Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 84 / Thursday, May 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules 23695

the crop, you must leave representative

samples of the unharvested crop for our

inspection. The samples must be at least 10

feet wide and extend the entire length of each

field in each unit and must not be destroyed

until the earlier of our inspection or 15 days

after notice is given to us; and

(c) At least 15 days prior to the beginning

of harvest if you intend to claim an

indemnity on any unit, or immediately if

damage is discovered during harvest, so that

we may inspect any damaged production. If

you fail to notify us and such failure results

in our inability to inspect the damaged

production, we will consider all such

production to be undamaged and include it

as production to count. You do not have to

delay harvest if notification is timely given.

12. Settlement of Claim

(a) We will determine your loss on a unit

basis. In the event you are unable to provide

separate acceptable production records:

(1) For any optional units, we will combine

all optional units for which such production

records were not provided; or

(2) For any basic units, we will allocate any

commingled production to such units in

proportion to our liability on the harvested

acreage for the units.

(b) In the event of loss or damage covered

by this policy, we will settle your claim by:

(1) Multiplying the insured acreage by its

respective production guarantee, by type if

applicable;

(2) Multiplying each result in section

12(b)(1) by the respective price election, by

type if applicable;

(3) Totaling the results in section 12(b)(2);

(4) Multiplying the total production to be

counted of each type, if applicable, (see

section 12(c)) by the respective price

election;

(5) Totaling the results in section 12(b)(4);

(6) Subtracting the results in section

12(b)(5) from the results in section 12 (b)(3);

and

(7) Multiplying the result in section

12(b)(6) by your share.

(c) The total production to count, specified

in tons of unhusked ear weight, from all

insurable acreage on the unit will include:

(1) All appraised production as follows:

(i) Not less than the production guarantee

for acreage:

(A) That is abandoned;

(B) That is put to another use without our

consent;

(C) That is damaged solely by uninsured

causes;

(D) For which you fail to provide

production records that are acceptable to us;

or

(E) That is bypassed unless the acreage was

bypassed due to a cause of loss stated in

section 10(a).

(ii) Production lost due to uninsured

causes;

(iii) Potential production on insured

acreage that you intend to put to another use

or abandon, if you and we agree on the

appraised amount of production. Upon such

agreement, the insurance period for that

acreage will end when you put the acreage

to another use or abandon the crop. If

agreement on the appraised amount of

production is not reached:

(A) If you do not elect to continue to care

for the crop, we may give you consent to put

the acreage to another use if you agree to

leave intact, and provide sufficient care for,

representative samples of the crop in

locations acceptable to us (The amount of

production to count for such acreage will be

based on the harvested production or

appraisals from the samples at the time

harvest should have occurred. If you do not

leave the required samples intact, or fail to

provide sufficient care for the samples, our

appraisal made prior to giving you consent to

put the acreage to another use will be used

to determine the amount of production to

count); or

(B) If you elect to continue to care for the

crop, the amount of production to count for

the acreage will be the harvested production,

or our reappraisal if additional damage

occurs and the crop is not harvested.

(2) All harvested sweet corn production

from the insurable acreage. The amount of

such production will be determined by

dividing the dollar amount as required by the

contract for the quality and quantity of the

sweet corn delivered to the processor by the

base contract price per ton. The total

production to count will be expressed as an

unhusked ear weight. Any other measure of

production will be converted to an unhusked

ear weight equivalent.

(d) If any acreage is not timely harvested

due to an uninsured cause of loss but is later

harvested, the production to count will be

the greater of:

(1) The harvested amount of production

with no adjustment for quality; or

(2) The amount determined by dividing the

dollar amount as required by the contract for

the quality and quantity of the sweet corn

delivered to the processor for the production

by the base contract price per ton.

13. Late Planting

Late planting provisions are not applicable

to processing sweet corn.

14. Written Agreements

Designated terms of this policy 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

14(e);

(b) The application for a written agreement

must contain all variable 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 crop

years will be in accordance with the printed

policy); and

(e) An application for a 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, DC, on April 25,

1997.

Kenneth D. Ackerman,

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance

Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–11251 Filed 4–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–FA–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–167–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model

SAAB 2000 Series Airplanes

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

certain Saab Model SAAB 2000 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

replacement of the existing fire, tailpipe,

and bleed-air overheat detector control

units with new, improved units. This

proposal is prompted by reports

indicating that false engine and

auxiliary power unit (APU) fire

warnings were issued from the fire

detector control units due to moisture or

induced voltages of the detector control

unit. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent

such false fire warnings, which could

result in unnecessary diversion of the

airplane, and resultant increased risks to

the airplane, passengers, and crew, and

the potential for an overweight landing.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

167–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.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

SAAB Aircraft AB, SAAB Aircraft

Product Support, S–581.88, Linko ̈ping,

Sweden. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport
23696 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 84 / Thursday, May 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth Harder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–1721; fax (206) 227–1149.

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 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 Number 96–NM–167–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–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–NM–167–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Luftfartsverket (LFV), which is

the airworthiness authority for Sweden,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Saab

Model SAAB 2000 series airplanes. The

LFV advises that it has received reports

indicating that false engine and

auxiliary power unit (APU) fire

warnings were issued from the fire

detector control units on these

airplanes. Investigation has revealed

that the false engine and APU fire

warnings were caused by moisture or

induced voltages of the overheat

detector wires, which resulted in false

input signals to the fire detector control

units. Additionally, the investigation

revealed that moisture or induced

voltages also caused false warnings of

the tailpipe and bleed-air overheat

detection control units.

Such moisture or induced voltages of

the fire detector control units, if not

corrected, could cause false fire

warnings of the engine or APU during

flight; false fire warnings could result in

unnecessary diversion of the airplane,

and resultant increased risks to the

airplane, passengers, and crew, and the

potential for an overweight landing.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Saab has issued Service Bulletin

2000–26–002, dated May 9, 1995, which

describes procedures for replacement of

the fire, tailpipe, and bleed leak detector

control units with new, improved units.

These new, improved control units

contain new software that give fire

warnings only when a fire or overheat

condition occurs. The LFV classified

this service bulletin as mandatory and

issued Swedish Airworthiness Directive

(SAD) No. 1–073, dated May 10, 1995,

in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

Sweden.

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in Sweden and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of section 21.29 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.29) and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the LFV has kept the FAA informed of

the situation described above. The FAA

has examined the findings of the LFV,

reviewed all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would require

replacement of the existing fire, tailpipe,

and bleed leak detector control units

with new, improved units. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletin

described previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 2 Saab Model

SAAB 2000 series airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 3 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be provided by the manufacturer

at no cost to the operators. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $360, or $180 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 AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

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.

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:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 84 / Thursday, May 1, 1997 / Proposed Rules 23697

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Saab Aircraft AB: Docket 96–NM–167–AD.

Applicability: Model SAAB 2000 series

airplanes having serial numbers 005 through

029 inclusive, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 (c) 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 false fire warning inputs of the

engines and Auxiliary Power Unit (APU),

which could result in unnecessary diversion

of the airplane, resultant increased risks to

the airplane, passengers, and crew, and the

potential for an overweight landing;

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 4 months after the effective date

of this AD, replace the existing fire (engine/

APU), tailpipe, and bleed-air overheat

detector control units with new, improved

control units, in accordance with Saab

Service Bulletin 2000–26–002, dated May 9,

1995.

(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person shall install a fire, tailpipe, or bleedair detector control unit having part number

25000020–21, 25000021–31, or 25000020–11,

on any airplane.

(c) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished. Issued in Renton,

Washington, on April 25, 1997.

Neil D. Schalekamp,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Dos. 97–11333 Filed 4–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–170–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300–600 Series Airplanes

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

certain Airbus Model A300–600 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

repetitive inspections to detect fatigue

cracking in the left and right wings in

the area where the top skin attaches to

the center spar; and repair or

modification of this area, if necessary.

This proposal is prompted by a report

from the manufacturer indicating that,

during full-scale fatigue testing of the

airframe, fatigue cracking was detected

in this area. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to detect and

correct this cracking, which could

reduce the residual strength of the top

skin of the wings, and consequently

affect the structural integrity of the

airframe.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

170–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.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2589; fax (206) 227–1149.

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 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 Number 96–NM–170–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–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–NM–170–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France, has

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Airbus

Model A300–600 series airplanes. The

DGAC advises that it has received a

report from the manufacturer indicating

that, during full-scale fatigue testing of

the airframe, fatigue cracking was

detected in an area of the wing where

the top skin attaches to the center spar

between ribs 1 and 7. This cracking

originated in clearance fit fastener holes

of joints between the skin and the center