54844 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 173 / Thursday, September 6, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2 74 FR 43232 (Aug. 26, 2009). 

3 Generally, these other rulemakings are as 

follows: (1) Expanded protections for high-cost 

mortgage loans under HOEPA pursuant to TILA 

sections 103(bb) and 129, as amended by DoddFrank Act sections 1431 through 1433 (see 

proposed rule at 77 FR 49089 (Aug. 15, 2012)); (2) 

requirements for creditors to determine that a 

consumer can repay a mortgage loan and the 

establishment of minimum standards for 

compliance, such as by making a ‘‘qualified 

mortgage,’’ pursuant to TILA section 129C, as 

established by Dodd-Frank Act sections 1411 and 

1412 (see proposed rule at 76 FR 27390 (May 11, 

2011)); (3) required escrow account disclosures and 

mandatory escrow accounts for certain first-lien 

higher-priced mortgage loans pursuant to TILA 

section 129D, as established by Dodd-Frank Act 

sections 1461 and 1462 (see proposed rule at 76 FR 

11598 (Mar. 2, 2011)); and (4) required appraisals 

for higher-risk mortgages pursuant to TILA section 

129H, as established by Dodd-Frank Act section 

1471 (see proposed rule at https:// 

s3.amazonaws.com/publicinspection.federalregister.gov/2012-20432.pdf; 

Federal Register publication scheduled for 

September 5, 2012). The TILA-RESPA Integration 

Proposal explains in detail the intersection of the 

proposed more inclusive finance charge and these 

other rulemakings. See 77 FR 51116, 51144–46. 

finance charge. This aspect of the TILARESPA Integration Proposal largely 

mirrors a 2009 proposed rule published 

by the Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System (Board), which was not 

finalized before TILA rulemaking 

authority transferred to the Bureau 

(2009 Closed-End Proposal).2

The TILA-RESPA Integration Proposal 

provides for a bifurcated comment 

process. Comments regarding the 

proposed amendments to §§ 1026.1(c) 

and 1026.4 must be received on or 

before September 7, 2012. For all other 

proposed amendments, comments must 

be received on or before November 6, 

2012. 

The TILA-RESPA Integration Proposal 

describes the rationale for a bifurcated 

comment process. With respect to the 

proposed changes to the definition of 

the finance charge, the proposed rule 

notes that the Bureau expects to issue 

several final rules to implement 

provisions of title XIV of the DoddFrank Act by January 21, 2013, that 

address loan pricing thresholds for 

coverage of various substantive 

requirements under the Home 

Ownership and Equity Protection Act 

(HOEPA) and other Dodd-Frank Act 

provisions that are based, at least in 

part, on the finance charge and 

corresponding annual percentage rate 

(APR).3 Accordingly, the Bureau wished 

to evaluate comments on the expanded 

definition of the finance charge 

simultaneously with comments on the 

other proposed rules, and therefore 

provided a comment period of 60 days 

for the proposed amendments to 

§ 1026.4, rather than the 120-day 

comment period provided for most 

other aspects of the proposed rule. The 

Bureau also believed a shorter comment 

period would be appropriate for the 

proposed changes to the finance charge 

definition given that this aspect of the 

proposal largely mirrors the 2009 

Closed-End Proposal. The Bureau also 

sought comment on the timing of 

implementation of the proposed 

changes to the finance charge definition 

in light of the Bureau’s other 

rulemakings. 

Based on informal feedback received 

by the Bureau since publishing the 

TILA-RESPA Integration Proposal, the 

Bureau now believes that it is 

appropriate to provide additional time 

for commenters to provide their views 

on the proposed changes to the 

definition of the finance charge. The 

Bureau recently published proposed 

rules related to HOEPA protections and 

mandatory appraisals for certain higherrisk mortgages; those proposals discuss 

certain means of reconciling an 

expanded definition of the finance 

charge with coverage thresholds that 

depend on the finance charge or APR. 

The Bureau understands that 

commenters may need additional time 

to evaluate the proposed more inclusive 

finance charge in light of these 

proposals, as well as prior proposed 

rules published by the Board related to 

qualified mortgages and mandatory 

escrow accounts that discuss similar 

issues. In particular, the TILA-RESPA 

Integration Proposal specifically 

requests data that will allow the Bureau 

to perform a quantitative analysis to 

determine the impacts of a broader 

finance charge definition on the 

coverage thresholds for these other 

regimes. The Bureau understands that 

such data collection may require 

additional time and that commenters 

may wish to evaluate any data they 

collect when preparing their comments. 

For these reasons, the Bureau is 

extending the comment period for the 

proposed changes to § 1026.4 in the 

TILA-RESPA Integration Proposal to 

November 6, 2012. In light of this 

extended comment period and the 

subsequent, necessary analysis of 

comments and data received, the Bureau 

does not expect to address any proposed 

changes to § 1026.4 until after the 

Bureau has met its deadlines to issue 

final rules to implement requirements of 

the Dodd-Frank Act that would 

otherwise take effect on January 21, 

2013. Instead, the Bureau expects to 

address the proposals to expand the 

finance charge when it finalizes the 

disclosures in the TILA-RESPA 

Integration Proposal. 

The comment period for the proposed 

changes to § 1026.1(c) concerning 

certain disclosure requirements under 

the Dodd-Frank Act, which ends 

September 7, 2012, is unchanged. In 

addition, the comment period for all 

other aspects of the TILA-RESPA 

Integration Proposal containing 

proposed amendments, which ends 

November 6, 2012, is unchanged. In a 

separate notice, the Bureau is also 

extending to November 6, 2012, the 

comment period for the portions of the 

Bureau’s HOEPA Proposal regarding 

whether and how to account for the 

implications of a more inclusive finance 

charge on the scope of HOEPA coverage. 

If the Bureau expands the definition of 

the finance charge, the Bureau will at 

the same time address the proposals to 

adjust the coverage thresholds that 

depend on the finance charge or the 

APR in the HOEPA Proposal and the 

other proposed rules implementing title 

XIV of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Bureau 

continues to encourage commenters to 

submit comments during the relevant 

comment periods. 

Dated: August 30, 2012. 

Richard Cordray, 

Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2012–22000 Filed 9–5–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

12 CFR Part 1026 

[Docket No. CFPB–2012–0029] 

RIN 3170–AA12 

High-Cost Mortgage and 

Homeownership Counseling 

Amendments to the Truth in Lending 

Act (Regulation Z) and 

Homeownership Counseling 

Amendments to the Real Estate 

Settlement Procedures Act (Regulation 

X) 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice of request for public 

comment; extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: On July 9, 2012, the 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

(Bureau) published on its Web site and 

transmitted to the Federal Register a 

notice requesting comment on, among 

other things, proposed changes to 

Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) to 

implement amendments to the Truth in 

Lending Act made by the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act that expand the types of 

mortgage loans that are subject to the 

protections of the Home Ownership and 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 173 / Thursday, September 6, 2012 / Proposed Rules 54845 

1Comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) analysis are due October 15, 2012. 

Equity Protection Act of 1994 (HOEPA) 

(the HOEPA Proposal). The proposed 

rule was published in the Federal 

Register on August 15, 2012. See 77 FR 

49089 (Aug. 15, 2012). The proposed 

rule set a comment deadline of 

September 7, 2012. In a separate 

rulemaking published on the Bureau’s 

Web site on July 9, 2012 and published 

in the Federal Register on August 23, 

2012 (see 77 FR 51116 (Aug. 23, 2012)), 

the Bureau proposed changes to the 

definition of the finance charge, which 

would result in a simpler, more 

inclusive definition of the finance 

charge (TILA-RESPA Integration 

Proposal). In light of these proposed 

changes, the HOEPA Proposal seeks 

comment on whether and how to 

account for the implications of a more 

inclusive finance charge on the scope of 

HOEPA coverage. Although the TILARESPA Integration Proposal set an 

initial comment deadline regarding the 

proposed changes to the finance charge 

definition of September 7, 2012, by 

separate notice, the Bureau is extending 

that deadline to November 6, 2012. For 

the same reasons discussed in that 

notice, the Bureau has determined that 

an extension of the comment period 

until November 6, 2012 for the portion 

of the HOEPA Proposal regarding 

whether and how to account for the 

implications of a more inclusive finance 

charge on the scope of HOEPA coverage 

is appropriate. This extension does not 

apply to any other aspect of the HOEPA 

Proposal. 

DATES: The comment period for whether 

and how to account for the implications 

of a more inclusive finance charge on 

the scope of HOEPA coverage, see 

proposed § 1026.32(a)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(i), 

is extended to November 6, 2012. The 

comment period for all other proposed 

amendments in that notice, which ends 

on September 7, 2012, is unchanged. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CFPB–2012– 

0028 or RIN 3170–AA19, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive 

Secretary, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20552. 

Instructions: All submissions should 

include the agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Information 

Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. 

Because paper mail in the Washington, 

DC area and at the Bureau is subject to 

delay, commenters are encouraged to 

submit comments electronically. In 

general, all comments received will be 

posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In addition, 

comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying at 1700 G Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20552, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can 

make an appointment to inspect the 

documents by telephoning (202) 435– 

7275. 

All comments, including attachments 

and other supporting materials, will 

become part of the public record and 

subject to public disclosure. Sensitive 

personal information, such as account 

numbers or Social Security Numbers, 

should not be included. Comments will 

not be edited to remove any identifying 

or contact information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Priscilla Walton-Fein, Counsel, or Paul 

Mondor, Managing Counsel, Office of 

Regulations, at (202) 435–7700. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 9, 

2012, the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (Bureau) published 

on its Web site and transmitted to the 

Federal Register a notice requesting 

comment on, among other things, 

proposed changes to Regulation Z 

(Truth in Lending) to implement 

amendments to the Truth in Lending 

Act (TILA) made by the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act that expand the types of 

mortgage loans that are subject to the 

protections of the Home Ownership and 

Equity Protection Act of 1994 (HOEPA) 

(the HOEPA Proposal). The proposed 

rule was published in the Federal 

Register on August 15, 2012. See 77 FR 

49089 (Aug. 15, 2012). The proposed 

rule set a comment deadline of 

September 7, 2012.1

In a separate rulemaking published on 

the Bureau’s Web site on July 9, 2012 

and published in the Federal Register 

on August 23, 2012 (77 FR 51116 (Aug. 

23, 2012)), the Bureau proposed changes 

to the definition of the finance charge, 

which would result in a simpler, more 

inclusive definition of the finance 

charge (the TILA-RESPA Integration 

Proposal). Although the proposed 

changes to the definition of the finance 

charge were proposed in this separate 

rulemaking, the HOEPA Proposal seeks 

comment on whether and how to 

account for the implications of a more 

inclusive finance charge on the scope of 

HOEPA coverage, if the more inclusive 

finance charge is adopted. In particular, 

the HOEPA Proposal seeks comment 

and data on potential modifications to 

HOEPA’s annual percentage rate (APR) 

coverage threshold (proposed 

§ 1026.32(a)) and points and fees 

threshold (proposed § 1026.32(b)) to 

account for an expanded finance charge, 

and also seeks comment on the timing 

of implementation for any change to the 

definition of finance charge and any 

related change to the HOEPA APR and 

points and fees thresholds. 

The TILA-RESPA Integration Proposal 

set an initial comment deadline 

regarding the proposed changes to the 

definition of the finance charge of 

September 7, 2012. This comment 

period was based in part on the 

Bureau’s desire to evaluate comments 

on the expanded definition of the 

finance charge simultaneously with 

comments on the other proposed rules, 

including the HOEPA Proposal, that 

address loan pricing thresholds for 

coverage of various substantive 

requirements that are based on the 

finance charge and corresponding APR. 

However, by separate notice, the Bureau 

is extending that comment deadline to 

November 6, 2012. For the same reasons 

discussed in that notice, the Bureau has 

determined that it is appropriate to 

extend the comment period regarding 

whether and how to account for the 

implications of a more inclusive finance 

charge on the scope of HOEPA coverage 

until November 6, 2012. The comment 

period for all other proposed 

amendments in the HOEPA Proposal, 

which ends September 7, 2012, is 

unchanged. 

In light of the extended comment 

periods and the subsequent, necessary 

analysis of comments and data received, 

the Bureau does not expect to address 

any proposed changes to the definition 

of the finance charge or the related 

portions of the HOEPA Proposal until 

after the Bureau has met its deadlines to 

issue final rules to implement 

requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act that 

would otherwise take effect on January 

21, 2013. Instead, the Bureau expects to 

address the proposal to expand the 

finance charge when it finalizes the 

disclosures in the TILA-RESPA 

Integration Proposal. If the Bureau 

expands the definition of the finance 

charge, the Bureau will at the same time 

address the proposals to adjust the 

coverage thresholds that depend on the 

finance charge or the APR in the 

HOEPA Proposal and the other 

proposed rules implementing title XIV 

of the Dodd-Frank Act. 

The comment period for all other 

aspects of the HOEPA Proposal, which 

ends September 7, 2012, is unchanged. 

The Bureau continues to encourage 

commenters to submit comments during 

the relevant comment periods. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
54846 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 173 / Thursday, September 6, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: August 31, 2012. 

Meredith Fuchs, 

General Counsel, Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2012–21998 Filed 9–5–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0930; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–251–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Bombardier, Inc. Model BD–100–1A10 

(Challenger 300) airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by reports 

of failure of a screw cap or end cap of 

the auxiliary hydraulic system 

accumulator while on the ground, 

which resulted in loss of use of that 

hydraulic system and high-energy 

impact damage to adjacent systems and 

structures. This proposed AD would 

require inspecting for the correct serial 

number of a certain hydraulic system 

accumulator, and replacing affected 

hydraulic system accumulators with 

new or serviceable accumulators. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent failure 

of a screw cap or end cap and loss of 

the related hydraulic system, which 

could result in damage to airplane 

structure and consequent reduced 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 22, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, 

Inc., 400 Coˆte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, 

Que ́bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 

514–855–5000; fax 514–855–7401; email 

thd.crj@aero.bombardier.com; Internet 

http://www.bombardier.com. You may 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7318; fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2012–0930; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–251–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Canada, has issued Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2011–41, 

dated October 31, 2011 (referred to after 

this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

Seven cases of on-ground hydraulic 

accumulator screw cap/end cap failure have 

been experienced on CL–600–2B19 

aeroplanes, resulting in loss of the associated 

hydraulic system and high-energy impact 

damage to adjacent systems and structure. To 

date, the lowest number of flight cycles 

accumulated at the time of failure has been 

6991. 

Although there have been no failures to 

date on any BD–100–1A10 aeroplanes, 

accumulators similar to those installed on the 

CL–600–2B19 are installed on them. The 

affected part numbers (P/Ns) of the 

accumulators installed on BD–100–1A10 are 

900095–1 (Auxiliary Hydraulic System 

accumulator), 08–60219–001 (Inboard Brake 

accumulator), and 08–60218–001 (Outboard 

Brake accumulator). 

A detailed analysis of the calculated line 

of trajectory of a failed screw cap/end cap for 

the accumulator has been conducted, 

resulting in the identification of areas where 

systems and/or structural components could 

potentially be damaged. Although all of the 

failures to date have occurred on the ground, 

an in-flight failure affecting such components 

could potentially have an adverse effect on 

the controllability of the aeroplane. 

This [TCCA] directive provides the initial 

action by mandating the replacement of the 

Auxiliary Hydraulic System accumulators 

that are not identified by the letter ‘‘E’’ after 

the serial number on the identification plate. 

Further corrective actions are anticipated to 

rectify similar safety concerns with the 

Inboard and Outboard Brake accumulators. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Bombardier has issued Service 

Bulletin 100–29–14, dated December 16, 

2010. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 75 airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We estimate the following costs 

to comply with this proposed AD 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS