Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 88129 

4Available at https://www.mcc.gov/resources/ 

doc/guide-to-program-surveys-fy23. 

5Available at https://www.mcc.gov/who-weselect/suspension-or-termination. 

responsible for compact 

implementation, monitoring, and 

evaluation. MCC published a Guide to 

the Program Surveys 4 regarding the 

information collected and assessed for 

any country with an existing or prior 

compact or threshold program to ensure 

transparency about the type of 

information the Board considers 

regarding a country’s performance on 

MCC programs, as relevant. The Board 

also considered a country’s commitment 

to further sector reform, as well as 

evidence of improved scorecard policy 

performance. 

In addition, this is the eighth year in 

which the Board considered an 

explicitly higher bar for countries close 

to the upper end of the candidate pool. 

The Board looked closely—in such 

cases—at a country’s access to 

development financing, the nature of 

poverty in the country, and its policy 

performance. 

Countries Newly Selected for Compact 

Assistance 

Using the criteria described above, 

one candidate country under section 

606(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 7705(a) was 

newly selected as eligible for assistance 

under section 607 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 

7706): Cabo Verde. Cabo Verde is 

invited by MCC to develop a compact 

for the purposes of regional economic 

integration. 

Cabo Verde: Cabo Verde has 

consistently passed the scorecard for 

over a decade and has some of the 

highest Control of Corruption and 

Democratic Rights scores of any MCC 

partner. The government was a 

committed partner during its prior MCC 

programs and has consistently 

expressed deep interest in renewing its 

partnership with MCC. While Cabo 

Verde has made strides in reducing 

poverty, recent progress has been 

hampered by global events and external 

shocks. MCC’s Board selected Cabo 

Verde for a regional compact as a result 

of its strong commitment to democracy, 

its economic development needs and 

lingering poverty, and the potential 

opportunities to strengthen regional 

economic integration and trade in West 

Africa with a committed and engaged 

former MCC partner. 

Countries Selected To Continue 

Compact Development 

Six of the countries selected as 

eligible for compact assistance for FY 

2024 were previously selected for FY 

2023. Coˆte d’Ivoire (regional), Senegal 

(regional), Sierra Leone, The Gambia, 

Togo, and Zambia were selected to 

continue developing compacts. 

Selection of these countries for FY 2024 

was based on an assessment of their 

policy performance since their prior 

selection and their progress in 

developing programs with MCC. 

Countries Selected To Receive 

Threshold Program Assistance 

The Board selected Tanzania and the 

Philippines to receive threshold 

program assistance for FY 2024, 

leveraging MCC’s new authority to 

pursue threshold programs after 

compacts for countries that have 

experienced set-backs, but are now on a 

positive governance trajectory. 

Tanzania: A former MCC compact 

partner, Tanzania offers MCC the 

opportunity to engage with a country 

that faces significant challenges to 

economic growth and that is 

demonstrating a trajectory of reform. 

While Tanzania does not pass the MCC 

scorecard in FY 2024 due to not passing 

the Democratic Rights ‘‘hard hurdle,’’ it 

passes the Control of Corruption ‘‘hard 

hurdle,’’ and passes 15 of 20 indicators 

overall. Since taking office in 2021, 

President Hassan has taken some steps 

to strengthen democratic governance, 

including restoring some media 

freedoms and political rights for 

opposition groups and initiating a 

process to identify other key democratic 

and constitutional reforms. By selecting 

Tanzania for a threshold program, MCC 

will work with the government to 

undertake policy and institutional 

reforms to address the country’s 

development needs while also 

encouraging further democratic progress 

and the advancement of human rights. 

Philippines: A former MCC compact 

partner, the Philippines passes 11 of 20 

indicators on the MCC scorecard in FY 

2024, including both Democratic Rights 

indicators, but does not pass the 

scorecard because it fails the Control of 

Corruption indicator in the 50th 

percentile (countries must score above 

the 50th percentile to pass). President 

Ferdinand Marcos Jr., elected in May 

2022, has committed to advancing 

critical reforms, pledged to increase 

transparency, and strengthened judicial 

independence and the prosecution of 

human rights violations. By selecting 

the Philippines for a threshold program, 

MCC can support the government to 

undertake policy and institutional 

reforms to address the country’s 

development needs while also 

encouraging further progress on 

advancing labor and human rights and 

combatting corruption. 

Country Selected To Continue 

Developing a Threshold Program 

The Board selected Mauritania to 

continue developing a threshold 

program. Selection of Mauritania for FY 

2024 was based on its continued 

commitment to strengthening its policy 

performance since its prior selection, 

particularly in its fight against 

trafficking in persons and hereditary 

slavery, and its progress toward 

developing its threshold program. 

Ongoing Review of Partner Countries’ 

Policy Performance 

The Board emphasized the need for 

all partner countries to maintain or 

improve their policy performance. If it 

is determined during compact 

implementation that a country has 

demonstrated a significant policy 

reversal, MCC can hold it accountable 

by applying MCC’s Suspension and 

Termination Policy.5

(Authority: 22 U.S.C. 7707(d)(2)) 

Dated: December 15, 2023. 

Peter E. Jaffe, 

Vice President, General Counsel, and 

Corporate Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28044 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9211–03–P 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

ADMINISTRATION 

[NARA–23–0015; NARA–2024–009] 

Records Schedules; Availability and 

Request for Comments 

AGENCY: National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability of 

proposed records schedules; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA) 

publishes notice of certain Federal 

agency requests for records disposition 

authority (records schedules). We 

publish notice in the Federal Register 

and on regulations.gov for records 

schedules in which agencies propose to 

dispose of records they no longer need 

to conduct agency business. We invite 

public comments on such records 

schedules. 

DATES: We must receive responses on 

the schedules listed in this notice by 

February 5, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: To view a records schedule 

in this notice, or submit a comment on 

one, use the following address: https:// 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
88130 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 

www.regulations.gov/docket/NARA-23- 

0015/document. This is a direct link to 

the schedules posted in the docket for 

this notice on regulations.gov. You may 

submit comments by the following 

method: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. On the 

website, enter either of the numbers 

cited at the top of this notice into the 

search field. This will bring you to the 

docket for this notice, in which we have 

posted the records schedules open for 

comment. Each schedule has a 

‘comment’ button so you can comment 

on that specific schedule. For more 

information on regulations.gov and on 

submitting comments, see their FAQs at 

https://www.regulations.gov/faq. 

If you are unable to comment via 

regulations.gov, you may email us at 

request.schedule@nara.gov for 

instructions on submitting your 

comment. You must cite the control 

number of the schedule you wish to 

comment on. You can find the control 

number for each schedule in 

parentheses at the end of each 

schedule’s entry in the list at the end of 

this notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Richardson, Strategy and 

Performance Division, by email at 

regulation_comments@nara.gov or at 

301–837–2902. For information about 

records schedules, contact Records 

Management Operations by email at 

request.schedule@nara.gov or by phone 

at 301–837–1799. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comment Procedures 

We are publishing notice of records 

schedules in which agencies propose to 

dispose of records they no longer need 

to conduct agency business. We invite 

public comments on these records 

schedules, as required by 44 U.S.C. 

3303a(a), and list the schedules at the 

end of this notice by agency and 

subdivision requesting disposition 

authority. 

In addition, this notice lists the 

organizational unit(s) accumulating the 

records or states that the schedule has 

agency-wide applicability. It also 

provides the control number assigned to 

each schedule, which you will need if 

you submit comments on that schedule. 

We have uploaded the records 

schedules and accompanying appraisal 

memoranda to the regulations.gov 

docket for this notice as ‘‘other’’ 

documents. Each records schedule 

contains a full description of the records 

at the file unit level as well as their 

proposed disposition. The appraisal 

memorandum for the schedule includes 

information about the records. 

We will post comments, including 

any personal information and 

attachments, to the public docket 

unchanged. Because comments are 

public, you are responsible for ensuring 

that you do not include any confidential 

or other information that you or a third 

party may not wish to be publicly 

posted. If you want to submit a 

comment with confidential information 

or cannot otherwise use the 

regulations.gov portal, you may contact 

request.schedule@nara.gov for 

instructions on submitting your 

comment. 

We will consider all comments 

submitted by the posted deadline and 

consult as needed with the Federal 

agency seeking the disposition 

authority. After considering comments, 

we may or may not make changes to the 

proposed records schedule. The 

schedule is then sent for final approval 

by the Archivist of the United States. 

After the schedule is approved, we will 

post on regulations.gov a ‘‘Consolidated 

Reply’’ summarizing the comments, 

responding to them, and noting any 

changes we made to the proposed 

schedule. You may elect at 

regulations.gov to receive updates on 

the docket, including an alert when we 

post the Consolidated Reply, whether or 

not you submit a comment. If you have 

a question, you can submit it as a 

comment, and can also submit any 

concerns or comments you would have 

to a possible response to the question. 

We will address these items in 

consolidated replies along with any 

other comments submitted on that 

schedule. 

We will post schedules on our 

website in the Records Control Schedule 

(RCS) Repository, at https://

www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/rcs, 

after the Archivist approves them. The 

RCS contains all schedules approved 

since 1973. 

Background 

Each year, Federal agencies create 

billions of records. To control this 

accumulation, agency records managers 

prepare schedules proposing retention 

periods for records and submit these 

schedules for NARA’s approval. Once 

approved by NARA, records schedules 

provide mandatory instructions on what 

happens to records when no longer 

needed for current Government 

business. The records schedules 

authorize agencies to preserve records of 

continuing value in the National 

Archives or to destroy, after a specified 

period, records lacking continuing 

administrative, legal, research, or other 

value. Some schedules are 

comprehensive and cover all the records 

of an agency or one of its major 

subdivisions. Most schedules, however, 

cover records of only one office or 

program or a few series of records. Many 

of these update previously approved 

schedules, and some include records 

proposed as permanent. 

Agencies may not destroy Federal 

records without the approval of the 

Archivist of the United States. The 

Archivist grants this approval only after 

thorough consideration of the records’ 

administrative use by the agency of 

origin, the rights of the Government and 

of private people directly affected by the 

Government’s activities, and whether or 

not the records have historical or other 

value. Public review and comment on 

these records schedules is part of the 

Archivist’s consideration process. 

Schedules Pending 

1. Department of Defense, Defense 

Logistics Agency, Records related to 

Transportation and DLA Energy 

Research (DAA–0361–2021–0002). 

2. Department of Defense, Defense 

Logistics Agency, Records related to 

Production and Manufacturing (DAA– 

0361–2021–0019). 

3. Department of Defense, Office of 

the Secretary of Defense, Conflict 

Records Research Collection (DAA– 

0330–2023–0001). 

4. Department of Homeland Security, 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services, G–1580 USCIS Citizenship 

Ambassadors Initiative (DAA–0566– 

2022–0005). 

5. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 

2.2 Employee Management Records 

Revision (DAA–GRS–2023–0002). 

6. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 

2.3 Employee Relations Records 

Revision (DAA–GRS–2023–0003). 

7. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 

2.4 Employee Compensation and 

Benefits Records Revision (DAA–GRS– 

2023–0004). 

8. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 

2.6 Employee Training Records Revision 

(DAA–GRS–2023–0005). 

9. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 

5.4 Facility, Equipment, Vehicle, 

Property, and Supply Records Revision 

(DAA–GRS–2023–0006). 

10. National Archives and Records 

Administration, Government-wide, GRS 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 88131 

1See, e.g., 12 U.S.C. 1783(a) (making the Share 

Insurance Fund available ‘‘for such administrative 

and other expenses incurred in carrying out the 

purpose of [Subchapter II of the FCU Act] as [the 

Board] may determine to be proper.’’). 

2 12 U.S.C. 1755(a) (‘‘In accordance with rules 

prescribed by the Board, each Federal credit union 

shall pay to the Administration an annual operating 

fee which may be composed of one or more charges 

identified as to the function or functions for which 

assessed.’’). 

3 12 U.S.C. 1783(a) (‘‘Money in the fund shall be 

available upon requisition by the Board, without 

fiscal year limitation, for making payments of 

insurance under section 1787 of this title, for 

providing assistance and making expenditures 

under section 1788 of this title in connection with 

the liquidation or threatened liquidation of insured 

credit unions, and for such administrative and 

other expenses incurred in carrying out the 

purposes of this subchapter as it may determine to 

be proper.’’). 

4 12 U.S.C. 1755. 

5 12 U.S.C. 1755(d). 

6Public Law 91–468; 12 U.S.C. 1783. 

7 General Accounting Office, Examination of 

Financial Statements of the Nat’l Credit Union 

Admin. (Sept. 18, 1973), https://www.gao.gov/ 

assets/b-164031%284%29-096067.pdf. 

5.6 Security Management Records 

Revision (DAA–GRS–2023–0007). 

Laurence Brewer, 

Chief Records Officer for the U.S. 

Government. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27958 Filed 12–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION 

ADMINISTRATION 

[NCUA–2023–0142] 

Request for Comment Regarding 

Overhead Transfer Rate Methodology 

AGENCY: National Credit Union 

Administration (NCUA). 

ACTION: Request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) is 

inviting comment on the methodology 

used to determine the Overhead 

Transfer Rate (OTR). The Board applies 

the OTR to the NCUA’s operating 

budget to determine the portion of the 

budget that will be funded from the 

National Credit Union Share Insurance 

Fund (Share Insurance Fund). In 

response to industry recommendations, 

the Board has provided more detail, 

clarity, and transparency so the public 

can better understand the OTR 

methodology. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 20, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit written 

comments, identified by Docket ID 

NCUA–2023–0142, by any of the 

following methods (Please send 

comments by one method only): 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

for Docket ID NCUA–2023–0142. 

Mail: Address to Melane ConyersAusbrooks, Secretary of the Board, 

National Credit Union Administration, 

1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia 

22314–3428. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

mailing address. 

Public Inspection: You may view all 

submitted public comments on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov except for those 

we cannot post for technical reasons. 

The NCUA will not edit or remove any 

identifying or contact information from 

the public comments submitted. If you 

cannot access public comments on the 

internet, you may contact the NCUA for 

alternative access by calling (703) 518– 

6360 or emailing EIMail@ncua.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Ward or Sarah Savoie, Risk 

Officers, Office of Examination and 

Insurance at (703) 819–1770 or (571) 

451–7204; or by mail at National Credit 

Union Administration, 1775 Duke 

Street, Alexandria, VA 22314–3428. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board 

is inviting comment on the NCUA’s 

methodology to determine the OTR. The 

Board applies the OTR to the NCUA’s 

operating budget to determine the 

portion of the NCUA’s budget that will 

be funded from the Share Insurance 

Fund. In response to industry 

recommendations, this request for 

comment provides added detail, clarity, 

and transparency to help the public 

better understand the NCUA’s 

methodology to calculate the OTR. No 

changes to the existing OTR 

methodology are being proposed as part 

of this request for comment. The added 

transparency and clarity do not 

constitute a change in methodology. 

I. Background 

The NCUA charters, regulates, and 

insures deposits in federal credit unions 

(FCUs) and insures deposits in federally 

insured state-chartered credit unions 

(FISCUs) that have their shares insured 

through the Share Insurance Fund. To 

cover the NCUA’s task-related expenses, 

the Board approves a two-year budget 

and revisits the budget each year. The 

FCU Act provides two primary sources 

to fund the budget: (1) requisitions from 

the Share Insurance Fund, referred to as 

the OTR; 1 and (2) operating fees 

charged against FCUs.2

The first budget funding source listed 

above, the OTR, represents the formula 

the NCUA uses to allocate insurancerelated expenses to the Share Insurance 

Fund under Title II of the FCU Act. 

There are two statutory provisions that 

outline the Board’s discretion regarding 

the OTR. First, expenses funded from 

the Share Insurance Fund must carry 

out Title II’s purposes, which relate to 

share insurance.3 Second, the NCUA 

may not fund its entire budget through 

charges to the Share Insurance Fund.4

The NCUA has not imposed regulatory 

limitations in its discretion for 

determining the OTR. 

The second budget funding source is 

operating fees assessed to FCUs. 

Operating fees are required for FCUs 

under 12 U.S.C. 1755 ‘‘and may be 

expended by the Board to defray the 

expenses incurred in carrying out the 

provisions of the FCU Act, including the 

examination and supervision of 

FCUs.’’ 5 The Board uses the following 

OTR methodology to determine an 

appropriate division of expenses 

between the operating fee and the OTR. 

II. Historical Practice in Determining 

the Overhead Transfer Rate 

The Share Insurance Fund was 

established under Title II of the FCU Act 

on October 19, 1970.6 Section 1783(a) of 

the FCU Act authorizes the Board to use 

the Share Insurance Fund to pay for 

such administrative and other expenses 

incurred in carrying out this title’s 

purposes as it deems proper. 

In 1973, a Government Accountability 

Office audit recommended the NCUA 

adopt a method of allocating costs 

between the operating fund and the 

newly formed Share Insurance Fund.7

Between 1973 and 1980, various cost 

allocation methods were employed, 

including direct charges to the Share 

Insurance Fund for insurance expenses 

such as costs to liquidate or merge 

credit unions and examiner time spent 

conducting safety and soundness 

examinations. Starting in 1981, the OTR 

ranged between 30 and 34 percent and 

stayed in that range through 1984. 

From 1985 through 1994, the NCUA 

conducted annual examiner time 

surveys (ETS) to determine an 

appropriate factor for apportioning the 

agency’s total operating expenses. The 

survey results supported a transfer rate 

between 50.1 percent and 60.4 percent 

for insurance-related activities; 

however, the Board maintained the OTR 

at 50 percent. 

After the 1994 survey, the Board 

approved surveys that were conducted 

every three years. Three-year surveys 

covered fiscal years 1995 through 1997 

and fiscal years 1998 through 2000. 

During that time, the OTR was kept at 

50 percent. The Board voted to resume 

the annual ETS in 2000 and expanded 

the survey to include more examiners. 

The 2000 survey results supported an 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1