Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules 63855 

determination of the biobased content. 

In situations where a new product for 

which certification is sought is 

composed of the same biobased 

ingredients and has the same biobased 

content as a product that has already 

been certified, the manufacturer may, in 

lieu of having the new product tested, 

self-declare the biobased content of the 

new product by referencing the tested 

biobased content of the original certified 

product. Certification of the original 

product must have been obtained by 

either the manufacturer of the new 

product or by the supplier of the 

biobased ingredients used in the new 

product. 

(c) * * * Paragraph (c)(5) of this 

section presents the procedures for 

revising the information provided under 

paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this 

section after a notice of certification has 

been issued. 

* * * * * 

(5) If at any time, during the 

application process or after a product 

has been certified, any of the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (4) of this section 

changes, the applicant must notify 

USDA of the change within 30 days. 

Such notification must be provided in 

writing to USDA. 

(d) * * * 

(1) The effective date of certification 

is the date on which the applicant 

receives a notice of certification from 

USDA. Except as specified in 

paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (d)(2)(v) of 

this section, certifications will remain in 

effect as long as the product is 

manufactured and marketed in 

accordance with the approved 

application and the requirements of this 

subpart. 

(2) * * * 

(iv) All certifications are subject to 

USDA periodic auditing activities, as 

described in § 3202.10(d). If a 

manufacturer or vendor of a certified 

biobased product fails to participate in 

such audit activities or if such audit 

activities reveal biobased content 

violations, as specified in § 3202.8(b)(1), 

the certification will be subject to 

suspension and revocation according to 

the procedures specified in § 3202.8(c). 

(v) If USDA discovers that a 

certification has been issued for an 

ineligible biobased product as a result of 

errors on the part of USDA during the 

approval process, USDA will notify the 

product’s manufacturer or vendor in 

writing that the certification is revoked 

effective 30 days from the date of the 

notice. 

■ 5. Section 3202.8 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 3202.8 Violations. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) Other remedies. In addition to the 

suspension or revocation of the 

certification to use the label, depending 

on the nature of the violation, USDA 

may pursue suspension or debarment of 

the entities involved in accordance with 

2 CFR part 417 and 48 CFR subpart 9.4. 

USDA further reserves the right to 

pursue any other remedies available by 

law, including any civil or criminal 

remedies, against any entity that 

violates the provisions of this part. 

■ 6. Section 3202.10 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 3202.10 Oversight and monitoring. 

* * * * * 

(d) Audits. USDA expects to conduct 

audits of the voluntary labeling program 

on an ongoing basis with audit activities 

conducted every other calendar year (biannually). Audit activities will include 

three stages and will be conducted in 

sequential order as follows: 

(1) Stage 1 auditing includes 

contacting all participants via email and 

requesting that they complete a 

‘‘Declaration of Conformance Form.’’ 

Program participants are asked to 

confirm that they still manufacture the 

product and that the formulation and 

manufacturing processes remain the 

same. Participants are also asked to list 

all active products and advise the USDA 

of any complaints regarding the claim of 

the biobased content. The first Stage 1 

auditing activity was completed in 2012 

and the second Stage 1 audit will be 

conducted in 2018. 

(2) Stage 2 auditing consists of a 

random sampling of certified products 

to confirm the accuracy of biobased 

content percentages claimed. The 

participants whose products are 

selected will be required to submit 

product samples to be tested by 

independent testing labs at USDA 

expense. The first Stage 2 auditing 

activity is scheduled to be completed 

during 2014 and the second Stage 2 

audit will be conducted in 2020. 

(3) Stage 3 auditing requires 

manufacturers of products that have 

been certified for 5 years or more to 

have their products re-tested at their 

expense to confirm that the biobased 

content remains at or above the level at 

which the product was originally 

certified. The first Stage 3 auditing 

activity is scheduled to be completed 

during 2016 and the second Stage 3 

audit will be conducted in 2022. 

Dated: October 15, 2014. 

Gregory L. Parham, 

Assistant Secretary For Administration, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25427 Filed 10–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–93–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–1088; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–SW–76–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky 

Aircraft Corporation Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to revise 

airworthiness directive (AD) 2014–12– 

11 for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation 

(Sikorsky) Model S–92A helicopters. AD 

2014–12–11 currently requires revising 

the Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) to 

include the appropriate operating 

limitations for performing Class D 

external load-combination operations. 

As published, AD 2014–12–11 

references an incorrect date for Revision 

No. 12 of Sikorsky RFM SA S92A– 

RFM–003, Part 1. This proposed AD 

would correct the error while retaining 

the requirements of AD 2014–12–11. 

These proposed actions are intended to 

require appropriate operating 

limitations to allow operators to perform 

Class D external load-combination 

operations, including human external 

cargo, in this model helicopter that now 

meets the Category A performance 

standard. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 12, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
63856 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Operations Office between 9 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Sikorsky 

Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, 

Commercial Technical Support, 

mailstop S581A, 6900 Main Street, 

Stratford, CT, telephone (203) 383–4866, 

email address tsslibrary@sikorsky.com, 

or at http://www.sikorsky.com. You may 

review service information at the FAA, 

Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham 

Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 

76137. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Coffey, Flight Test Engineer, Boston 

Aircraft Certification Office, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; telephone (781) 238–7173; email: 

john.coffey@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to participate in this 

rulemaking by submitting written 

comments, data, or views. We also 

invite comments relating to the 

economic, environmental, energy, or 

federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit only one time. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments that we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

Before acting on this proposal, we will 

consider all comments we receive on or 

before the closing date for comments. 

We will consider comments filed after 

the comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. We may change this 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. 

Discussion 

AD 2014–12–11, amendment 39– 

17872 (79 FR 45085, August 4, 2014), 

applies to Sikorsky Model S–92A 

helicopters and requires revising the 

RFM to include the appropriate 

operating limitations for performing 

Class D external load-combination 

operations. When AD 2014–12–11 was 

published, an incorrect reference to the 

date of the RFM revision appeared in 

the text of the rule. 

Specifically, the AD included the 

following under paragraph (f), Credit for 

Actions Previously Completed: 

‘‘Incorporation of the changes contained 

in Sikorsky RFM SA S92A–RFM–003, 

Part 1, Revision No. 12, approved March 

21, 2005, before the effective date of this 

AD is considered acceptable for 

compliance with the corresponding 

actions specified in paragraph (e) of this 

AD.’’ As published, the reference to 

March 21, 2005, is incorrect. The correct 

approval date for Revision 12 is 

December 9, 2010. 

The FAA has determined that it is 

appropriate to revise AD 2014–12–11 to 

correct the RFM approval date. This 

revision would clarify any confusion 

regarding which RFM revision is 

acceptable to obtain credit for previous 

actions. 

No other part of the preamble or 

regulatory information has been 

changed. The final rule would be 

reprinted in its entirety for the 

convenience of affected operators. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would 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. 

For the reasons discussed, I certify 

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); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction; and 

4. 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. 

We prepared an economic evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2014–12–11, Amendment 39–17872 (79 

FR 45085, August 4, 2014), and by 

adding the following new AD: 

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. 

FAA–2009–1088; Directorate Identifier 

2008–SW–76–AD. 

(a) Applicability 

This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft 

Corporation Model S–92A helicopters, 

certificated in any category. 

(b) Unsafe Condition 

This AD defines the unsafe condition as an 

inaccurate Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) 

provision, which was approved without 

appropriate limitations for this model 

helicopter for carrying Class D external 

rotorcraft-load combinations, including 

Human External Cargo (HEC), when this 

model helicopter was not certificated to 

Category A one-engine inoperative (OEI) 

performance standards, including fly away 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules 63857 

capabilities after an engine failure, which is 

required for carrying HEC. 

(c) Affected ADs 

This AD revises AD 2014–12–11, 

Amendment 39–17872 (79 FR 45085, August 

4, 2014). 

(d) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by November 

12, 2014. 

(e) Compliance 

You are responsible for performing each 

action required by this AD within the 

specified compliance time unless it has 

already been accomplished prior to that time. 

(f) Required Actions 

Within 90 days, revise the Operating 

Limitations section of Sikorsky Rotorcraft 

Flight Manual (RFM) SA S92A–RFM–003, 

Part 1, Section I, by inserting a copy of this 

AD into the RFM or by making pen and ink 

changes, as follows: 

(1) In the ‘‘Types of Operation’’ section, 

beneath Hoist, add the following: ‘‘The hoist 

equipment certification installation approval 

does not constitute approval to conduct hoist 

operations. Operational approval for hoist 

operations must be granted by the Federal 

Aviation Administration. No cabin seats may 

be installed in front of station 317 when 

conducting Human External Cargo hoist 

operations, which requires Category A 

performance capabilities.’’ 

(2) In the ‘‘Flight Limits’’ section, add the 

following: ‘‘ ‘‘HOIST’’ When conducting 

Human External Cargo operations, which 

require category ‘A’ performance capabilities, 

the minimum hover height is 20 feet AGL 

and the maximum hover height is 80 feet 

AGL. ‘‘HOIST’’ The collective axis must 

remain uncoupled when conducting Human 

External Cargo, which requires category ‘A’ 

performance capabilities, for the period of 

time that the person is off the ground or 

water and not in the aircraft. This can be 

accomplished by either uncoupling the 

collective axis or by the pilot depressing the 

collective trim switch during the pertinent 

portion of the maneuver.’’ 

(3) In the ‘‘Weight Limits’’ section: 

(i) Remove the following: ‘‘NOTE: The 150 

pound hoist decrement does not preclude Cat 

A operations at a gross weight of 26,500 

pounds with a hoist installed. If conditions 

permit, the pilot may go to the right of the 

26,500 line on Figure 1–2 to determine a 

maximum gross weight up to 26,650 and then 

subtract 150 pounds.’’ 

(ii) Add the following: ‘‘NOTE: If 

conditions permit, the pilot may go to the 

right of the 26,500 pound line on Figure 1– 

2 to determine the maximum gross weight 

and then subtract a 150 pound hoist 

decrement. The maximum gross weight for 

category ‘A’ operations cannot exceed 26,500 

pounds (12,020 kilograms).’’ 

(iii) Add the following and insert Figure 1 

to Paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this AD: ‘‘ ‘‘HOIST’’ 

Maximum gross weight for Human External 

Cargo, which requires category ‘A’ 

performance capabilities, is limited to the 

gross weight determined in accordance with 

the following Figure 1 to Paragraph (f)(3)(iii) 

of this AD for your altitude and temperature 

with the air-conditioner, anti-ice, and bleed 

air turned off.’’ 

Note 1 to paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this AD: 

Figure 1 to Paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this AD 

becomes Figure 1–2A when inserted in the 

‘‘Weight Limits’’ section of your RFM. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
63858 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP27OC14.000</GPH>

SA S92A·RfM.OOO P~rt 1, Section i 

OPERATING LIMITATIONS 

ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE OS 30 SECOND POWER 

AJR-CONDIOONER OFF ANTI-ICE OFF BLEED .AIR OFF 

HOTE1:THISCHARTOEPlCTSTHEGROSSWBGHT,PRESSIJREAlTITOOE,TEMPERATI..FRECOMBINAT!ONWHERE 

OEl HOGE CAPABILITY EXISTS USIHG30 SECONOOEIPOWERW!THA60 SHPMARGH. 

NOTE 2:15 FTOFGROIJNOCLEAAANCE ISASSUREIJlNTHEEVENTO'FANEHGINiEFAlliJREAT2G TOBO FT AGL 

Figure 1-2A- Ma.x.imum Gross 'Weight for HEC Requiring Cat 'A' 

Figure 1 to Paragraph (t)(3)(iii) 
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules 63859 

(g) Credit for Actions Previously Completed 

Incorporation of the changes contained in 

Sikorsky RFM SA S92A–RFM–003, Part 1, 

Revision No. 12, approved December 9, 2010, 

before the effective date of this AD is 

considered acceptable for compliance with 

the corresponding actions specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD. 

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, may approve 

AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: 

John Coffey, Flight Test Engineer, Boston 

Aircraft Certification Office, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

telephone (781) 238–7173; email: 

john.coffey@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(i) Additional Information 

For service information identified in this 

AD, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 

Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical 

Support, mailstop S581A, 6900 Main Street, 

Stratford, CT, telephone (203) 383–4866, 

email address tsslibrary@sikorsky.com, or 

http://www.sikorsky.com. You may review a 

copy of this information at the FAA, Office 

of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, 

Texas 76137. 

(j) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 2510 Flight Compartment Equipment. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 3, 

2014. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25402 Filed 10–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

20 CFR Part 615 

RIN 1205–AB62 

Federal-State Unemployment 

Compensation Program; Implementing 

the Total Unemployment Rate as an 

Extended Benefits Indicator and 

Amending for Technical Corrections; 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Employment and Training 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Employment and 

Training Administration (ETA) of the 

U.S. Department of Labor (Department) 

issues this notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to implement 

statutory amendments to the Extended 

Benefits (EB) program, which pays extra 

weeks of unemployment compensation 

during periods of high unemployment 

in a State. Specifically, this NPRM 

proposes a methodology for computing 

the Total Unemployment Rate (TUR) 

indicator which is an optional indicator 

used to measure unemployment in a 

state. We also propose amendments to 

make technical corrections to the 

current regulations and to correct minor 

mistakes. 

DATES: To be ensured consideration, 

comments must be submitted in writing 

on or before December 26, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Regulatory Information 

Number (RIN) 1205–AB62, by only one 

of the following methods: 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Submit comments to Adele Gagliardi, 

Administrator, Office of Policy 

Development and Research (OPDR), 

U.S. Department of Labor, Employment 

and Training Administration, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW., Room N– 

5641, Washington, DC 20210. Because 

of security-related concerns, there may 

be a significant delay in the receipt of 

submissions by United States Mail. You 

must take this into consideration when 

preparing to meet the deadline for 

submitting comments. The Department 

will post all comments received on 

http://www.regulations.gov without 

making any changes to the comments or 

redacting any information, including 

any personal information provided. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

the Federal e-rulemaking portal and all 

comments posted there are available 

and accessible to the public. The 

Department recommends that 

commenters not include personal 

information such as Social Security 

Numbers, personal addresses, telephone 

numbers, and email addresses that they 

do not want made public in their 

comments as such submitted 

information will be available to the 

public via the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Comments submitted through http://

www.regulations.gov will not include 

the email address of the commenter 

unless the commenter chooses to 

include that information as part of his 

or her comment. It is the responsibility 

of the commenter to safeguard personal 

information. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and the 

RIN for this rulemaking: RIN 1205– 

AB62. Please submit your comments by 

only one method. 

Docket: All comments will be 

available for public inspection and 

copying during normal business hours 

by contacting OPDR at (202) 693–3700. 

You may also contact OPDR at the 

address listed above. As noted above, 

the Department also will post all 

comments it receives on http://

www.regulations.gov. Copies of the 

proposed rule are available in 

alternative formats of large print and 

electronic file on computer disk, which 

may be obtained at the above-stated 

address. The proposed rule is available 

on the Internet at the Web address 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adele Gagliardi, Administrator, OPDR, 

Employment and Training 

Administration, (202) 693–3700 (this is 

not a toll-free number) or 1–877–889– 

5627 (TTY). Individuals with hearing or 

speech impairments may access the 

telephone number above via TTY by 

calling the toll-free Federal Information 

Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Preamble to this proposed rule is 

organized as follows: 

I. Background—provides a brief 

description of the development of the 

proposed rule. 

II. Section-by-Section Review of the 

Proposed Rule—summarizes and discusses 

proposed changes to the Federal-State 

Unemployment Compensation Program. 

III. Administrative Information—sets forth 

the applicable regulatory requirements. 

I. Background 

EB is payable in a State only during 

an EB period of unusually high 

unemployment in the State. Section 203 

of the Federal-State Extended 

Unemployment Compensation Act of 

1970 (EUCA), Public Law 91–373, 

provides methods for determining 

whether a State’s current 

unemployment situation qualifies as an 

EB period. EB periods are determined 

by ‘‘on’’ and ‘‘off’’ indicators (commonly 

referred to as triggers) in the State. 

Section 203(d), EUCA, provides for an 

‘‘on’’ indicator based on the insured 

unemployment rate (IUR). The IUR is 

computed weekly by the States using 

administrative data on State 

unemployment compensation claims 

filed and the total population of 

employed individuals covered by 

unemployment insurance. States trigger 

‘‘on’’ EB if the IUR trigger value for the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS