60244 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 199 / Monday, October 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

commonly triggers an increased APR in 

addition to a late payment fee. As a part 

of the Regulation Z review, should the 

Board consider requiring that any 

increased rate that would apply to 

outstanding balances accompany the 

late payment fee disclosure? 

Q101: The late payment disclosure is 

required for all open-end credit 

products. Are there any special issues 

applicable to open-end accounts other 

than credit cards that the Board should 

consider? 

E. Disclosures for Home-Secured Loans 

That May Exceed the Dwelling’s FairMarket Value 

Under the Bankruptcy Act, creditors 

extending home-secured credit (both 

open-end and closed-end) must provide 

additional disclosures for home-secured 

loans that exceed or may exceed the 

fair-market value of the dwelling. 

Section 144 and 147(b) of TILA are 

amended to require that each 

advertisement relating to an extension 

of credit that may exceed the fair-market 

value of the dwelling must include a 

clear and conspicuous statement that: 

(1) The interest on the portion of the 

credit extension that is greater than the 

fair-market value of the dwelling is not 

tax deductible for Federal income tax 

purposes; and (2) the consumer should 

consult a tax adviser for further 

information about the deductibility of 

interest and charges. This requirement 

only applies to advertisements that are 

disseminated in paper form to the 

public or through the Internet, as 

opposed to radio or television. 

In addition, Sections 127(A) and 128 

of TILA are amended to require 

creditors extending home-secured credit 

to make the above disclosures at the 

time of application in cases where the 

extension of credit exceeds or may 

exceed the fair-market value of the 

dwelling. Currently, open-end creditors 

extending home-secured credit already 

are required to disclose at the time of 

application that the consumer should 

consult a tax adviser for further 

information about the deductibility of 

interest and charges. See 15 U.S.C. 

1637a(a)(13); 12 CFR 226.5b(d)(11). 

Q102: What guidance should the 

Board provide in interpreting when an 

‘‘extension of credit may exceed the fairmarket value of the dwelling?’’ For 

example, should the disclosures be 

required only when the new credit 

extension may exceed the dwelling’s 

fair-market value, or should disclosures 

also be required if the new extension of 

credit combined with existing mortgages 

may exceed the dwelling’s fair-market 

value? 

Q103: In determining whether the 

debt ‘‘may exceed’’ a dwelling’s fairmarket value, should only the initial 

amount of the loan or credit line and the 

current property value be considered? 

Or should other circumstances be 

considered, such as the potential for a 

future increase in the total amount of 

the indebtedness when negative 

amortization is possible? 

Q104: What guidance should the 

Board provide on how to make these 

disclosures clear and conspicuous? 

Should the Board provide model clauses 

or forms with respect to these 

disclosures? 

Q105: With the exception of certain 

variable-rate disclosures (12 CFR 

226.17(b) and 226.19(a)), disclosures for 

closed-end mortgage transactions 

generally are provided within three days 

of application for home-purchase loans 

and before consummation for all other 

home-secured loans. 15 U.S.C. 1638(b). 

Is additional compliance guidance 

needed for the Bankruptcy Act 

disclosures that must be provided at the 

time of application in connection with 

closed-end loans? 

F. Prohibition on Terminating Accounts 

for Failure To Incur Finance Charges 

The Bankruptcy Act amends Section 

127 of TILA to prohibit an open-end 

creditor from terminating an account 

under an open-end consumer credit 

plan before its expiration date solely 

because the consumer has not incurred 

finance charges on the account. Under 

the Bankruptcy Act, this prohibition 

would not prevent a creditor from 

terminating an account for inactivity in 

three or more consecutive months. 

Q106: What issues should the Board 

consider in providing guidance on when 

an account ‘‘expires?’’ For example, 

card issuers typically place an 

expiration date on the credit card. 

Should this date be considered the 

expiration date for the account? 

Q107: The prohibition on terminating 

accounts for failure to incur finance 

charges applies to all open-end credit 

products. Are there any issues 

applicable to open-end accounts other 

than credit card accounts that the Board 

should consider? 

Q108: The prohibition on terminating 

accounts does not prevent creditors 

from terminating an account for 

inactivity in three or more consecutive 

months (assuming the termination 

complies with other applicable laws and 

regulations, such as the rules in 

Regulation Z governing the termination 

of HELOCS, 12 CFR 226.5b(f)(2)). 

Should the Board provide guidance on 

this aspect of the statute, and what 

constitutes ‘‘inactivity?’’

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, October 11, 2005. 

Jennifer J. Johnson, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 05–20664 Filed 10–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22696; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–SW–46–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter 

France Model EC 155B and B1 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This document proposes 

adopting a new airworthiness directive 

(AD) for Eurocopter France (ECF) Model 

EC 155B and B1 helicopters. This 

proposal would require inspecting an 

electrical cable bundle for wear. If wear 

is present, the AD would require 

installing an airworthy cable bundle and 

modifying the routing of the electrical 

cable bundles. This proposal is 

prompted by reports of a short circuit in 

the wiring, which led to failure of the 

normal and emergency landing gear 

operation modes. The actions specified 

by this proposed AD are intended to 

prevent interference of the wiring with 

the structure resulting in an electrical 

short circuit, failure of the landing gear 

to extend, and an emergency landing. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 16, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD: 

• DOT Docket Web Site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically; 

• Government-Wide Rulemaking Web 

Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically; 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590; 

• Fax: 202–493–2251; or 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 199 / Monday, October 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules 60245 

You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from 

American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 

Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 

75053–4005, telephone (972) 641–3460, 

fax (972) 641–3527. 

You may examine the comments to 

this proposed AD in the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jorge Castillo, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations 

and Policy Group, Fort Worth, Texas 

76193–0111, telephone (817) 222–5127, 

fax (817) 222–5961. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

data, views, or arguments regarding this 

proposed AD. Send your comments to 

the address listed under the caption 

ADDRESSES. Include the docket number 

‘‘FAA–2005–22696, Directorate 

Identifier 2004–SW–46–AD’’ at the 

beginning of your comments. We 

specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed AD. We will consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and may amend the proposed AD in 

light of those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed 

rulemaking. Using the search function 

of our docket Web site, you can find and 

read the comments to any of our 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual who sent or signed the 

comment. You may review the DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the docket that 

contains the proposed AD, any 

comments, and other information in 

person at the Docket Management 

System (DMS) Docket Office between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647–

5227) is located at the plaza level of the 

Department of Transportation NASSIF 

Building in Room PL–401 at 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after the DMS receives 

them. 

Discussion 

The Direction Generale de l’Aviation 

Civile (DGAC), the airworthiness 

authority for France, notified the FAA 

that an unsafe condition may exist on 

ECF Model EC 155 helicopters. The 

DGAC advises of the occurrence of a 

short circuit that occurred in the wiring 

of panel 12 Alpha making the landing 

gear inoperative. 

ECF has issued Alert Service Bulletin 

No. 24A011 (ASB), dated March 11, 

2004, and subsequently revised on May 

14, 2004, which specifies checking the 

condition of the wiring and modifying 

its routing to preclude the risk of 

interference and associated damage. The 

May 14, 2004, revision to the ASB also 

specifies prevention of any interference 

of the wiring with the head of the vent 

line attaching clamp by replacing wiring 

kit 365A0739C28.71 with wiring kit 

365A0739C28.72. The DGAC classified 

these ASBs as mandatory and issued AD 

No. F–2004–057 R1, dated July 21, 2004, 

to ensure the continued airworthiness of 

these helicopters in France. 

These helicopter models are 

manufactured in France and are type 

certificated for operation in the United 

States under the provisions of 14 CFR 

21.29 and the applicable bilateral 

agreement. Pursuant to the applicable 

bilateral agreement, the DGAC has kept 

us informed of the situation described 

above. We have examined the findings 

of the DGAC, reviewed all available 

information, and determined that AD 

action is necessary for products of this 

type design that are certificated for 

operation in the United States. 

This previously described unsafe 

condition is likely to exist or develop on 

other helicopters of the same type 

designs registered in the United States. 

Therefore, the proposed AD would 

require the following: 

• Within 50 hours time-in-service 

(TIS), inspect the wiring of panel 12 

Alpha electrical (wiring) cable bundle 

for wear. If wear is present, replace the 

worn cable bundle with an airworthy 

cable bundle. 

• Modify the routing of the electrical 

wiring (MOD 0739C28) and replace 

spreaders and spacers. 

The actions would be required to be 

accomplished in accordance with 

specified portions of the ASB described 

previously. 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 7 helicopters of U.S. 

registry and would take about 16 work 

hours to inspect and modify the wiring 

per helicopter at an average labor rate of 

$65 per work hour. Required parts and 

material would cost about $240. Based 

on these figures, we estimate the total 

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $8,960, assuming that all 

of the helicopters will be modified. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. Additionally, this proposed AD 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a draft economic 

evaluation of the estimated costs to 

comply with this proposed AD. See the 

DMS to examine the draft economic 

evaluation. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in subtitle VII, 

part A, subpart III, section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the Federal Aviation 

Administration proposes to amend part 

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR part 39) as follows: 

60246 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 199 / Monday, October 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding a new airworthiness directive to 

read as follows: 

Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA–2005–

22696; Directorate Identifier 2004–SW–

46–AD. 

Applicability: Model EC 155B and B1 

helicopters, certificated in any category. 

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent interference of the wiring with 

the structure resulting in an electrical short 

circuit, failure of the landing gear to extend, 

and an emergency landing, accomplish the 

following: 

(a) Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS), 

(1) Inspect the wiring of panel 12 Alpha 

(wiring) electrical cable bundle for wear. If 

wear is present, replace the worn cable 

bundle with an airworthy cable bundle by 

following the Accomplishment Instructions, 

paragraphs 2.A.1, 2.B.1, and 2.B.2 of 

Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC155, 

Revision 1, dated May 14, 2004 (ASB). 

Note 1: Aircraft Maintenance Manual 

(AMM): Tasks 24.00.00.911 and 32–30–00–

721 and Standard Practices Manual (MTC) 

Work Cards 20.02.01.415, 20.06.01.310, 

20.06.01.406, and 20.02.06.409 pertain to the 

subject of this AD. 

(2) Modify the routing of the electrical 

wiring (MOD 0739C28) and replace spreaders 

and spacers by following the 

Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 

2.B.3. through 2.B.9. of the ASB. 

(b) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Contact the Safety Management Group, 

FAA, for information about previously 

approved alternative methods of compliance. 

(c) Special flight permits will not be 

issued. 

Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in Direction Generale de l’Aviation Civile 

(France) AD F–2004–057 R1, dated July 21, 

2004. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 7, 

2005. 

David A. Downey, 

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20679 Filed 10–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22696; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–SW–22–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada Model 

206A, B, L, L–1, L–3, and L–4 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This document proposes 

superseding an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for the specified Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) 

model helicopters. That AD currently 

requires an initial inspection and at 

specified intervals checks and 

inspections of the tail rotor blade (blade) 

for a deformation, a crack, and a bent or 

deformed tail rotor weight (weight). 

Also, that AD requires, before further 

flight, replacing each blade with an 

airworthy blade if a deformation, a 

crack, or a bent or deformed weight is 

found. This action would contain the 

same actions as the existing AD and 

would also propose adding certain 

serial-numbered blades to the 

applicability that were inadvertently 

omitted from the current AD and would 

require replacing each affected blade, 

which would be terminating action. 

This proposal is prompted by three 

reports of skin cracks originating near 

the blade trailing edge balance weight. 

The actions specified by the proposed 

AD are intended to prevent blade failure 

and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 16, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD: 

• DOT Docket Web Site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically; 

• Government-Wide Rulemaking Web 

Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically; 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590; 

• Fax: 202–493–2251; or 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada, 12,800 Rue 

de l’Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4, 

telephone (450) 437–2862 or (800) 363–

8023, fax (450) 433–0272 

• You may examine the comments to 

this proposed AD in the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations 

and Guidance Group, Fort Worth, Texas 

76193–0111, telephone (817) 222–5122, 

fax (817) 222–5961. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

data, views, or arguments regarding this 

proposed AD. Send your comments to 

the address listed under the caption 

ADDRESSES. Include the docket number 

‘‘FAA–2005–22696, Directorate 

Identifier 2005–SW–22–AD’’ at the 

beginning of your comments. We 

specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed AD. We will consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and may amend the proposed AD in 

light of those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed 

rulemaking. Using the search function 

of our docket web site, you can find and 

read the comments to any of our 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual who sent or signed the 

comment. You may review the DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. The postcard will be 

date stamped and returned to the 

commenter. 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the docket that 

contains the proposed AD, any 

comments, and other information in 

person at the Docket Management 

System (DMS) Docket Office between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647–

5227) is located at the plaza level of the 

Department of Transportation NASSIF 

Building in Room PL–401 at 400