79140 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

74See generally note 41. 

75See 12 U.S.C. 1831u. 

76A ‘‘non-bank’’ refers to an IDI that is a bank for 

purposes of the FDI Act, but that is not a bank for 

purposes of the Bank Holding Company Act 

(BHCA). Non-banks may be owned by parent 

companies that are not subject to the BHCA, and 

therefore may not regulated or supervised by the 

FRB. 

implementing regulations following 

consummation of the merger. 

Significant unresolved AML/CFT 

concerns or uncorrected problems, or an 

outstanding or proposed formal or 

informal enforcement action that 

includes provisions related to AML/ 

CFT, will generally result in unfavorable 

findings on this factor.74 In limited 

cases, sufficient mitigating factors may 

support a favorable finding, such as 

when an acquirer with a strong AML/ 

CFT program replaces a target entity’s 

less than satisfactory program and 

presents an appropriate plan to address 

the target entity’s deficiencies. 

V. Other Matters and Considerations 

Interstate Merger Transactions 

In cases where section 44 of the FDI 

Act applies to an interstate merger 

transaction, the FDIC will ensure that 

the additional requirements and 

restrictions of section 44 are satisfied.75

Applications Involving Non-Banks or 

Banks That Are Not Traditional 

Community Banks 

Historically, most merger transactions 

considered by the FDIC have involved 

traditional community banks. In 

general, traditional community banks 

focus on providing the banking services, 

including loans and core deposits, 

typically relied on by individuals and 

businesses in their local communities. 

However, merger applications may also 

involve non-banks 76 or banks that are 

not traditional community banks, which 

may involve more complexity than a 

traditional community bank in terms of 

its business model, products, services, 

activities, market segments, funding, 

delivery channels, geographic footprint, 

operations, or intercompany or other 

third-party relationships. Merger 

applications where the resulting IDI will 

be a non-bank or not a traditional 

community bank are subject to the same 

statutory factors as any other merger 

application. However, the FDIC will 

appropriately tailor its review to the 

nature, complexity, and scale of the 

entities involved in the transaction and 

the underlying business model. The 

FDIC’s Washington Office or FDIC 

Board reserve authority to act on certain 

merger applications that do not involve 

traditional community banks. 

Applications Involving Operating NonInsured Entities 

Applications may involve an existing 

IDI merging with an operating entity 

that is not FDIC-insured. Operating noninsured entities may vary widely in the 

type of business and activities 

conducted (e.g., credit unions, which 

typically offer products and services 

consistent with a traditional community 

bank, mortgage companies, financing 

companies, payment services firms, or 

other types of entities whose business 

model may have elements more 

consistent with that of a noncommunity bank). Merger applications 

that involve an operating non-insured 

entity are subject to the same statutory 

factors as any other merger application. 

However, in reviewing such 

applications, the FDIC will also 

consider the nature and complexity of 

the non-insured entity, its scale relative 

to the existing IDI, its current condition 

and historical performance, and any 

other relevant information regarding the 

entity’s operations or risk profile. 

The FDIC will review audited 

financial statements (covering at least 

three years, unless the entity’s operating 

history is shorter) and assess any 

deferred tax assets or liabilities, 

intangible assets, contingent liabilities, 

and any recent or pending legal or 

regulatory actions. Further, independent 

appraisals or valuations may be 

necessary to support the projected value 

of any business (or assets) expected to 

be transferred from the operating noninsured entity to the resultant IDI 

through the merger transaction. 

VI. Resources 

FDIC Bank Application Resource page, 

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/ 

applications/resources/ 

FDIC Regional Offices, https://www.fdic.gov/ 

about/contact/directory/region.html 

FDIC Law, Regulations, Related Acts, https:// 

www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/ 

Section 18(c) of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 

1828(c) 

Section 42 of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1831r– 

1 

Section 44 of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1831u 

12 CFR part 303, subparts A and D 

Interagency Policy Statement Concerning 

Branch Closing Notices and Policies, 64 

FR 34845 (June 29, 1999) 

Applications Procedures Manual (APM), 

https://www.fdic.gov/bankexaminations/applications-proceduresmanual 

Section 1 of the FDIC APM, https://

www.fdic.gov/system/files/2024-07/ 

section-01-01-overview.pdf 

Section 4 of the FDIC Application Procedures 

Manual, https://www.fdic.gov/system/ 

files/2024-07/section-04-mergers.pdf 

FDIC Delegations of Authority—Filings, 

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/ 

matrix/index.html 

Interagency Bank Merger Act Form, https:// 

www.fdic.gov/formsdocuments/f6220- 

01.pdf 

Deposit Market Share Reports—Summary of 

Deposits, https://www2.fdic.gov/sod 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 

Competitive Analysis and Structure 

Source Instrument for Depository 

Institutions, https://cassidi.

stlouisfed.org/index 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

By order of the Board of Directors. 

Dated at Washington, DC, on September 

17, 2024. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–22189 Filed 9–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 126 

[Public Notice: 12515] 

RIN 1400–AF87 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Prohibited 

Exports, Imports, and Sales to or From 

Certain Countries—Cyprus 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State is 

amending the International Traffic in 

Arms Regulations to reflect current 

defense trade policy toward Cyprus. 

DATES: This rule is effective on October 

1, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Hershel Tamboli, Foreign Affairs 

Officer, Office of Defense Trade Controls 

Policy, U.S. Department of State, 

telephone (771) 204–0008; email 

DDTCCustomerService@state.gov. 

ATTN: Regulatory Change, ITAR 

Section 126.1 Cyprus Country Policy 

Update. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department of State (the Department) 

amends section 126.1 of the 

International Traffic in Arms 

Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts 120 

through 130) to specify that the 

Republic of Cyprus’ status as a 

proscribed destination is suspended 

from October 1, 2024, through 

September 30, 2025. This action 

continues the Department’s current 

policy, which originally lifted the arms 

embargo to the Republic of Cyprus, 

under section 126.1 of the ITAR, on 

October 1, 2022. 

Specifically, section 1250A(d) of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 79141 

Fiscal Year 2020 (Pub. L. 116–92) (2020 

NDAA) and section 205(d) of the 

Eastern Mediterranean Security and 

Energy Partnership Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 

116–94, Div. J.) (EMSEPA) provide that 

the policy of denial for exports, 

reexports, and transfers of defense 

articles on the United States Munitions 

List to the Republic of Cyprus shall 

remain in place unless the President 

determines and certifies to the 

appropriate congressional committees 

not less than annually that: (A) the 

Government of the Republic of Cyprus 

is continuing to cooperate with the 

United States Government in efforts to 

implement reforms on anti-money 

laundering regulations and financial 

regulatory oversight; and (B) the 

Government of the Republic of Cyprus 

has made and is continuing to take the 

steps necessary to deny Russian military 

vessels access to ports for refueling and 

servicing. 

On April 14, 2020, the President 

delegated to the Secretary of State the 

functions and authorities vested by the 

2020 NDAA and the EMSEPA (85 FR 

35797, June 12, 2020). On August 19, 

2024, utilizing these authorities, the 

Secretary of State certified to the 

appropriate congressional committees 

that the Republic of Cyprus meets the 

statutory requirements to remove the 

policy of denial for exports, reexports, 

and transfers of defense articles to the 

Republic of Cyprus for fiscal year 2025. 

The Secretary of State further approved 

the suspension of the policy of denial 

for exports, reexports, and transfers of 

defense articles and defense services to 

the Republic of Cyprus for fiscal year 

2025. In conjunction with this action, 

the Secretary of State also suspended 

the policy of denial for retransfers and 

temporary imports destined for or 

originating in the Republic of Cyprus 

and brokering activities involving the 

Republic of Cyprus for fiscal year 2025. 

As a result of this certification, certain 

exemptions to licensing requirements 

continue to be available for exports, 

reexports, retransfers, and temporary 

imports destined for or originating in 

the Republic of Cyprus and brokering 

activities involving the Republic of 

Cyprus, provided the conditions for use 

of those exemptions are met. 

Applications for licenses and other 

authorizations submitted to the 

Directorate of Defense Trade Controls 

involving the Republic of Cyprus and 

nationals of the Republic of Cyprus are 

subject to case-by-case review. 

Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

Administrative Procedure Act 

This rulemaking involves a military or 

foreign affairs function of the United 

States under 5 U.S.C. 553(a). As the 

provisions of section 553 do not apply 

to this rulemaking, the Department is 

publishing this rule with a specified 

effective date and without a request for 

public comment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Since this rule is exempt from the 

notice-and-comment rulemaking 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not 

require analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This rulemaking does not involve a 

mandate that will result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any year and it will not significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions were deemed 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 

Congressional Review Act 

It is the view of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs that 

this rulemaking is not a major rule 

under the criteria of 5 U.S.C. 804. This 

rule will not increase costs or prices and 

should have no adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises in 

domestic and export markets. The 

Department does not expect this rule to 

have an annual effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more. 

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132 

This rulemaking will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this amendment 

does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to require consultations or 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. The 

regulations implementing Executive 

Order 12372 regarding 

intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities do not 

apply to this rulemaking. 

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Executive Orders 12866 (as amended 

by Executive Order 14094) and 13563 

direct agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributed impacts, and equity). 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. Because the scope of this rule 

implements a governmental policy 

expanding defense trade with a country, 

and does not impose additional 

regulatory requirements or obligations, 

the Department believes costs associated 

with this rule will be minimal. This rule 

has been designated as a significant 

regulatory action by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

under Executive Order 12866, as 

amended. 

Executive Order 12988 

The Department of State has reviewed 

this rulemaking in light of Executive 

Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, 

minimize litigation, establish clear legal 

standards, and reduce burden. 

Executive Order 13175 

The Department of State has 

determined that this rulemaking will 

not have tribal implications, will not 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on Indian tribal governments, and 

will not preempt tribal law. 

Accordingly, the requirements of 

Executive Order 13175 do not apply to 

this rulemaking. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rulemaking does not impose or 

revise any information collections 

subject to 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35. 

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 126 

Arms and munitions, Exports. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter 

M, part 126 is amended as follows: 

PART 126—GENERAL POLICIES AND 

PROVISIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 126 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 22 U.S.C. 287c, 2651a, 2752, 

2753, 2776, 2778, 2779, 2779a, 2780, 2791, 

2797; Sec. 1225, Pub. L. 108–375, 118 Stat. 

2091; Sec. 7045, Pub. L. 112–74, 125 Stat. 

1232; Sec. 1250A, Pub. L 116–92, 133 Stat. 

1665; Sec. 205, Pub. L. 116–94, 133 Stat. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
79142 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 188 / Friday, September 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

3052; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129, 3 CFR, 2013 

Comp., p. 223. 

■ 2. Amend § 126.1 by revising 

paragraph (r)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 126.1 Prohibited exports, imports, and 

sales to or from certain countries. 

* * * * * 

(r) * * * 

(2) From October 1, 2024, through 

September 30, 2025, the policy of denial 

and the status of Cyprus as a proscribed 

destination is suspended. 

* * * * * 

Bonnie D. Jenkins, 

Under Secretary, Arms Control and 

International Security, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21849 Filed 9–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2024–0868] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Monongahela River Mile 

Markers 0–43.5, Allegheny River Mile 

Markers 0–14.5, and Ohio River Mile 

Markers 0–28.5 and 89–93, Pittsburgh, 

PA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing four security zones for 

certain navigable waters on the 

Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio 

Rivers to prevent waterside threats for 

persons under the protection of the 

United States Secret Service (USSS). 

These security zones will be enforced 

intermittently and when persons under 

USSS protection are in the area. This 

rule prohibits vessels and people from 

entering or remaining in the zones 

unless specifically exempt under the 

provisions of this rule or granted 

specific permission from the Captain of 

the Port Pittsburgh. The regulation will 

enhance the safety and security of 

persons and property, while 

minimizing, to the extent possible, the 

impact on commerce and legitimate 

waterway use. 

DATES: This rule is effective without 

actual notice from September 27, 2024 

through November 30, 2024. For the 

purpose of enforcement, actual notice 

will be used from September 23, 2024, 

until September 27, 2024. This rule will 

be enforced when persons under USSS 

protection are in the vicinity of one of 

the security zone areas. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2024– 

0868 in the search box and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Marine Science Technician First 

Class Brett Lanzel, Marine Safety Unit 

Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 

206–815–6624, email brett.j.lanzel@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COTP Captain of the Port Pittsburgh 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

On seven separate occasions since 

February 2024, the COTP has 

established temporary security zones 

encompassing certain U.S. navigable 

waters on the Allegheny, Monongahela 

and Ohio River. These security zones 

were established and enforced at the 

request of the U.S. Secret Service 

(USSS) to support security measures 

required during visits by high-ranking 

United States government officials. 

There is a high likelihood that 

between September 23, 2024, and 

November 30, 2024, there will be 

several visits to the Pittsburgh, PA area 

by persons under USSS protection. Most 

of these visits will occur with less than 

two weeks’ notice. Therefore, the Coast 

Guard is establishing these security 

zones to notify the public that when 

these visits occur, the Coast Guard may 

enforce one or more security zones to 

ensure the safety of the protected 

persons, vessels, bridges, and the public 

while the protected persons transit 

bridges or are at waterfront facilities. 

The security zones will be enforced only 

when protected persons are in the area. 

The Coast Guard will provide local 

notice for each instance the security 

zones will be enforced. 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary rule under the authority in 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B). This statutory 

provision authorizes an agency to issue 

a rule without prior notice and 

opportunity to comment when the 

agency for good cause finds that those 

procedures are ‘‘impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the 

Coast Guard finds that good cause exists 

for not publishing a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this 

rule because it is impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest to delay 

the effective date of this rule due to the 

short time period between event 

planners notifying the Coast Guard and 

the effective date needed for the security 

zones. 

It is impracticable because this 

security zone must be established by 

September 23, 2024, to provide for the 

security of life on the navigable waters 

during anticipated dignitary visits, and 

we lack sufficient time to provide a 

reasonable comment period and then 

consider those comments before issuing 

this rule. And publishing an NPRM is 

contrary to the public interest because 

waiting for the NPRM process would 

delay the establishment of the security 

zone until after the date of anticipated 

dignitary visits. 

Additionally, under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for making this rule 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. As 

previously mentioned above, delaying 

the effective date of this rule would be 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest because action is needed by 

September 23, 2024, to ensure the 

security of the of life on the navigable 

waters during a dignitary visit. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70051 and 

70124. The Captain of the Port 

Pittsburgh (COTP) has determined that 

four security zone are needed to protect 

various visiting dignitaries, persons, and 

property during multiple anticipated 

visits between September 23, 2024, until 

November 30, 2024. This rule is 

necessary to provide waterside security 

and protection when persons under 

USSS protection are in these areas. 

These security zones will protect both 

the persons under USSS protection, 

vessels and certain shoreside facilities, 

and the public from potential hazards 

and threats. 

IV. Discussion of the Rule 

This rule establishes four security 

zones that will be enforced at one (1) 

mile segments for up to six (6) hours 

each during various dignitary bridge 

crossings or waterside events from 

September 23, 2024, through November 

30, 2024. The Coast Guard will provide 

local notice for each instance of 

enforcement. This rule is necessary to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1