[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 1, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79785-79789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22393]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2024 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 79785]]



FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

12 CFR Part 1227

RIN 2590-AB23


Suspended Counterparty Program

AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On July 21, 2023, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) 
published a proposed rule to amend its Suspended Counterparty Program 
(SCP) regulation by expanding the categories of covered misconduct on 
which a suspension could be based to include sanctions arising from 
certain forms of civil enforcement. After reviewing the comments and 
reconsidering the proposed rule's substantive and procedural 
amendments, FHFA has determined that a number of material changes to 
the rule are necessary. Therefore, it is publishing this second 
proposed rule.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 2, 2024.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by regulatory 
information number (RIN) 2590-AB23, by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Agency Website: https://www.fhfa.gov/regulation/federal-register?comments=open.
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. If you submit your 
comment to the Federal eRulemaking Portal, please also send it by email 
to FHFA at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d0f383a1e3230303833292e1d3b353b3c733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="50023537133f3d3d353e242310363836317e373f26">[email protected]</span></a> to ensure timely receipt by FHFA. 
Include the following information in the subject line of your 
submission: Comments/RIN 2590-AB23.
    <bullet> Hand Delivered/Courier: The hand delivery address is: 
Clinton Jones, General Counsel, Attention: Comments/RIN 2590-AB23, 
Federal Housing Finance Agency, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 
20219. Deliver the package at the Seventh Street entrance Guard Desk, 
First Floor, on business days between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
    <bullet> U.S. Mail, United Parcel Service, Federal Express, or 
Other Mail Service: The mailing address for comments is: Clinton Jones, 
General Counsel, Attention: Comments/RIN 2590-AB23, Federal Housing 
Finance Agency, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 20219. Please 
note that all mail sent to FHFA via U.S. Mail is routed through a 
national irradiation facility, a process that may delay delivery by 
approximately two weeks. For any time-sensitive correspondence, please 
plan accordingly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Heidel, Assistant General 
Counsel, Office of General Counsel, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e1aa8093848fcfa9848885848da187898780cf868e97"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2a614b584f4404624f434e4f466a4c424c4b044d455c">[email protected]</span></a>, (202) 738-
7753; or Joseph Germany, Honors Counsel, Office of General Counsel, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aae0c5d9cfdac284edcfd8c7cbc4d3eaccc2cccb84cdc5dc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6c26031f091c04422b091e010d02152c0a040a0d420b031a">[email protected]</span></a>, (202) 649-3643. These are not toll-free 
numbers. For TTY/TRS users with hearing and speech disabilities, dial 
711 and ask to be connected to any of the contact numbers above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Comments

    FHFA invites comments on all aspects of this second proposed rule, 
and will take all comments into consideration before issuing a final 
rule. Comments will be posted to the electronic rulemaking docket on 
the FHFA public website at http://www.fhfa.gov, except as described 
below. Commenters should submit only information that the commenter 
wishes to make available publicly. FHFA may post only a single 
representative example of identical or substantially identical 
comments, and in such cases will generally identify the number of 
identical or substantially identical comments represented by the posted 
example. FHFA may, in its discretion, redact or refrain from posting 
all or any portion of any comment that contains content that is 
obscene, vulgar, profane, or threatens harm. All comments, including 
those that are redacted or not posted, will be retained in their 
original form in FHFA's internal rulemaking file and considered as 
required by all applicable laws. Commenters that would like FHFA to 
consider any portion of their comment exempt from disclosure on the 
basis that it contains trade secrets, or financial, confidential or 
proprietary data or information, should follow the procedures in 
section IV.D. of FHFA's Policy on Communications with Outside Parties 
in Connection with FHFA Rulemakings, see https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Ex-Parte-Communications-Public-Policy_3-5-19.pdf. FHFA cannot guarantee that such data or information, or the 
identity of the commenter, will remain confidential if disclosure is 
sought pursuant to an applicable statute or regulation. See 12 CFR 
1202.8, 12 CFR 1214.2, and FHFA's FOIA Reference Guide https://www.fhfa.gov/about/foia-reference-guide for additional information.

II. Background

A. The SCP Regulation

    The SCP requires a regulated entity--the Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
Corporation (Freddie Mac) and any affiliate thereof, the Federal 
National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and any affiliate thereof 
(individually, an Enterprise and together, the Enterprises), and any 
Federal Home Loan Bank (Bank) (hereinafter the Enterprises and Banks 
are collectively referred to as the regulated entities)--to submit a 
report to FHFA if it becomes aware that an individual or institution 
with which it does business has been found within the past three years 
to have committed certain forms of misconduct. FHFA may issue proposed 
and final suspension orders based on the reports it has received from 
the regulated entities or based on other information. FHFA offers the 
affected individual or institution and the regulated entities an 
opportunity to respond to any proposed suspension order. FHFA may issue 
a final suspension order if FHFA determines that the underlying 
misconduct is of a type that would be likely to cause significant 
financial or reputational harm to a regulated entity. Final suspension 
orders direct the regulated entities to cease or refrain from doing 
business with the suspended counterparties, subject to terms as 
provided in the orders.
    The reporting that is required under the SCP regulation is 
authorized by sections 1313, 1313B, and 1314 of the Federal Housing 
Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended 
(Safety and Soundness Act).

[[Page 79786]]

Section 1314(a) of the Safety and Soundness Act authorizes FHFA to 
require the regulated entities to submit regular reports on their 
activities and operations, as the Director considers appropriate. See 
12 U.S.C. 4513, 4514b, and 4514(a).
    The orders issued under the SCP regulation fall within FHFA's 
general supervisory authority over the regulated entities, specifically 
its authority under sections 1313, 1313B, and 1319G of the Safety and 
Soundness Act. Section 1313B of the Safety and Soundness Act authorizes 
FHFA to establish standards, by regulation or guideline, for each 
regulated entity regarding prudential management of risks. See 12 
U.S.C. 4513b. The Director may also require by order that the regulated 
entities take any action that will best carry out the purposes of that 
section. See 12 U.S.C. 4513(b)(2)(B)(iii). Section 1319G(a) of the 
Safety and Soundness Act authorizes FHFA to issue any regulations, 
guidelines, or orders necessary to ensure that the purposes of the 
Safety and Soundness Act and the Enterprise charter acts are 
accomplished. See 12 U.S.C. 4526(a). Finally, section 1313(a)(2) of the 
Safety and Soundness Act authorizes FHFA to exercise such incidental 
powers as may be necessary in the supervision and regulation of each 
regulated entity. See 12 U.S.C. 4513(a)(2).
    FHFA established the SCP regulation in June 2012 by letter to the 
regulated entities. The requirements and procedures for the SCP 
regulation were generally codified at 12 CFR part 1227 by the interim 
final rule.\1\ FHFA amended the SCP regulation via final rule.\2\ The 
SCP does not replace or relieve the regulated entities' duties and 
responsibilities to manage their operations in a safe and sound manner. 
Each regulated entity must adopt and implement prudent measures to 
identify areas where fraud or financial misconduct may present a risk 
to the regulated entity and take all appropriate measures to address 
any such risks.\3\ These measures include establishing third-party 
provider contractual relationships which can be terminated by the 
regulated entity for cause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 78 FR 63007 (Oct. 23, 2013).
    \2\ 80 FR 79675 (Dec. 23, 2015).
    \3\ See 78 FR 63007, 63008 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The First Proposed Rule

    On July 21, 2023, FHFA published in the Federal Register a proposed 
rule (first proposed rule) to amend the SCP regulation by including 
certain orders or judgments in civil matters under the definition of 
``conviction'' at Sec.  1227.2 and by adding new Sec. Sec.  1227.11 and 
1227.12, which would have created a process for imposing immediate 
suspensions and a procedure for requesting their vacation. The first 
proposed rule would have expanded the categories of covered misconduct 
on which a suspension could be based to include sanctions arising from 
certain forms of civil enforcement. Additionally, the first proposed 
rule would have added ``knowingly committed a material breach of 
contract'' to the definition of ``conviction'' in addition to the 
offenses enumerated in the definition of ``covered misconduct.'' 
Finally, where a suspension was based on an administrative sanction, 
the first proposed rule also would have eliminated the requirement that 
a final suspension order be preceded by a proposed suspension order. 
The 60-day comment period closed on September 19, 2023.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 88 FR 47077 (July 21, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FHFA received eleven unique comment letters in response to the 
first proposed rule. Seven of the comment letters expressed strong 
opposition to the proposed rule. Six of these commenters expressed 
concern with the substantive changes in the first proposed rule: that 
it was overly broad; granted FHFA with undue discretion; and risked 
capture of relatively minor misconduct that would not pose a risk to 
the regulated entities' safety and soundness. Six commenters expressed 
concern with the due process implications of the proposed rule's 
authorization of immediate suspension in certain circumstances.
    Four commenters expressed support for the first proposed rule. 
These commenters supported the expansion of the definition of covered 
misconduct. Commenters in support of the rule viewed the expanded 
definition as increasing accountability and suggested that further 
expansion would be beneficial. However, two of these commenters still 
urged FHFA to clarify what types of misconduct would give rise to 
suspension under the first proposed rule. One commenter supported the 
first proposed rule's elimination of the requirement for a proposed 
suspension where the suspension was based upon administrative 
sanctions, due to the administrative burden imposed by the proposed 
suspension requirement.

III. The Second Proposed Rule

    Following the close of the comment period on the first proposed 
rule, FHFA reviewed all of the comments received and considered the 
issues raised by the commenters, including how to capture misconduct 
posing a risk to the regulated entities' safety and soundness while 
excluding relatively de minimis actions. As a result, FHFA concluded 
that the current requirement for a proposed suspension should be 
retained in all cases instead of authorizing immediate suspension in 
certain cases. FHFA also determined that the substantive changes to the 
rule should be more narrowly tailored, both to provide greater clarity 
and to avoid capture of relatively minor misconduct that does not pose 
a risk to the safety and soundness of the regulated entities. FHFA 
believes that these changes represent a significant enough departure 
from the approach taken in the first proposed rule to warrant the 
publication of this second proposed rule, which supersedes the first 
proposed rule.
    In this second proposed rule, no changes would be made to the 
current regulation's procedural requirement that a proposed suspension 
is first issued, maintaining counterparties' ability to respond prior 
to the issuance of a final suspension. Substantively, under the second 
proposed rule, covered misconduct would include prohibition orders and 
civil monetary penalty orders as defined. However, the scope of those 
additions would be limited to capture only orders from certain Federal 
agencies and, where applicable, above a numerical threshold. Specific 
comments, FHFA's responses, and differences between the first and 
second proposed rules are described in greater detail below in the 
sections describing the relevant rule provisions.
    As a result of these changes, the second proposed rule is organized 
differently. Under the second proposed rule, the definition of 
``conviction'' remains unchanged. Instead, the definition of ``covered 
misconduct'' would be amended to include the additional bases of 
``prohibition order'' and ``civil monetary penalty order.'' Separate 
definitions for both of those terms are provided under the proposed 
amendments to Sec.  1227.2. The definition of ``covered misconduct'' 
would also be amended to include breach of contract actions in civil 
monetary penalty orders, unlike the first proposed rule in which it 
would have appeared under the definition of ``conviction.'' FHFA 
believes that these organizational changes and definitions will better 
fulfill the purposes of the SCP regulation by tailoring the scope of 
captured misconduct more narrowly to the SCP's safety and soundness 
purpose.

[[Page 79787]]

A. Covered Misconduct

    The first proposed rule would have amended the definition of 
``conviction'' in Sec.  1227.2 to include ``[a]n order or judgment by a 
Federal or state agency or court in a civil matter to which a Federal 
or state agency or government, or private citizen asserting claims on 
behalf of the government, is a party, constituting or including a 
finding that the respondent committed one of the offenses enumerated in 
the definition of `covered misconduct' or knowingly committed a 
material breach of contract, or any other resolution that is the 
functional equivalent of such a judgment or order, such as a consent 
order, regardless of whether it includes any admission of misconduct.''
    Six commenters specifically opposed these proposed substantive 
changes, while four either supported the substantive changes or 
encouraged greater expansion. Commenters in opposition to the proposed 
substantive changes expressed concern that relatively minor misconduct 
would be captured under the first proposed rule. Four commenters 
opposed the amount of discretion that would be given to FHFA in 
determining what forms of misconduct fell within the scope of the first 
proposed rule. Commenters also expressed concern that the first 
proposed rule's substantive changes were overly broad.
    Based upon the comments received and internal discussion, FHFA 
reconsidered the changes to the definition of ``conviction'' in the 
first proposed rule, and determined that the changes in the second 
proposed rule would achieve FHFA's goal of capturing misconduct that 
poses a risk to the safety and soundness of the regulated entities, 
while avoiding capture of relatively minor misconduct. Commenters also 
expressed a desire for greater clarity as to what misconduct would be 
captured under the first proposed rule. Under the new approach, rather 
than amending the definition of ``conviction,'' the definition of 
``covered misconduct'' would be amended to include new terms 
``prohibition order'' and ``civil monetary penalty order.'' In response 
to the comments requesting greater clarity, definitions for each new 
term would be provided under Sec.  1227.2.
    Under this second proposed rule, a ``prohibition order'' would be 
defined to include only orders issued by the enumerated Federal 
agencies having the effect of prohibiting a person from participating 
in the affairs of an institution or market or in mortgage- or real 
estate-related activities, as applicable, overseen by such agencies.\5\ 
Likewise, ``civil monetary penalty order'' would refer only to an order 
by one of three Federal agencies, the U.S. Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture, or U.S. Department 
of Veterans Affairs, where the agency had imposed a civil monetary 
penalty of at least $1,000,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The enumerated Federal agencies are the Board of Governors 
of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Office of the Comptroller of the 
Currency (OCC), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Securities and Exchange 
Commission (SEC), and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the first proposed rule's amendment to the definition of 
``conviction'' to include knowing, material, breach of contract actions 
has been removed. Instead, the second proposed rule would amend the 
definition of ``covered misconduct'' to include breach of contract 
actions, but only with respect to civil monetary penalty orders. 
Additionally, the first proposed rule would have amended the definition 
of ``covered misconduct'' to include misconduct in connection with the 
management or ownership of real property. This second proposed rule 
retains this amendment. As discussed in the preamble to the first rule, 
real property management and real property ownership both demonstrate 
potential risk to the regulated entities and are significant functions 
performed by certain regulated entity counterparties, especially those 
participating in Enterprise multifamily loan transactions.
    One commenter expressed support for this amendment, reasoning that 
failing to suspend beneficiaries of financing who commit fraud related 
to property management or ownership would pose a major risk to the 
safety and soundness of the Enterprises. Two commenters expressed 
specific opposition to this amendment in the first proposed rule, with 
one stating that the proposed amendment lacked any limiting standard. 
FHFA believes that the proposed amendments elsewhere in the second 
proposed rule are responsive in providing sufficient limiting 
standards, such as the $1,000,000 threshold set forth in the definition 
of ``civil monetary penalty order.''

B. Immediate Suspension Orders

    The current SCP regulation establishes a series of procedures 
governing the issuance of a final order of suspension. Under the 
current SCP regulation, FHFA must first issue a proposed order of 
suspension and provide the relevant counterparty and each regulated 
entity an opportunity to respond. Only after the response period does 
the regulation authorize issuance of a final suspension order, and any 
such suspension order may not be effective sooner than 45 days after 
signature by the suspending official.
    Under the first proposed rule, the SCP regulation would have been 
amended to add Sec.  1227.11, giving FHFA the ability to issue 
immediate suspension orders where the basis of the covered misconduct 
was an administrative sanction. Additionally, the proposed rule would 
have created Sec.  1227.12, granting counterparties the corresponding 
right to request FHFA to vacate such an order. In the first proposed 
rule, FHFA reasoned that another Federal agency's conclusion to limit a 
counterparty's right to do business with the government warranted 
particular deference, and that issuance of immediate suspension efforts 
in such situations would avoid excessive delay.
    FHFA received seven comments specifically opposing the proposed 
addition of immediate suspension orders. Several of those comments 
emphasized the due process concerns implicated by immediate suspension 
orders. One commenter stated that the proposed rule was unclear as to 
how immediate suspensions would be applied to a counterparty's 
affiliates. Other commenters stated that admissions of guilt could be 
absent from an administrative action, creating additional due process 
concerns. Only one commenter expressed support for elimination of the 
requirement for a proposed suspension order where suspension is based 
on an administrative sanction, reasoning that it would be a reasonable 
and efficient way to streamline the suspension process.
    In the process of developing a final rule, FHFA considered the 
objections raised to the procedural changes contemplated in the first 
proposed rule and ultimately decided to retain the current procedure. 
Accordingly, the first proposed rule's addition of Sec. Sec.  1227.11 
and 1227.12 are not included as part of this second proposed rule.

C. Section-by-Section Analysis

1. Sec.  1227.2 Definitions
    As in the first proposed rule, Sec.  1227.2 of this second proposed 
rule sets forth a definition for ``covered misconduct.'' As noted, the 
first proposed rule would have amended the definition of ``conviction'' 
to include an order or

[[Page 79788]]

judgment by a Federal or state agency or court in a civil matter to 
which a Federal or state agency or government, or private citizen 
asserting claims on behalf of the government, is a party, constituting 
or including a finding that the respondent committed one of the 
offenses enumerated in the definition of ``covered misconduct'' or 
knowingly committed a material breach of contract, or any other 
resolution that is the functional equivalent of such a judgment or 
order, such as a consent order, regardless of whether it includes any 
admission of misconduct. It would also have amended the definition of 
``covered misconduct'' to include misconduct in connection with the 
management or ownership of real property.
    For the reasons discussed above in section III.A, this second 
proposed rule would not amend the definition of ``conviction.'' 
Instead, this second proposed rule would amend paragraph (1) of the 
definition of ``covered misconduct'' to read ``[a]ny conviction, 
prohibition order, civil monetary penalty order, or administrative 
sanction within the past three (3) years if the basis of such action 
involved fraud, embezzlement, theft, conversion, forgery, bribery, 
perjury, making false statements or claims, tax evasion, obstruction of 
justice, or any similar offense, or, with respect to a civil monetary 
penalty order only, breach of contract, in each case in connection with 
a mortgage, mortgage business, mortgage securities or other lending 
product, or ownership or management of real property.''
    Additionally, the second proposed rule would amend Sec.  1227.2 to 
add ``civil monetary penalty order,'' defined as ``[a]ny order issued 
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, or U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 
pursuant to the relevant Federal agency's authority to impose civil 
monetary penalties, that requires a person to pay an amount no less 
than $1,000,000.''
    Finally, the second proposed rule would amend Sec.  1227.2 to add 
``prohibition order,'' defined as any order issued by:
    1. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of 
the Currency, or the National Credit Union Administration that has the 
effect of prohibiting a person from participating in the affairs of any 
institution for which the Federal agency has supervisory authority;
    2. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that has the effect of 
prohibiting a person from participating in mortgage- or real estate-
related activities; or
    3. The Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission, or a judicial authority, that has the effect of 
prohibiting a person from participating in the relevant regulated 
market overseen by the Federal agency.
2. Sec.  1227.11 Immediate Suspension Order and Sec.  1227.12 Request 
To Vacate
    The first proposed rule would have amended the SCP regulation to 
create Sec.  1227.11, allowing for immediate suspensions under certain 
circumstances, and Sec.  1227.12, creating procedures to provide 
respondents the opportunity to request vacation of an immediate 
suspension. For the reasons described above, the second proposed rule 
makes no changes to the current procedure for requiring proposed 
suspensions prior to issuance of a final suspension. Accordingly, 
neither amendment is included in the second proposed rule.
3. Miscellaneous Provisions
    The first proposed rule would have amended Sec.  1227.6(a) to 
specify that a final suspension order may be issued only if preceded by 
a proposed suspension order, pursuant to the requirements of Sec.  
1227.5. Despite this requirement already being implicit within the SCP 
regulation, FHFA believed that amendment was appropriate in light of 
the proposed addition of immediate suspensions. Further, the first 
proposed rule would have made a series of revisions to include 
reference to immediate suspension orders. However, as this second 
proposed rule would not add immediate suspension orders, these 
amendments are no longer warranted and thus are not proposed.

IV. Consideration of Differences Between the Banks and the Enterprises

    Section 1313(f) of the Safety and Soundness Act requires FHFA, when 
promulgating regulations relating to the Banks, to consider the 
differences between the Enterprises and the Banks with respect to the 
Banks' cooperative ownership structure; mission of providing liquidity 
to members; affordable housing and community development mission; 
capital structure; joint and several liability; and any other 
differences FHFA considers appropriate.\6\ In preparing this second 
proposed rule, FHFA considered the differences between the Banks and 
the Enterprises as they relate to the above factors, and determined 
that the second proposed rule is appropriate. No commenters raised any 
issues relating to this statutory requirement as applied to the first 
proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 12 U.S.C. 4513(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The second proposed rule does not contain any information 
collection requirement that requires the approval of OMB under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Therefore, FHFA has 
not submitted any information to OMB for review.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that 
a regulation that has a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, small businesses, or small organizations must 
include an initial regulatory flexibility analysis describing the 
regulation's impact on small entities. FHFA need not undertake such an 
analysis if the agency has certified that the regulation will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
(5 U.S.C. 605(b)). FHFA has considered the impact of the second 
proposed rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. FHFA certifies that 
the second proposed rule, if adopted as a final rule, would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because the second proposed rule is applicable only to the regulated 
entities, which are not small entities for purposes of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.

VII. Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023

    The Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023 (5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(4)) requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking include 
the internet address of a summary of not more than 100 words in length 
of a proposed rule, in plain language, that shall be posted on the 
internet website under section 206(d) of the E-Government Act of 2002 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 note) (commonly known as regulations.gov). The proposal 
and the required summary can be found at www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1227

    Administrative practice and procedure, Federal home loan banks, 
Government-sponsored enterprises, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, FHFA proposes 
to amend

[[Page 79789]]

part 1227 of chapter XII of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
as follows:

PART 1227--SUSPENDED COUNTERPARTY PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for part 1227 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 4513, 4513b, 4514, 4526.

0
2. Amend Sec.  1227.2 by:
0
a. Adding the definition of ``Civil monetary penalty'' in alphabetical 
order;
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Covered misconduct'';
0
c. Adding the definition of ``Prohibition order'' in alphabetical 
order.
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  1227.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Civil monetary penalty order means any order issued by the U.S. 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, or U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, pursuant to the 
relevant Federal agency's authority to impose civil monetary penalties, 
that requires a person to pay an amount no less than $1,000,000.
* * * * *
    Covered misconduct means:
    (1) Any conviction, prohibition order, civil monetary penalty 
order, or administrative sanction within the past three (3) years if 
the basis of such action involved fraud, embezzlement, theft, 
conversion, forgery, bribery, perjury, making false statements or 
claims, tax evasion, obstruction of justice, or any similar offense, 
or, with respect to a civil monetary penalty order only, breach of 
contract, in each case in connection with a mortgage, mortgage 
business, mortgage securities or other lending product, or ownership or 
management of real property.
* * * * *
    Prohibition order means any order issued by:
    (1) The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of 
the Currency, or the National Credit Union Administration that has the 
effect of prohibiting a person from participating in the affairs of any 
institution for which the Federal agency has supervisory authority;
    (2) The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that has the effect of 
prohibiting a person from participating in mortgage- or real estate-
related activities; or
    (3) The Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission, or a judicial authority, that has the effect of 
prohibiting a person from participating in the relevant regulated 
market overseen by the Federal agency.
* * * * *

Sandra L. Thompson,
Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency.
[FR Doc. 2024-22393 Filed 9-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8070-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>