Notices. Proposed rule

10,441 words·~47 min read·/register/2006/03/28/06-2973

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4310-2W-P 71 59 Tuesday, March 28, 2006 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food Safety and Inspection Service 9 CFR Parts 317, 381, and 442 [Docket No. 04-041P; FDMS Docket Number FSIS-2005-0032] RIN #0583-AD17 Determining Net Weight Compliance for Meat and Poultry Products AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Food Safety and Inspection Service

(FSIS)is proposing to amend the Federal meat and poultry products inspection regulations in order that they reference the revised version of the National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST)Handbook 133 that contains standards for determining the reasonable variations allowed for the declared net weight on labels of immediate containers of meat and poultry products; the procedures to be used to determine the net weight and net weight compliance of meat and poultry products; and related definitions. The Agency also is proposing to consolidate the separate net weight regulations for meat and poultry products in a new CFR part, applicable to both meat and poultry products. DATES: Submit comments by May 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: FSIS invites interested persons to submit comments on this proposed rule. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: This Web site provides the ability to type short comments directly into the comment field on this Web page or attach a file for lengthier comments. FSIS prefers to receive comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and, in the “Search for Open Regulations” box, select “Food Safety and Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click on “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select FDMS Docket Number FSIS-2005-0032 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. • Mail, including floppy disks or CD-ROM's, and hand- or courier-delivered items: Send to Docket Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, 300 12th Street, SW., Room 102 Cotton Annex, Washington, DC 20250. • Electronic mail: *fsis.regulationscomments@fsis.usda.gov.* All submissions received by mail or electronic mail must include the Agency name and docket number 04-041P. All comments submitted in response to this proposal, as well as research and background information used by FSIS in developing this document, will be available for public inspection in the FSIS Docket Room at the address listed above between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Comments will also be posted on the Agency's Web site at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/2006_Proposed_Rules_Index/index.asp.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Post, PhD, Director, Labeling and Consumer Protection Staff, Office of Policy, Program, and Employee Development, FSIS, by telephone at

(202)205-0279 or by fax at

(202)205-3625. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background FSIS administers the Federal Meat Inspection Act

(FMIA)(21 U.S.C. 601-695), the Poultry Products Inspection Act

(PPIA)(21 U.S.C. 451-470), and the regulations that implement these Acts. The FMIA and the PPIA require that packages of meat and poultry products bear an accurate statement of the quantity of their contents in terms of weight, measure, or numerical count (21 U.S.C. 601(n)(5) and 453(b)(5)). The FMIA and PPIA also provide the Secretary of Agriculture with the authority to prescribe standards of fill of containers for such articles (21 U.S.C. 607(c)(2), 457 (b)(2)) that are not inconsistent with any such standards established under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301-392). In implementing regulations, FSIS has elected to enforce these provisions of the Acts through the adoption of the NIST standards established for determining compliance with the net weight contents statement of packaged goods that are enumerated in NIST Handbook 133. Consequently, FSIS has incorporated, by reference, the appropriate NIST standards in the Federal meat and poultry inspection regulations. NIST was established by Congress in 1988 to assist industry in the development of technology to improve product quality, to modernize manufacturing processes, to ensure product reliability, and to facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on new scientific discoveries. NIST's basic functions include developing, maintaining, and retaining custody of the national standards of measurement and providing the means and methods for comparing standards used in science, engineering, manufacturing, commerce, industry, and education with the standards adopted or recognized by the Federal Government. NIST Handbook 133 is a procedural guide for compliance testing of net content statements on packaged goods. FSIS has elected to make mandatory the NIST standards in Handbook 133 regarding the determination of the reasonable variations allowed from the declared net weight on labels of immediate containers of meat and poultry products, the procedures to be used to determine net weight and net weight compliance for meat and poultry products, and related definitions. Consequently, FSIS currently incorporates, by reference, the NIST standards from Handbook 133 in its meat and poultry inspection regulations (9 CFR parts 317.18 through 317.22 and 381.121a through 381.121e respectively). In January 2002, NIST issued a revised Handbook 133. Therefore, it is necessary for FSIS to amend the meat and poultry inspection regulations to incorporate by reference the revised NIST Handbook 133 and the standards set forth in it regarding the determination of the reasonable variations allowed, definitions, and procedures used to determine net weight, and net weight compliance of packaged goods. The standards in revised Handbook 133 that are being proposed to be incorporated by reference in FSIS' meat and poultry inspection regulations remain substantively unchanged from those currently incorporated by reference in FSIS' regulations. FSIS is also proposing to consolidate the separate net weight regulations for meat and poultry products in a new CFR part 442 that will be applicable to both meat and poultry products. Therefore, FSIS is proposing to move the provisions in §§ 317.18 through 317.22 and the provisions in §§ 381.121a through 381.121e to new part 442. Sections 317.20 and 381.121c incorporate NIST Handbook 44 by reference. Therefore, FSIS is proposing to move the provisions that incorporate NIST Handbook 44 by reference to new CFR part 442. FSIS is proposing to incorporate the same version of Handbook 44 that is currently incorporated by reference in the regulations: “Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices,” 1999 Edition, November 1988. Executive Order 12988 This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is adopted:

(1)All State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with this rule will be preempted;

(2)no retroactive effect will be given to this rule; and

(3)no retroactive proceedings will be required before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). There are no costs associated with this proposal. The intent of this proposed rule is to amend the meat and poultry inspection regulations to incorporate by reference the standards in revised Handbook 133, which are not substantively changed from those in the version of Handbook 133 that is currently reflected in FSIS' meat and poultry inspection regulations regarding the procedures to be used to determine the net weight of, and net weight compliance for, meat and poultry products. In addition, FSIS is proposing to consolidate its meat and poultry net weight regulations into a new part 442 which will be applicable to both meat and poultry products. FSIS has made an initial determination that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). The proposed rule reflects the recent changes in the NIST Handbook 133 standards for determining net weight compliance for meat and poultry products. Paperwork Reduction Act This proposed rule has been reviewed under the Paperwork Reduction Act and imposes no new paperwork or record-keeping requirements. The information collection was approved under OMB number 0583-0094. This proposed rule contains no other paperwork requirements. Government Paperwork Elimination Act

(GPEA)FSIS is committed to compliance with the GPEA, which requires Government agencies, in general, to provide the public the option of communicating electronically with the government to the maximum extent possible. The Agency will ensure that all forms used by the establishments are made available electronically. Additional Public Notification Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that the public and in particular minorities, women, and persons with disabilities, are aware of this proposed rule, FSIS will announce it on-line through the FSIS Web page located at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/2006_Proposed_Rules_Index/index.asp.* The Regulations.gov Web site is the central online rulemaking portal of the United States government. It is being offered as a public service to increase participation in the Federal government's regulatory activities. FSIS participates in Regulations.gov and will accept comments on documents published on the site. The site allows visitors to search by keyword or Department or Agency for rulemakings that allow for public comment. Each entry provides a quick link to a comment form so that visitors can type in their comments and submit them to FSIS. The Web site is located at *http://www.regulations.gov/.* FSIS also will make copies of this **Federal Register** publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, **Federal Register** notices, public meetings, recalls, and other types of information that could affect or would be of interest to our constituents and stakeholders. The update is communicated via Listserv, a free e-mail subscription service consisting of industry, trade, and farm groups, consumer interest groups, allied health professionals, scientific professionals, and other individuals who have requested to be included. The update also is available on the FSIS Web page. Through Listserv and the Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader, more diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an e-mail subscription service which provides an automatic and customized notification when popular pages are updated, including **Federal Register** publications and related documents. This service is available at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/email_subscription/* and allows FSIS customers to sign up for subscription options across eight categories. Options range from recalls to export information to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete subscriptions themselves and have the option to password protect their account. List of Subjects 9 CFR Part 317 Food labeling, Meat inspection. 9 CFR Part 381 Food labeling, Poultry and poultry products. 9 CFR Part 424 Food labeling, Incorporation by reference, Meat inspection, Poultry and poultry products. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FSIS proposes to amend 9 CFR Chapter III as follows: PART 317—LABELING, MARKING DEVICES, AND CONTAINERS 1. The authority citation for part 317 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601-695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. §§ 317.18 through 317.22 [Removed and Reserved]. 2. Remove and reserve §§ 317.18 through 317.22. PART 381—POULTRY PRODUCTS INSPECTION REGULATIONS 3. The authority citation for part 381 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138f, 450; 21 U.S.C. 451-470; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. §§ 381.121a through 381.121e [Removed and Reserved]. 4. Remove and reserve §§ 381.121a through 381.121e. Subchapter E—Regulatory Requirements Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act 5. Subchapter E is amended by adding a new part 442 to read as follows: PART 442—QUANTITY OF CONTENTS LABELING AND PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCURATE WEIGHTS Sec. 442.1 Quantity of contents labeling 442.2 Definitions and procedures for determining net weight compliance 442.3 Scale requirements for accurate weights, repairs, adjustments, and replacement after inspection 442.4 Testing of scales 442.5 Handling of failed product Authority: 21 U.S.C. 451-470, 601-695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. § 442.1 Quantity of contents labeling. This part prescribes the procedures to be followed for determining net weight compliance and prescribes the reasonable variations allowed from the declared net weight on the labels of immediate containers of products in accordance with 9 CFR 317.2(c)(4), 317.2(h), and 381.121. § 442.2 Definitions and procedures for determining net weight compliance.

(a)For the purpose of § 442.1 of this part, the reasonable variations allowed, the definitions, and the procedures to be used in determining net weight and net weight compliance are presented in the National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST)Handbook 133, “Checking the Net Contents of Packaged Goods,” Fourth Edition, January 2002, which is incorporated by reference. Those provisions are considered mandatory requirements. This incorporation was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (These materials are incorporated as they exist on the date of approval.) A notice of any change in the Handbook cited herein will be published in the **Federal Register** . Copies may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. The incorporation information also is available for inspection at the Office of the Federal Register Information Center, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC 20408.

(b)The following NIST Handbook 133 requirements are not incorporated by reference. Chapter 2—Basic Test Procedure—Gravimetric Testing 2.4 Borax Chapter 3—Test Procedures—For Packages Labeled by Volume 3.5 Mayonnaise and Salad Dressing 3.7 Pressed and Blown Glass Tumblers and Stemware 3.8 Volumetric Test Procedures for Paint, Varnish, and Lacquers—Non Aerosol 3.9 Testing Viscous Materials—Such as Caulking Compounds and Pasters 3.10 Peat Moss 3.11 Mulch and Soils Labeled by Volume 3.12 Ice Cream Novelties 3.13 Fresh Oysters Labeled by Volume 3.14 Determining the Net Contents of Compressed Gas Cylinders 3.15 Volumetric Test Procedures for Packaged Firewood with a Labeled Volume of 133 L (4 Cu Ft) or Less 3.16 Boxed Firewood 3.17 Crosshatched Firewood 3.18 Bundles and Bags of Firewood Chapter 4—Test Procedures—Packages Labeled by Count, Linear Measure, Area, Thickness, and Combinations of Quantities 4.5 Paper Plates and Sanitary Paper Products 4.6 Special Test Requirements for Packages Labeled by Linear or Square Measure

(Area)4.7 Polyethylene sheeting 4.8 Packages Labeled by Linear or Square

(Area)Measure 4.9 Bailer Twine—Test Procedure for Length 4.10 Procedure for Checking the Area Measurement of Chamois § 442.3 Scale requirements for accurate weights, repairs, adjustments, and replacements after inspection.

(a)All scales used to weigh meat and poultry products sold or otherwise distributed in commerce in federally inspected meat and poultry establishments will be installed, maintained, and operated in a manner that ensures accurate weights. Such scales shall meet the applicable requirements contained in National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST)Handbook 44, “Specifications, Tolerances, and Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices,” 1999 Edition, November 1988, which is incorporated by reference. This incorporation was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (These materials are incorporated as they exist on the date of approval.) A notice of any change in the Handbook cited here will be published in the **Federal Register** . Copies may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. The incorporation information also is available for inspection at the Office of the Federal Register Information Center, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC 20408.

(b)All scales used to weigh meat or poultry products sold or otherwise distributed in commerce or in States designated under section 301(c) of the Federal Meat Inspection Act and section 5(c) of the Poultry Products Inspection Act shall be of sufficient capacity to weigh the entire unit or package.

(c)No scale will be used at a federally inspected establishment to weigh meat or poultry products unless it has been found upon test and inspection, as specified in NIST Handbook 44 to provide accurate weight. If a scale is inspected or tested and found to be inaccurate, or if any repairs, adjustments, or replacements are made to a scale, it shall not be used until it has been reinspected and retested by a USDA official, or a State or local government weights and measures official, or a State registered or licensed scale repair firm or person, and it must meet all accuracy requirements as specified in NIST Handbook 44. If a USDA inspector has put a “Retain” tag on a scale, the tag can only be removed by a USDA inspector. As long as the tag is on the scale, it shall not be used. § 442.4 Testing of scales.

(a)The operator of each official establishment that weighs meat or poultry food products will cause such scales to be tested for accuracy in accordance with the technical requirements of NIST Handbook 44, at least once during the calendar year. In cases where the scales are found not to maintain accuracy between tests, more frequent tests may be required and monitored by an authorized USDA program official.

(b)The operator of each official establishment shall display on or near each scale a valid certification of the scale's accuracy from a State or local government's weights and measures authority or from a State registered or licensed scale repair firm or person, or shall have alternative documented procedures showing that the scale has been tested for accuracy in accordance with the requirements of NIST Handbook 44. § 442.5 Handling of failed product. Any lot of product that is found to be out of compliance with net weight requirements upon testing in accordance with the methods prescribed in § 442.2 of this subchapter shall be handled as follows;

(a)A lot tested in an official establishment and found not to comply with net weight requirements may be reprocessed and must be reweighed and remarked to satisfy the net weight requirements of this section in accordance with the requirements of this part.

(b)A lot tested outside an official establishment and found not to comply with net weight requirements must be reweighed and remarked with a proper net weight statement, provided that such reweighing and remarking will not deface, cover, or destroy any other marking or labeling required under this subchapter and the net quantity of contents is shown with the same prominence as the most conspicuous feature of a label. Done in Washington, DC, on March 22, 2006. Barbara J. Masters, Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-4420 Filed 3-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 12 CFR Parts 611, 612, 613, and 614 RIN 3052-AC15 Organization; Standards of Conduct and Referral of Known or Suspected Criminal Violations; Eligibility and Scope of Financing; Loan Policies and Operations; Regulatory Burden AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration (FCA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This proposed rule is intended to reduce regulatory burden on the Farm Credit System (FCS or System) by repealing or revising five regulations. The proposed rule would also correct outdated and erroneous cross-references in two regulations. These revisions provide System banks and associations with greater flexibility concerning stock ownership of service corporations, employee reporting under standards of conduct rules, domestic lending to cooperatives, and real property evaluations for certain loans. DATES: Please send your comments to us by May 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent by electronic mail to *regcomm@fca.gov,* through the Pending Regulations section of our Web site at *http://www.fca.gov* or through the Government-wide *http://www.regulations.gov* portal. You may also send written comments to Gary K. Van Meter, Deputy Director, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090 or by fax to

(703)734-5784. You may review copies of all comments we receive at our office in McLean, Virginia or from our Web site at *http://www.fca.gov.* Once you are in the Web site, select “Legal Info,” and then select “Public Comments.” We will show your comments as submitted, but for technical reasons we may omit items such as logos and special characters. Identifying information you provide, such as phone numbers and addresses, will be publicly available. However, we will attempt to remove electronic-mail addresses to help reduce Internet spam. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline R. Melvin, Associate Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090,

(703)883-4414, TTY

(703)883-4434; or Howard Rubin, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090,

(703)883-4020, TTY

(703)883-4020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On May 16, 2003, we published a notice in the **Federal Register** at 68 FR 26551 that invited the public to identify existing regulations and policies that impose unnecessary burdens on the FCS. We specifically asked for comments on those regulations and policies that are ineffective, duplicate other governmental requirements, or impose burdens that are greater than the benefits received. We took this action in our continuing effort to improve the regulatory environment so the System can better serve farmers, ranchers, aquatic producers and harvesters, cooperatives, and other rural residents. We received 19 comment letters: 11 from System associations, five from Farm Credit banks, one from the Farm Credit Council on behalf of its membership, one from CoBank, ACB's Northeast Farm Credit Regional Council, and one from a private citizen. In response, we are proposing to:

(1)Revise and clarify who may own stock in an FCS service corporation;

(2)expand the time for a newly hired employee to report matters to an institution's standards of conduct official;

(3)eliminate the 10-percent limit on dividends in determining the eligibility of a cooperative to borrow from a System lender under title III of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (Act);

(4)eliminate the requirement for a Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practices (USPAP) compliant real property appraisal for business loans between $250,000 and $1 million that are not otherwise exempt under our rules; and

(5)repeal an outdated and obsolete regulation on bankers' acceptance financing. We are also proposing to correct three cross-reference errors affecting two regulations governing title III lending. Contemporaneously with this proposed rule, we are publishing a notice in the **Federal Register** explaining how we addressed, or will address, all remaining comments we received. II. Analysis of Changes and Comments by Section Section 611.1135—Incorporation of Service Corporations Section 4.25 of the Act, provides that any System bank or association, or two or more such institutions, may organize a federally chartered corporation for the purpose of performing functions and services for or on behalf of the organizing institutions. Current § 611.1135(a) provides that “[a]ll Farm Credit banks and associations are eligible to become stockholders in your service corporation.” A bank commented that: The existing requirement that each bank or association be eligible to become a stockholder of each 4.25 service corporation is not required by the Act and may limit the usefulness of these corporations to FCS institutions that might wish to organize them. We agree that the Act does not require that “each” service corporation must make its stock available to “each” System bank and association. To clarify, we are proposing to amend the relevant sentence of § 611.1135(b) to read: Your service corporation may issue voting and non-voting stock to one or more Farm Credit banks and associations. This should clarify that while each bank and association has the statutory authority to organize (and own stock in) section 4.25 service corporation, each service corporation is not required to offer stock to every System bank and association. Section 612.2155—Employee Reporting Existing § 612.2155(d) provides: A newly hired employee shall report matters required to be reported in paragraphs (a), (b), and

(c)of this section to the Standards of Conduct Official within 30 days after accepting an offer for employment and thereafter shall comply with the requirements of this section. CoBank, ACB stated that: This provision requires newly hired employees to complete a standards of conduct report within 30 days after accepting an offer for employment. This is often impractical. It is not uncommon for offers of employment to be accepted 2 to 4 months before employment is to begin. Also, it may not be wise to share the list of bank's borrowers who are publicly traded long before the start date, as the prospective employee can always renege on the offer/acceptance. Finally, the standards of conduct material have more meaning to the new employee nearer to the employee's start date. We believe that this comment has merit and we propose to amend § 612.2155(d) to adopt CoBank's proposal to revise the regulation to require reporting no later than 5 business days after the new employee's start date. Section 613.3100—Domestic Lending—Banks Operating Under Title III of the Farm Credit Act Section 3.8(a) of the Act provides that an agricultural cooperative is eligible for financing from a title III lender if it conforms to either of the two following requirements:

(1)No member of the association is allowed more than one vote because of the amount of stock or membership capital he may own therein; or

(2)Does not pay dividends on stock or membership capital in excess of such per centum per annum as may be approved under regulations of the Farm Credit Administration * * *. Current § 613.3100(b)(1)(iii) implementing section 3.8 of the Act provides that an eligible cooperative must comply with one of the following two conditions:

(A)No member of the cooperative shall have more than one vote because of the amount of stock or membership capital owned therein; or

(B)The cooperative restricts dividends on stock or membership capital to 10 percent per year or the maximum percentage per year permitted by applicable state law, whichever is less. CoBank, ACB stated that: This 10-percent limitation is overly restrictive with respect to new forms of cooperatives, such as those organized under the Wyoming Processing Cooperative statute (Wyo. Stat. § 17-10-201~.) or the similar cooperative statute recently enacted in Minnesota. These statutes specifically permit the formation of cooperatives with both patron members (producers with delivery obligations) and non-patron investor members. While patron members continue to follow the more traditional cooperative model with respect to voting and dividends, the investor members vote on the basis of equity ownership and have no specific limit on dividends. This creates eligibility problems that might be avoided if the 10-percent dividend limitation were deleted. Since these organizations are still fundamentally cooperatives, CoBank, ACB should be able to finance them. The statute clearly gives FCA broad discretion in setting the dividend limitation. Unlike prior law, the Act does not incorporate any definition of cooperative or otherwise attempt to define “cooperative.” 1 A review of past FCA rulemaking in this area indicates that the 10-percent limitation was based solely on FCA policy. 2 1 *See* former 11 U.S.C. 1134c (repealed 1971) (providing that Banks for Cooperatives could make loans to “cooperative associations as defined in the Agricultural Marketing Act * * *.”) The Agricultural Marketing Act (incorporating the Capper-Volstead Act provisions) includes an 8-percent limit on dividends. *See* 7 U.S.C. 291. 2 *See* 47 FR 12136 (March 22, 1982). As pointed out by CoBank, ACB, cooperatives have continued to evolve and we believe that so long as an entity is considered a “cooperative” under state law and continues to meet the eligibility requirements of the Act, FCA regulations should not impose additional restrictions on lending eligibility. Therefore, we are proposing to delete the 10-percent dividend limitation from our rules and instead require that to be eligible, a cooperative restrict dividends on stock or membership capital to the maximum percentage per year permitted by applicable State law. Section 614.4265—Real Property Evaluations Current § 614.4265(c) provides: Where real estate appraisals or real estate collateral valuations for business loans in excess of $250,000 that would not otherwise be exempted under § 614.4260(c) are required, such evaluations shall be completed in accordance with the USPAP and shall include a legal description of the subject property. Several commenters stated that this requirement is unduly burdensome and places System lenders at a competitive disadvantage because non-System lenders are not required to perform USPAP appraisals for these loans. Commenters added that the requirement does not necessarily ensure greater safety and soundness because a similar level of analysis is required for collateral evaluations. We agree with the commenters that removing this provision and putting our rules in accord with those of other financial institution regulators will not adversely impact the System's safety and soundness. Therefore, we are proposing to delete § 614.4265(c). Section 614.4710—Bankers' Acceptance Financing CoBank, ACB asked us to clarify the limited scope of § 614.4710 that was originally adopted in 1982 and pertained primarily to the rediscount of bankers' acceptances. Section 614.4710(a) and

(c)authorize the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation to accept drafts or bills of exchange drawn upon banks for cooperatives and agricultural credit banks. Section 614.4710(b) provides the basis on which a bank for cooperatives or agricultural credit bank may purchase participations in discounted acceptances of another bank for cooperatives or agricultural credit bank. Because the System has only one remaining agricultural credit bank that is also a bank for cooperatives, paragraph

(b)clearly is no longer relevant or needed. Additionally, the type of transaction contemplated by paragraphs

(a)and

(c)of the rule has not taken place for many years (if ever). Therefore, we are proposing to delete § 614.4710 in its entirety. III. Technical Corrections In response to comments, we are proposing to correct outdated and erroneous cross-references in §§ 613.3100(d)(1) and 614.4010(d)(1) and (d)(2) of our regulations. IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ), FCA hereby certifies that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Each of the banks in the Farm Credit System, considered together with its affiliated associations, has assets and annual income in excess of the amounts that would qualify them as small entities. Therefore, Farm Credit System institutions are not “small entities” as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 611 Agriculture, Banks, banking, Rural areas. 12 CFR Part 612 Agriculture, Banks, banking, Conflicts of interest, Crime, Investigations, Rural areas. 12 CFR Part 613 Agriculture, Banks, banking, Credit, Rural areas. 12 CFR Part 614 Agriculture, Banks, banking, Foreign trade, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rural areas. For the reasons stated in the preamble, parts 611, 612, 613 and 614 of chapter VI, title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be amended as follows: PART 611—ORGANIZATION 1. The authority citation for part 611 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1.3, 1.4, 1.13, 2.0, 2.1, 2.10, 2.11, 3.0, 3.2, 3.21, 4.12, 4.15, 4.20, 4.21, 5.9, 5.10, 5.17, 6.9, 6.26, 7.0-7.13, 8.5(e) of the Farm Credit Act (12 U.S.C. 2011, 2013, 2021, 2071, 2072, 2091, 2092, 2121, 2123, 2142, 2183, 2203, 2208, 2209, 2243, 2244, 2252, 2278a-9, 2278b-6, 2279a-2279f-1, 2279aa-5(e)); secs. 411 and 412 of Pub. L. 100-233, 101 Stat. 1568, 1638; secs. 409 and 414 of Pub. L. 100-399, 102 Stat. 989, 1003, and 1004. Subpart I—Service Organizations 2. Amend § 611.1135 by revising paragraph

(b)to read as follows: § 611.1135 Incorporation of service corporations. *

(b)*Who may own equities in your service corporation* ?

(1)Your service corporation may only issue voting and non-voting stock to:

(i)One or more Farm Credit banks and associations; and

(ii)Persons that are not Farm Credit banks or associations, provided that at least 80 percent of the voting stock is at all times held by Farm Credit banks or associations.

(2)For the purposes of this subpart, we define persons as individuals or legal entities organized under the laws of the United States or any state or territory thereof. PART 612—STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND REFERRAL OF KNOWN OR SUSPECTED CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS 3. The authority citation for part 612 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 5.9, 5.17, 5.19 of the Farm Credit Act (12 U.S.C. 2243, 2252, 2254). Subpart A—Standards of Conduct 4. Amend 612.2155 by revising paragraph

(d)to read as follows: § 612.2155 Employee reporting.

(d)A newly hired employee shall report matters required to be reported in paragraphs (a), (b), and

(c)of this section to the Standards of Conduct Official 5 business days after starting employment and thereafter shall comply with the requirements of this section. PART 613—ELIGIBILITY AND SCOPE OF FINANCING 5. The authority citation for part 613 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1.5, 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 2.2, 2.4, 2.12, 3.1, 3.7, 3.8, 3.22, 4.18A, 4.25, 4.26, 4.27, 5.9, 5.17 of the Farm Credit Act (12 U.S.C. 2013, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2073, 2075, 2093, 2122, 2128, 2129, 2143, 2206a, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2243, 2252). Subpart B—Financing for Banks Operating Under Title III of the Farm Credit Act 6. Amend § 613.3100 by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B) and (d)(1) to read as follows: § 613.3100 Domestic lending.

(b)* * *

(1)* * *

(iii)* * *

(B)The cooperative restricts dividends on stock or membership capital to the maximum percentage per year permitted by applicable state law.

(d)*Water and waste disposal facilities* .

(1)*Eligibility.* A cooperative or a public agency, quasi public agency, body, or other public or private entity that, under the authority of state or local law, establishes and operates water and waste disposal facilities in a rural area, as that term is defined by paragraph (a)(4) of this section, is eligible to borrow from a bank for cooperatives or an agricultural credit bank. PART 614—LOAN POLICIES AND OPERATIONS 7. The authority citation for part 614 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4012a, 4104a, 4104b, 4106, and 4128; secs. 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 2.0, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.10, 2.12, 2.13, 2.15, 3.0, 3.1, 3.3, 3.7, 3.8, 3.10, 3.20, 3.28, 4.12, 4.12A, 4.13B, 4.14, 4.14A, 4.14C, 4.14D, 4.14E, 4.18, 4.18A, 4.19, 4.25, 4.26, 4.27, 4.28, 4.36, 4.37, 5.9, 5.10, 5.17, 7.0, 7.2, 7.6, 7.8, 7.12, 7.13, 8.0, 8.5 of the Farm Credit Act (12 U.S.C. 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2071, 2073, 2074, 2075, 2091, 2093, 2094, 2097, 2121, 2122, 2124, 2128, 2129, 2131, 2141, 2149, 2183, 2184, 2201, 2202, 2202a, 2202c, 2202d, 2202e, 2206, 2206a, 2207, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2214, 2219a, 2219b, 2243, 2244, 2252, 2279a, 2279a-2, 2279b, 2279c-1, 2279f, 2279f-1, 2279aa, 2279aa-5); sec. 413 of Pub. L. 100-233, 101 Stat. 1568, 1639. Subpart A—Lending Authorities 8. Amend § 614.4010 by revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) to read as follows: § 614.4010 Agricultural credit banks.

(d)* * *

(1)Eligible cooperatives, as defined in § 613.3100(b)(1), in accordance with §§ 614.4200, 614.4231, 614.4232, 614.4233, and subpart Q of part 614;

(2)Other eligible entities, as defined in § 613.3100(b)(2), in accordance with §§ 614.4200, 614.4231, and 614.4232; Subpart F—Collateral Evaluation Requirements § 614.4265 [Amended] 9. Amend § 614.4265 by removing paragraph

(c)and redesignating paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (g), and

(h)as (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g), respectively. Subpart Q—Banks for Cooperatives and Agricultural Credit Banks Financing International Trade § 614.4710 [Removed and reserved] 10. Remove and reserve § 614.4710. Dated: March 23, 2006. Roland E. Smith, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. [FR Doc. E6-4479 Filed 3-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM341; Notice No. 25-06-02-SC] Special Conditions: Airbus Model A380-800 Airplane, Loading Conditions for Multi-Leg Landing Gear AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions. SUMMARY: This notice proposes special conditions for the Airbus A380-800 airplane. This airplane will have novel or unusual design features when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. Many of these novel or unusual design features are associated with the complex systems and the configuration of the airplane, including its full-length double deck. For these design features, the applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards regarding loading conditions for multi-leg landing gear. These proposed 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. Additional special conditions will be issued for other novel or unusual design features of the Airbus Model A380-800 airplane. DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 12, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal may be mailed in duplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attention: Rules Docket (ANM-113), Docket No. NM341, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; or delivered in duplicate to the Transport Airplane Directorate at the above address. All comments must be marked: Docket No. NM341. 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: Holly Thorson, FAA, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone

(425)227-1357; facsimile

(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 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 ask that you send us two copies of written comments. We will file in the docket all comments we receive as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning these proposed special conditions. The docket is available for public inspection before and after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this notice between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late, if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change the proposed special conditions in light of the comments we receive. If you want the FAA to acknowledge receipt of your comments on this proposal, include with your comments a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background Airbus applied for FAA certification/validation of the provisionally-designated Model A3XX-100 in its letter AI/L 810.0223/98, dated August 12, 1998, to the FAA. Application for certification by the Joint Aviation Authorities

(JAA)of Europe had been made on January 16, 1998, reference AI/L 810.0019/98. In its letter to the FAA, Airbus requested an extension to the 5-year period for type certification in accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(c). The request was for an extension to a 7-year period, using the date of the initial application letter to the JAA as the reference date. The reason given by Airbus for the request for extension is related to the technical challenges, complexity, and the number of new and novel features on the airplane. On November 12, 1998, the Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, AIR-100, granted Airbus' request for the 7-year period, based on the date of application to the JAA. In its letter AI/LE-A 828.0040/99 Issue 3, dated July 20, 2001, Airbus stated that its target date for type certification of the Model A380-800 had been moved from May 2005, to January 2006, to match the delivery date of the first production airplane. In a subsequent letter (AI/L 810.0223/98 Issue 3, dated January 27, 2006), Airbus stated that its target date for type certification is October 2, 2006. In accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(d)(2), Airbus chose a new application date of December 20, 1999, and requested that the 7-year certification period which had already been approved be continued. The FAA has reviewed the part 25 certification basis for the Model A380-800 airplane, and no changes are required based on the new application date. The Model A380-800 airplane will be an all-new, four-engine jet transport airplane with a full double-deck, two-aisle cabin. The maximum takeoff weight will be 1.235 million pounds with a typical three-class layout of 555 passengers. Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, Airbus must show that the Model A380-800 airplane meets the applicable provisions of 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-98. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Airbus A380-800 airplane because of novel or unusual design features, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.16. In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Airbus Model A380-800 airplane 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. In addition, the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy pursuant to section 611 of Public Law 93-574, the “Noise Control Act of 1972.” Special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, are issued in accordance with 14 CFR 11.38 and become part of the type certification basis in accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(a)(2). 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 novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101. Discussion of Novel or Unusual Design Features The A380 has a multi-leg landing gear arrangement consisting of a nose gear, two wing mounted gear, and two body mounted gear. This arrangement is different from the simpler, conventional landing gear arrangement envisioned by the landing and ground load requirements of 14 CFR part 25. Those regulations assume a landing gear arrangement comprising a three point suspension system (two main gear and a nose or tail gear) in which load sharing between the landing gear can be determined without considering the flexibility of the airframe. In fact, § 25.477 states that certain Ground Load provisions apply only to “airplanes with conventional arrangements of main and nose gears, or main and tail gears, when normal operating techniques are used.” For a five point suspension system, like that of the A380, load sharing between landing gear must be determined in a rational manner considering the flexibility of the airplane. Therefore, the landing and ground load requirements of 14 CFR part 25 are not valid, and special conditions specifying the load conditions appropriate to the multi-leg landing gear on the A380 are necessary. Proposed regulatory changes pertaining to landing and ground handling structural design loads have been developed by a working group of the Aviation Rulemaking and Advisory Committee (ARAC). The proposal, dated May 30, 2003, provides design load requirements for various landing gear configurations, including the multi-leg landing gear configuration of the A380. The special conditions proposed in this document are based upon the regulatory changes proposed by the ARAC working group, as are the special conditions issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency for its certification of the A380. For ease of reference, the special conditions proposed in this document are organized in the same manner as in the ARAC recommendation. Since the changes proposed by ARAC cover various landing gear configurations, certain paragraphs of the proposal are not applicable to the A380. These paragraphs are so indicated in the section of this notice, entitled “The Proposed Special Conditions.” This notice contains two groups of proposed special conditions. The first group (Group A) addresses Landing Conditions and includes proposed special conditions pertaining to the following: A.1. Landing load conditions and assumptions, A.2. Symmetric landing load conditions, A.3. One-gear landing conditions, and A.4. Side load conditions. The second group (Group B) addresses other conditions and tests, including Ground Handling Conditions. It includes proposed special conditions pertaining to the following: B.1. Ground handling conditions, B.2. Taxi, takeoff and landing roll, B.3. Braked roll conditions, B.4. Nose-wheel yaw and steering, B.5. Pivoting, B.6. Reversed braking, B.7. Ground load: unsymmetrical loads on multiple-wheel units, and B.8. Shock absorption tests. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the Airbus A380-800 airplane. Should Airbus apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design features, these 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 of the Airbus A380-800 airplane. It is not a rule of general applicability. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. The Proposed Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)proposes the following special conditions as part of the type certification basis for the Airbus A380-800 airplane. A. Landing Conditions 1. Landing Load Conditions and Assumptions In lieu of §§ 25.473 and 25.477, the following special conditions apply:

(a)The landing gear and airplane structure must be investigated for the landing conditions specified in Special Conditions A.2., A.3., and A.4. For these conditions, the airplane is assumed to contact the ground—

(1)In the attitudes defined in Special Conditions A.2. and A.3.

(2)At the descent velocities defined in Special Conditions A.2. and A.3. The prescribed descent velocities may be modified, if it is shown that the airplane has design features that make it impossible to develop these velocities.

(b)Airplane lift, not exceeding airplane weight, may be assumed, unless the presence of systems or procedures significantly affects the lift.

(c)The method of analysis of airplane and landing gear loads must take into account at least the following elements:

(1)Landing gear dynamic characteristics.

(2)Spin-up and spring back.

(3)Rigid body response.

(4)Structural dynamic response of the airframe, if significant.

(5)Each approved tire with nominal characteristics.

(d)The landing gear dynamic characteristics must be validated by tests as defined in Special Condition B.8., paragraph (a).

(e)The coefficient of friction between the tires and the ground may be established by considering the effects of skidding velocity and tire pressure. However, this coefficient of friction need not be more than 0.8. 2. Symmetric Landing Load Conditions In lieu of §§ 25.479 and 25.481, the following special conditions apply: The landing gear and airframe structure must be designed for the dynamic landing conditions of Special Condition A.2., using the assumptions specified in Special Condition A.1.

(a)The airplane is assumed to contact the ground—

(1)With an airspeed corresponding to the attitudes specified in paragraph

(c)of this special condition in the following conditions:

(i)Standard sea level conditions, and

(ii)at maximum approved altitude in a hot day temperature of 22.8°C (41°F) above standard. The airspeed need not be greater than 1.25V S0 , or less than V S0 , where V S0 = the 1-g stalling speed based on C NAmax at the appropriate weight and in the landing configuration. The effects of increased ground contact speeds must be investigated to account for downwind landings for which approval is desired.

(2)With a limit descent velocity of 3.05 m/sec (10 fps) at the design landing weight (the maximum weight for landing conditions at maximum descent velocity); and,

(3)With a limit descent velocity of 1.83 m/sec (6 fps) at the design takeoff weight (the maximum weight for landing conditions at a reduced descent velocity). ( *b) Not applicable to A380.*

(c)For airplanes with nose wheels, the conditions specified in this paragraph must be investigated assuming the following attitudes:

(1)An attitude in which the nose and main wheels are assumed to contact the ground simultaneously, as shown in 14 CFR part 25, Appendix A, Figure 2. For this condition, airplane pitching moment is assumed to be reacted by the nose gear.

(2)An attitude corresponding to the smallest pitch attitude at which the main landing gear reach maximum vertical compression before impact on the nose gear.

(3)An attitude corresponding to either the stalling angle or the maximum angle allowing clearance with the ground by each part of the airplane other than any wheel of the main landing gear, in accordance with 14 CFR part 25, Appendix A, Figure 3, whichever is less.

(4)For aircraft with more than two main landing gear or more than two wheels per main landing gear unit, each intermediate attitude that may be critical.

(d)For airplanes with more than two main landing gear, landing must be considered on a level runway and, as a separate condition, on a runway having a convex upward shape that may be approximated by a slope of 1.5% at main landing gear stations. 3. One-Gear Landing Conditions In lieu of § 25.483, the following special condition applies: *(a) Not applicable to the A380.*

(b)For airplanes with more than two main landing gear, a dynamic rolled landing condition on a level runway must be considered, using the assumptions specified in Special Condition A.1., in which—

(1)The airplane is assumed to contact the ground—

(i)At the maximum roll angle attainable within the geometric limitations of the airplane; (however, the roll angle need not exceed 10 degrees),

(ii)With a limit descent velocity of 2.13 m/sec (7 fps) at the design landing weight,

(iii)At the critical pitch attitudes and corresponding contact velocities obtained under Special Conditions No. A.2.

(2)The dynamic analysis must include the contact of all gear outboard of the airplane centerline on the side of first gear impact. This condition need not apply to the gear on the opposite side of the airplane.

(3)Side loads (in the ground reference system) may be assumed to be zero.

(4)Airplane rolling moments shall be reacted by airplane inertia forces and by subsequent main gear reactions. 4. Side Load Conditions In lieu of § 25.485, the following special conditions apply: For the side load conditions specified in paragraphs

(a)and

(b)below, the vertical and drag loads are assumed to act at the wheel axle centerline, and the side loads are assumed to act at the ground contact point. The gear loads are balanced by inertia of the airplane.

(a)The most severe combination of loads that are likely to arise during a lateral drift landing must be taken into account. In the absence of a more rational analysis of this condition, the following must be investigated:

(1)A separate condition for each gear, for which the vertical load is assumed to be 75% of the maximum vertical reaction obtained in Special Condition A.2. or A.3., whichever is greater. For airplanes with more than two main landing gear, the vertical load on the other gear is assumed to be 75% of the correlated vertical load for those gear in the same condition. The vertical loads for each gear are combined with drag and side loads of 40% and 25%, respectively, of the vertical load.

(2)The airplane is assumed to be in the attitude corresponding to the maximum vertical reaction obtained in Special Condition A.2 or A.3., whichever is greater.

(3)The shock absorber and tire deflections must be assumed to be 75% of the deflection corresponding to the vertical loads obtained in Special Condition A.2., whichever is greater.

(b)In addition to the side load conditions specified in paragraph

(a)above, the following side load conditions must be considered for each main landing gear unit:

(1)A separate condition for each main landing gear unit, for which the vertical load is assumed to be 50% of the maximum vertical reaction obtained in Special Condition A.2. For airplanes with more than two main gear, the vertical load on other gear is assumed to be 50% of the correlated vertical load for those gear in the same condition. The vertical loads for each gear are combined with the side loads specified in paragraph (b)(3) or (b)(4) of this special condition, as applicable.

(2)The airplane is assumed to be in the attitude corresponding to the maximum vertical reaction obtained in Special Conditions A.2.

(3)For the outboard main landing gear, side loads of 0.8 of the vertical reaction (on one side) acting inward and 0.6 of the vertical reaction (on the other side) acting outward as shown in 14 CFR part 25, Appendix A, Figure 5.

(4)For airplanes with more than two main landing gear, the side load of each inboard main landing gear is determined by a linear interpolation between 0.8 and 0.6 of the vertical gear load on that gear, depending on the lateral position of that gear relative to the outboard main landing gear. The side loads act in the same direction as the outboard main gear side loads.

(5)The drag loads may be assumed to be zero.

(6)The shock absorber and tire deflections must be assumed to be 50% of the deflection corresponding to the vertical loads of Special Conditions A.2. B. Ground Handling Conditions 1. Ground Handling Conditions In lieu of § 25.489, the following special conditions apply:

(a)Unless otherwise prescribed, the landing gear and airplane structure must be investigated for the conditions in § 25.509 and in Special Conditions. B.2, B.3, B.4, B.5, and B.6, as follows:

(1)The airplane must be assumed to be at the design ramp weight (the maximum weight for ground handling conditions);

(2)The airplane lift must be assumed to be zero; and

(3)The shock absorbers and tires may be assumed to be in their static position.

(b)For airplanes with more than two main landing gears, the airplane must be considered to be on a level runway and, as a separate condition, on a runway having a convex upward shape that may be approximated by a slope of 1.5% at the main landing gear stations. The ground reactions must be distributed to the individual landing gear in a rational or conservative manner. 2. Taxi, Takeoff and Landing Roll In lieu of § 25.491, the following special condition applies: Within the range of appropriate ground speeds and approved weights, the airplane structure and landing gear are assumed to be subjected to loads not less than those obtained when the aircraft is operating over the roughest ground that may reasonably be expected in normal operation. Steady aerodynamic effects must be considered in a rational or conservative manner. 3. Braked Roll Conditions In lieu of § 25.493, the following special conditions apply: *(a) Not applicable to A380.* (b)For an airplane with a nose wheel, the limit vertical load factor is 1.2 at the design landing weight and 1.0 at the design ramp weight. A drag reaction equal to the vertical reaction, multiplied by a coefficient of friction of 0.8, must be combined with the vertical reaction and applied at the ground contact point of each wheel with brakes. The following two attitudes, in accordance with14 CFR part 25, Appendix A, Figure 6, must be considered:

(1)The level attitude with the wheels contacting the ground and the loads distributed between the main and nose gear. Zero pitching acceleration is assumed.

(2)The level attitude with only the main gear contacting the ground and with the pitching moment resisted by angular acceleration.

(c)An airplane equipped with a nose gear must be designed to withstand the loads arising from the dynamic pitching motion of the airplane due to sudden application of maximum braking force. The airplane is considered to be at design takeoff weight with the nose and main gears in contact with the ground, and with a steady-state vertical load factor of 1.0. The steady-state nose gear reaction must be combined with the maximum incremental nose gear vertical reaction caused by the sudden application of maximum braking force as described in paragraphs

(b)and

(e)of this paragraph. *(d) Not applicable to the A380. *

(e)A drag reaction lower than that prescribed in Special Condition B.3 may be used if it is substantiated that an effective drag force of 0.8 times the vertical reaction cannot be attained under any likely loading condition. 4. Nose-Wheel Yaw and Steering In lieu of § 25.499, the following special conditions apply:

(a)A vertical load factor of 1.0 at the airplane center of gravity and a side component at the nose wheel ground contact equal to 0.8 of the vertical ground reaction at that point are assumed.

(b)With the airplane assumed to be in static equilibrium with the loads resulting from the use of brakes on one side of the main landing gear system, the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the fuselage structure forward of the center of gravity must be designed for the following loads:

(1)A vertical load factor at the center of gravity of 1.0.

(2)For wheels with brakes applied, the coefficient of friction must be 0.8. Drag loads are balanced by airplane inertia. Airplane pitching moment is reacted by the nose gear.

(3)Side and vertical loads at the ground contact point on the nose gear that are required for static equilibrium.

(4)A side load factor at the airplane center of gravity of zero.

(c)If the loads prescribed in paragraph

(b)above result in a nose gear side load higher than 0.8 times the vertical nose gear load, the design nose gear side load may be limited to 0.8 times the vertical load, with unbalanced yawing moments assumed to be resisted by airplane inertia forces.

(d)For other than the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the forward fuselage structure, the loading conditions are those prescribed in paragraph

(b)above, except that—

(1)A lower drag reaction may be used if an effective drag force of 0.8 times the vertical reaction cannot be reached under any likely loading condition; and

(2)The forward acting load at the center of gravity need not exceed the maximum drag reaction on the main landing gear, determined in accordance with Special Conditions B.3., paragraph (b).

(e)With the airplane at design ramp weight, and the nose gear in any steerable position, the combined application of full normal steering torque and vertical force equal to 1.33 times the maximum static reaction on the nose gear must be considered in designing the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the forward fuselage structure. 5. Pivoting In lieu of § 25.503, the following special condition applies: The main landing gear and supporting structure must be designed for the loads induced by pivoting during ground maneuvers in paragraph

(b)below. *(a) Not applicable to A380. *

(b)For airplanes with more than two main landing gear, the following pivoting conditions must be considered:

(1)The following rational pivoting maneuvers must be considered:

(i)Towing at the nose gear at the critical towing angle, no brakes applied, and separately,

(ii)Application of symmetrical and unsymmetrical forward thrust to aid pivoting, with and without braking by pilot action on the pedals.

(2)The airplane is assumed to be in static equilibrium, with the loads being applied at the ground contact points.

(3)The limit vertical load factor must be 1.0, and

(i)For wheels with brakes applied, the coefficient of friction must be 0.8.

(ii)For wheels with brakes not applied, the ground tire reactions must be based on reliable tire data. 6. Reversed Braking In lieu of § 25.507, the following special conditions apply:

(a)The airplane must be in a static ground attitude. Horizontal reactions parallel to the ground and directed forward must be applied at the ground contact point of each wheel with brakes. The limit loads must be equal to 0.55 times the vertical load at each wheel or to the load developed by 1.2 times the nominal maximum static brake torque, whichever is less.

(b)For airplanes with nose gears, the pitching moment must be balanced by rotational inertia. 7. Ground Load: Unsymmetrical Loads on Multiple-Wheel Units In lieu of § 25.511, subparagraphs

(d)and (e), the following special conditions apply:

(a)Landing conditions. For one and for two deflated tires, the applied load to each gear unit is assumed to be 60 percent and 50 percent, respectively, of the limit load applied to each gear for each of the prescribed landing conditions. However, for Special Condition A.4., paragraph (b), 100 percent of the vertical load must be applied. Special Condition A.4., paragraph (a)(3), need not be considered with deflated tires.

(b)Taxiing and ground handling conditions. For one and for two deflated tires—

(1)The applied side or drag load factor, or both factors, at the center of gravity must be the most critical value up to 50 percent and 40 percent, respectively, of the limit side or drag load factors, or both factors, corresponding to the most severe condition resulting from consideration of the prescribed taxiing and ground handling conditions;

(2)For the braked roll conditions of Special Conditions B.3., paragraph (b)(2), the drag loads on each inflated tire may not be less than those at each tire for the symmetrical load distribution with no deflated tires;

(3)The vertical load factor at the center of gravity must be 60 percent and 50 percent, respectively, of the factor with no deflated tires, except that it may not be less than 1g; and

(4)The pivoting condition of Special Condition B.5. and the braked roll conditions of Special Condition B.3., paragraph (c), need not be considered with deflated tires. 8. Shock Absorption Tests In lieu of § 25.723, the following special conditions apply:

(a)The analytical representation of the landing gear dynamic characteristics that is used in determining the landing loads must be validated by energy absorption tests. A range of tests must be conducted to ensure that the analytical representation is valid for the design conditions specified in Special Conditions A.2. and A.3., if applicable.

(1)The configurations subjected to energy absorption tests at limit design conditions must include both the condition with the maximum energy absorbed by the landing gear and the condition with the maximum descent velocity obtained from Special Condition A.2. and A.3.

(2)The test attitude of the landing gear unit and the application of appropriate drag loads during the test must simulate the airplane landing conditions in a manner consistent with the development of rational or conservative limit loads.

(b)Each landing gear unit may not fail in a test, demonstrating its reserve energy absorption capacity, assuming—

(3)The test descent velocity is 120% of that corresponding to the condition specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this paragraph;

(4)The effects of wheel spin-up need not be included.

(c)In lieu of the tests prescribed in this paragraph, changes in previously approved design weights and minor changes in design may be substantiated by analyses based on previous tests conducted on the same basic landing gear system that has similar energy absorption characteristics. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 20, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 06-2973 Filed 3-27-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 18

Traces to 18 documents

U.S. Code