Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:17 Aug 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1
46412 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 156 / Monday, August 14, 2006 / Proposed Rules
percent of bankers’ bank capital may be stated and effectively organized, and the Board reviewed the proposed rule
owned by non-depository institution how the Board might make the proposed under the authority delegated to the
customers and bankers’ bank business text easier to understand. Board by the Office of Management and
with non-depository institution Budget (OMB). The proposed rule
VI. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
customers may not exceed 10 percent of contains no requirements subject to the
Analysis
total assets/liabilities). PRA.
The Board believes that this In accordance with section 3(a) of the
amendment is appropriate in order to Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 12 CFR Chapter II
align the Interpretation more closely U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Board has
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 204
with current business and regulatory reviewed the proposed amendments to
practices relating to bankers’ banks. The the Interpretation of Regulation D. A Banks, banking, Reporting and
Board has received inquiries concerning final regulatory flexibility analysis will recordkeeping requirements.
whether certain non-depository be conducted after consideration of
institution entities not already listed in comments received during the public For the reasons set forth in the
the Interpretation may permissibly do comment period. preamble, the Board is proposing to
business with bankers’ banks, and it 1. Statement of the objectives of the amend 12 CFR part 204 as follows:
appears that amending the proposal. The Board is proposing
Interpretation to allow case by case revisions to its Interpretation of PART 204—RESERVE
determinations of such inquiries is Regulation D in order to authorize the REQUIREMENTS OF DEPOSITORY
appropriate at this time. The Board is Board to determine, on a case by case INSTITUTIONS (REGULATION D)
not proposing at this time to specify any basis, whether non-depository
standards under which it would make institutions that are not already listed in 1. The authority citation for part 204
such case by case determinations in the Interpretation may be bankers’ bank continues to read as follows:
order to provide institutions and the customers without the bankers’ bank Authority: 12 U.S.C. 248(a), 248(c), 371a,
Board with flexibility in making such losing its exemption from reserve 461, 601, 611, and 3105.
determinations, in keeping with the requirements. Section 19 of the Act was
purposes of the Act and the bankers’ enacted to impose reserve requirements 2. The second sentence of paragraph
bank exemption. Specifically, the Board on certain deposits and other liabilities (a)(2)(iii) of § 204.121 is revised to read
anticipates that such requests would be of depository institutions for monetary as follows:
made only in cases where granting the policy purposes. Section 19 exempts
request would facilitate the conduct of certain institutions from reserve § 204.121 Bankers’ banks.
bankers’ banking business. Accordingly, requirements as ‘‘bankers’’ banks’’ (a) * * *
the Board would not generally expect to provided that the institutions meet the
characteristics specified in the statute. (2) * * *
exercise such authority for the purpose
of expanding the range of non- Section 19 also authorizes the Board to (iii) * * * First, the range of
depository institution customers of promulgate such regulations as it may customers with which the institution
bankers’ banks to include the general deem necessary to effectuate the does business must be limited to
public. The Board expects that, if this purposes of the section. The Board depository institutions; directors,
amendment is adopted, the Board believes that the proposed revisions to officers or employees of the same or
should over time obtain increased the Interpretation are within the other depository institutions;
experience with future requests, and Congress’ broad grant of authority to the individuals whose accounts are
based on that experience may find that Board to adopt provisions that carry out acquired at the request of the
proposing further amendments the purposes of section 19 of the Act. institution’s supervisory authority due
(including standards) to the 2. Small entities affected by the to the actual or impending failure of
Interpretation are warranted. proposal. The number of small entities another depository institution; share
Comment is solicited on all aspects of affected by this proposal is unknown. insurance funds; depository institution
the proposal. The proposal would only affect those
trade associations; and such others as
entities, regardless of size, that choose
IV. Form of Comment Letters the Board may determine on a case by
to request a Board determination to
Comment letters should refer to case basis consistent with the purposes
permit them to do business with non-
Docket No. R–1262 and, when possible, depository institutions not already of the Act and the bankers’ bank
should use a standard typeface with a specified in the Interpretation while exemption.* * *
font size of 10 or 12; this will enable the maintaining their bankers’ bank * * * * *
Board to convert text submitted in paper exemption from reserve requirements. By order of the Board of Governors of the
form to machine-readable form through 3. Other federal rules. The Board Federal Reserve System, August 8, 2006.
electronic scanning, and will facilitate believes that no federal rules duplicate,
automated retrieval of comments for Jennifer J. Johnson,
overlap, or conflict with the proposed
review. Comments may be mailed revisions to the Interpretation. Secretary of the Board.
electronically to 4. Significant alternatives to the [FR Doc. E6–13235 Filed 8–11–06; 8:45 am]
regs.comments@federalreserve.gov. proposed revisions. The Board BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
welcomes comment on any significant
V. Solicitation of Comments Regarding
alternatives that would minimize the
Use of ‘‘Plain Language’’
impact of the proposed rule on small
Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
entities.
Bliley Act of 1999 requires the Board to
use ‘‘plain language’’ in all proposed VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
and final rules published after January In accordance with the Paperwork
1, 2000. The Board invites comments on Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
whether the proposed rule is clearly 3506; 5 CFR part 1320 Appendix A.1),
VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:17 Aug 11, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14AUP1.SGM 14AUP1