62772 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules

nature of reverse mortgage transactions.

Special definitions and instructions are

included where appropriate.

(b) Instructions and equations for the total

annual loan cost rate.

(b)(5) Number of unit-periods between two

given dates.

1. Assumption as to when transaction

begins. The computation of the total annual

loan cost rate is based on the assumption that

the reverse mortgage transaction begins on

the first day of the month in which

consummation is estimated to occur.

Therefore, fractional unit-periods (as used

under appendix J for calculating annual

percentage rates) are not used.

(b)(9) Assumption for discretionary cash

advances.

1. Amount of credit. Creditors should

compute the total annual loan cost rates for

transactions involving discretionary cash

advances by assuming that 50 percent of the

initial amount of the credit available under

the transaction is advanced at closing or, in

an open-end transaction, when the consumer

becomes obligated under the plan. (For the

purposes of this assumption, the initial

amount of the credit is the principle loan

amount less any costs to the consumer under

section 226.33(c)(1).)

(b)(10) Assumption for variable-rate

reverse mortgage transactions.

1. Initial discount or premium rate. Where

a variable-rate reverse mortgage transaction

includes an initial discount or premium rate,

the creditor should apply the same rules for

calculating the total annual loan cost rate as

are applied when calculating the annual

percentage rate for a loan with an initial

discount or premium rate (see the

commentary to § 226.17(c)).

(d) Reverse mortgage model form and

sample form.

(d)(2) Sample form.

1. General. The ‘‘clear and conspicuous’’

standard for reverse mortgage disclosures

does not require disclosures to be printed in

any particular type size. Disclosures may be

made on more than one page, and use both

the front and the reverse sides, so long as the

pages constitute an integrated document.

Appendix L—Assumed Loan Periods for

Computations of Total Annual Loan Cost

Rates

1. General. The life expectancy figures

used in this appendix are those found in the

U.S. Decennial Life Tables for women, as

rounded to the nearest whole year and as

published by the U. S. Department of Health

and Human Services. The figures contained

in this appendix must be used by creditors

for all consumers (men and women). This

appendix will be revised periodically by the

Board to incorporate revisions to the figures

made in the Decennial Tables.fi

By order of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, acting through the

Secretary of the Board under delegated

authority, December 1, 1995.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 95–29711 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–ANE–03]

Airworthiness Directives; Sensenich

Propeller Manufacturing Company Inc.

Models M76EMM, M7EMMS, 76EM8,

and 76EM8S() Metal Propellers

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to Sensenich

Propeller Manufacturing Company Inc.

Models M76EMM, M7EMMS, 76EM8,

and 76EM8S() metal propellers, that

currently restricts operators from

continuously operating the propeller at

engine speeds from 2,150 to 2,350

revolutions per minute (RPM). This

action would remove propellers

installed on certain additional Textron

Lycoming O–360 series reciprocating

engines with solid crankshafts from this

requirement, and update the referenced

Sensenich Propeller Company Inc.

service bulletin to the latest revision.

Reworking of all affected propeller

models remains a requirement of the

proposed AD, regardless of engine

installation. This proposal is prompted

by inquiries concerning tachometer red

arc restrictions on certain Textron

Lycoming O–360 series reciprocating

engines with solid crankshafts. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent propeller blade

tip fatigue failure, which can result in

loss of control of the aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–ANE–03, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Sensenich Propeller Manufacturing

Company Inc., 519 Airport Road, Lititz,

PA 17543; telephone (717) 569–0435,

fax (717) 560–3725. This information

may be examined at the FAA, New

England Region, Office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel, 12 New England

Executive Park, Burlington, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Raymond J. O’Neill, Aerospace

Engineer, New York Aircraft

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and

Propeller Directorate, 10 Fifth St.,

Valley Stream, NY 11581; telephone

(516) 256–7505, fax (516) 568–2716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–ANE–03.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, New England Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–ANE–03, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299.

Discussion

On May 6, 1969, the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) issued

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 69–09–03,

Amendment 39–761 (34 FR 7371, May

7, 1969), applicable to Sensenich

Propeller Manufacturing Company Inc.

Models M76EMM, M7EMMS, 76EM8,

and 76EM8S() metal propellers.

Revision 1, Amendment 39–808 (34 FR

12563, August 1, 1969); and Revision 2,

Amendment 39–1102 (35 FR 17030,

November 5, 1970), were subsequently
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules 62773

issued. That AD restricts operators from

continuously operating the propeller at

engine speeds from 2,150 to 2,350

revolutions per minute (RPM) and

requires reworking the propeller by

reducing blade thickness and stiffness.

That action was prompted by reports of

propeller blade tip failures due to

continuous operation in an RPM range

of relatively high vibration stresses

aggravated by impact-related

mechanical damage such as cuts, nicks,

and dents. That condition, if not

corrected, could result in propeller

blade tip fatigue failure, which can

result in loss of control of the aircraft.

Since the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has received numerous inquiries

from the field concerning tachometer

red arc restrictions on certain Textron

Lycoming O–360 series reciprocating

engines with solid crankshafts that are

identified by suffixes having a digit ‘‘4’’

or higher in the second position, e.g.

A4AD, A4M, etc. The FAA has

determined that these additional

engines, with solid crankshafts, have

vibration characteristics that closely

approximate engines to which the

current AD does not apply, and can

therefore also be removed from the AD’s

applicability and requirement for

tachometer restriction. Contrary to the

requirements of AD 69–09–03 R2, this

AD would require reworking all affected

propellers, regardless of engine

installation.

When propeller blade reworking is

accomplished, the resulting reduction in

blade thickness and stiffness reduces

blade second order-first mode peak

resonance RPM to lower values. The

reworked propeller (later adopted in

production) is marked with the letter

‘‘K.’’

The FAA has reviewed and approved

the technical contents of Sensenich

Propeller Service Bulletin (SB) No. R–

13, dated April 11, 1969, that describes

avoiding continuous operation between

2150 and 2350 RPM; and Sensenich

Propeller SB No. R–14A, dated

November 15, 1994, that describes

reworking the propeller by reducing

blade thickness and stiffness in order to

avoid propeller blade tip failures.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

revise AD 69–09–03 R2 to remove from

the AD’s applicability propellers

installed on certain Textron Lycoming

O–360 series reciprocating engines with

solid crankshafts that are identified by

suffixes having a digit ‘‘4’’ or higher in

the second position, e.g. A4A, A4G, etc.,

and from the tachometer restriction, and

update the referenced Sensenich

Propeller SB No. R–14 to R–14A, dated

November 15, 1994.

There are approximately 100

propellers of the affected design that

may not have been modified to the ‘‘K’’

standard in the worldwide fleet. The

FAA estimates that 50 propellers

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD,

that it would take approximately 2.5

work hours per propeller to accomplish

the proposed actions, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $7,500.

However, since this proposed rule

further restricts the applicability by

exempting propellers installed on

certain Textron Lycoming engine

models from the tachometer restriction,

there is a potential overall cost savings

of $4,395,000, if all the affected

Sensenich propellers are installed on

the newly exempted engines.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this 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) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

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:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113,

44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing Amendment 39–1102 (35 FR

17030, November 5, 1970), and by

adding a new airworthiness directive, to

read as follows:

Sensenich Propeller Manufacturing

Company Inc.: Docket No. 95–ANE–03.

Revises AD 69–09–03, Amendment 39–

1102.

Applicability: Sensenich Propeller

Manufacturing Company Inc. Models

M76EMM, M7EMMS, 76EM8, and 76EM8S()

metal propellers. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of

this airworthiness directive (AD) do not

apply to those propellers installed on the

following solid crankshaft Textron Lycoming

O–360 series reciprocating engines: O–360–

A4A, –A4D, –A4G, –A4J, –A4K, –A4M,

–A4N, –A4P, and –A5AD, or additional

engines identified by suffixes having a digit

‘‘4’’ or higher in the second position. These

propellers are installed on but not limited to

the following aircraft: Piper PA–28–180, PA–

28–181, American General Aircraft Holding

Co. Inc. (formerly Gulfstream American) AA–

5 series, Beech B23 and C23, Cessna 172Q,

Avions Pierre Robin R–3000/160, and aircraft

modified under various Supplemental Type

Certificates (STC’s).

Note: This AD applies to each propeller

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

propellers that have been modified, altered,

or repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (f) to request approval

from the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA). This approval may address either no

action, if the current configuration eliminates

the unsafe condition, or different actions

necessary to address the unsafe condition

described in this AD. Such a request should

include an assessment of the effect of the

changed configuration on the unsafe

condition addressed by this AD. In no case

does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any propeller

from the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent propeller blade tip fatigue

failure, which can result in loss of control of

the aircraft, accomplish the following:

(a) Commencing with the next flight after

the effective date of this AD, do not operate

the engine in continuous operation between

2,150 and 2,350 RPM.

(b) Within the next 25 hours time in

service (TIS) after the effective date of this

AD, mark engine tachometer with a red arc

from 2150 RPM to 2350 RPM, in accordance

with Sensenich Propeller Service Bulletin

(SB) No. R–13, dated April 11, 1969.
62774 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules

(c) For propellers with 500 or more total

hours TIS, or unknown TIS on the effective

date of this AD, inspect, and rework or

replace, as necessary, within the next 50

hours TIS after the effective date of this AD,

in accordance with Sensenich Propeller SB

No. R–14A, dated November 15, 1994.

(d) For propellers with less than 500 total

hours TIS on the effective date of this AD,

inspect, and rework or replace, as necessary,

prior to accumulating 550 total hours TIS, in

accordance with Sensenich Propeller SB No.

R–14A, dated November 15, 1994.

(e) Mark with a suffix letter ‘‘K’’ propellers

that have been inspected, reworked, or

replaced in accordance with Sensenich

Propeller SB No. R–14A, dated November 15,

1994, and found satisfactory. New

production propellers include change ‘‘K’’ or

subsequent changes.

(f) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial compliance time

that provides an acceptable level of safety

may be used if approved by the Manager,

New York Aircraft Certification Office. The

request should be forwarded through an

appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification

Office.

Note: Information concerning the existence

of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York Aircraft

Certification Office.

(g) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

November 28, 1995.

Jay J. Pardee,

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–29843 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 90–CE–59–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; The New

Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Formerly Piper

Aircraft Corporation) Models PA31,

PA31–325, PA31–350, PA31P, PA31T1,

and PA31T Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

80–26–05, which currently requires the

following on The New Piper Aircraft,

Inc. (Piper) Models PA31, PA31–325,

PA31–350, PA31P, PA31T1, and PA31T

airplanes: repetitively inspecting the

main landing gear (MLG) inboard door

hinges and attachment angles for cracks,

and replacing any cracked MLG inboard

door hinge or attachment angle. The

Federal Aviation Administration’s

policy on aging commuter-class aircraft

is to eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of certain repetitive

short-interval inspections when

improved parts or modifications are

available. The proposed action would

retain the current repetitive inspections

contained in AD 80–26–05, and would

require incorporating a MLG inboard

door hinge and attachment angle

assembly of improved design (part

number 47529–32) or approved hinges

and angles made of steel as terminating

action for the repetitive inspection

requirement. The actions specified in

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent separation of the inboard MLG

door from the airplane caused by a

cracked inboard door hinge or

attachment angle, which, if not detected

and corrected, could result in the MLG

jamming and loss of control of the

airplane during landing operations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before February 21, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 90–CE–59–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that relates to the

proposed AD may be obtained from The

New Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer

Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach,

Florida 32960. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christina Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification

Office, Campus Building, 1701

Columbia Avenue, suite 2–160, College

Park, Georgia 30337–2748; telephone

(404) 305–7362; facsimile (404) 305–

7348.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 90–CE–59–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 90–CE–59–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

The FAA has determined that reliance

on critical repetitive inspections on

aging commuter-class airplanes carries

an unnecessary safety risk when a

design change exists that could

eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of those critical

inspections. In determining what

inspections are critical, the FAA

considers (1) the safety consequences if

the known problem is not detected

during the inspection; (2) the

probability of the problem not being

detected during the inspection; (3)

whether the inspection area is difficult

to access; and (4) the possibility of

damage to an adjacent structure as a

result of the problem.

These factors have led the FAA to

establish an aging commuter-class

aircraft policy that requires

incorporating a known design change

when it could replace a critical

repetitive inspection. With this policy

in mind, the FAA conducted a review

of existing AD’s that apply to Piper

Models PA31–350 and PA31T3

airplanes. Assisting the FAA in this

review were (1) The New Piper Aircraft,

Inc.; (2) the Regional Airlines

Association (RAA); and (3) several

operators of the affected airplanes.