Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 82537 

80See, e.g., FINRA, ‘‘Firm Summary Scorecard,’’ 

available at https://www.finra.org/compliancetools/report-center/equity/firm-summary-scorecard 

(last accessed Aug. 2024); ‘‘TRACE Quality of 

Market Report Cards—Treasuries,’’ available at 

https://www.finra.org/compliance-tools/reportcenter/trace/quality-of-markets-treasuries (last 

accessed Aug. 2024). 

challenges of thinning markets in mind, 

especially at the regional level. 

Development could use certain 

advanced modeling techniques for 

aggregating and reporting market 

information. Such models may have the 

potential to incorporate valuable 

information related to premiums and 

discounts paid for fed cattle 

characteristics. Or, tailored alternative 

benchmark reports could be designed to 

enable market participants to develop 

their own models based on certain 

consistent widely reported transactionspecific information, as is the case 

under the FINRA’s TRACE System for 

bonds. 

5. What risks might exist during any 

transition away from the use of existing 

benchmarks, and in what ways could 

they be mitigated? Are certain external 

regulatory regimes valuable for USDA to 

learn from in this regard, such as how 

financial regulators handled the 

transition away from LIBOR, how 

FINRA implemented the TRACE 

System, or other models from financial 

or commodity trading markets? 

D. Written Documentation Options 

1. Should AMS require covered 

packers to submit annual 

documentation to AMS describing how 

the packer plans to conduct market 

activities in a fair manner, participate in 

price discovery for fed cattle, and 

ensure market access for small and 

medium-sized feeders? 

2. Please comment on how packers 

should plan to structure market 

participation and procurement methods 

to contribute to market price discovery. 

Provide specific details about actions 

packers should take to achieve these 

goals and any market information or 

data that could be provided to the 

industry on a voluntary basis to improve 

market transparency. 

3. What role should exchange trading 

play in considerations of price 

discovery? For example, for a covered 

packer to count as contributing to price 

discovery, would it be useful to 

establish a presumptive requirement 

that no less than a certain percentage 

(e.g., 15% or 30%) of cattle be either 

exchanged or auction purchased or paid 

as a market-making fee to the exchange 

or auction to cover the risks and costs 

of other producers in those transparent, 

competitive pricing venues? 

4. Please discuss specific problems 

that feedlot sellers experience with 

market access and actions that packers 

could take to improve market access, 

especially for small and medium-sized 

producers. For example, would 

enhanced access to exchange trading be 

effective in supporting market access, 

and could a market-making fee system 

that supported smaller producers be 

helpful—for example, from packers that 

chose to make contributing to such fee 

one part of their contribution to price 

discovery under their plan? 

5. Please comment about specific 

concerns related to packer purchasing 

behavior during periods of supply and 

demand disruption (i.e., pandemics, 

disease outbreaks, production 

disruptions, etc.). What are the 

important elements of packer plans for 

maintaining adequate price discovery 

and market participation during these 

times? 

6. Were AMS to require packers to 

report to PSD all pricing agreements that 

describe how base prices are determined 

for all cattle procured by the packer, 

describe any specific information or 

data that should be required for this 

documentation or otherwise associated 

to make this documentation more useful 

for AMS to monitor the market. Should 

AMS consider any other appropriate 

documentation requirements of covered 

packers? 

7. In what ways could it be 

appropriate and useful for AMS to make 

aspects of the information from these 

documentation reports available to the 

public, subject to confidentiality 

protections? Which ones and why? 

Would a firm-specific approach, as 

opposed to an aggregated approach, ever 

be appropriate for public disclosure? 

8. Would it be appropriate and useful 

for AMS to score or rank covered 

packers based on their contribution to 

price discovery, potentially similarly to 

how FINRA scores broker-dealers on 

certain metrics? 80 If so, what metrics 

would be appropriate for the scoring: 

cash trade and exchange trading 

purchases, purchases from smaller 

producers, or other factors? Should any 

deductions be taken, such as the use of 

TOMP contracts or delayed packer 

pickup? Should scoring be dynamic, 

such that improvements from year to 

year are recognized? Would any scoring 

or ranking be most appropriate and 

useful if provided confidentially to 

covered packers, or should any ranking 

be made available publicly? 

V. Conclusions and Next Steps 

Given the background, key regulatory 

challenges, and options for 

consideration outlined in this ANPR, 

AMS is seeking comment on potential 

and preferred paths forward. Comments 

received in response to this ANPR will 

inform AMS’s approach to regulating 

the Nation’s fed cattle markets. 

Substantive, well-reasoned, constructive 

comments, including comments that 

provide data to support views (for 

example, are based on industry 

surveys), will assist in identifying if 

there are unforeseen challenges or 

viable alternatives before the Agency 

moves forward. Comments generally in 

support or opposition to options 

identified in this ANPR will assist AMS 

in identifying the acceptability of the 

presented options in the absence of 

other alternatives. 

Erin Morris, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23528 Filed 10–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

12 CFR Parts 303 and 337 

RIN 3064–AF99 

Unsafe and Unsound Banking 

Practices: Brokered Deposits 

Restrictions; Extension of Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation (FDIC). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: On August 23, 2024, the FDIC 

published in the Federal Register a 

proposed rule that would make 

revisions to its regulations relating to 

the brokered deposit restrictions that 

apply to less than well-capitalized 

insured depository institutions. The 

proposed rule provided for a 60-day 

comment period, which closes on 

October 22, 2024. The FDIC has 

determined that an extension of the 

comment period until November 21, 

2024, is appropriate. This action will 

allow interested parties additional time 

to analyze the proposal and prepare 

comments. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

document that published at 89 FR 68244 

(August 23, 2024) is extended. 

Comments must be received on or 

before November 21, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document using any of the 

following methods: 

• Agency Website: https://

www.fdic.gov/resources/regulations/ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
82538 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 198 / Friday, October 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1 89 FR 68244. 

2 12 U.S.C. 1831f. 

federal-register-publications/. Follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments on the agency website. 

• Email: comments@fdic.gov. Include 

RIN 3064–AF99 in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: James P. Sheesley, Assistant 

Executive Secretary, Attention: 

Comments—RIN 3064–AF99, Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20429. 

• Hand Delivery: Comments may be 

hand delivered to the guard station at 

the rear of the 550 17th Street NW 

Building (located on F Street) on 

business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

• Public Inspection: Comments 

received, including any personal 

information provided, may be posted 

without change to https://www.fdic.gov/ 

resources/regulations/federal-registerpublications/. Commenters should 

submit only information that the 

commenter wishes to make available 

publicly. The FDIC may review, redact, 

or refrain from posting all or any portion 

of any comment that it may deem to be 

inappropriate for publication, such as 

irrelevant or obscene material. The FDIC 

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. All comments that have been 

redacted, as well as those that have not 

been posted, that contain comments on 

the merits of the notice will be retained 

in the public comment file and will be 

considered as required under all 

applicable laws. All comments may be 

accessible under the Freedom of 

Information Act. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Division of Risk Management 

Supervision: Thomas F. Lyons, 

Associate Director, 202–898–6850, 

TLyons@fdic.gov; Karen J. Currie, Chief, 

202–898–3981, KCurrie@fdic.gov; Judy 

E. Gross, Senior Policy Analyst, 202– 

898–7047, JuGross@fdic.gov. 

Legal Division: Vivek Khare, Senior 

Counsel, 202–898–6847, VKhare@

fdic.gov; Chantal Hernandez, Counsel, 

202–898–7388, ChHernandez@fdic.gov; 

Ryan McCarthy, Counsel, 202–898– 

7301, RyMccarthy@fdic.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

23, 2024, the FDIC published in the 

Federal Register 1 a proposed rule 

amending the brokered deposits-related 

regulations implementing section 29 of 

the FDI Act.2 The proposed rule stated 

that the comment period would close on 

October 22, 2024. However, to provide 

additional opportunity for the public to 

prepare comments to address the 

matters raised by the proposed rule, the 

FDIC is extending the comment period 

for the brokered deposits-related 

proposed rule from October 22, 2024, to 

November 21, 2024. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Dated at Washington, DC, on October 8, 

2024. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23631 Filed 10–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2024–2055; Airspace 

Docket No. 22–AWP–56] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Modification of Class D Airspace, 

Establishment of Class E Airspace; 

San Bernardino International Airport, 

San Bernardino, CA 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

modify the Class D airspace and 

establish Class E airspace designated as 

an extension to a Class D surface area at 

San Bernardino International Airport, 

CA (KSBD). Additionally, this action 

proposes an administrative amendment 

to update the airport’s existing Class D 

airspace legal description. These actions 

would support the safety and 

management of instrument flight rules 

(IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR) 

operations at the airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 25, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by FAA Docket No. FAA–2024–2055 

and Airspace Docket No. 22–AWP–56 

using any of the following methods: 

* Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov and follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

* Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

* Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

* Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at (202) 493–2251. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FAA Order JO 7400.11J, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, and 

subsequent amendments can be viewed 

online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/ 

publications/. You may also contact the 

Rules and Regulations Group, Office of 

Policy, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nathan A. Chaffman, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Western Service Center, 

Operations Support Group, 2200 S 

216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; 

telephone (206) 231–3460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in Subtitle VII, Part A, 

Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of the airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it would 

modify Class D airspace and establish 

Class E airspace to support IFR and VFR 

operations at KSBD. 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. Comments are specifically 

invited on the overall regulatory, 

aeronautical, economic, environmental, 

and energy-related aspects of the 

proposal. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1