Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 71751 

other commodity (for example, could it 

lead to over insurance of the crop for 

which a written agreement is sought) 

and whether an actuarially sound 

premium rate can be determined that 

will cover the anticipated losses and a 

reasonable reserve for the crop for 

which a written agreement is being 

sought. 

Good cause is shown to make this rule 

effective upon filing for public 

inspection at the Office of the Federal 

Register. Good cause to make the rule 

effective upon filing at the Office of the 

Federal Register exists when the 30 day 

delay in the effective date is 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest. The changes in 

this rule are statutorily mandated. 

With respect to the provisions of this 

rule, it would be contrary to the public 

interest to delay its implementation. 

Further, such changes regarding written 

agreements for producers in areas of the 

United States where crop insurance is 

not available for a particular commodity 

are in the public interest. This is 

because the changes will allow a 

producer to submit records of a crop 

that is similar to the crop for which 

insurance is being requested, and 

expand the availability of insurance for 

a producer who may not have 

previously qualified. 

If FCIC is required to delay the 

implementation of this rule 30 days 

after the date it is published, the 

provisions of this rule could not be 

implemented until the next crop year 

for those crops having a contract change 

date prior to the effective date of this 

publication. This would mean that the 

affected producers would be without the 

benefits described above for an 

additional year. 

For the reasons stated above, good 

cause exists to make these policy 

changes effective upon filing with the 

Office of the Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457 

Crop insurance, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Interim Rule 

■ Accordingly, as set forth in the 

preamble, the Federal Crop Insurance 

Corporation amends 7 CFR part 457 

effective for the 2006 and succeeding 

crop years for all crops with a contract 

change date on or after the effective date 

of this rule and for the 2007 and 

succeeding crop years for all crops with 

a contract change date prior to the 

effective date of this rule, as follows: 

PART 457—COMMON CROP 

INSURANCE REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 457 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(p). 

■ 2. Amend § 457.8, as follows: 

■ (a) Revise section 18(f)(2)(i); and 

■ (b) Revise section 18(f)(2)(ii). 

The revised sections read as follows: 

18. Written Agreements 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) A completed APH form (except for 

policies that do not require APH) based 

on verifiable records of actual yields for: 

(A) The crop and county for which 

the written agreement is being requested 

(the actual yields do not necessarily 

have to be from the same physical 

acreage for which you are requesting a 

written agreement) for at least the most 

recent three crop years in which the 

crop was planted during the base 

period; or 

(B) A similar crop in the county, or a 

combination of actual yields for a 

similar crop in the county and the crop 

in the county for which the written 

agreement is being requested if you have 

not produced the crop for which the 

written agreement is being requested for 

at least three crop years. 

(1) To be considered a similar crop to 

the crop for which a written agreement 

is being requested, such crop must: 

(i) Be included in the same category 

of crops, e.g., row crops (including, but 

not limited to, small grains, coarse 

grains, and oil seed crops), vegetable 

crops grown in rows, tree crops, vine 

crops, bush crops, etc., as defined by 

FCIC; 

(ii) Have substantially the same 

growing season (i.e., normally planted 

around the same dates and harvested 

around the same dates); 

(iii) Require comparable agronomic 

conditions (e.g., comparable water, soil, 

etc. needs); and 

(iv) Be subject to substantially the 

same risks (frequency and severity of 

loss would be expected to be 

comparable from the same cause of 

loss); 

(2) The actual yields for the similar 

crop do not necessarily have to be from 

the same physical acreage for which you 

are requesting a written agreement; 

(ii) Acceptable production records for 

at least the most recent three crop years 

in which the crop or a similar crop was 

planted; 

* * * * * 

Signed in Washington, DC, on November 

22, 2005. 

Eldon Gould, 

Manager, Federal Crop Insurance 

Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 05–23509 Filed 11–25–05; 4:21 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3410–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 23 

[Docket No. CE234, Special Condition 23–

174–SC] 

Special Conditions; Garmin AT, Inc. 

EFIS on the Mooney M20M and M20R; 

Protection of Systems From High 

Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued to Garmin AT, Inc., 2345 Turner 

Rd. SE, Salem, OR 97302, for a 

Supplemental Type Certificate for the 

Mooney M20M and M20R. These 

airplanes will have novel and unusual 

design features when compared to the 

state of technology envisaged in the 

applicable airworthiness standards. 

These novel and unusual design 

features include the installation of an 

electronic flight instrument system 

(EFIS) display, Model G–1000, 

manufactured by Garmin International, 

for which the applicable regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

airworthiness standards for the 

protection of these systems from the 

effects of high intensity radiated fields 

(HIRF). These special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to the airworthiness 

standards applicable to these airplanes. 

DATES: The effective date of these 

special conditions is November 3, 2005. 

Comments must be received on or 

before December 30, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed 

in duplicate to: Federal Aviation 

Administration, Regional Counsel, 

ACE–7, Attention: Rules Docket Clerk, 

Docket No. CE234, Room 506, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. All 

comments must be marked: Docket No. 

CE234. Comments may be inspected in 

the Rules Docket weekdays, except 

Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 

4 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wes 

Ryan, Aerospace Engineer, Standards 

71752 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Office (ACE–110), Small Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 901 Locust, Room 301, 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone 

(816) 329–4127. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

has determined that notice and 

opportunity for prior public comment 

hereon are impracticable because these 

procedures would significantly delay 

issuance of the approval design and 

thus delivery of the affected aircraft. In 

addition, 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 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit such written data, views, or 

arguments, as they may desire. 

Communications should identify the 

regulatory docket or notice number and 

be submitted in duplicate to the address 

specified above. All communications 

received on or before the closing date 

for comments will be considered by the 

Administrator. The special conditions 

may be changed in light of the 

comments received. All comments 

received will be available in the Rules 

Docket for examination by interested 

persons, both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerning 

this rulemaking will be filed in the 

docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

submitted in response to this notice 

must include a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. CE234.’’ The postcard will 

be date stamped and returned to the 

commenter. 

Background 

On August 13, 2004, Garmin AT, Inc., 

2345 Turner Rd. SE, Salem, OR 97302, 

made an application to the FAA for a 

new Supplemental Type Certificate for 

the Mooney M20M and M20R. The 

Mooney M20M and M20R are currently 

approved under TC No. 2A3. The 

proposed modification incorporates a 

novel or unusual design feature, such as 

digital avionics consisting of an EFIS 

that is vulnerable to HIRF external to 

the airplane. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of 14 CFR 

21.101, Garmin AT, Inc. must show that 

the Mooney M20M and M20R meet their 

original certification basis, as listed on 

Type Data Sheet 2A3, the additional 

certification requirements added for the 

G1000 system, exemptions, if any; and 

the special conditions adopted by this 

rulemaking action. The additional 

certification requirements for the G1000 

system include §§ 23.1301, 23.1309, 

23.1311, 23.1322, 23.1353 and other 

rules at the amendment appropriate for 

the date of application. Further details 

of the certification basis for the 

installation of the G1000 EFIS are 

available on request. 

Discussion 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness standards do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards because of novel or 

unusual design features of an airplane, 

special conditions are prescribed under 

the provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions, as appropriate, as 

defined in § 11.19, are issued in 

accordance with § 11.38 after public 

notice and become part of the type 

certification basis in accordance with 

§ 21.101. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the model for which they 

are issued. Should the applicant apply 

for a supplemental type certificate to 

modify any other model already 

included on the same type certificate to 

incorporate the same novel or unusual 

design feature, the special conditions 

would also apply to the other model 

under the provisions of § 21.101. 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

Garmin AT, Inc. plans to incorporate 

certain novel and unusual design 

features into the Mooney M20M and 

M20R for which the airworthiness 

standards do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for 

protection from the effects of HIRF. 

These features include EFIS, which are 

susceptible to the HIRF environment, 

that were not envisaged by the existing 

regulations for this type of airplane. 

Protection of Systems from High 

Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF): Recent 

advances in technology have given rise 

to the application in aircraft designs of 

advanced electrical and electronic 

systems that perform functions required 

for continued safe flight and landing. 

Due to the use of sensitive solid-state 

advanced components in analog and 

digital electronics circuits, these 

advanced systems are readily responsive 

to the transient effects of induced 

electrical current and voltage caused by 

the HIRF. The HIRF can degrade 

electronic systems performance by 

damaging components or upsetting 

system functions. 

Furthermore, the HIRF environment 

has undergone a transformation that was 

not foreseen when the current 

requirements were developed. Higher 

energy levels are radiated from 

transmitters that are used for radar, 

radio, and television. Also, the number 

of transmitters has increased 

significantly. There is also uncertainty 

concerning the effectiveness of airframe 

shielding for HIRF. Furthermore, 

coupling to cockpit-installed equipment 

through the cockpit window apertures is 

undefined. 

The combined effect of the 

technological advances in airplane 

design and the changing environment 

has resulted in an increased level of 

vulnerability of electrical and electronic 

systems required for the continued safe 

flight and landing of the airplane. 

Effective measures against the effects of 

exposure to HIRF must be provided by 

the design and installation of these 

systems. The accepted maximum energy 

levels in which civilian airplane system 

installations must be capable of 

operating safely are based on surveys 

and analysis of existing radio frequency 

emitters. These special conditions 

require that the airplane be evaluated 

under these energy levels for the 

protection of the electronic system and 

its associated wiring harness. These 

external threat levels, which are lower 

than previous required values, are 

believed to represent the worst case to 

which an airplane would be exposed in 

the operating environment. 

These special conditions require 

qualification of systems that perform 

critical functions, as installed in aircraft, 

to the defined HIRF environment in 

paragraph 1 or, as an option to a fixed 

value using laboratory tests, in 

paragraph 2, as follows: 

(2) The applicant may demonstrate 

that the operation and operational 

capability of the installed electrical and 

electronic systems that perform critical 

functions are not adversely affected 

when the aircraft is exposed to the HIRF 

environment defined below: 

Frequency 

Field strength 

(volts per meter) 

Peak Average 

10 kHz–100 kHz ....... 50 50 

100 kHz–500 kHz ..... 50 50 

500 kHz–2 MHz ........ 50 50 

2 MHz–30 MHz ......... 100 100 

30 MHz–70 MHz ....... 50 50 

70 MHz–100 MHz ..... 50 50 

100 MHz–200 MHz ... 100 100 

200 MHz–400 MHz ... 100 100 

400 MHz–700 MHz ... 700 50 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 71753 

Frequency 

Field strength 

(volts per meter) 

Peak Average 

700 MHz–1 GHz ....... 700 100 

1 GHz–2 GHz ........... 2000 200 

2 GHz–4 GHz ........... 3000 200 

4 GHz–6 GHz ........... 3000 200 

6 GHz–8 GHz ........... 1000 200 

8 GHz–12 GHz ......... 3000 300 

12 GHz–18 GHz ....... 2000 200 

18 GHz–40 GHz ....... 600 200 

The field strengths are expressed in terms 

of peak root-mean-square (rms) values. 

or, 

(2) The applicant may demonstrate by 

a system test and analysis that the 

electrical and electronic systems that 

perform critical functions can withstand 

a minimum threat of 100 volts per 

meter, electrical field strength, from 10 

kHz to 18 GHz. When using this test to 

show compliance with the HIRF 

requirements, no credit is given for 

signal attenuation due to installation. 

A preliminary hazard analysis must 

be performed by the applicant for 

approval by the FAA to identify either 

electrical or electronic systems that 

perform critical functions. The term 

‘‘critical’’ means those functions, whose 

failure would contribute to, or cause, a 

failure condition that would prevent the 

continued safe flight and landing of the 

airplane. The systems identified by the 

hazard analysis that perform critical 

functions are candidates for the 

application of HIRF requirements. A 

system may perform both critical and 

non-critical functions. Primary 

electronic flight display systems, and 

their associated components, perform 

critical functions such as attitude, 

altitude, and airspeed indication. The 

HIRF requirements apply only to critical 

functions. 

Compliance with HIRF requirements 

may be demonstrated by tests, analysis, 

models, similarity with existing 

systems, or any combination of these. 

Service experience alone is not 

acceptable since normal flight 

operations may not include an exposure 

to the HIRF environment. Reliance on a 

system with similar design features for 

redundancy as a means of protection 

against the effects of external HIRF is 

generally insufficient since all elements 

of a redundant system are likely to be 

exposed to the fields concurrently. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the Mooney 

M20M and M20R. Should Garmin AT, 

Inc. apply at a later date for a 

supplemental type certificate to modify 

any other model on the same type 

certificate to incorporate the same novel 

or unusual design feature, the special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well under the provisions of § 21.101. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

of airplane. It is not a rule of general 

applicability and affects only the 

applicant who applied to the FAA for 

approval of these features on the 

airplane. 

The substance of these special 

conditions has been subjected to the 

notice and comment period in several 

prior instances and has been derived 

without substantive change from those 

previously issued. It is unlikely that 

prior public comment would result in a 

significant change from the substance 

contained herein. For this reason, and 

because a delay would significantly 

affect the certification of the airplane, 

which is imminent, the FAA has 

determined that prior public notice and 

comment are unnecessary and 

impracticable, and good cause exists for 

adopting these special conditions upon 

issuance. The FAA is requesting 

comments to allow interested persons to 

submit views that may not have been 

submitted in response to the prior 

opportunities for comment described 

above. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and 

symbols. 

Citation 

■ The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

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

44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and 21.101; and 14 CFR 

11.38 and 11.19. 

PART 23—AIRWORTHINESS 

STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, 

ACROBATIC, AND COMMUTER 

CATEGORY AIRPLANES 

The Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the following special conditions are 

issued as part of the type certification 

basis for the Mooney M20M and M20R 

airplanes modified by Garmin AT, Inc. 

to add the G1000 EFIS system. 

1. Protection of Electrical and 

Electronic Systems from High Intensity 

Radiated Fields (HIRF). Each system 

that performs critical functions must be 

designed and installed to ensure that the 

operations, and operational capabilities 

of these systems to perform critical 

functions, are not adversely affected 

when the airplane is exposed to high 

intensity radiated electromagnetic fields 

external to the airplane. 

2. For the purpose of these special 

conditions, the following definition 

applies: 

Critical Functions: Functions whose 

failure would contribute to, or cause, a 

failure condition that would prevent the 

continued safe flight and landing of the 

airplane. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on 

November 3, 2005. 

William J. Timberlake, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–23481 Filed 11–29–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22731; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NE–36–AD; Amendment 39–

14389; AD 2005–24–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; McCauley 

Propeller Systems Propeller 

Assemblies Models 2D34C53/74E–X; 

D2A34C58/90AT–X; 3AF32C87/82NC–

X; D3AF32C87/82NC–X; D3A32C88/ 

82NC–X; D3A32C90/82NC–X; and 

3AF34C92/90LF–X. 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for 

McCauley Propeller Systems propeller 

assemblies, models 2D34C53/74E–X; 

D2A34C58/90AT–X; 3AF32C87/82NC–

X; D3AF32C87/82NC–X; D3A32C88/ 

82NC–X; D3A32C90/82NC–X; and 

3AF34C92/90LF–X. This AD requires, 

within 10 flight hours or 10 days after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first, removing certain serial 

number propeller hubs from service. 

This AD results from a report by the 

manufacturer that they manufactured 

and released 40 propeller hubs with 

improperly machined socket retention 

threads. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent cracked propeller hubs, which 

could cause failure of the propeller hub, 

blade separation, and loss of control of 

the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

December 15, 2005. 

We must receive any comments on 

this AD by January 30, 2006.