70456 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Notices 

structure of the BHC. The BHC 

maintains an appropriate capital 

allocation across the organization 

commensurate with associated risks. 

Intra-group exposures, including 

servicing agreements, are very unlikely 

to undermine the financial condition of 

the subsidiary depository institution(s). 

Parent company cash flow is sufficient 

and not dependent on excessive 

dividend payments from subsidiaries. 

The potential risks posed to the 

subsidiary depository institution(s) by 

strategic plans, the control environment, 

risk concentrations, or legal or 

reputational issues within or facing the 

nondepository entities are minor in 

nature and can be addressed in the 

normal course of business. 

Rating 2 (Limited Likelihood of 

Significant Negative Impact). A rating of 

2 indicates a limited likelihood that the 

nondepository entities of the BHC will 

have a significant negative impact on 

the subsidiary depository institution(s) 

due to the adequate financial condition 

of the nondepository entities, the 

satisfactory risk management practices 

within the parent nondepository 

entities, or the corporate structure of the 

BHC. The BHC maintains adequate 

capital allocation across the 

organization commensurate with 

associated risks. Intra-group exposures, 

including servicing agreements, are 

unlikely to undermine the financial 

condition of the subsidiary depository 

institution(s). Parent company cash flow 

is satisfactory and generally does not 

require excessive dividend payments 

from subsidiaries. The potential risks 

posed to the subsidiary depository 

institution(s) by strategic plans, the 

control environment, risk 

concentrations, or legal or reputational 

issues within the nondepository entities 

are modest and can be addressed in the 

normal course of business.

Rating 3 (Moderate Likelihood of 

Significant Negative Impact). A rating of 

3 indicates a moderate likelihood that 

the aggregate impact of the 

nondepository entities of the BHC on 

the subsidiary depository institution(s) 

will have a significant negative impact 

on the subsidiary depository 

institution(s) due to weaknesses in the 

financial condition and/or risk 

management practices of the 

nondepository entities. The BHC may 

have only marginally sufficient 

allocation of capital across the 

organization to support risks. Intragroup exposures, including servicing 

agreements, may have the potential to 

undermine the financial condition of 

the subsidiary depository institution(s). 

Parent company cash flow may at times 

require excessive dividend payments 

from subsidiaries. Strategic growth 

plans, weaknesses in the control 

environment, risk concentrations or 

legal or reputational issues within the 

nondepository entities may pose 

significant risks to the subsidiary 

depository institution(s). A BHC 

assigned a 3 impact rating requires more 

than normal supervisory attention, as 

there could be adverse effects on the 

safety and soundness of the subsidiary 

depository institution(s) if corrective 

action is not taken by management. 

Rating 4 (Considerable Likelihood of 

Significant Negative Impact). A rating of 

4 indicates that there is a considerable 

likelihood that the nondepository 

entities of the BHC will have a 

significant negative impact on the 

subsidiary depository institution(s) due 

to weaknesses in the financial condition 

and/or risk management practices of the 

nondepository entities. A 4-rated BHC 

may have insufficient capital within the 

nondepository entities to support their 

risks and activities. Intra-group 

exposures, including servicing 

agreements, may also have the 

immediate potential to undermine the 

financial condition of the subsidiary 

depository institution(s). Parent 

company cash flow may be dependent 

on excessive dividend payments from 

subsidiaries. Strategic growth plans, 

weaknesses in the control environment, 

risk concentrations or legal or 

reputational issues within the 

nondepository entities may pose 

considerable risks to the subsidiary 

depository institution(s). A BHC 

assigned a 4 impact rating requires 

immediate remedial action and close 

supervisory attention because the 

nondepository entities could seriously 

affect the safety and soundness of the 

subsidiary depository institution(s). 

Rating 5 (High Likelihood of 

Significant Negative Impact). A rating of 

5 indicates a high likelihood that the 

aggregate impact of the nondepository 

entities of the BHC on the subsidiary 

depository institution(s) is or will 

become significantly negative due to 

substantial weaknesses in the financial 

condition and/or risk management 

practices of the nondepository entities. 

Strategic growth plans, a deficient 

control environment, risk 

concentrations or legal or reputational 

issues within the nondepository entities 

may pose critical risks to the subsidiary 

depository institution(s). The parent 

company also may be unable to meet its 

obligations without excessive support 

from the subsidiary depository 

institution(s). The BHC requires 

immediate and close supervisory 

attention, as the nondepository entities 

seriously jeopardize the continued 

viability of the subsidiary depository 

institution(s). 

(D) (Depository Institutions) Component 

The (D) component identifies the 

overall condition of the subsidiary 

depository institution(s) of the BHC. For 

BHCs with only one subsidiary 

depository institution, the (D) 

component rating generally will mirror 

the CAMELS composite rating for that 

depository institution. To arrive at a (D) 

component rating for BHCs with 

multiple subsidiary depository 

institutions, the CAMELS composite 

ratings for each of the depository 

institutions should be weighted, giving 

consideration to asset size and the 

relative importance of each depository 

institution within the overall structure 

of the organization. In general, it is 

expected that the resulting (D) 

component rating will reflect the lead 

depository institution’s CAMELS 

composite rating. 

If in the process of analyzing the 

financial condition and risk 

management programs of the 

consolidated organization, a major 

difference of opinion regarding the 

safety and soundness of the subsidiary 

depository institution(s) emerges 

between the Federal Reserve and the 

depository institution’s primary 

regulator, then the (D) rating should 

reflect the Federal Reserve’s evaluation.

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System.

Dated: December 1, 2004. 

Jennifer J. Johnson, 

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 04–26723 Filed 12–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices; 

Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank 

Holding Companies

The notificants listed below have 

applied under the Change in Bank 

Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and 

§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 

CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank 

holding company. The factors that are 

considered in acting on the notices are 

set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 

U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for 

immediate inspection at the Federal 

Reserve Bank indicated. The notices 

also will be available for inspection at 

the office of the Board of Governors. 

Interested persons may express their 

views in writing to the Reserve Bank 

indicated for that notice or to the offices 

of the Board of Governors. Comments 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 233 / Monday, December 6, 2004 / Notices 70457

must be received not later than 

December 20, 2004.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

(Sue Costello, Vice President) 1000 

Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303:

1. Rogers Investments, LP, 

Russellville, Alabama, with Dianne 

Rogers Barnes, Marietta, Georgia, and 

Robert Isaac Rogers, Jr., Russellville, 

Alabama, as general partners; Rogers 

Family Holdings, LLC, Russellville, 

Alabama, with Dianne Rogers Barnes 

and Robert Isaac Rogers, Jr., as 

managers, and whose members include 

the two managers and Anne C. Rogers, 

Russellville, Alabama, the R.I. Rogers, 

Sr. Marital Trust GST Non—Exempt, the 

Robert I. Rogers, Sr. GST Exempt Family 

Trust, and the Robert I. Rogers, Sr. 

Marital Trust GST Exempt, with Robert 

Isaac Rogers, Jr., and Dianne Rogers 

Barnes serving as trustees of the trusts; 

and Robert Isaac Rogers, Jr., and Dianne 

Rogers Barnes; to collectively retain 

voting shares of Valley Bancshares, Inc., 

and thereby indirectly retain voting 

shares of Valley State Bank, both of 

Russellville, Alabama.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, November 30, 2004.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 04–26712 Filed 12–3–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–S

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and 

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

The companies listed in this notice 

have applied to the Board for approval, 

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company 

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) 

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 

225), and all other applicable statutes 

and regulations to become a bank 

holding company and/or to acquire the 

assets or the ownership of, control of, or 

the power to vote shares of a bank or 

bank holding company and all of the 

banks and nonbanking companies 

owned by the bank holding company, 

including the companies listed below.

The applications listed below, as well 

as other related filings required by the 

Board, are available for immediate 

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 

indicated. The application also will be 

available for inspection at the offices of 

the Board of Governors. Interested 

persons may express their views in 

writing on the standards enumerated in 

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the 

proposal also involves the acquisition of 

a nonbanking company, the review also 

includes whether the acquisition of the 

nonbanking company complies with the 

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 

(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise 

noted, nonbanking activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Additional information on all bank 

holding companies may be obtained 

from the National Information Center 

website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding each of these applications 

must be received at the Reserve Bank 

indicated or the offices of the Board of 

Governors not later than December 30, 

2004.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of San 

Francisco (Tracy Basinger, Director, 

Regional and Community Bank Group) 

101 Market Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–1579:

1. Great Western Bancorp, Inc., 

Phoenix, Arizona; to become a bank 

holding company by acquiring at least 

45 percent of the voting shares of 

Western National Bank, Phoenix, 

Arizona (in organization).

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, November 30, 2004.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 04–26711 Filed 12–3–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–S

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

Draft Guidelines for Preventing the 

Transmission of Mycobacterium 

tuberculosis in Health-care Settings, 

2005

AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC), Department of Health 

and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice for public comment.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is 

to request public comment on draft 

Guidelines for Preventing the 

Transmission of Mycobacterium 

tuberculosis in Health-care Settings, 

2005 (Guidelines). These Guidelines are 

available at the CDC Web site at

http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/tb/

Federal_Register/default.htm as a pdf 

file. The Guidelines will be used by 

infection control staff, healthcare 

epidemiologists, healthcare 

administrators, facility managers, and 

other persons responsible for 

developing, implementing, and 

evaluating infection-control programs 

for healthcare settings across the 

continuum of patient care. These 

Guidelines update the CDC Guidelines 

for Preventing the Transmission of 

Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Healthcare Facilities and were last published 

in 1994. 

The 2005 draft Guidelines reflect 

shifts in the epidemiology of 

tuberculosis, advances in scientific 

understanding, and changes in healthcare practice that have occurred in the 

United States in the last decade.

DATES: Comments on the draft 

Guidelines for Preventing the 

Transmission of Mycobacterium 

tuberculosis in Health-care Settings, 

2005, must be received in writing on or 

before February 4, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the draft 

Guidelines should be labeled ‘‘Public 

comment on Draft Guidelines for 

Preventing the Transmission of 

Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Healthcare Settings, 2005,’’ and submitted by 

e-mail to TBinfectioncontrol@cdc.gov. 

Please include the specific section, 

paragraph, and page number for each 

comment. If unable to submit 

electronically, comments may be mailed 

to Public Comment on Draft Guidelines 

for Preventing the Transmission of 

Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Healthcare Settings 2005, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, Division of 

Tuberculosis Elimination, 1600 Clifton 

Road, NE., Mailstop E10, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30333. Comments may also be 

faxed to 404–929–2676.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lauren Lambert, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, National Center 

for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, 1600 

Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop E10, 

Atlanta, Georgia 30333. Telephone: 

(404) 639–8120. Email: 

TBinfectioncontrol@cdc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As stated 

above, the 2005 draft Guidelines reflect 

shifts in the epidemiology of 

tuberculosis, advances in scientific 

understanding, and changes in healthcare practice that have occurred in the 

United States in the last decade. In the 

context of diminished risk of healthcare-associated transmission of M. 

tuberculosis, the 2005 Draft Guidelines 

places emphasis on actions needed to 

maintain momentum and expertise 

needed to avert another resurgence of 

tuberculosis and to eliminate the 

lingering threat to healthcare workers, 

which is mainly from patients or others 

with unsuspected and undiagnosed 

infectious tuberculosis disease. Whereas 

previous Guidelines were aimed 

primarily at hospital-based facilities, the 

2005 CDC Guidelines have been 

expanded to address a broader concept: 

health-care-associated settings go 

beyond the previously defined facilities.