Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 6147

which branches are insured and which

branches are not insured in all of its

advertisements requiring the use of the

official advertising statement.

(b) Official advertising statement. The

official advertising statement shall be in

substance as follows: ‘‘Member of the

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’’.

The word ‘‘the’’ or the words ‘‘of the’’

may be omitted. The words ‘‘This bank

is a’’, ‘‘This savings association is a’’,

‘‘This savings and loan is a’’, or the

words ‘‘This institution is a’’ or the

name of the insured depository

institution followed by the words ‘‘is a’’

may be added before the word

‘‘member.’’ The short title ‘‘Member of

FDIC’’ or ‘‘Member FDIC’’ or a

reproduction of the ‘‘symbol’’ may be

used by insured depository institutions

at their option as the official advertising

statement. The official advertising

statement shall be of such size and print

to be clearly legible. Where it is desired

to use the ‘‘symbol’’ of the Corporation

as the official advertising statement, and

the ‘‘symbol’’ must be reduced to such

proportions that the small lines of type

and the Corporation seal therein are

indistinct and illegible, the Corporation

seal in the letter C and the two lines of

small type may be blocked out or

dropped.

(c) Types of advertisements which do

not require the official advertising

statement. The following types of

advertisements need not include the

official advertising statement:

(1) Statements of condition and

reports of condition of an insured

depository institution which are

required to be published by state or

federal law;

(2) Stationery (except when used for

circular letters), envelopes, deposit

slips, checks, drafts, signature cards,

deposit passbooks, certificates of

deposit, and other similar items;

(3) Signs or plates in the banking

office or attached to the building or

buildings in which the banking offices

are located;

(4) Listings in directories;

(5) Advertisements not setting forth

the name of the insured depository

institution;

(6) Display advertisements in

depository institution directory,

provided the name of the depository

institution is listed on any page in the

directory with a symbol or other

descriptive matter indicating it is a

member of the Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation;

(7) Joint or group advertisements of

banking services where the names of

insured depository institutions and

noninsured institutions are listed and

form a part of such advertisements;

(8) Advertisements by radio or

television, other than display

advertisements, which do not exceed

thirty (30) seconds in time;

(9) Advertisements which are of the

type or character making it impractical

to include thereon the official

advertising statement including, but not

limited to, promotional items such as

calendars, matchbooks, pens, pencils,

and key chains;

(10) Advertisements which contain a

statement to the effect that the

depository institution is a member of

the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation, or that the depository

institution is insured by the Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation, or that

its deposits or depositors are insured by

the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation to the maximum of

$100,000 for each depositor;

(11) Advertisements which do not

relate to insured deposit products or

services.

(d) Prohibited use. (1) Except as

provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this

section, an insured depository

institution may not include the official

advertising statement or refer to either

federal deposit insurance or the Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation in any

advertisement relating to nondeposit

investment products or similar

nondeposit products.

(2) In advertisements containing

information about both insured deposits

and nondeposit investment products or

similar nondeposit products, the

information concerning insured

deposits shall be clearly segregated from

the information about nondeposit

investment products (or similar

nondeposit products) and shall contain

either the official statement, or any

similar statement, including, but not

limited to, statements to the effect that

the depository institution’s deposits or

depositors are insured by the Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation to the

maximum of $100,000 for each

depositor, or that specific deposit

products are insured by the Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation.

(e) Billboard advertisements. Where

an insured depository institution has

billboard advertisements in use as of

[the effective date of the final rule]

which are required to include the

official advertising statement and the

insured depository institution has direct

control of such advertisements either by

possession or under the terms of a

contract, the institution shall, as soon as

it can consistent with its contractual

obligations, cause the official

advertising statement to be included

therein.

(f) Official advertising statement in

non-English language. The non-English

equivalent of the official advertising

statement may be used in any

advertisement: Provided, That the

translation has had the prior written

approval of the Corporation. Authority

to provide such approval on behalf of

the Corporation is hereby delegated to

the Director, Division of Compliance

and Consumer Affairs; the Deputy

Director, Division of Compliance and

Consumer Affairs; and each Regional

Director, Division of Compliance and

Consumer Affairs.

§ 328.4 [Removed]

5. Section 328.4 is removed.

By order of the Board of Directors.

Dated at Washington, D.C., this 21st day of

January, 1997.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Jerry L. Langley,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–3319 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

13 CFR Part 107

Small Business Investment Companies

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In response to concerns

expressed by a number of small

business investment companies (SBICs),

SBA is proposing to modify the

examination fees charged to SBICs. SBA

believes that the current fee schedule

places a disproportionate burden on

certain classes of licensees (particularly

those with the largest amount of total

assets) and, in some cases, results in fee

assessments that exceed reasonable

charges based on the level of effort and

time associated with the examination

process.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before March 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to Don A. Christensen,

Associate Administrator for Investment,

U.S. Small Business Administration,

409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6300,

Washington, DC 20416.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leonard W. Fagan, Investment Division,

at (202) 205–7583.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 31, 1996 the Small Business

Administration (SBA) published final

regulations which, among other things,

increased the examination fees charged

to SBICs. See 61 FR 3177. Fees
6148 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules

continued to be assessed based on total

assets of the licensee, but at higher rates.

The new fee schedule was designed to

produce total revenue sufficient to cover

the current direct costs to SBA of

conducting examinations.

Since the effective date and

implementation of this regulation

(March 1, 1996), SBA has received a

number of comments regarding the

impact of the new fee schedule on

licensees in certain asset size groups. In

particular, bank-owned SBICs argue that

they are required to bear an unfair

portion of the overall fees. In this

regard, they note that they generally

have no federal funds at risk. However,

because fees are based on total assets

and they generally have the largest

amount of total assets, they are required

to pay fees at levels which far exceed

the level of effort and risk associated

with the examination process. Similarly,

larger SBICs which are not bank-owned

and do rely on federal funds to

supplement private capital argue that

the fees greatly exceed the amount they

pay for financial audits and are not

representative of the level of effort and

time attributable to the process.

Because of these comments, the SBA

has re-assessed its examination fee

schedule and its impact on the various

classes of licensees. Based on its

reassessment, the SBA has concluded

that the current fee schedule places a

disproportionate burden on certain

classes of licensees and, in some cases,

results in fee assessments that exceed

reasonable charges based on the level of

effort and time associated with the

examination process.

To remedy this situation, the SBA is

proposing revisions to § 107.692 to

establish fees that are more reasonable

in relation to the level of effort and

resources expended by the Agency. The

proposed fee schedule would establish

‘‘base fees’’ for examinations. The base

fee increases as a licensee’s total assets

increase, but is capped at $14,000. The

base fee would be adjusted upward in

circumstances where the Agency incurs

additional cost or burdens in the

process because of circumstances solely

related to the licensee to be examined.

Similarly, the base fee would be

adjusted downward where

circumstances solely related to the

licensee to be examined are such that

the Agency’s level of effort and time are

minimized. In SBA’s view, these

adjustments are incentives for the

licensees to adhere to program

regulations and will serve to further

enhance the safety and soundness of the

SBIC program. The new fee schedule

would apply to examinations beginning

after the effective date of a final rule.

Compliance With Executive Orders,

12612, 12778, and 12866, the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601,

et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction

Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35)

SBA certifies that this proposed rule

would not be a significant regulatory

action for purposes of Executive Order

12866 because it would not have an

annual effect on the economy of more

than $100 million, and that it would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities

within the meaning of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The

purpose of the proposed rule is to

modify the existing regulatory guidance

related to SBIC examination fees. The

proposed regulations would provide for

more reasonable and equitable

examination fees. The proposed fee

structure would more properly reflect

the level of effort and Agency resources

expended to conduct an examination,

would encourage continued compliance

with program regulations, and would

continue to allow for efficient and

effective program administration.

The proposed regulations would have

some economic effect. The base fee for

examinations would continue to be

based on total assets of a licensee and,

for the most part, at the rates prescribed

in current regulations. However, no

licensee would have a base fee greater

than $14,000. The proposed regulations

would provide for discounts of the base

examination fee for (1) licensees that

had no outstanding regulatory violations

at the time of the examination and there

were no violations noted as a result of

the most recent prior examination; and

(2) licensees that are cooperative with

SBA examination personnel by being

fully responsive to the letter of

notification of examination. Similarly,

the proposed regulations would provide

increases to the base examination fee for

a licensee that (1) is organized as a

partnership or limited liability

company; (2) is authorized to issue

Participating Securities; and/or (3)

maintains its records/files in multiple

locations.

The largest licensees, those with total

assets exceeding $60 million, would

realize substantial fee decreases. The

examination base fee of all licensees

potentially could be increased or

decreased. Therefore, all licensees with

total assets below $60 million may

experience a 5% to 25% increase or a

10% to 25% decrease in the cost of an

annual examination. The economic

impact in either case is inconsequential

given the total number of licensees and

the base fees applicable to the majority

of the licensees. Further, even assuming

the maximum increases provided for in

the proposed regulations, most licensees

with total assets greater than $60

million would realize significant

examination fee reductions.

For purposes of the Paperwork

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Ch. 35, SBA

certifies that this proposed rule, if

adopted in final form, would contain no

new reporting or recordkeeping

requirements that have not already been

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget.

For purposes of Executive Order

12612, SBA certifies that this rule

would not have any federalism

implications warranting the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For purposes of Executive Order

12778, SBA certifies that this rule is

drafted, to the extent practicable, in

accordance with the standards set forth

in Section 2 of that Order.

List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 107

Investment companies, Loan

programs-business, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Small

businesses.

For the reasons set forth above, SBA

hereby proposes to amend Part 107 of

Title 13 of the Code of Federal

Regulations as follows:

PART 107—SMALL BUSINESS

INVESTMENT COMPANIES

1. The authority citation for part 107

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 681 et seq., 683,

687(c), 687b, 687d, 687g and 687m, Pub. L.

104–208.

2. Section 107.692 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 107.692 Examination fees.

(a) General. SBA will assess fees for

examinations in accordance with this

§ 107.692. Unless SBA determines

otherwise on a case by case basis, SBA

will not assess fees for special

examinations to obtain specific

information.

(b) Base fee. A base fee will be

assessed based on your total assets (at

cost) as of the date of your latest

certified financial statement or a more

recent interim statement requested by

and submitted to SBA in connection

with the examination. The base fee table

is as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 6149

Total assets of licensee Base fee Plus, percent of assets

$0 to $1,500,000 .......................................................................................................... $3,500 +0%.

$1,500,001 to $5,000,000 ............................................................................................ 3,700 +.065% of the amount over $1,500,000.

$5,000,001 to $10,000,000 .......................................................................................... 6,000 +.02% of the amount over $5,000,000.

$10,000,001 to $15,000,000 ........................................................................................ 7,000 +.01% of the amount over $10,000,000.

$15,000,001 to $25,000,000 ........................................................................................ 7,700 +.015% of the amount over $15,000,000.

$25,000,001 to $50,000,000 ........................................................................................ 9,200 +.015% of the amount over $25,000,000.

$50,000,001 to $60,000,000 ........................................................................................ 13,000 +.01% of the amount over $50,000,000.

$60,000,001 and above ............................................................................................... 14,000 +0%.

(c) Adjustments to base fee. Your base

fee, as determined by the table in

paragraph (b) of this section, will be

adjusted (increased or decreased) based

on the following criteria:

(1) If you have no outstanding

regulatory violations at the time of the

commencement of the examination and

SBA did not identify any violations as

a result of the most recent prior

examination, you will receive a 15%

discount on your base fee;

(2) If you were fully responsive to the

letter of notification of examination

(that is, you provided all requested

documents and information within the

time period stipulated in the

notification letter in a complete and

accurate manner, and you prepared and

had available all information requested

by the examiner for on-site review), you

will receive a 10% discount on your

base fee;

(3) If you are organized as a

partnership or limited liability

company, you will pay an additional

charge equal to 5% of your base fee;

(4) If you are a Licensee authorized to

issue Participating Securities, you will

pay an additional charge equal to 10%

of your base fee; and

(5) If you maintain your records/files

in multiple locations (as permitted

under § 107.600(b)), you will pay an

additional charge equal to 10% of your

base fee.

(d) Fee discounts and additions table.

The following table summarizes the

discounts and additions noted in

paragraph (c) of this section:

Examination fee discounts

Amount of

discount—

% of base

examination

fee

Examination fee additions

Amount of

addition—%

of base examination

fee

No prior violations ............................... 15 Partnership or limited liability co .................................................................... 5

Responsiveness .................................. 10 Participating Security Licensee ...................................................................... 10

.................... Financing Records at Multiple Locations ....................................................... 10

(e) Delay fee. If, in the judgment of

SBA, the time required to complete your

examination is delayed due to your lack

of cooperation or the condition of your

records, SBA may assess an additional

fee of up to $500 per day.

Dated: February 4, 1997.

Philip Lader,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–3280 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Part 251

RIN 1010–AC10

Geological and Geophysical (G&G)

Explorations of the Outer Continental

Shelf

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service

(MMS), Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We propose to revise the

regulations that specify how to conduct

G&G exploration and research for oil,

gas, and sulphur in the Outer

Continental Shelf (OCS) under a permit

and to expand the provisions governing

research by requiring everyone

conducting G&G scientific research in

the OCS without a permit to file a notice

with MMS. These revisions respond to

changes in technology and practice.

DATES: MMS will consider all comments

we receive by April 14, 1997. We will

begin reviewing comments then and

may not fully consider comments we

receive after April 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand-carry written

comments to the Department of the

Interior, Minerals Management Service,

Mail Stop 4700, 381 Elden Street,

Herndon, Virginia 20170–4817,

Attention: John V. Mirabella, Chief,

Engineering and Standards Branch.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David R. Zinzer, Geologic Assessment

Branch, (703) 787–1515 or Kumkum

Ray, Engineering and Standards Branch,

(703) 787–1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Outer

Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA)

(43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) is the basis for

MMS regulations to administer G&G

exploration and scientific research

activities in the OCS. Section 11(a) of

the OCSLA provides authority for the

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to

permit G&G exploration activities as

follows:

(a) Approved exploration plans.

(1) Any agency of the United States

and any person authorized by the

Secretary may conduct geological and

geophysical explorations in the outer

Continental Shelf, which do not

interfere with or endanger actual

operations under any lease maintained

or granted pursuant to this Act, and

which are not unduly harmful to aquatic

life in such area.

The regulations at 30 CFR part 251

implement the Secretary’s authority and

prescribe:

(1) MMS requirements for a permit or

the filing of a statement of intent

(notice) to conduct G&G exploration or

scientific research in the OCS,

(2) Operating procedures for

conducting exploration or scientific

research,

(3) Conditions for reimbursing

permittee for certain costs,

(4) Other conditions for conducting

exploration and research, and

(5) Procedures for drilling deep

stratigraphic tests in the OCS.

This proposed rule is especially

timely now. Advances in 3-D seismic