This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

44504 

Vol. 83, No. 170 

Friday, August 31, 2018 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Rural Housing Service 

7 CFR Parts 3550 and 3555 

RIN 0575–AD13 

Single Family Housing Direct and 

Guaranteed Loan Programs 

AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Through this action, the Rural 

Housing Service (RHS or Agency) is 

proposing to amend its regulations for 

the direct and guaranteed single family 

housing loan and grant programs. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

must be received on or before October 

30, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to this rule by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments via 

the U.S. Postal Service to the Branch 

Chief, Regulations and Paperwork 

Management Branch, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, STOP 0742, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–0742. 

All written comments will be 

available for public inspection during 

regular work hours at the address listed 

above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shannon Chase, Finance and Loan 

Analyst, Single Family Housing Direct 

Loan Origination Branch, USDA Rural 

Development, STOP 0783, 1400 

Independence Ave. SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–0783, Telephone: (515) 305– 

0399. Email: shannon.chase@

wdc.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RHS 

is proposing to amend its regulations for 

the direct and guaranteed single family 

housing loan and grant programs in 7 

CFR parts 3550 and 3555 by: 

(1) Revising the definition of very 

low-, low-, and moderate-income to 

allow for a two-tier income limit 

structure (also known as income 

banding) within the single family 

housing direct loan and grant programs. 

(2) Clarifying that net family assets are 

not considered when calculating 

repayment income, and that net family 

assets exclude amounts in voluntary 

retirement accounts, tax advantaged 

college, health, or medical savings or 

spending accounts, and other amounts 

deemed by the Agency not to constitute 

net family assets. 

(3) Revising the methodology used to 

determine the area loan limits to use a 

percentage(s), as determined by the 

Agency, of the applicable local HUD 

section 203(b) limit. 

(4) As a result of income banding, 

converting borrowers currently 

receiving payment assistance method 1 

to payment assistance method 2 should 

they receive a subsequent loan. 

(5) Revising the definition of lowincome to allow for the two-tier income 

limit structure (income banding) within 

the single family housing guaranteed 

loan program. 

Statutory Authority 

Section 510(k) of Title V the Housing 

Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1480(k)), as 

amended, authorizes the Secretary of 

Agriculture to promulgate rules and 

regulations as deemed necessary to 

carry out the purpose of that title. 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has designated this rule as not 

significant under Executive Order 

12866. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Except where specified, all 

State and local laws and regulations that 

are in direct conflict with this rule will 

be preempted. Federal funds carry 

Federal requirements. No person is 

required to apply for funding under this 

program, but if they do apply and are 

selected for funding, they must comply 

with the requirements applicable to the 

Federal program funds. This rule is not 

retroactive. It will not affect agreements 

entered into prior to the effective date 

of the rule. Before any judicial action 

may be brought regarding the provisions 

of this rule, the administrative appeal 

provisions of 7 CFR part 11 must be 

exhausted. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effect of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

the Agency generally must prepare a 

written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final 

rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, or 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

to the private sector, of $100 million, or 

more, in any one year. When such a 

statement is needed for a rule, section 

205 of the UMRA generally requires the 

Agency to identify and consider a 

reasonable number of regulatory 

alternatives and adopt the least costly, 

most cost-effective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. 

This proposed rule contains no 

Federal mandates (under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for 

State, local, and tribal governments or 

the private sector. Therefore, this rule is 

not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

Environmental Impact Statement 

This document has been reviewed in 

accordance with 7 CFR part 1970, 

subpart A, ‘‘Environmental Policies.’’ It 

is the determination of the Agency that 

this action does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment, and, 

in accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 

Public Law 91–190, neither an 

Environmental Assessment nor an 

Environmental Impact Statement is 

required. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The policies contained in this rule do 

not have any substantial direct effect on 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and States, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Nor does this rule 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on State and local governments. 

Therefore, consultation with the States 

is not required. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules 44505 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In compliance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) the 

undersigned has determined and 

certified by signature of this document 

that this rule, while affecting small 

entities, will not have an adverse 

economic impact on small entities. This 

rule does not impose any significant 

new requirements on program recipients 

nor does it adversely impact proposed 

real estate transactions involving 

program recipients as the buyers. 

Executive Order 12372, 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs 

This program/activity is not subject to 

the provisions of Executive Order 

12372, which require intergovernmental 

consultation with State and local 

officials. (See the Notice related to 7 

CFR part 3015, subpart V, at 48 FR 

29112, June 24, 1983; 49 FR 22675, May 

31, 1984; 50 FR 14088, April 10, 1985.) 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This executive order imposes 

requirements in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications or preempt tribal laws. 

RHS has determined that the proposed 

rule does not have a substantial direct 

effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or 

on either the relationship or the 

distribution of powers and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and the Indian tribes. Thus, 

this proposed rule is not subject to the 

requirements of Executive Order 13175. 

Programs Affected 

The following programs, which are 

listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance, are affected by this proposed 

rule: Number 10.410, Very Low to 

Moderate Income Housing Loans 

(specifically the section 502 direct and 

guaranteed loans), and Number 10.417, 

Very Low-Income Housing Repair Loans 

and Grants (specifically the section 504 

direct loans and grants). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.), the information collection 

activities associated with this rule are 

covered under OMB Number: 0575– 

0172. This proposed rule contains no 

new reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements that would require 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

E-Government Act Compliance 

RHS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C. 3601 

et. seq., to promote the use of the 

internet and other information 

technologies to provide increased 

opportunities for citizen access to 

Government information and services, 

and for other purposes. 

Non-Discrimination Policy 

In accordance with Federal civil 

rights law and U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) civil rights 

regulations and policies, the USDA, its 

Agencies, offices, and employees, and 

institutions participating in or 

administering USDA programs are 

prohibited from discriminating based on 

race, color, national origin, religion , 

sex, gender identity (including gender 

expression), sexual orientation, 

disability, age, marital status, family/ 

parental status, income derived from a 

public assistance program, political 

beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior 

civil rights activity, in any program or 

activity conducted or funded by USDA 

(not all bases apply to all programs). 

Remedies and complaint filing 

deadlines vary by program or incident. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means of communication for 

program information (e.g., Braille, large 

print, audiotape, American Sign 

Language, etc.) should contact the 

responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET 

Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and 

TTY) or contact USDA through the 

Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. 

Additionally, program information may 

be made available in languages other 

than English. 

To file a program discrimination 

complaint, complete the USDA Program 

Discrimination Complaint Form, AD– 

3027, found online at http://

www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_

cust.html and at any USDA office or 

write a letter addressed to USDA and 

provide in the letter all of the 

information requested in the form. To 

request a copy of the complaint form, 

call (866) 632–9992. Submit your 

completed form or letter to USDA by: 

(1) Mail: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Civil Rights. 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–9410; 

(2) Fax: (202)690–7442; or 

(3) Email: program.intake@usda.gov. 

USDA is an equal opportunity 

provider, employer, and lender. 

I. Background 

In order to improve the delivery of the 

single family housing loan programs 

and to promote consistency among the 

programs when appropriate, RHS 

proposes making the following revisions 

to 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555. 

(1) Revising the definition of very 

low-, low-, and moderate-income in 

§ 3550.10 to allow for a two-tier income 

limit structure (income banding) for the 

single family housing direct loan and 

grant programs. 

The revisions will help minimize the 

impact of varying minimum wages 

among states and territories and the 

observed disconnect between minimum 

wages and the low median income in 

many areas. Under current regulations, 

the income of a household with two 

people earning the minimum wage 

would exceed the low-income eligibility 

limit in 39 to 93 percent of the counties 

in 16 states and territories. In other 

words, under current regulations and 

income limits, the income from a twoperson household earning minimum 

wage may be considered too high to 

qualify for a direct loan. 

In accordance with Section 501(b)(4) 

of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 

1471(b)(4)), the terms ‘‘low income 

families or persons’’ and ‘‘very lowincome families or persons’’ mean those 

families and persons whose income do 

not exceed the respective levels 

established for low-income families and 

very low-income families under the 

United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 

U.S.C. 1437 et seq.). The income levels 

in the Housing Act of 1937 are generally 

established by the U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development 

(HUD). RHS currently uses the HUD 

income levels without income banding. 

However, HUD programs authorized by 

the Housing Act of 1937 focus on 

renting as opposed to home purchases, 

which contributes to the 

disqualification of households with 

minimum wage earners as described 

above. The Agency has been operating 

a pilot in 23 states to test the alternate 

methodology of a two-tier income limit 

structure to address this issue. 

For the pilot, the Agency used the 

authority in 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D), 

which provides for HUD and USDA to 

consult on income ceilings for rural 

areas, taking into account the types of 

programs that will use the income 

ceilings as well as subsidy 

characteristics. Based on this authority, 

the Agency used a two-tier income limit 

structure for the single family housing 

programs which bands together 1–4 

person households using the 4-person 

income level set by HUD, and 5–8 

person households using the 8-person 

income level established by HUD. The 

pilot has successfully served more 

borrowers, providing meaningful 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
44506 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

homeownership opportunities to those 

who would otherwise be denied. The 

Agency is now proposing to use income 

banding to determine all limits for very 

low-income, low-income, moderateincome, 38 year term, and adjusted 

median income. 

Such banding has successfully been 

used to establish the moderate income 

limits in the guaranteed single family 

housing loan program for years (the 

term ‘‘moderate income’’ is not defined 

in Section 501(b)(4) of the Housing Act 

of 1949 and therefore is not restricted in 

the same way as ‘‘very low-’’ and ‘‘lowincome’’). 

The Agency has consulted with HUD, 

and both agencies agree that the two-tier 

income limit approach is suitable for the 

USDA single family housing loan and 

grant programs. The impacted income 

definitions in § 3550.10 will be revised 

to simply state that the respective limit 

is ‘‘an adjusted income limit developed 

in consultation with HUD’’. The two-tier 

income limits will be published 

annually via a Procedure Notice and 

posted to the Agency website at https:// 

www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-DirectLimit

Map.pdf. 

The Agency also proposes to revise 

the definition of moderate income so 

that it does not exceed the moderate 

income limit established for the 

guaranteed single family housing loan 

program. The Agency will publish a 

specific limit in the program handbook. 

The revisions to the income 

definitions will ultimately allow the 

Agency and HUD to account for the 

differences between renting (which is 

the focus of HUD and 42 U.S.C. 1437 et 

seq.) and owning a home. This proposed 

action will improve program availability 

to the intended recipients. 

(2) Revising § 3550.54(d) to remove 

the requirement that net family assets be 

included in the calculation of 

repayment income. 

Currently, net family assets are 

considered for determining annual 

income, down payment purposes, and 

repayment income. The Agency 

proposes to exclude net family assets 

from repayment income calculations 

because repayment income focuses on 

the income of those who sign the 

promissory note, whereas net family 

assets considers the finances of other 

family members. Net family assets will 

still be considered for annual income 

and down payment purposes. 

The Agency also proposes to revise 

the regulation so that the list of net 

family assets considered for annual 

income and down payment purposes 

would exclude amounts in voluntary 

retirement accounts such as individual 

retirement accounts (IRAs), 401(k) 

plans, Keogh accounts, and the cash 

value of life insurance policies. 

In addition, the Agency proposes to 

exclude the value of tax advantaged 

college savings plans, the value of tax 

advantaged health or medical savings or 

spending accounts, and other amounts 

deemed by the Agency, from net family 

assets considered in the determination 

of annual income and down payments. 

Excluding these types of assets when 

considering annual income or down 

payment requirements will help 

safeguard the assets for their intended 

purposes and promote a healthy 

financial support system for the 

household when it does incur education 

and health care costs, or enters 

retirement. 

The Agency also proposes removing 

from net family assets the value, in 

excess of the consideration received, for 

any business or household assets 

disposed of for less than the fair market 

value during the 2 years preceding the 

income determination. This proposed 

change recognizes that it is not 

productive or meaningful to consider 

assets which have been disposed of in 

the past. 

Lastly, the Agency proposes two 

minor changes primarily for consistency 

between the direct and guaranteed 

single family housing loan regulations. 

The Agency proposes to include in net 

family assets any equity in capital 

investments for consistency with the 

guaranteed single family housing loan 

regulations, as well as obtaining a full 

understanding of an applicant’s 

financial condition before making a 

decision on a loan. In the exclusions 

from net family assets, the Agency 

proposes to change the language from 

‘‘American Indian trust land’’ to 

‘‘American Indian restricted land’’. The 

terms ‘‘trust land’’ and ‘‘restricted’’ are 

often used interchangeably, and the 

proposed revision is for consistency 

between the direct and guaranteed 

program regulations, and will not result 

in any substantive changes. 

(3) Revising the methodology used to 

determine the area loan limits in 

§ 3550.63(a) to use a percentage(s), as 

determined by the Agency, of the 

applicable local HUD section 203(b) 

limit. 

The revisions to the area loan limit 

methodology will streamline the 

determination of area loan limits and 

improve the reliability of the data set 

used to establish the area loan limits. 

The current process to annually 

establish the area loan limits uses a data 

set based on overly restrictive 

nationalized parameters and requires a 

significant amount of staff time on all 

levels (field, state, and national). 

Currently, § 3550.63(a) allows for two 

methods that a State Director may use 

to establish area loan limits. The first 

option is based on the cost to construct 

a modest home plus the market value of 

an improved lot based on recent sales 

data. The second option allows the State 

Director to use State Housing Authority 

(SHA) limits as long as the limit is 

within 10 percent of the cost data plus 

the market value of the improved lot. 

This second option is rarely used 

because the SHA limits are usually not 

within the 10 percent limit. 

For the first option, the most widely 

used option, the Agency contracts with 

a third party that provides building cost 

data for real estate valuations to obtain 

construction costs, but those 

construction costs are based on 

parameters for homes that do not reflect 

the varied modest homes available to 

program borrowers. In addition, 

obtaining the market value is a timeconsuming process relying on collecting 

and updating recent home sales data, 

which is particularly difficult given 

Agency staff appraiser shortages over 

the past few years. 

The Agency has been operating a pilot 

to test the alternate methodology of 

basing the area loan limits on a 

percentage of the FHA Forward OneFamily mortgage limits (the HUD 203(b) 

limit). Under the pilot, 80 percent of the 

HUD 203(b) limit was used to establish 

the area loan limits in selected pilot 

states. The 80 percent was established 

based on a side-by-side, county-bycounty comparison of the Agency’s 

existing area loan limits to various 

percentages of the HUD 203(b) limits. It 

was determined that 80 percent of the 

HUD 203(b) limits was adequate to 

cover the loan amounts in the majority 

of states (vs. lower percentages of 60–70 

percent). 

While the pilot states generally 

experienced increases in their area loan 

limits, the increases were not 

significant, in part because an 

applicant’s qualification amount 

continues to be limited to repayment 

ability, property eligibility criteria (for 

example, properties financed through 

the program are currently subject to 

2,000 square feet), and other factors. 

Average loan amounts in the pilot states 

increased 13.4 percent from Fiscal Year 

2015 to 2017, while average loan 

amounts in the non-pilot states have 

increased 5.4 percent during the same 

period. 

The Agency believes the higher 

percent increase in the pilot states is 

acceptable for several reasons. For 

example, the alternate methodology 

makes new construction under the 

program more feasible, and new 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules 44507 

construction can improve a rural 

community’s housing stock and 

economy. In addition, this proposed 

action will save the Agency more than 

$70,000 each year (which is the cost to 

obtain the construction cost data set 

from a nationally recognized residential 

cost provider). A significant amount of 

staff time will also be saved. 

The Agency will determine the 

percentage(s) based on housing market 

conditions and trends, and publish the 

percentage(s) in the program handbook. 

The resulting area loan limits will be 

posted to the Agency website at https:// 

www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-SFHArea

LoanLimitMap.pdf. The proposed 

change allows the Agency to adjust the 

percentage(s) as necessary in order to be 

responsive to housing market conditions 

and trends. 

(4) Revising § 3550.68(b)(2) to convert 

a borrower currently receiving payment 

assistance method 1 to payment 

assistance method 2 should that 

borrower receive a subsequent loan. 

The proposed change is related to the 

income banding proposal, as payment 

assistance method 2 will more closely 

align the subsidy with what is actually 

needed for affordability. The proposed 

change avoids potentially oversubsidizing borrowers using payment 

assistance method 1 under the income 

banding system, and reduces the 

potential for negative impacts to the 

program’s subsidy rate. 

(5) Revising the definition of lowincome in § 3555.10 for the single 

family housing guaranteed loan program 

to allow for the two-tier income limit 

structure (income banding) discussed 

above. The two-tier income limits will 

be published annually via a Procedure 

Notice and posted to the Agency 

website at https://www.rd.usda.gov/ 

files/RD-GRHLimitMap.pdf. 

The single family housing guaranteed 

loan program provides guarantees to 

lenders who make loans to low- and 

moderate-income borrowers in rural 

areas who are without sufficient 

resources or credit to obtain a loan 

without the guarantee. As mentioned, 

the guaranteed loan program already 

uses the two-tier income limit structure 

for moderate income limits. The 

proposed change would allow the twotier income limit structure to be used for 

determining the very low- and lowincome limits in the guaranteed loan 

program. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 3550 and 

3555 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Environmental impact 

statements, Fair housing, Grant 

programs—housing and community 

development, Housing, Loan 

programs—housing and community 

development, Low and moderate 

income housing, Manufactured homes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Rural areas. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555 

are proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 3550—DIRECT SINGLE FAMILY 

HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 3550 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k). 

Subpart A—General 

■ 2. Section 3550.10 is amended by 

revising the definitions of ‘‘low 

income’’, ‘‘moderate income’’, and ‘‘very 

low income’’ to read as follows: 

§ 3550.10 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Low income. An adjusted income 

limit developed in consultation with 

HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D). 

* * * * * 

Moderate income. An adjusted 

income that does not exceed the 

moderate income limit for the 

guaranteed single family housing loan 

program authorized by Section 502(h) of 

the Housing Act of 1949, as amended. 

* * * * * 

Very low income. An adjusted income 

limit developed in consultation with 

HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D). 

* * * * * 

Subpart B—Section 502 Origination 

■ 3. In § 3550.54: 

■ a. Revise the first sentence of 

paragraph (d) introductory text; 

■ b. Revise paragraphs (d)(1) 

introductory text and (d)(1)(i); 

■ c. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)(iv) through 

(vi); 

■ d. Remove paragraph (d)(1)(vii); 

■ e. Revise paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (v); 

and 

■ f. Add paragraphs (d)(2)(vi) through 

(x). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 3550.54 Calculation of income and 

assets. 

* * * * * 

(d) Net family assets. Income from net 

family assets must be included in the 

calculation of annual income. * * * 

(1) Net family assets include, but are 

not limited to: 

(i) Equity in real property or other 

capital investments, other than the 

dwelling or site; 

* * * * * 

(iv) Stocks, bonds, and other forms of 

capital investments that are accessible 

to the applicant without retiring or 

terminating employment; 

(v) Lump sum receipts such as lottery 

winnings, capital gains, inheritances; 

and 

(vi) Personal property held as an 

investment. 

(2) * * * 

(i) Interest in American Indian 

restricted land; 

* * * * * 

(v) Amounts in voluntary retirement 

plans such as individual retirement 

accounts (IRAs), 401(k) plans, and 

Keogh accounts (except at the time 

interest assistance is initially granted); 

(vi) The value of an irrevocable trust 

fund or any other trust over which no 

member of the household has control; 

(vii) Cash value of life insurance 

policies; 

(viii) The value of tax advantaged 

college savings plans (529 plan, 

Coverdell Education Savings Account, 

etc.); 

(ix) The value of tax advantaged 

health or medical savings or spending 

accounts; and 

(x) Other amounts deemed by the 

Agency not to constitute net family 

assets. 

■ 4. In § 3550.63, paragraph (a)(1) is 

revised to read as follows in its entirety: 

§ 3550.63 Maximum loan amount. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) The area loan limit is the 

maximum value of the property RHS 

will finance in a given locality. This 

limit is based on a percentage(s) of the 

applicable local HUD section 203(b) 

limit. The percentage(s) will be 

determined by the Agency and 

published in the program handbook. 

The area loan limits will be reviewed at 

least annually and posted to the Agency 

website. 

(i) [Removed] 

(ii) [Removed] 

(iii) [Removed] 

(iv) [Removed] 

(v) [Removed] 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 3550.68, paragraph (b)(2) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 3550.68 Payment subsidies. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) If a borrower receiving payment 

assistance using payment assistance 

method 1 received a subsequent loan, 

payment assistance method 2 will be 

used to calculate the subsidy for the 

initial loan and subsequent loan. 

* * * * * 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
44508 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

PART 3555—GUARANTEED RURAL 

HOUSING PROGRAM 

■ 6. The authority citation for part 3555 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k). 

Subpart A—General 

■ 2. Section 3555.10 is amended to 

revising the definition of ‘‘low-income’’ 

to read as follows: 

§ 3555.10 Definitions and abbreviations. 

* * * * * 

Low-income. An adjusted income 

limit developed in consultation with 

HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D). 

* * * * * 

Dated: August 1, 2018. 

Joel C. Baxley, 

Administrator, Rural Housing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–18683 Filed 8–30–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2018–0763; Product 

Identifier 2018–NM–052–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 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 

The Boeing Company Model 787–8 and 

787–9 airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a determination that 

certain areas in the tire/wheel threat 

zones could be susceptible to damage, 

which could result in loss of braking on 

one main landing gear (MLG) truck, loss 

of nose wheel steering, and loss of 

directional control on the ground when 

below rudder effectiveness speed. This 

proposed AD would require installing 

hydraulic tubing, a pressure-operated 

check valve, and new flight control 

software. We are proposing this AD to 

address the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 15, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster 

Blvd., MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 

90740–5600; telephone 562–797–1717; 

internet https://www.myboeingfleet.

com. You may view this referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Standards Branch, 2200 

South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. 

It is also available on the internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0763. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0763; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this NPRM, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (phone: 800–647– 

5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, 

Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th 

Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone 

and fax: 206–231–3546; email: 

Kelly.McGuckin@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2018–0763; Product Identifier 2018– 

NM–052–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this NPRM. We will consider 

all comments received by the closing 

date and may amend this NPRM 

because of 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 

Boeing determined that certain areas 

in the tire/wheel threat zones could be 

susceptible to damage due to a thrown 

tire tread or tire burst. This could result 

in a loss of braking on one MLG truck, 

loss of nose wheel steering, and loss of 

directional control on the ground when 

below rudder effectiveness speed. The 

Model 787 hydraulic system is 

configured with a reserve steering 

system intended to maintain the nose 

wheel steering function in the event that 

a thrown tire tread or tire burst leads to 

a brake system failure such that 

differential braking cannot be used for 

directional control. Boeing has 

determined that damage from a MLG 

thrown tire tread or tire burst event 

could also result in the loss of the 

reserve steering system, resulting in loss 

of directional control on the ground and 

consequent runway excursion. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletins B787–81205–SB290032–00 

and B787–81205–SB290033–00, both 

Issue 001, both dated November 17, 

2017. This service information describes 

procedures for installing hydraulic 

tubing and installing a pressureoperated check valve. These documents 

are distinct since they apply to different 

airplane models. 

We also reviewed Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin B787–81205– 

SB270039–00, Issue 002, dated March 8, 

2018. This service information describes 

procedures for installing new flight 

control software. 

This service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS