11346 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

have qualified. The consecutive terms of 

office of a member shall be limited to 

two terms. The terms of office of 

alternate members shall not be so 

limited. Members, their alternates, and 

their respective successors shall be 

nominated and selected by the Secretary 

as provided in § 905.22 and § 905.23. 

■ 9. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) 

and add a new paragraph (c) in § 905.22 

to read as follows: 

§ 905.22 Nominations. 

(a) Grower members. (1) The 

Committee shall give public notice of a 

meeting of producers in each district to 

be held not later than June 10th of evennumbered years, for the purpose of 

making nominations for grower 

members and alternate grower members. 

The Committee, with the approval of the 

Secretary, shall prescribe uniform rules 

to govern such meetings and the 

balloting thereat. The chairman of each 

meeting shall publicly announce at such 

meeting the names of the persons 

nominated, and the chairman and 

secretary of each such meeting shall 

transmit to the Secretary their 

certification as to the number of votes so 

cast, the names of the persons 

nominated, and such other information 

as the Secretary may request. All 

nominations shall be submitted to the 

Secretary on or before the 20th day of 

June. 

* * * * * 

(b) Shipper members. (1) The 

Committee shall give public notice of a 

meeting for bona fide cooperative 

marketing organizations which are 

handlers, and a meeting for other 

handlers who are not so affiliated, to be 

held not later than June 10th of evennumbered years, for the purpose of 

making nominations for shipper 

members and their alternates. The 

Committee, with the approval of the 

Secretary, shall prescribe uniform rules 

to govern each such meeting and the 

balloting thereat. The chairperson of 

each such meeting shall publicly 

announce at the meeting the names of 

the persons nominated and the 

chairman and secretary of each such 

meeting shall transmit to the Secretary 

their certification as to the number of 

votes cast, the weight by volume of 

those shipments voted, and such other 

information as the Secretary may 

request. All nominations shall be 

submitted to the Secretary on or before 

the 20th day of June. 

* * * * * 

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, 

nomination and election of members 

and alternate members to the Committee 

may be conducted by mail, electronic 

mail, or other means according to rules 

and regulations recommended by the 

Committee and approved by the 

Secretary. 

■ 10. Revise § 905.28 to read as follows: 

§ 905.28 Qualification and Acceptance. 

Any person nominated to serve as a 

member or alternate member of the 

Committee shall, prior to selection by 

the Secretary, qualify by filing a written 

qualification and acceptance statement 

indicating such person’s qualifications 

and willingness to serve in the position 

for which nominated. 

■ 11. Revise the first sentence of 

paragraph (a) in § 905.42 to read as 

follows: 

§ 905.42 Handler’s accounts. 

(a) If, at the end of a fiscal period, the 

assessments collected are in excess of 

expenses incurred, the Committee, with 

the approval of the Secretary, may carry 

over such excess into subsequent fiscal 

periods as a reserve: Provided, That 

funds already in the reserve do not 

exceed approximately two fiscal 

periods’ expenses. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5), 

and add a new paragraph (a)(6) in 

§ 905.52 to read as follows: 

§ 905.52 Issuance of regulations. 

(a) * * * 

(4) Establish, prescribe, and fix the 

size, capacity, weight, dimensions, 

marking (including labels and stamps), 

or pack of the container or containers 

which may be used in the packaging, 

transportation, sale, shipment, or other 

handling of fruit. 

(5) Provide requirements that may be 

different for the handling of fruit within 

the production area, the handling of 

fruit for export, or for the handling of 

fruit between the production area and 

any point outside thereof within the 

United States. 

(6) Any regulations or requirements 

pertaining to intrastate shipments shall 

not be implemented unless Florida 

statutes and regulations regulating such 

shipments are not in effect. 

* * * * * 

Dated: February 23, 2015. 

Rex. A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04085 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 925 and 944 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0031; FV14–925–2 

PR] 

Grapes Grown in a Designated Area of 

Southeastern California and Imported 

Table Grapes; Relaxation of Handling 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule invites 

comments on partially relaxing the 

handling requirements currently 

prescribed under the California table 

grape marketing order (order) and the 

table grape import regulation. The order 

regulates the handling of table grapes 

grown in a designated area of 

southeastern California and is 

administered locally by the California 

Desert Grape Administrative Committee 

(committee). The import regulation is 

authorized under section 8e of the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937 and regulates the importation of 

table grapes into the United States. This 

action would partially relax the onequarter pound minimum bunch size 

requirement in the order’s regulations 

and the import regulation for U.S. No. 

1 Table grade grapes packed in 

consumer packages known as 

clamshells weighing 5 pounds or less. 

Under the proposal, up to 20 percent of 

the weight of such containers may 

consist of single grape clusters weighing 

less than one-quarter pound, but 

consisting of at least five berries each. 

This rule would provide California 

desert grape handlers and importers 

with the flexibility to respond to an 

ongoing marketing opportunity to meet 

consumer needs. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 2, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this proposed rule. 

Comments must be sent to the Docket 

Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202) 720–8938; or 

Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments should reference the 

document number and the date and 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register and will be made available for 

public inspection in the Office of the 

Docket Clerk during regular business 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules 11347 

hours, or can be viewed at: http://

www.regulations.gov. All comments 

submitted in response to this proposal 

will be included in the record and will 

be made available to the public. Please 

be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

Internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kathie Notoro, Marketing Specialist, or 

Martin Engeler, Regional Director, 

California Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email: 

Kathie.Notoro@ams.usda.gov or 

Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal is issued under Marketing 

Order No. 925, as amended (7 CFR part 

925), regulating the handling of grapes 

grown in a designated area of 

southeastern California, hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is 

effective under the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ 

This proposed rule is also issued 

under section 8e of the Act, which 

provides that whenever certain 

specified commodities, including table 

grapes, are regulated under a Federal 

marketing order, imports of these 

commodities into the United States are 

prohibited unless they meet the same or 

comparable grade, size, quality, or 

maturity requirements as those in effect 

for the domestically produced 

commodities. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13175. 

This proposal has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This proposed rule is 

not intended to have retroactive effect. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

There are no administrative 

procedures which must be exhausted 

prior to any judicial challenge to the 

provisions of import regulations issued 

under section 8e of the Act. 

This proposed rule would partially 

relax the one-quarter pound minimum 

bunch size requirement in the order’s 

regulations and the import regulation 

for all U.S. No. 1 Table grade grapes 

packed in clamshell consumer packages 

weighing 5 pounds or less. Under the 

revision, up to 20 percent of the weight 

of such containers could consist of 

single grape clusters weighing less than 

one-quarter pound but consisting of at 

least five berries each. This proposed 

rule would provide California desert 

grape handlers and importers with the 

flexibility to respond to an ongoing 

marketing opportunity. The committee 

met on November 5, 2013, and 

conducted an electronic vote on April 8, 

2014, to unanimously recommend the 

partial relaxation for California desert 

grapes. The change in the import 

regulation is required under section 8e 

of the Act. 

Section 925.52(a)(1) of the order 

provides authority to regulate the 

handling of any grade, size, quality, 

maturity, or pack of any and all varieties 

of grapes during the season. Section 

925.53 provides authority for the 

committee to recommend to USDA 

changes to regulations issued pursuant 

to § 925.52. Section 925.55 specifies that 

when grapes are regulated pursuant to 

§ 925.52, such grapes must be inspected 

by the Federal or Federal-State 

Inspection Service (FSIS) to ensure they 

meet applicable requirements. 

Section 925.304(a) of the order’s rules 

and regulations requires grapes to meet 

the minimum grade and size 

requirements of U.S. No 1 Table; or to 

meet all the requirements of U.S. No. 1 

Institutional, except that a tolerance of 

33 percent is provided for off-size 

bunches. The requirements for the U.S. 

No. 1 Table and U.S. No. 1 Institutional 

grades are set forth in the United States 

Standards for Grades of Table Grapes 

(European or Vinifera Type) (7 CFR 

51.880 through 51.914) (Standards). To 

meet the requirements of U.S. No. 1 

Table grade, grapes must have a bunch 

size of at least one-quarter pound. 

In 2010, the order’s regulations were 

relaxed with respect to the bunch size 

requirement specified in the Standards 

(75 FR 17031). This change permitted 

the use of bunch sizes smaller than onequarter pound, but with at least five 

berries each, in packing consumer 

clamshell containers containing 2 

pounds net weight or less. Not more 

than 20 percent of the weight of such 

containers could consist of these smaller 

bunches. This relaxation was made to 

allow handlers to take advantage of a 

new marketing opportunity for grapes 

packed in small clamshell containers. 

Prior to the relaxation, handlers were 

experiencing difficulty filling these 

containers properly with one-quarter 

pound bunches; smaller bunches were 

needed to fill the corners of the square 

container configuration to achieve the 

desired weight. 

Since the order’s regulations were 

amended in 2010, customers nationwide 

have been increasingly requesting 

grapes in larger clamshell containers. 

Handlers experience difficulty properly 

filling these larger containers to the 

desired weights with one-quarter pound 

bunch sizes, similar to the problem they 

experienced with the smaller 2-pound 

clamshell containers. Therefore, the 

committee recommended that the bunch 

size requirement in the order’s 

regulations pertaining to U.S. No. 1 

Table grade grapes be partially relaxed 

with respect to containers weighing 5 

pounds or less. Under this proposed 

change, up to 20 percent of the weight 

of such containers may consist of single 

grape clusters weighing less than onequarter pound, but with at least five 

berries each. This proposal would allow 

handlers to continue to respond to 

increased marketing opportunities. 

Section 925.304 (a) would be revised 

accordingly. 

Under section 8e of the Act, minimum 

grade, size, quality, and maturity 

requirements for table grapes imported 

into the United States are established 

under Table Grape Import Regulation 4 

(7 CFR 944.503) (import regulation). A 

relaxation in the California Desert Grape 

Regulation 6 minimum bunch size 

requirement would require a 

corresponding relaxation to the 

minimum bunch size requirement for 

imported table grapes. Like the domestic 

industry, this proposed action would 

allow importers the flexibility to 

respond to an ongoing marketing 

opportunity to meet consumer needs. 

Section 944.503(a)(1) would be revised 

accordingly. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11348 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to such actions in 

order that small businesses will not be 

unduly or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 15 handlers 

of southeastern California grapes who 

are subject to regulation under the 

marketing order and about 41 grape 

producers in the production area. In 

addition, there are about 102 importers 

of grapes. Small agricultural service 

firms are defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) as those having 

annual receipts of less than $7,000,000, 

and small agricultural producers are 

defined as those whose annual receipts 

are less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

Ten of the 15 handlers subject to 

regulation have annual grape sales of 

less than $7,000,000, according to 

USDA Market News Service and 

committee data. Based on information 

from the committee and USDA’s Market 

News Service, it is estimated that at 

least 10 of the 41 producers have annual 

receipts of less than $750,000. Thus, it 

may be concluded that a majority of 

grape handlers regulated under the 

order and about ten of the producers 

could be classified as small entities 

under the SBA definitions. 

Mexico, Chile, and Peru are the major 

countries that export table grapes to the 

United States. According to 2013 data 

from USDA’s Foreign Agricultural 

Service (FAS), shipments of table grapes 

imported into the United States from 

Mexico totaled 16,582,989 18-pound 

lugs, from Chile totaled 47,922,204 18- 

pound lugs, and from Peru totaled 

3,519,448 18-pound lugs. According to 

FAS data, the value of table grapes 

imported from Mexico, Chile, and Peru 

was $332,284,000, $760,952,000, and 

$80,912,000, respectively, for a total 

value of $1,174,148,000. It is estimated 

that the average importer receives $11.5 

million in revenue from the sale of table 

grapes. Based on this information, it 

may be concluded that the average table 

grape importer would not be classified 

as a small entity. 

This proposed rule would revise 

§ 925.304(a) of the rules and regulations 

of the California desert grape order and 

§ 944.503(a)(1) of the table grape import 

regulation. This proposed rule would 

partially relax the one-quarter pound 

minimum bunch size requirement in the 

order’s regulations and the import 

regulation for U.S. No. 1 Table grade 

grapes packed in consumer clamshell 

packages weighing 5 pounds or less. 

Under the proposed relaxation, up to 20 

percent of the weight of each package 

may consist of single grape clusters 

weighing less than one-quarter pound, 

but with at least five berries each. 

Authority for the proposed change to 

the California desert grape rules and 

regulations is provided in 

§§ 925.52(a)(1) and 925.53. Authority for 

the change to the table grape import 

regulation is provided in section 8e of 

the Act. 

There is agreement in the industry for 

the need to expand the revised 

minimum bunch size requirement for 

grapes packed in these consumer 

clamshell packages to allow for more 

packaging options. 

Regarding the impact of this proposed 

rule on affected entities, this rule would 

provide both California desert grape 

handlers and importers with the 

flexibility to continue to respond to an 

ongoing marketing opportunity to meet 

consumer needs. This marketing 

opportunity initially existed in the 2009 

season, and the minimum bunch size 

regulations were revised for consumer 

clamshell packages weighing 2 pounds 

or less, on a test basis. In 2011, the 

regulation was revised permanently for 

consumer clamshell packages weighing 

2 pounds or less due to the positive 

market response. This proposal would 

expand the revised requirements to 

include larger consumer clamshell 

packages weighing 5 pounds or less. 

Customers have been requesting larger 

sized clamshell packages, and this 

proposed action would enable handlers 

and importers to take advantage of 

increased market opportunities, which 

may result in increased shipments of 

consumer grape packages. This is 

expected to have a positive impact on 

producers, handlers, and importers. 

No additional alternatives were 

considered because the 2011 revision 

produced the desired results, and no 

problems were identified. The 

committee believes the partial 

relaxation of the bunch size requirement 

for grapes packed in larger consumer 

clamshell packages was appropriate to 

prescribe for the 2014 and subsequent 

seasons. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189. No 

changes in those requirements as a 

result of this action are necessary. 

Should any changes become necessary, 

they would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This rule would not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

grape handlers or importers. As with all 

Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 

requirements and duplication by 

industry and public sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act 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. 

In addition, USDA has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap or conflict with this 

rule. 

Further, the committee’s meeting was 

widely publicized throughout the grape 

industry, and all interested persons 

were invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in committee deliberations. 

Like all committee meetings, the 

November 5, 2013 meeting was a public 

meeting; and all entities, both large and 

small, were able to express their views 

on this issue. 

Finally, interested persons are invited 

to submit comments on this proposed 

rule, including the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed 

appropriate because this rule, if 

adopted, needs to be in place as soon as 

possible to allow handlers to take 

advantage of this relaxation during the 

regulatory period which begins on April 

10, 2015. All written comments timely 

received will be considered before a 

final determination is made on this 

matter. 

In accordance with section 8e of the 

Act, the United States Trade 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules 11349 

1See 79 FR 75473 (December 18, 2014). 

2See 79 FR 75473 (December 18, 2014). 

3 Id. 

4See, e.g., Comment letter to the Board from The 

Clearing House (February 20, 2015). 

Representative has concurred with the 

issuance of this rule. 

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 925 

Grapes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

7 CFR Part 944 

Avocados, Food grades and standards, 

Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit, 

Limes, Olives, Oranges. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 925 and 944 are 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 925 and 944 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

PART 925—GRAPES GROWN IN A 

DESIGNATED AREA OF 

SOUTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA 

■ 2. Amend § 925.304(a) by redesignating paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) 

as paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4), revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text and 

adding new paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) 

to read as follows: 

§ 925.304 California Desert Grape 

Regulation 6. 

* * * * * 

(a) Grade, size, and maturity. Except 

as provided in paragraphs (a)(3) and 

(a)(4) of this section, such grapes shall 

meet the minimum grade and size 

requirements established in paragraphs 

(a)(1) or (a)(2). 

(1) U.S. No. 1 Table, as set forth in the 

United States Standards for Grades of 

Table Grapes (European or Vinifera 

Type 7 CFR 51.880 through 51.914), 

with the exception of the tolerance 

percentage for bunch size when packed 

in individual consumer clamshell 

packages weighing 5 pounds or less: not 

more than 20 percent of the weight of 

such containers may consist of single 

clusters weighing less than one-quarter 

pound, but with at least five berries 

each; or 

(2) U.S. No. 1 Institutional, with the 

exception of the tolerance percentage for 

bunch size. Such tolerance shall be 33 

percent instead of 4 percent as is 

required to meet U.S. No. 1 Institutional 

grade. Grapes meeting these quality 

requirements may be marked ‘‘DGAC 

No. 1 Institutional’’ but shall not be 

marked ‘‘Institutional Pack.’’ 

* * * * * 

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 3. Amend § 944.503 by redesignating 

paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii) as 

paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv), 

revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory 

text and adding new paragraphs (a)(1)(i) 

and (a)(1)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 944.503 Table Grape Import Regulation 

4. 

(a)(1) Pursuant to section 8e of the Act 

and Part 944—Fruits, Import 

Regulations, and except as provided in 

paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv), the 

importation into the United States of 

any variety of Vinifera species table 

grapes, except Emperor, Calmeria, 

Almeria, and Ribier varieties, is 

prohibited unless such grapes meet the 

minimum grade and size requirements 

established in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) or 

(a)(2)(ii). 

(i) U.S. No. 1 Table, as set forth in the 

United States Standards for Grades of 

Table Grapes (European or Vinifera 

Type 7 CFR 51.880 through 51.914), 

with the exception of the tolerance 

percentage for bunch size when packed 

in individual consumer clamshell 

packages weighing 5 pounds or less: not 

more than 20 percent of the weight of 

such containers may consist of single 

clusters weighing less than one-quarter 

pound, but with at least five berries 

each; or 

(ii) U.S. No. 1 Institutional, with the 

exception of the tolerance percentage for 

bunch size. Such tolerance shall be 33 

percent instead of 4 percent as is 

required to meet U.S. No. 1 Institutional 

grade. Grapes meeting these quality 

requirements may be marked ‘‘DGAC 

No. 1 Institutional’’ but shall not be 

marked ‘‘Institutional Pack.’’ 

* * * * * 

Dated: February 23, 2015. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04087 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

12 CFR Part 217 

[Regulation Q; Docket No. R–1505] 

RIN 7100–AD–26 

Risk-Based Capital Guidelines: 

Implementation of Capital 

Requirements for Global Systemically 

Important Bank Holding Companies 

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System (Board). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: On December 18, 2014, the 

Board published in the Federal Register 

a proposal to implement risk-based 

capital surcharges for U.S.-based global 

systemically important banking 

organizations. 

Due to the range and complexity of 

the issues addressed in the proposed 

rulemaking, the public comment period 

has been extended until April 3, 2015. 

This action will allow interested 

persons additional time to analyze the 

proposal and prepare their comments. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on December 

18, 2014 (79 FR 75473) to implement 

risk-based capital surcharges for U.S.- 

based global systemically important 

banking organizations is extended from 

March 2, 2015 to April 3, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the methods identified in the 

proposed rule.1 Please submit your 

comments using only one method. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jordan Bleicher, Senior Supervisory 

Financial Analyst, (202) 973–6123, or 

Holly Kirkpatrick, Supervisory 

Financial Analyst, (202) 452–2796, 

Division of Banking Supervision and 

Regulation, or Christine Graham, Senior 

Attorney, (202) 452–3005, Legal 

Division. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 18, 2014, the Board published 

in the Federal Register a proposal to 

implement risk-based capital surcharges 

for U.S.-based global systemically 

important banking organizations.2 The 

proposed rule stated that the public 

comment period would close on March 

2, 2015.3

The Board has received a comment 

letter requesting that the Board extend 

the comment period for the proposal.4

The commenter suggested that an 

extension of the comment period would 

facilitate more detailed comments about 

the implications of the proposal and its 

potential consequences. 

Due to the range and complexity of 

the issues addressed in the proposed 

rulemaking, the public comment period 

has been extended until April 3, 2015. 

This action will allow interested 

persons additional time to analyze the 

proposal and prepare their comments. 

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, acting through the 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS