Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 15861

V. Paperwork Reduction Act

The FDIC has determined that, in

comparison to the existing risk-based

capital treatment of low level recourse

transactions, this final rule will not

increase the regulatory paperwork

burden of FDIC-supervised banks

pursuant to the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 325

Bank deposit insurance, Banks,

banking, Capital adequacy, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements,

Savings associations, State nonmember

banks.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Board of Directors of the

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

hereby amends part 325 of title 12 of the

Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 325—CAPITAL MAINTENANCE

1. The authority citation for Part 325

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1815(a), 1815(b),

1816, 1818(a), 1818(b), 1818(c), 1818(t),

1819(Tenth), 1828(c), 1828(d), 1828(i),

1828(n), 1828(o), 1831o, 3907, 3909, 4808;

Pub. L. 102–233, 105 Stat. 1761, 1789, 1790

(12 U.S.C. 1831n note); Pub. L. 102–242, 105

Stat. 2236, 2355, 2386 (12 U.S.C. 1828 note).

2. Section II.D.1. of appendix A to

part 325 is amended by removing the

sixth paragraph and adding in its place

two new paragraphs to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 325—Statement of

Policy on Risk-Based Capital

* * * * *

II. * * *

D. * * *

1. * * *

Sale and repurchase agreements and

asset sales with recourse, if not already

included on the balance sheet, are also

converted at 100 percent. For risk-based

capital purposes, the definition of sales

of assets with recourse, including the

sale of one-to-four family residential

mortgages, is consistent with the

definition contained in the instructions

for the preparation of the Consolidated

Reports of Condition and Income.

Accordingly, except as noted below, the

entire amount of any assets transferred

with recourse that are not already

included on the balance sheet,

including pools of one-to-four family

residential mortgages, is to be converted

at 100 percent and assigned to the risk

weight category appropriate to the

obligor or, if relevant, the guarantor or

the nature of the collateral. The terms of

a transfer of assets with recourse may

contractually limit the amount of the

bank’s liability to an amount less than

the effective risk-based capital

requirement for the assets being

transferred with recourse. If such a

transaction (including one that, in

accordance with the instructions for the

preparation of the Consolidated Reports

of Condition and Income, is reported as

a financing, i.e., the assets are not

removed from the balance sheet) meets

the criteria for sale treatment under

generally accepted accounting

principles, the amount of total capital

required is equal to the maximum

amount of loss possible under the

recourse provision. If the transaction is

also treated as a sale in accordance with

the instructions for the preparation of

the Consolidated Reports of Condition

and Income, then the required amount

of capital may be reduced by the

balance of any associated noncapital

liability account established pursuant to

generally accepted accounting

principles to cover estimated probable

losses under the recourse provision. Socalled ‘‘loan strips’’ (that is, short-term

advances sold under long-term

commitments without direct recourse)

are defined in the instructions for the

preparation of the Consolidated Reports

of Condition and Income and for riskbased capital purposes as assets sold

with recourse.

In addition, a 100 percent conversion

factor applies to forward agreements.

Forward agreements are legally binding

contractual obligations to purchase

assets with drawdown which is certain

at a specified future date. These

obligations include forward purchases,

forward deposits placed, and partly paid

shares and securities, but do not include

forward foreign exchange rate contracts

or commitments to make residential

mortgage loans.

* * * * *

By order of the Board of Directors.

Dated at Washington, D.C., this 21st day of

March, 1995.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Acting Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7535 Filed 3–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision

12 CFR Part 563

[No. 95–55]

RIN 1550–AA78

Loans to one Borrower

AGENCY: Office of Thrift Supervision,

Treasury.

ACTION: Interim final rule with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: The Office of Thrift

Supervision (OTS) is amending its

lending limits regulation, also known as

the loans to one borrower (LTOB) rule,

to reflect recent changes to the Office of

the Comptroller of the Currency’s

(OCC’s) lending limits regulation.

Section 5(u) of the Home Owners’ Loan

Act requires that savings association

lending limits parallel those applicable

to national banks. This interim final rule

amends OTS’s LTOB regulation so that

thrifts, like national banks, will use

regulatory capital as the starting point

for determining ‘‘unimpaired capital

and unimpaired surplus’’ for LTOB

purposes, removing the need for a

separate calculation. It also removes

other outdated or redundant provisions.

DATES: The interim final rule is effective

March 28, 1995. Written comments on

this interim final rule must be received

on or before April 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Director,

Information Services Division, Office of

Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW.,

Washington, D.C. 20552, Attention

Docket No. 95–55. These submissions

may be hand-delivered to 1700 G Street,

NW., from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on business

days; they may be sent by facsimile

transmission to FAX Number (202) 906–

7755. Comments will be available for

inspection at 1700 G Street, NW., from

1 p.m. until 4 p.m. on business days.

Visitors will be escorted to and from the

Public Reading Room at established

intervals.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William J. Magrini, Project Manager,

Policy, (202) 906–5744; Valerie J.

Lithotomos, Counsel (Banking and

Finance), (202) 906–6439; Deborah

Dakin, Assistant Chief Counsel, (202)

906–6445, Regulations and Legislation

Division, Chief Counsel’s Office, Office

of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street,

NW., Washington DC 20552.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Statutory and Regulatory Ties

Between OCC and OTS Lending Limits

Both savings associations and

national banks have statutory limits

placed on the amount an institution can

lend to one borrower. Since 1989,

Section 5(u) of the Home Owners’ Loan

Act (HOLA) has provided that ‘‘Section

5200 of the Revised Statutes applies to

savings associations in the same manner

and to the same extent as it applies to
15862 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

1 12 U.S.C. 1464(u)(1).

2 12 U.S.C. 84.

3 12 CFR 563.93(b), (c)(1994).

4See 60 FR 8526 (February 15, 1995).

5 Id. at 8527. 6 59 FR 6593, 6595 (February 11, 1994).

7 12 CFR 567.1(l) (1994).

8 12 U.S.C. 1864(f) (bank service corporation may

engage in any activity other than deposit taking

permitted for a bank holding company,

notwithstanding section 1864(d), which otherwise

limits the activities of a bank service corporation in

which a national bank is a shareholder to services

authorized for a national bank).

national banks.’’ 1 Section 5200

establishes lending limits, measured as

a percentage of an institution’s capital

and surplus, for national banks.2 The

OCC’s implementing regulations appear

at 12 CFR part 32. The OTS’s LTOB rule

references the lending limits set forth in

the OCC rule and most lending limit

definitions.3 Therefore, as OCC amends

those limits and definitions in Part 32,

the new limits and definitions apply

directly to savings associations, without

further OTS action. However, section

563.93(b)(11) of the OTS LTOB rule

currently defines the term ‘‘unimpaired

capital and unimpaired surplus’’ by

reference to another OCC regulation, 12

CFR 3.100. Any OCC changes to the use

of that definition for lending limit

purposes would require separate OTS

regulatory action to clarify what

definition thrifts should use in

calculating lending limits.

B. Recent OCC Revisions to Lending

Limits

As part of the OCC’s Regulation

Review Program, the OCC has recently

published final revisions to the national

bank lending limits regulation.4 OCC’s

primary purpose in revising this

regulation was to eliminate inefficient

and unduly costly regulatory

requirements for national banks and

thereby better focus the lending limits

rule on areas of significant safety and

soundness concern.5 The regulation also

incorporates interpretations OCC has

developed over the years. These changes

will apply to savings associations upon

the OCC’s rule becoming effective.

One of the most important changes

OCC’s final rule makes is redefining

‘‘capital and surplus.’’ Before

amendment, OCC’s lending limit rule

used a definition of ‘‘capital and

surplus’’ at 12 CFR 3.100 that is

calculated separately from the

definitions of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital

used for determining capital adequacy.

In its recent rulemaking, the OCC

redefined ‘‘capital and surplus’’ as Tier

1 and Tier 2 capital included in

calculating a bank’s risk-based capital,

plus the balance of its allowances for

loan and lease losses (ALLL) not

included in its Tier 2 capital. Thus,

national banks no longer need to

perform totally different calculations for

calculating lending limits and capital

adequacy, but can use the same Report

of Bank Condition (Call Report) line

items to calculate both.

The OCC’s new definition included

the balance of ALLL not already

included in Tier 2 capital because the

full amount of ALLL had long been

included under section 3100. The

preamble to the proposal that formed

the basis for the recent final rule stated

that ‘‘The OCC believes it is inadvisable

to constrict the lending limit base at a

time when concerns about credit

availability are widespread, and

believes this proposed change will not

impact credit availability.’’ 6

C. Comparable OTS Revisions to Its

Lending Limits Regulation

The OTS, in making conforming

changes to its LTOB regulation, enables

savings associations to realize a similar

reduction in regulatory burden.

Extensive revision is not necessary

because nearly all of the OCC changes

will become effective for savings

associations by virtue of OTS’s

referencing of most of the OCC lending

limits regulation. However, a few small

changes are required.

First, section 563.93(c) is being

amended today to remove an obsolete

cross-reference to former section 32.7,

which OCC removed.

Second, the OCC has changed its

lending limits rule to allow national

banks to calculate their lending limits

quarterly, rather than every time a new

loan is made. The OTS LTOB rule

already incorporates periodic

calculations at section 563.93(f)(1). That

section is being modified only to

remove an obsolete parenthetical

reference to ‘‘monthly or quarterly’’

calculations.

Third, as discussed above, section

563.93(b)’s definition of ‘‘unimpaired

capital and unimpaired surplus’’

currently incorporates 12 CFR 3.100.

The OCC’s lending limits regulation no

longer refers to that definition but

substitutes a definition based on the

components national banks already use

in calculating capital for capital

adequacy purposes. This has created

confusion about how this change

applies to savings association

calculation of ‘‘unimpaired capital and

unimpaired surplus.’’ OTS also wants

savings associations to have their

regulatory calculation burden reduced

as much as possible. Because of the

structure of the OTS capital regulation,

however, an extra step is required to

reach the same result as the OCC

revision.

For savings associations, the

components calculated on their Thrift

Financial Report for capital adequacy

purposes are core and supplementary

capital. These are substantially similar

to Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital for banks.

However, in calculating core capital for

capital adequacy purposes, thrifts may

not include investments in certain

subsidiaries, commonly known as

‘‘nonincludable subsidiaries.’’ This

requirement, imposed pursuant to

section 5(t) of the HOLA, is designed to

ensure that a thrift with investments in

such subsidiaries holds enough capital

to fully protect it against any risks such

investments might pose. An ‘‘includable

subsidiary’’ is one engaged solely in

activities permissible for a national

bank, with a few exceptions not relevant

here.7 A national bank may have

subsidiaries, such as service

corporations, that engage in activities

not authorized for the bank itself.8 Thus,

a national bank may have a subsidiary,

which, if held by a savings association,

would be considered a ‘‘nonincludable

subsidiary’’ and deducted in calculating

core capital pursuant to section 5(t).

The section 5(t) deduction from

capital has never affected savings

associations’ lending limit calculations

under section 5(u). Section 5(u) does not

require such a deduction in calculating

capital and surplus for lending limits

nor has the OCC required such a

deduction. Under both 12 CFR 3.100

and new section 32.2(b), investments in

subsidiaries are not deducted in

calculating capital. Using the OTS

section 5(t) capital definitions could

thus cause a savings association with

non-includable subsidiaries to have a

lower lending limit than it currently has

or would have if it were a national bank

with the identical subsidiaries. Such a

credit-limiting result would not be

driven by safety or soundness concerns

on the part of either the OTS or the

OCC, but merely by a difference in

capital components not relevant for

lending limit purposes.

If section 3.100 still applied, or if OTS

were to reference section 32.2(b), a

savings association would not be

required to deduct any of its

investments in any of its subsidiaries in

calculating capital and surplus.

However, this approach would not

allow savings associations to realize the

benefit of being able to use the same

basic components used for capital

adequacy purposes in calculating

lending limits. Unlike national banks,

they would continue to have to
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 15863

9 60 FR 8526 (February 15, 1995).

10 5 U.S.C. 553.

11 12 U.S.C. 4802.

12See 60 FR at 8531.

complete a complex worksheet in order

to determine their lending limit base of

capital and surplus.

II. Description of Interim Final Rule

The OTS has therefore determined

that unimpaired capital and unimpaired

surplus is best defined as the sum of a

savings association’s core and

supplementary capital included in total

capital under 12 CFR part 567, plus the

balance of its general valuation

allowances for loan and lease losses or

ALLL not included in its supplementary

capital under part 567, plus its

investments in subsidiaries that are not

included in calculating core capital

under part 567. Because the net worth

certificates currently specifically

included in section 563.93(b)(11) are

included in supplementary capital, the

new regulation removes this reference.

This definition neither raises nor

lowers savings associations’ lending

limits. It will make it substantially

easier for all savings associations to

calculate their loan-to-one-borrower

limitations because all of the

components are already reported on the

Thrift Financial Report. This definition

eliminates the requirement that a

savings association prepare a separate

and complex worksheet to calculate its

LTOB limit without itself raising or

lowering savings associations’ lending

limits. Just as OCC found it appropriate

to continue to include the full balance

of the ALLL in its new definition of

capital and surplus in order to avoid a

credit-limiting result, so the OTS

believes it is appropriate to continue to

include both the full balance of loss

allowances and savings association

investments in subsidiaries in

calculating unimpaired capital and

unimpaired surplus to avoid a creditlimiting result.

The OTS is also removing an obsolete

definition of ‘‘qualifying association’’

and an outdated provision in the

Appendix to section 563.93 and

correcting cross-references.

III. Need for an Interim Final Rule

The OTS believes that an immediately

effective interim final rule is

appropriate and necessary because of

how closely the OTS lending limits

regulation is tied to the OCC lending

limits regulation. The OCC’s final rule is

effective March 17, 1995, 30 days after

its publication in the Federal Register.9

The OTS’s interim final rule will

eliminate any potential confusion for

savings associations that may result

from the OCC’s new lending limit

requirements; it will also eliminate any

possible lending limit disparities

savings associations may have as

compared to national banks.

Additionally, immediate application of

the OTS interim final rule will relieve

unnecessary regulatory burdens and

provide savings associations with the

increased flexibility that national banks

have been accorded by the OCC’s final

rule.

Section 553 of the Administrative

Procedure Act 10 requires separate

findings for good cause, first, that notice

and comment are impracticable,

unnecessary, or contrary to the public

interest when an agency determines to

issue a rule without prior notice and

comment and second, when it

determines to make a rule effective

without a 30-day delay. Section 302 of

the Riegle Community Development and

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 11

requires that a regulation that imposes

new requirements take effect on the first

day of the quarter following publication

of the final rule. That section provides,

however, that an agency may determine

that the rule should take effect earlier

upon a finding of good cause.

Under existing section 563.93, savings

associations are already bound by the

lending limits of the new OCC rule.

Allowing 12 CFR 563.93(b)’s outdated

cross-reference to 12 CFR 3.100 to

remain in place during notice and

comment rulemaking and a delayed

effective date could lead to considerable

confusion and result in savings

associations performing unnecessary

calculations. Additionally, the OTS

believes (as does the OCC with respect

to its rule) that this rule relieves burden

by eliminating inefficient and unduly

costly regulatory requirements and

better focusing the lending limit rules

on areas of significant safety and

soundness concern.12 For these reasons,

the OTS believes there is good cause to

make this rule effective immediately

upon publication.

IV. Comment Solicitation

Because OTS application of the OCC’s

new limits is statutorily mandated, this

interim final rulemaking does not seek

comments on the substance of the OCC’s

revisions that are referenced in the OTS

LTOB rule. However, interested parties

are invited to submit written comments

on the interim final rule as to the

amendments adopted here. A 30-day

comment period is provided.

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This regulation simplifies lending

limit calculations for all savings

associations. Other alternatives might

result in some smaller savings

associations having lower lending

limits.

VI. Executive Order 12866

It has been determined that this

document is not a significant regulatory

action. It will benefit savings

associations by simplifying their

lending limit calculations. It is not

expected to raise or lower savings

association lending limits themselves.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 563

Accounting, Advertising, Crime,

Currency, Flood insurance, Investments,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Savings associations,

Securities, Surety bonds.

Accordingly, the Office of Thrift

Supervision hereby amends part 563,

chapter V, title 12 of the Code of Federal

Regulations as set forth below.

SUBCHAPTER D—REGULATIONS

APPLICABLE TO ALL SAVINGS

ASSOCIATIONS

PART 563—OPERATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 563

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 375b, 1462, 1462a,

1463, 1464, 1467a, 1468, 1817, 1828, 3806;

42 U.S.C. 4106.

2. Section 563.93 is amended by:

a. Removing the phrase ‘‘See 2 CFR

part 32.’’ from the introductory text of

paragraph (b) and by adding in lieu

thereof the phrase ‘‘See 12 CFR Part

32.’’;

b. revising paragraphs (b)(6) and

(b)(11);

c. removing the phrase ‘‘12 CFR

541.20’’ from paragraph (b)(9) and by

adding in lieu thereof the phrase ‘‘12

CFR 541.25’’;

d. removing the phrase ‘‘, but not

including 12 CFR 32.7’’ from the

introductory text of paragraph (c);

e. removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph

(b)(11)’’ from paragraph (d)(3)(ii) and by

adding in lieu thereof the phrase

‘‘paragraph (b)(6)’’;

f. removing the phrase ‘‘(monthly or

quarterly)’’ from paragraph (f)(1); and

g. in the appendix to § 563.93, by

removing section 563.93–102.

§ 563.93 Lending limitations.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(6) The term fully phased-in capital

standards means the capital standards

that will be in effect at the expiration of
15864 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

all statutory and regulatory phase-in

requirements set forth in 12 U.S.C.

1464(t) and 12 CFR 567.2, 567.5, and

567.9.

* * * * *

(11) Unimpaired capital and

unimpaired surplus means—(i) A

savings association’s core capital and

supplementary capital included in its

total capital under part 567 of this

chapter; plus

(ii) The balance of a savings

association’s general valuation

allowances for loan and lease losses not

included in supplementary capital

under part 567 of this chapter; plus

(iii) The amount of a savings

association’s loans to, investments in,

and advances to subsidiaries not

included in calculating core capital

under part 567 of this chapter.

* * * * *

Dated: March 14, 1995.

By the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Jonathan L. Fiechter,

Acting Director.

[FR Doc. 95–7589 Filed 3–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6720–01–P

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

13 CFR Part 101

Delegation of Authority

AGENCY: Small Business Administration

(SBA).

ACTION: Notice delegating loan approval

to specific agency field personnel.

SUMMARY: This notice delegates

authority to a specific SBA field person

to approve SBA guaranteed export

loans. This authority is based upon the

education, training, and experience of

such person and is meant to expedite

Agency action is processing loan

applications.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This notice is effective

March 28, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

R. Cox, Associate Administrator for

Financial Assistance, 409 Third Street,

SW., Washington, DC 20416, Tel. (202)

205–6490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

December 19, 1991, SBA published in

the Federal Register, a final rule

amending § 101.3–2 of part 101, Title

13, Code of Federal Regulations, which

set forth a clarified standard delegation

of authority to conduct program

activities in SBA field offices (56 FR

65821). Previously, § 101.3–2 had set

forth the standard delegation of

authority to SBA field personnel as well

as all deviations from the standard

based upon education, experience and/

or training. The December 19, 1991

publication eliminated all deviations in

favor of a standard delegation of

authority. In addition, the rule provided

authority by which SBA might, as it

deemed appropriate, increase, decrease

or set the level of authority for any

individual SBA field official in a

regional, district or branch office, based

upon education, training or experience,

by publication of a notice in the Federal

Register.

The Agency believes that, when

appropriate, delegating increased levels

of authority to field personnel yields

increased benefits for program

participants and SBA. The Agency is

authorized to guarantee up to 90% of a

loan depending upon total loan amount.

It is essential that SBA have qualified

loan officers available to process

expeditiously and accurately the

applications submitted. Agency officials

in the field who are delegated greater

levels of authority because of their

additional education, training or

experience allow SBA to process an

increased number of loan applications.

The loan applicant and the lender are

both served with quicker and more

accurate processing, while SBA is

served by quality lending and better

relations with participating lenders.

This notice delegates authority to a

specific SBA official to approve or

decline guaranteed loan applications, as

well as to undertake other loan related

activities based upon experience. In the

United States Export Assistance Center

(USEAC) in Long Beach, California, the

SBA USEAC Director has successfully

completed training courses offered by

the Agency. Such training in

conjunction with his extensive

experience justifies delegating loan

approval authority.

No standard delegated authority to

approve SBA guaranteed loans exists for

a USEAC. This notice establishes the

authority to approve SBA guaranteed

export loans at $750,000 for the SBA

Director at the USEAC in Long Beach,

CA and only for that person.

This delegation of authority is specific

to the incumbent and continues only so

long as he remains in such position.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

John R. Cox,

Associate Administrator for Financial

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 95–7455 Filed 3–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–ANE–14; Amendment 39–

9183; AD 95–07–01]

Airworthiness Directives; Textron

Lycoming O–360, LO–360, HO-360,

HIO–360, TIO–360, LIO–360, AEIO–360,

O–540, IO–540, TIO–540, LTIO–540,

IVO–540, AEIO–540, TIO–541, and IO–

720 Series Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This document publishes in

the Federal Register an amendment

adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD)

95–07–01 that was sent previously to all

known U.S. owners and operators of

Textron Lycoming O–360, LO–360, HO–

360, HIO–360, TIO–360, LIO–360,

AEIO–360, O–540, IO–540, TIO–540,

LTIO–540, IVO–540, AEIO–540, TIO–

541, and IO–720 series reciprocating

engines by individual letters. This AD

requires removal prior to further flight

of suspect unapproved connecting rod

bolts and replacement with serviceable

connecting rod bolts. This amendment

is prompted by reports of connecting

rod bolt failures. The actions specified

by this AD are intended to prevent

engine failure due to connecting rod

bolt failure, which could result in

damage to or loss of the aircraft.

DATES: Effective April 12, 1995, to all

persons except those persons to whom

it was made immediately effective by

priority letter AD 95–07–01, issued on

March 17, 1995, which contained the

requirements of this amendment.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

May 30, 1995.

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–14, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard D. Karanian, Aerospace

Engineer, Special Certification Office,

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137–

4298; telephone (817) 222–5195, fax

(817) 222–5959; or Locke Easton,

Aerospace Engineer, Engine and

Propeller Standards Staff, FAA, Engine

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA