/. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov/at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Todd Martin, FAA, Airframe and Cabin 

Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227–1178; facsimile 

(425) 227–1320. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

has determined that notice of, and 

opportunity for public comments on, 

these special conditions are 

unnecessary. The substance of these 

special conditions has been subject to 

the public comment process in several 

prior instances with no substantive 

comments received. The FAA therefore 

finds that good cause exists for making 

these special conditions effective upon 

issuance. 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. 

We will consider all comments we 

receive by the closing date for 

comments. We may change these special 

conditions based on the comments we 

receive. 

Background 

On February 9, 2009, Learjet Inc. 

applied for a type certificate for their 

new Model LJ–200–1A10 (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘Model LJ–200’’) airplane. 

The Model LJ–200 is a business class 

aircraft powered by 2 high bypass 

turbine engines with an estimated 

maximum takeoff weight of 36,000 

pounds and an interior configuration for 

up to 10 passengers. 

The airplane is equipped with 

systems that, directly or as a result of 

failure or malfunction, affect its 

structural performance. Current 

regulations do not take into account 

loads for the aircraft due to the effects 

of system failures on structural 

performance. These special conditions 

define criteria to be used in the 

assessment of the effects of these 

systems on structures. The general 

approach of accounting for the effect of 

system failures on structural 

performance would be extended to 

include any system whose partial or 

complete failure, alone or in 

combination with other system failures, 

would affect structural performance. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, 

Learjet Inc. must show that the Model 

LJ–200 meets the applicable provisions 

of part 25, as amended by Amendments 

25–1 through 25–127 thereto. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for the Model LJ–200 because of a novel 

or unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the model for which they 

are issued. Should the type certificate 

for that model be amended later to 

include any other model that 

incorporates the same or similar novel 

or unusual design feature, these special 

conditions would also apply to the other 

model. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, the Model LJ–200 must 

comply with the fuel vent and exhaust 

emission requirements of 14 CFR part 

34 and the noise certification 

requirements of 14 CFR part 36; and the 

FAA must issue a finding of regulatory 

adequacy pursuant to § 611 of Public 

Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 

1972.’’ 

The FAA issues special conditions, as 

defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance 

with § 11.38, and they become part of 

the type certification basis under 

§ 21.17(a)(2). 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The Model LJ–200 will incorporate 

the following novel or unusual design 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES