62508 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

were estimated at 3,150,000 standard

boxes, which should provide $94,500 in

assessment income. Income derived

from handler assessments, along with

interest income and funds from the

Committee’s authorized reserve, will be

adequate to cover budgeted expenses.

Funds in the reserve will be kept within

the maximum permitted by the order.

The Committee discussed alternatives

to this rule, including alternative

expenditure levels. The former rate of

$0.0375 would have resulted in a

reserve that exceeded the level the

Committee believes is necessary to

administer the program. Lower

assessment rates were considered, but

not recommended because they would

not generate the income necessary to

administer the program with an

adequate reserve. Major expenses

recommended by the Committee for the

1997–98 fiscal period include $48,454

for salaries, $8,187 for office rent, and

$4,956 for health insurance. Budgeted

expenses for these items in 1996–97

were $46,306, $7,016, and $4,991,

respectively.

Recent price information indicates

that the grower price for the 1997–98

season will range between $5.79 and

$12.72 per standard box of fresh Bartlett

pears. Therefore, the estimated

assessment revenue for the 1997–98

fiscal period as a percentage of total

grower revenue will range between 0.24

and 0.52 percent.

This action will reduce the

assessment obligation imposed on

handlers. While this rule will impose

some additional costs on handlers, the

costs are minimal and in the form of

uniform assessments on all handlers.

Some of the additional costs may be

passed on to producers. However, these

costs will be offset by the benefits

derived by the operation of the

marketing order. In addition, the

Committee’s meeting was widely

publicized throughout the fresh Bartlett

pear industry and all interested persons

were invited to attend the meeting and

participate in Committee deliberations

on all issues. Like all Committee

meetings, the May 29, 1997, meeting

was a public meeting and all entities,

both large and small, were able to

express views on this issue.

This action will not impose any

additional reporting or recordkeeping

requirements on either small or large

fresh Bartlett pear handlers. 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.

The Department has not identified

any relevant Federal rules that

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this

final rule.

The interim final rule published in

the Federal Register (62 FR 44884) on

August 25, 1997, requested comments to

be received by September 24, 1997. A

copy of the interim final rule was also

made available on the Internet by the

U.S. Government Printing Office. No

comments were received.

After consideration of all relevant

material presented, including the

information and recommendation

submitted by the Committee and other

available information, it is hereby found

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,

will tend to effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 931

Fresh Bartlett pear, Marketing

agreements, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

PART 931—FRESH BARTLETT PEARS

GROWN IN OREGON AND

WASHINGTON

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR part 931 which was

published at 62 FR 44884 on August 25,

1997, is adopted as a final rule without

change.

Dated: November 18, 1997.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 97–30785 Filed 11–21–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 261

[Docket No. R–0975]

Rules Regarding Availability of

Information; Correction

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: The Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System (Board)

published in the Federal Register of

October 20, 1997, a document which

amended the Board’s Rules Regarding

Availability of Information (Rules). This

document corrects citation errors within

the Rules.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 19, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elaine M. Boutilier, Senior Counsel,

202–452–2418, Legal Division. For the

hearing impaired only, contact Diane

Jenkins, Telecommunications Device for

the Deaf (TDD), 202–452–3544, Board of

Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, 20th and Constitution, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board

published a document in the Federal

Register of October 20, 1997, (62 FR

54356). The document (FR Doc. 97–

27566) amended the Board’s Rules

Regarding Availability of Information

and contained several incorrect

citations. This document also adds an

amendatory instruction which will

revise citations within subpart C of the

Rules to reflect the new renumbering.

In final rule, FR Doc. 97–27566,

published on October 20, 1997, (62 FR

54356) make the following corrections:

PART 261—[CORRECTED]

1. On page 54359, in the first column,

in the authority citation, line 6, correct

‘‘15 U.S.C. 77uu(b)’’ to read ‘‘15 U.S.C.

77uuu(b)’’.

§ 261.22 [Corrected]

2. On page 54359, in the first column,

add amendatory instruction 3a. to read

as follows:

a. Newly designated § 261.22 is

amended by:

a. In paragraphs (b)(1) introductory

text and (b)(2), the reference ‘‘§§ 261.11

and 261.12’’ is removed and ‘‘§§ 261.20

and 261.21’’ is added in its place.

b. In paragraph (d), the reference

‘‘§ 261.9’’ is removed and ‘‘§ 261.12’’ is

added each place it appears.

§ 261.1 [Corrected]

3. On page 54359, in the second

column, in § 261.1, in paragraph (a)(1),

line 22, correct ‘‘the Securities and

Exchange Act,’’ to read ‘‘the Securities

and Exchange Commission

Authorization Act,’’.

§ 261.12 [Corrected]

4. On page 54362, in the second

column, in § 261.12, in paragraph (b)(3),

line 7, correct ‘‘§ 261.23(b)(1)(ii)’’ to

read ‘‘§ 261.22(b)’’.

5. On page 54362, in the second

column, in § 261.12, paragraph (c)(3),

last line, correct ‘‘§ 261.17(h)’’ to read

‘‘§ 261.17(f)’’.

6. On page 54362, in the second

column, in § 261.12, paragraph (c)(4),

last line, correct ‘‘§ 261.23(b)’’ to read

‘‘§ 261.22(b)’’.

§ 261.17 [Corrected]

7. On page 54366, in the first column,

in § 261.17, paragraph (f)(4), last line,

correct ‘‘§ 261.13(j)’’ to read

‘‘§ 261.13(i)’’.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 62509

1 12 U.S.C. 1465.

2 12 U.S.C. 1465(b)(2).

3 12 CFR 566.1(g) (1997).

4 62 FR 26449.

By order of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, November 18, 1997.

William W. Wiles,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–30711 Filed 11–21–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision

12 CFR Part 566

[No. 97–116]

RIN 1550–AA77

Liquidity

AGENCY: Office of Thrift Supervision,

Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Office of Thrift

Supervision (OTS) is issuing a final rule

that updates, simplifies, and streamlines

its liquidity regulation. This final rule

follows a detailed review of the

regulation to determine whether it is

necessary, imposes the least possible

burden consistent with statutory

requirements and safety and soundness,

and is written in a clear, straightforward

manner. Today’s final rule is made

pursuant to the Regulatory Reinvention

Initiative of the Vice President’s

National Performance Review and

section 303 of the Community

Development and Regulatory

Improvement Act of 1994.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 24, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Francis Raue, Program Analyst, (202)

906–5750, Robyn Dennis, Manager,

Thrift Policy, (202) 906–5751,

Supervision Policy, or Susan Miles,

Attorney, (202) 906–6798, Karen

Osterloh, Assistant Chief Counsel, (202)

906–6639, Regulations and Legislation

Division, Chief Counsel’s Office, Office

of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street,

NW, Washington, DC 20552.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 6 of the Home Owners’ Loan

Act (HOLA) 1 requires savings

associations to hold a prescribed

amount of statutorily defined liquid

assets. The Director of the OTS may, by

regulation, vary the amount of the

liquidity requirement, but only within

pre-established statutory limits. The

requirement must be no less than four

percent and no greater than ten percent

of ‘‘the obligation of the institution on

withdrawable accounts and borrowings

payable on demand or with unexpired

maturities of one year or less.’’ 2 The

Director may issue regulations defining

the terms used in the statute,

prescribing or limiting the extent to

which certain assets included on the

statutory liquidity list may be used to

meet the liquidity requirement, and

prescribing how to calculate the

liquidity requirement.

Regulations implementing the

Director’s authority under section 6 of

the HOLA appear at 12 CFR part 566

(1997). These rules define liquid assets

to include cash and certain securities

with detailed maturity limitations and

marketability requirements.3 The rules

currently impose a liquidity

requirement of five percent of an

institution’s liquidity base and a

separate, ‘‘short-term’’ liquidity

requirement of one percent of that base.

The liquidity base in defined as net

withdrawable accounts plus short-term

borrowings. Except for institutions with

less than $25,000,000 in assets, liquidity

requirements are based on the ‘‘average

daily balance’’ of the liquidity base

during the preceding month.

Institutions with less than $25,000,000

in assets may calculate their liquidity

base using month-end figures.

On May 14, 1997, the OTS published

a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR)

seeking comment on its liquidity

regulation.4 The OTS sought to reduce

the burden of compliance with the

statutory liquidity requirement to the

maximum extent possible, consistent

with statutory requirements and safety

and soundness considerations.

Specifically, the OTS proposed to: (1)

reduce the liquidity requirement from

five percent of net withdrawable

accounts and short-term borrowings to

four percent; (2) remove the one percent

short-term liquidity requirement; (3) set

forth an explicit requirement that thrifts

maintain a safe and sound level of

liquidity; (4) streamline the calculations

used to measure compliance with the

liquidity requirement; (5) expand the

categories of liquid assets that may

count toward satisfying a savings

association’s liquidity requirement; and

(6) reduce the liquidity base by

excluding withdrawable accounts

payable in more than one year form the

definition of the term ‘‘net

withdrawable accounts.’’

II. Summary of Comments and

Description of the Final Rule

The public comment period on the

proposed rule closed on July 14, 1997.

The OTS received twelve comments on

its proposal. Commenters included eight

savings associations, two trade

associations, one holding company, and

one individual. Commenters generally

concurred that the statutory liquidity

requirement imposes an unnecessary

burden on institutions and no longer

serves any useful purpose. Seven

commenters specifically urged the OTS

to continue to seek legislation that

would eliminate this requirement. Two

of these commenters urged the

elimination of the requirement for

institutions rated 1 or 2 under the

CAMELS system.

Eleven commenters supported the

proposed rule. These commenters

generally concluded that the proposed

rule would reduce the regulatory burden

to the extent permitted by the statute,

while maintaining the safety and

soundness of institutions. Several

commenters suggested revisions to the

proposed rule which are discussed

below. One commenter opposed the

proposed rule.

Today’s final rule is substantially

similar to the May proposal, but

incorporates several changes and

clarifications in response to comments

received. Specific comments are

discussed where appropriate in the

analysis below.

A. Reducing the Liquid Asset

Requirement From Five to Four Percent

and Removing the One Percent ShortTerm Requirement

The OTS proposed to reduce the

liquid asset requirement from five

percent of the liquidity base to four

percent, the lowest percentage

permissible by statute. Additionally, the

OTS proposed to eliminate the one

percent short-term liquidity

requirement, which is not mandated by

statute. The agency believed that these

changes were consistent with safety and

soundness and the goal of reducing

unnecessary burdens on the industry.

Commenters generally supported the

reduction of the liquid asset

requirement and the elimination of the

short term liquidity requirement. One

commenter noted that the OTS would

retain sufficient flexibility through its

examination process to determine the

proper amount of liquid assets to

support safe and sound operations. One

commenter expressed general concern

about this change, but did not cite

specific reasons for its concern. These

changes are adopted as proposed.

B. Adding a General Safety and

Soundness Requirement

The OTS proposed to incorporate a

general requirement that a savings