Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 4, 2009 / Proposed Rules 6007 

rating organizations. Consequently, 

NCUA is considering curbing the extent 

to which a corporate may rely on credit 

ratings provided by Nationally 

Recognized Statistical Rating 

Organizations (NRSROs). Comment is 

requested on whether NCUA should 

require more than one rating for an 

investment, or require that the lowest 

rating meet the minimum rating 

requirements of Part 704. NCUA also 

solicits comment on whether to require 

additional stress modeling tools in the 

regulation to enhance credit risk 

management. 

Several specific aspects of this issue 

are under consideration, for which 

comment is solicited, including whether 

Part 704 should be revised to lessen the 

reliance on NRSRO ratings. Commenters 

are invited to identify any other changes 

they believe may be prudent to help 

assure adequate management of credit 

risk. In this respect, commenters should 

consider whether Part 704 should be 

revised to provide specific 

concentration limits, including sector 

and obligor limits. If so, what specific 

limits would be appropriate for 

corporate credit unions? Comments are 

also solicited on the question of whether 

corporates should be required to obtain 

independent evaluations of credit risk 

in their investment portfolios. If so, 

what would be appropriate standards 

for these contractors? Another issue 

under consideration is whether 

corporates should be required to test 

sensitivities to credit spread widening, 

and if so, what standards should apply 

to that effort. 

5. Asset Liability Management 

In a previous version of its corporate 

rule, NCUA required corporate credit 

unions to perform net interest income 

modeling and stress testing. Because 

one of the problems leading to the 

current market dislocation is a widening 

of credit spreads, the agency is 

considering re-instating this 

requirement. Alternatively, the agency 

may consider some form of mandatory 

modeling and testing of credit spread 

increases. Comment is solicited on 

whether NCUA should require 

corporates to use monitoring tools to 

identify these types of trends, including 

specifically comments about tangible 

benefits, if any, that would flow from 

these types of modeling requirements. 

6. Corporate Governance 

The sophistication and far-reaching 

impact of corporate activities requires a 

governing board with appropriate 

knowledge and expertise. NCUA is 

considering minimum standards for 

directors that would require a director 

possess an appropriate level of 

experience and independence. The 

agency is also considering term limits, 

allowing compensation for corporate 

directors, and requiring greater 

transparency for executive 

compensation. Comment is sought on 

all these issues. 

In addition, commenters are invited to 

respond to the question of whether or 

not the current structure of retail and 

wholesale corporate credit union boards 

is appropriate given the corporate 

business model. Should NCUA establish 

more stringent minimum qualifications 

and training requirements for 

individuals serving as corporate credit 

union directors? If so, what should the 

minimum qualifications be? NCUA is 

also considering whether to establish a 

category of ‘‘outside director,’’ i.e., 

persons who are not officers of that 

corporate, officers of member natural 

person credit unions, and/or individuals 

from entirely outside the credit union 

industry. Commenters should offer their 

view on whether that approach is wise, 

and, if so whether NCUA should require 

that corporates select some minimum 

number of outside directors for their 

boards. Should a wholesale corporate 

credit union be required to have some 

directors from natural person credit 

unions? Comment is sought on whether 

NCUA should impose term limits on 

corporate directors, and, if so, what the 

maximum term should be. Comment is 

also sought on whether corporate 

directors should be compensated, and, if 

so, whether such compensation should 

be limited to outside directors only. 

Another issue under consideration, for 

which reaction from commenters is 

sought, is whether NCUA should allow 

members of corporate credit unions 

greater access to salary and benefit 

information for senior management. 

Request for Comments 

The NCUA Board invites comment on 

any of the issues discussed above 

including specifically if NCUA’s 

regulations should be amended to 

address the issues discussed in this 

ANPR. NCUA also welcomes comment 

on any other relevant issues pertaining 

to corporate credit unions that have not 

been addressed in this ANPR. 

By the National Credit Union 

Administration Board on January 28, 2009. 

Mary F. Rupp, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E9–2292 Filed 2–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration 

29 CFR 2550 

RIN 1210–AB13 

Investment Advice—Participants and 

Beneficiaries 

AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed extension of 

effective date and applicability date; 

request for public comments on legal 

and policy questions relating to the final 

rule. 

SUMMARY: Consistent with the 

memorandum of January 20, 2009, from 

the Assistant to the President and Chief 

of Staff, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Review,’’ 

this document proposes to extend for 60 

days the effective and applicability 

dates of final rules under the Employee 

Retirement Income Security Act, and 

parallel provisions of the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986, relating to the 

provision of investment advice to 

participants and beneficiaries in 

individual account plans, such as 401(k) 

plans, and beneficiaries of individual 

retirement accounts (and certain similar 

plans). These rules were published in 

the Federal Register on January 21, 

2009. Extending the effective date 

would allow the Department of Labor to 

evaluate comments on questions of law 

and policy concerning the rules. Thus, 

this document also seeks comments 

generally on the rules and on the merits 

of rescinding, modifying or retaining the 

rules. 

DATES: Comments on the proposal to 

extend the effective and applicability 

date should be submitted to the 

Department on or before February 18, 

2009. Comments on the provisions of 29 

CFR 2550.408g–1 and 2550.408g–2 

should be submitted to the Department 

on or before March 6, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred 

Wong, Office of Regulations and 

Interpretations, Employee Benefits 

Security Administration (EBSA), (202) 

693–8500. This is not a toll-free number. 

ADDRESSES: To facilitate the receipt and 

processing of comment letters, EBSA 

encourages interested persons to submit 

their comments electronically by e-mail 

to e-ORI@dol.gov (enter into subject 

line: Investment Advice Final Rule) or 

by using the Federal eRulemaking portal 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons 

submitting comments electronically are 

encouraged not to submit paper copies. 

Persons interested in submitting paper 

6008 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 4, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

copies should send or deliver their 

comments to the Office of Regulations 

and Interpretations, Employee Benefits 

Security Administration, Attn: 

Investment Advice Final Rule, Room N– 

5655, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20210. All comments will be 

available to the public, without charge, 

online at http://www.regulations.gov 

and http://www.dol.gov/ebsa and at the 

Public Disclosure Room, N–1513, 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 21, 2009, the Department of 

Labor published final rules on the 

provision of investment advice to 

participants and beneficiaries of 

participant-directed individual account 

plans and to beneficiaries of individual 

retirement accounts (74 FR 3822). The 

rules contain regulations implementing 

a statutory prohibited transaction 

exemption under ERISA § 408(b)(14) 

and § 408(g) and an administrative class 

exemption granting additional relief. As 

published, these rules were to be 

effective on March 23, 2009. Paragraph 

(g) of § 2550.408g–1 provided that the 

rule would apply to covered 

transactions occurring on or after March 

23, 2009. 

By memorandum dated January 20, 

2009, Rahm Emanuel, Assistant to the 

President and Chief of Staff, directed 

Agency Heads to consider extending for 

60 days the effective date of regulations 

that have been published in the Federal 

Register but not yet taken effect. The 

memorandum further advised that, 

where such regulations are extended, 

agencies should allow 30 days for 

interested persons to comment on issues 

of law and policy raised by the rules. In 

accordance with that memorandum, and 

taking into account the considerations 

listed in the Memorandum of January 

21, 2009, from Peter R. Orszag, Director 

of the Office of Management and 

Budget, the Department is proposing to 

extend the effective date for these rules 

until May 22, 2009, and to make a 

conforming amendment to the 

applicability date of § 2550.408g–1. 

Extending the effective date for 60 

days will allow the public to comment 

on whether the rules raise significant 

policy and legal issues and for the 

Department to review these comments 

and the rules before the relief granted by 

the rules becomes available. The 

exemptive relief granted by the rules 

would serve little purpose if the 

Department were to withdraw or amend 

the rules after plans and investment 

advisers had implemented procedures 

and incurred expenses in order to make 

use of the exemptive relief. 

The Department solicits comments on 

the proposal to extend the effective and 

applicability dates for 60 days. For this 

purpose, the comment period will end 

on February 18, 2009. At the same time, 

the Department also solicits comments 

on issues of law and policy concerning 

all the provisions of these rules. The 

purpose of these comments is to assist 

the Department in its review of these 

rules. Upon completion of this review, 

the Department may decide to allow the 

rules to take effect, issue a further 

extension, withdraw the rules, or 

propose amendments. The Department 

requests comments on each of these 

possible outcomes. The comment period 

for this broader purpose will end on 

March 6, 2009. 

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 2550 

Employee benefit plans, Exemptions, 

Fiduciaries, Investments, Pensions, 

Prohibited transactions, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Securities. 

For the reasons set forth above, the 

publication on January 21, 2009 (73 FR 

3822), of the final rule amending 29 CFR 

Part 2550, is proposed to be further 

amended as follows: 

PART 2550—RULES AND 

REGULATIONS FOR FIDUCIARY 

RESPONSIBILITY 

1. The authority citation for part 2550 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1135; and Secretary of 

Labor’s Order No. 1–2003, 68 FR 5374 (Feb. 

3, 2003). Sec. 2550.401b–1 also issued under 

sec. 102, Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 

43 FR 47713 (Oct. 17, 1978), 3 CFR, 1978 

Comp. 332, effective Dec. 31, 1978, 44 FR 

1065 (Jan. 3, 1978), 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. 332. 

Sec. 2550.401c–1 also issued under 29 U.S.C. 

1101. Sections 2550.404c–1 and 2550.404c– 

5 also issued under 29 U.S.C. 1104. Sec. 

2550.407c–3 also issued under 29 U.S.C. 

1107. Sec. 2550.404a–2 also issued under 26 

U.S.C. 401 note (sec. 657, Pub. L. 107–16, 115 

Stat. 38). Sec. 2550.408b–1 also issued under 

29 U.S.C. 1108(b)(1) and sec. 102, 

Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp. p. 332, effective Dec. 31, 1978, 

44 FR 1065 (Jan. 3, 1978), and 3 CFR, 1978 

Comp. 332. Sec. 2550.408b–19 also issued 

under sec. 611, Public Law 109–280, 120 

Stat. 780, 972, and sec. 102, Reorganization 

Plan No. 4 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 

332, effective Dec. 31, 1978, 44 FR 1065 (Jan. 

3, 1978), and 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. 332. Sec. 

2550.408g–1 also issued under sec. 102, 

Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp. p. 332, effective Dec. 31, 1978, 

44 FR 1065 (Jan. 3, 1978), and 3 CFR, 1978 

Comp. 332. Sec. 2550.408g–2 also issued 

under 29 U.S.C. 1108(g) and sec. 102, 

Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp. p. 332, effective Dec. 31, 1978, 

44 FR 1065 (Jan. 3, 1978), and 3 CFR, 1978 

Comp. 332. Sec. 2550.412–1 also issued 

under 29 U.S.C. 1112. 

2. Section 2550.408g–1 is amended by 

removing the date ‘‘March 23, 2009’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘May 22, 2009’’ 

in paragraph (g). 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of 

January, 2009. 

Alan D. Lebowitz, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Program 

Operations, Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. E9–2296 Filed 2–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 6 

[EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–0006; FRL–8766–1] 

RIN 2020–AA48 

Procedures for Implementing the 

National Environmental Policy Act and 

Assessing the Environmental Effects 

Abroad of EPA Actions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to correct its 

rule entitled ‘‘Procedures for 

Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act and Assessing 

the Effects Abroad of EPA Actions,’’ 

which was published September 19, 

2007. Since the final rule became 

effective on October 19, 2007, EPA has 

received inquiries about some minor 

inconsistencies and ambiguities in the 

final rule. This action involves four 

minor, technical corrections to the rule 

to address those issues. The first 

correction expands the definition of 

‘‘applicants’’ to include those who 

request EPA approvals. The second 

change clarifies that a categorical 

exclusion includes vacant land. The 

third change corrects the text to indicate 

that the number of extraordinary 

circumstances is ten. The last change 

expands Subpart C to apply to EPA 

approvals as well as permits and 

assistance grants. In the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register, we have made these four 

changes as a direct final rule without a 

prior proposed rule. If we receive no 

adverse comment, we will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. 

DATES: Any comments must be received 

by March 6, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. [EPA–HQ–