This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

84255 

Vol. 89, No. 204 

Tuesday, October 22, 2024 

1 81 FR 66791. The Guidelines are codified at 12 

CFR part 30, appendix E. They were issued 

pursuant to section 39 of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. 1831p–1, which authorizes 

the OCC to prescribe enforceable safety and 

soundness standards. 

2 83 FR 66604 (Dec. 27, 2018). 

3 89 FR 55114. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency 

12 CFR Part 30 

[Docket ID OCC–2024–0008] 

RIN 1557–AF27 

OCC Guidelines Establishing 

Standards for Recovery Planning by 

Certain Large Insured National Banks, 

Insured Federal Savings Associations, 

and Insured Federal Branches 

AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency, Treasury. 

ACTION: Final guidelines. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the Comptroller 

of the Currency is amending its 

enforceable recovery planning 

guidelines to apply them to insured 

national banks, insured Federal savings 

associations, and insured Federal 

branches of foreign banks with average 

total consolidated assets of $100 billion 

or more; incorporate a testing standard; 

and clarify the role of non-financial 

(including operational and strategic) 

risk in recovery planning. 

DATES: The final guidelines are effective 

on January 1, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Jameson, Lead Expert, Market 

Risk, (202) 322–8527; Andra Shuster, 

Senior Counsel, Karen McSweeney, 

Special Counsel, or Priscilla Benner, 

Counsel, Chief Counsel’s Office, (202) 

649–5490; 400 7th Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20219. If you are deaf 

or hard of hearing or have a speech 

disability, please dial 7–1–1 to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

Large-scale financial crises have

demonstrated the destabilizing effect 

that severe stress can have on financial 

entities, capital markets, the Federal 

banking system, and the U.S. and global 

economies. This is particularly true 

when a crisis places severe stress on 

large, complex financial institutions due 

to the systemic and contagion risks that 

they pose. For example, during the 2008 

crisis, the Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency (OCC) observed that many 

financial institutions were not prepared 

to respond effectively to the financial 

effects of severe stress. The lack of or 

inadequate planning threatened the 

viability of some financial institutions, 

and many were forced to take significant 

actions without the benefit of a welldeveloped plan for recovery. 

For the OCC, this experience 

highlighted the importance of large, 

complex banks having strong risk 

governance frameworks, including plans 

for how to respond quickly and 

effectively to, and recover from, the 

financial effects of severe stress. The 

agency recognized that this type of 

advance planning would reduce a 

bank’s risk of failure and increase the 

likelihood that it would return to a 

position of financial strength and 

viability following severe stress. 

On September 29, 2016, the OCC 

issued Guidelines Establishing 

Standards for Recovery Planning by 

Certain Large Insured National Banks, 

Insured Federal Savings Associations, 

and Insured Federal Branches 

(Guidelines).1 Under the Guidelines, an 

insured national bank, insured Federal 

savings association, or insured Federal 

branch (bank) subject to the standards 

(covered bank) should have a recovery 

plan that includes (1) quantitative or 

qualitative indicators of the risk or 

existence of severe stress that reflect its 

particular vulnerabilities; (2) a wide 

range of credible options that it could 

undertake in response to the stress to 

restore its financial strength and 

viability; and (3) an assessment and 

description of how these options would 

affect it. The Guidelines provide that a 

recovery plan should also address (1) 

the covered bank’s overall 

organizational and legal entity structure 

and its interconnections and 

interdependencies; (2) procedures for 

escalating decision-making to senior 

management or the board of directors or 

an appropriate committee thereof 

(board); (3) management reports; (4) 

communication procedures; and (5) any 

other information the OCC 

communicates in writing. The 

Guidelines also set forth the 

responsibilities of management and the 

board with respect to the covered bank’s 

recovery plan. 

The 2016 Guidelines applied to banks 

with total consolidated assets of $50 

billion or more. In 2018, the OCC 

amended the Guidelines to raise the 

threshold to $250 billion based on its 

view, at that time, that these larger, 

more complex, and potentially more 

interconnected banks presented greater 

systemic risk to the financial system and 

would benefit most from recovery 

planning.2

In March 2023, several insured 

depository institutions (IDIs) with total 

consolidated assets of $100 billion or 

more experienced significant 

withdrawals of uninsured deposits in 

response to underlying weaknesses in 

their financial position and failed. 

These events highlighted the risk, 

complexity, and interconnectedness of 

banks with average total consolidated 

assets between $100 billion and $250 

billion and underscored that it is 

important for banks in this size range 

(which are not covered by the current 

Guidelines) to develop and maintain 

recovery plans to respond to the 

financial effects of severe stress. 

In addition, since the issuance of the 

Guidelines in 2016, the agency has 

examined covered banks’ recovery 

planning processes and reviewed 

numerous recovery plans. Based on this 

experience, the OCC has identified areas 

where the current Guidelines should be 

strengthened. 

To address these issues, on July 3, 

2024, the OCC published a proposal to 

expand the Guidelines to apply to banks 

with average total consolidated assets of 

$100 billion or more; incorporate a 

testing standard; and clarify the role of 

non-financial (including operational 

and strategic) risk in recovery 

planning.3 The OCC received five 

comments on the proposal. Two 

comments were from banks, one was 

from an individual, one was from two 

trade associations, and one was from a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
84256 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

4The OCC also received a comment letter from 

three trade associations requesting that the agency 

extend the comment period by 30 days. The OCC 

denied this request on July 25, 2024. https://

www.regulations.gov/document/OCC-2024-0008- 

0004. 

5 In addition, the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation (FDIC) recently amended its resolution 

planning rule to require covered IDIs with $100 

billion or more in total assets to submit 

comprehensive resolution plans. 89 FR 56620 (July 

9, 2024). 

6The OCC also has authority to determine that a 

covered bank is no longer highly complex or no 

longer presents a heightened risk and thus should 

not be subject to the Guidelines. 

7For banks that become subject to the Guidelines 

through the OCC’s reservation of authority, the 

agency has already incorporated notice and 

response procedures at paragraph I.C.2. 

8Paragraph II.A. 

9Compare Schedule RC, item 12 and Schedule 

RC–R, item 27 of the Call Report. 

10 12 CFR part 30, appendix D. 

11Paragraph I.C.1.a. 

12The proposal did not include changes to 

paragraph I.C.1.b. of the Guidelines (which 

provides that the OCC can determine that the 

Guidelines should not apply to a covered bank) 

because this paragraph does not reference asset size. 

13 75 FR 13656 (March 22, 2010); Addendum to 

the Interagency Policy Statement on Funding and 

Liquidity Risk Management: Importance of 

Contingency Funding Plan (July 28, 2023). 

14 12 CFR part 46. 

non-profit organization.4 These 

comments are addressed in detail in the 

next section. 

II. Description of the Proposal, 

Comments, and Final Guidelines 

A. Covered Bank Threshold 

Definition of covered bank. The 

current Guidelines generally apply to 

banks with average total consolidated 

assets of $250 billion or more. Based on 

the OCC’s observations during the IDI 

failures in 2023, the agency proposed to 

expand the Guidelines to apply to banks 

with average total consolidated assets of 

$100 billion or more.5 To make this 

change, the OCC proposed to revise the 

definition of ‘‘covered bank’’ in 

paragraph I.E.3. of the current 

Guidelines. 

The OCC received several comments 

on this proposed change. While one 

commenter supported the proposed 

$100 billion threshold, another 

commenter suggested a $150 billion 

threshold. Commenters also 

recommended that the OCC include 

metrics in addition to asset size in its 

definition of covered bank, periodically 

adjust the threshold for inflation, notify 

covered banks when they become 

subject to the Guidelines, and tailor the 

Guidelines based on covered banks’ size 

and complexity. 

The OCC continues to believe that the 

$100 billion threshold is appropriate. As 

noted above, the agency has observed 

that banks at or above this size generally 

have a level of risk, complexity, and 

interconnectedness at which recovery 

planning is most beneficial. Narrowing 

the threshold to $150 billion would 

exclude some of these banks. With 

respect to additional metrics, the 

reservation of authority in paragraph 

I.C. of the Guidelines provides the OCC 

with sufficient flexibility to determine, 

based on factors other than asset size, 

that a bank is highly complex or 

otherwise presents a heightened risk 

and, thus, should be subject to the 

Guidelines.6

Regarding an inflation adjustment, the 

OCC has determined that it does not 

need to include this provision in the 

Guidelines, as the agency can revisit 

and amend the threshold through the 

rulemaking process as appropriate. The 

OCC has also concluded that it is not 

necessary to notify a bank when it 

becomes a covered bank because this is 

determined based on a bank’s own 

Consolidated Reports of Condition and 

Income (Call Report) data.7 Finally, the 

current Guidelines specifically state that 

each covered bank’s recovery plan 

should be ‘‘appropriate for its 

individual size, risk profile, activities, 

and complexity,’’ and thus, they are 

inherently tailored.8

Therefore, the OCC is adopting the 

changes to the definition of ‘‘covered 

bank’’ as proposed. 

Calculation of the threshold. The 

current Guidelines define ‘‘average total 

consolidated assets’’ in paragraph I.E.1. 

as ‘‘the average total consolidated assets 

of the bank or the covered bank,’’ as 

reported on its Call Report for the four 

most recent consecutive quarters. The 

OCC proposed a clarifying change to 

this definition to refer to the average 

‘‘of’’ total consolidated assets of the 

bank or covered bank. This change was 

intended to clarify that the calculation 

of ‘‘average total consolidated assets’’ 

for purposes of the Guidelines is based 

on the ‘‘total assets’’ line, not the 

‘‘average total consolidated assets’’ line, 

of the Call Report.9 This change could 

have affected the quarter in which a 

bank became a covered bank and would 

have been consistent with the OCC 

Guidelines Establishing Heightened 

Standards for Certain Large Insured 

National Banks, Insured Federal Savings 

Associations, and Insured Federal 

Branches.10 The OCC did not receive 

any comments on this proposed change 

and adopts it as proposed. 

Reservation of authority. The 

reservation of authority in paragraph 

I.C.1. of the current Guidelines provides 

that the OCC has the discretion to apply 

the Guidelines, in whole or in part, to 

a bank with average total consolidated 

assets of less than $250 billion if it 

determines that the bank is highly 

complex or otherwise presents a 

heightened risk that warrants 

application of the Guidelines.11

Consistent with the proposed threshold 

change described above, the proposal 

would have allowed the agency to apply 

the Guidelines to a bank with average 

total consolidated assets of less than 

$100 billion in these circumstances.12

The OCC received one comment on 

this proposed change, which stated that 

the reservation of authority should not 

be used for banks with under $100 

billion in average total consolidated 

assets because recovery planning 

addresses issues similar to those already 

addressed in other contexts (e.g., capital 

planning and stress testing). The OCC 

continues to believe that the agency 

should have the flexibility to apply the 

Guidelines to banks below the $100 

billion threshold based on whether the 

bank is highly complex or otherwise 

presents a heightened risk. For this 

reason, the OCC is adopting this change 

as proposed. 

B. Testing 

Testing generally. As stated above, the 

OCC has many years of experience with 

administering the Guidelines, including 

reviewing covered banks’ recovery 

plans. During this period, the agency 

has observed that covered banks would 

benefit from testing their recovery plans, 

which would allow them to proactively 

identify and address any weaknesses or 

deficiencies before they experience 

severe stress. This process would help 

a covered bank determine that its 

recovery plan is an effective tool that 

can realistically help restore the bank to 

financial strength and viability in 

response to severe stress. Not 

surprisingly, testing is already a key 

component of other regulatory 

frameworks addressing the stress 

continuum (e.g., contingency funding 

planning 13 and stress testing 14). 

For these reasons, the OCC proposed 

to add a testing provision as a new 

paragraph II.D. of the Guidelines, which 

stated that a covered bank should 

validate the effectiveness of its recovery 

plan. The preamble explained that a 

covered bank may do this by simulating 

severe financial and non-financial stress 

scenarios (e.g., the scenarios used to 

develop the plan) to confirm that the 

plan is likely to work as intended. This 

testing should include, for example, 

ensuring that the plan’s triggers 

appropriately reflect the covered bank’s 

particular vulnerabilities and will, in 

practice, provide timely notice of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 84257 

15As set forth in paragraph II.B. of the Guidelines, 

the elements of a recovery plan are (1) Overview of 

covered bank; (2) Triggers; (3) Options for recovery; 

(4) Impact assessments; (5) Escalation procedures; 

(6) Management reports; (7) Communication 

procedures; and (8) Other information. 

16Paragraph III.A. provides that management 

should review the recovery plan at least annually 

and in response to a material event. Paragraph III.B. 

provides that the board should review and approve 

the recovery plan at least annually and as needed 

to address significant changes made by 

management. The OCC did not propose and is 

making no changes to these paragraphs. 

increasingly severe stress, ranging from 

warnings of the likely occurrence of 

severe stress to its actual existence. 

Testing should also enable management 

and the board to verify that the covered 

bank has identified credible options that 

it is prepared to carry out during a 

period of severe stress. It should provide 

management and the board with similar 

assurances regarding other elements of 

the plan and, ultimately, the plan as a 

whole. The proposal did not specify a 

testing format or methodology but stated 

that testing should be risk-based and 

reflect the covered bank’s size, risk 

profile, activities, and complexity. 

The OCC received three comments on 

its proposed testing provision. One 

commenter stated that testing should be 

a flexible, risk-based ‘‘capabilities 

assessment’’ (i.e., an assessment of a 

covered bank’s capability to implement 

its recovery plan in a timely manner). 

The commenter also expressed concern 

that validation was not defined or 

explained and could require a covered 

bank to prove its plan’s effectiveness by, 

for example, actually executing a 

recovery plan option (e.g., divesting a 

business line). The commenter also 

argued that the inclusion of scenario 

analysis would duplicate the process 

that a covered bank used to develop or 

update a recovery plan. Another 

commenter supported the addition of 

testing to the Guidelines but stated that 

the OCC should provide more specific 

directions. 

The OCC disagrees with several of 

these comments. While a capabilities 

assessment is an important aspect of 

testing, it is insufficient on its own to 

achieve the purpose of testing. For 

example, a capabilities assessment 

would not necessarily help a covered 

bank identify gaps in its recovery plan 

(e.g., missing triggers or options) or 

determine if the plan can realistically 

help to restore the bank to financial 

strength and viability during periods of 

severe stress. With respect to the 

concept of validation, the OCC is using 

the term to convey that testing should 

confirm, to the extent possible, that the 

plan can accomplish its intended goals. 

Naturally, validation does not 

necessarily mean that a covered bank 

should actually execute a recovery 

option as part of testing. With respect to 

scenario analysis, the proposal would 

not have directed covered banks to use 

a specified testing format or 

methodology. Therefore, one covered 

bank could determine that a scenario 

analysis is an informative component of 

testing, while another may decide that 

it would unnecessarily duplicate its 

process for developing and updating its 

recovery plan. Accordingly, the OCC 

makes no change in the final Guidelines 

in response to these comments. 

However, the OCC agrees that testing 

should be risk-based. A risk-based 

standard will provide each covered 

bank with the flexibility to develop and 

implement a testing framework that is 

consistent with its individual 

characteristics. To reflect this, the OCC 

is amending the final Guidelines to state 

that testing ‘‘should be appropriate for 

the bank’s individual size, risk profile, 

activities, and complexity, including the 

complexity of its organizational and 

legal entity structure’’ and declines to 

establish a more prescriptive testing 

standard. 

Testing of elements. The proposal 

stated that testing should include 

validation of the effectiveness of each 

element of the plan.15 Two commenters 

questioned how a bank would validate 

the effectiveness of key aspects of 

recovery planning (e.g., the ‘‘Overview 

of covered bank,’’ which describes a 

covered bank’s overall organizational 

and legal entity structure and its 

interconnections and 

interdependencies). The OCC agrees 

that it may not be possible to validate 

the effectiveness of each plan element, 

particularly descriptive elements (e.g., 

the covered bank’s overview). The 

agency believes, however, that a covered 

bank should consider each element of 

its recovery plan as part of testing to 

validate the effectiveness of the overall 

plan. This consideration may include, 

for example, assessing the effectiveness, 

completeness, or accuracy of each 

element, as appropriate. To address any 

confusion, the OCC has revised the final 

Guidelines to state: ‘‘Testing should 

validate the effectiveness of the recovery 

plan, including by considering each 

element set forth in paragraph II.B. of 

this appendix.’’ 

Frequency of testing. The proposed 

testing provision provided that a 

covered bank should test its recovery 

plan periodically but not less than 

annually. Two commenters generally 

agreed that annual testing is appropriate 

while another commenter suggested that 

testing should be conducted at intervals 

and along timelines that are appropriate 

for each bank. In addition, a commenter 

said that the testing should be 

conducted in connection with, or as part 

of, resolution planning or other 

business-as-usual testing to avoid 

unnecessary duplication and that a 

provision for specific testing in response 

to a material change is unnecessary if 

testing is risk-based. 

The OCC continues to believe that 

annual testing is appropriate and has 

concluded that a covered bank should 

also test its recovery plan following any 

significant changes to the recovery plan 

made in response to a material event. 

This frequency will ensure that 

management and the board can consider 

the results of testing during their 

recovery plan reviews under paragraphs 

III.A. and B. of the Guidelines, 

respectively.16 Within this framework, 

the final Guidelines provide each bank 

with flexibility regarding when to test 

its plan, including whether to align this 

testing with other types of testing or to 

engage in continuous or regular testing 

throughout the testing cycle, provided 

that the bank meets the testing standard 

in the Guidelines. The OCC also 

reiterates that it does not expect a 

covered bank to consider every 

component of each element during each 

testing cycle (e.g., considering the 

trigger element during a cycle does not 

necessarily mean considering every 

trigger during that cycle). Rather, as 

noted above, testing should be riskbased. Therefore, the final Guidelines 

provide that ‘‘Each covered bank should 

test its recovery plan periodically but 

not less than annually and following 

any significant changes to the recovery 

plan made in response to a material 

event.’’ 

Plan updates following testing. 

Finally, the proposed testing provision 

provided that a covered bank should 

revise its recovery plan as appropriate 

following testing. One commenter stated 

that the OCC should not require a bank 

to both test and make changes to its 

recovery plan based on the result of the 

testing in the same testing cycle. The 

OCC believes that covered banks should 

take a risk-based approach to updating 

their recovery plans following testing. 

For example, if testing reveals a critical 

deficiency in the plan, the covered bank 

should update it as soon as feasible. 

However, for less significant 

deficiencies, it may be appropriate to 

delay updates until the next annual 

review cycle. Therefore, the OCC adopts 

this provision of the Guidelines as 

proposed. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
84258 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

17The OCC did not propose any changes to the 

‘‘options for recovery’’ element in paragraph II.B.3. 

of the Guidelines, which provides that recovery 

plans ‘‘should explain how the covered bank would 

carry out each option and describe the timing 

required for carrying out each option.’’ The OCC 

believes, however, it is important to emphasize that 

this process should include an understanding of, 

and plan for mitigating, the non-financial 

challenges and risks, including operational 

challenges and risks, associated with executing 

each recovery option during severe stress. Without 

this, a covered bank’s management and board 

cannot accurately assess whether the options 

identified in the recovery plan are, in fact, credible 

options that the covered bank could undertake to 

restore financial strength and viability. 

18A financial institution could become a covered 

bank after the effective date of the amended 

Guidelines, for example, (1) if its average total 

consolidated assets grow to or above the threshold, 

(2) if it is a State bank with average total 

consolidated assets of $100 billion or more that 

converts to an OCC charter, or (3) through the 

OCC’s exercise of its reservation of authority under 

paragraph I.C. 

C. Non-Financial Risk 

In the OCC’s experience with covered 

banks’ implementation of the 

Guidelines, banks have generally been 

successful in considering and 

addressing financial risks in their 

recovery plans. For example, many 

covered banks’ recovery plans address 

changes to the bank’s financial position, 

such as profitability, funding sources, 

liquidity ratios, and capital ratios. The 

OCC has observed, however, that 

covered banks have been less consistent 

in considering or addressing nonfinancial risk, such as operational and 

strategic risks. By focusing a recovery 

plan exclusively on financial risks while 

neglecting non-financial risks, the 

covered bank may overlook the very real 

threats that non-financial risks can pose 

to its financial strength and viability. 

Because the current Guidelines do not 

specifically reference non-financial risk, 

the proposal contained changes to 

ensure that covered banks appropriately 

address these risks in their recovery 

plans. Specifically, the OCC proposed to 

add language to paragraph II.A. stating 

that a covered bank ‘‘should 

appropriately consider both financial 

risk and non-financial risk (including 

operational and strategic risk).’’ The 

reference to financial risk was not 

because covered banks had not 

appropriately considered this type of 

risk but to highlight that both types of 

risk should be considered. The OCC also 

proposed conforming changes to the 

definitions of ‘‘recovery’’ and ‘‘trigger’’ 

in paragraphs I.E.4. and I.E.6., 

respectively, and to the recovery plan 

elements of ‘‘trigger’’ and ‘‘impact 

assessment’’ in paragraphs II.B.2. and 

II.B.4., respectively.17 Finally, to 

provide an additional example of an 

operational risk plan with which a 

covered bank should align its recovery 

plan, the OCC proposed adding a 

reference to ‘‘resilience program’’ in 

paragraph II.C. 

The OCC received one comment on 

the proposed non-financial risk 

language, which agreed that this type of 

risk should be considered but also 

observed that financial risk and nonfinancial risk have distinct roles in 

recovery planning. In particular, the 

commenter noted that the role of, and a 

covered bank’s response to, nonfinancial risk differs from its response to 

financial risk and that breaches of nonfinancial triggers should not 

automatically lead to activation of the 

recovery plan and execution of recovery 

options. 

The OCC agrees that financial risk and 

non-financial risk differ. However, both 

are important aspects of recovery 

planning, and the Guidelines provide 

covered banks with sufficient flexibility 

to account for these differences. Each 

covered bank’s recovery plan can and 

should address financial risk and nonfinancial risk in a manner appropriate 

for that bank, including by ensuring that 

its recovery plan reflects their 

differences. Moreover, while the breach 

of any trigger (whether financial or nonfinancial) should always be escalated for 

purposes of initiating a response, a 

covered bank should not view a specific 

trigger as necessitating the execution of 

a particular option. Rather, a covered 

bank should use its judgment to 

determine what options, if any, to 

undertake during a period of severe 

stress. Therefore, the OCC is adopting 

these changes as proposed. 

D. Compliance 

When the OCC issued the proposal, it 

understood that covered banks would 

need time to implement the proposed 

changes. To this end, the agency 

proposed to amend paragraph I.B. of the 

Guidelines, entitled ‘‘Compliance date,’’ 

to provide affected banks with sufficient 

time to comply. 

Specifically, under the proposal, a 

bank that is a covered bank under the 

current Guidelines would have had 12 

months from the effective date of the 

amendments to comply with the 

changes. A bank that has $100 billion or 

more but less than $250 billion in 

average total consolidated assets on the 

effective date of the amendments to the 

Guidelines would have had to comply 

with the Guidelines within 12 months 

of the effective date, except for the 

testing requirements with which the 

bank would have had to comply within 

18 months. A bank or other financial 

institution that is not a covered bank on 

the effective date of the amended 

Guidelines but that subsequently 

becomes a covered bank would have 

had 12 months from the date on which 

it became a covered bank to comply 

with the Guidelines, except that it 

would have had 18 months to comply 

with the testing requirements.18

The OCC received several comments 

on this topic. Two commenters stated 

that newly covered banks should have 

more time to comply (e.g., 24 months), 

while another suggested that the 

proposal provided newly covered banks 

with too much time because of synergies 

with resolution and contingency 

planning requirements. One commenter 

said that the final Guidelines should 

have (1) one compliance date for a 

covered bank to develop the testing 

framework and (2) another compliance 

date to conduct the testing and, if 

necessary, revise its recovery plan based 

on the testing results. Finally, one 

commenter suggested that the OCC’s 

compliance dates should not overlap 

with the FDIC’s resolution planning 

rule. 

The OCC agrees with commenters that 

covered banks should have time to both 

develop a testing framework and 

conduct testing. In order to provide 

sufficient time for both, the OCC is 

revising the proposed compliance dates. 

Specifically, under the final Guidelines, 

banks that are currently covered banks 

will have 12 months to amend their 

recovery plans to address non-financial 

risk and an additional 6 months to 

comply with the new testing provision. 

Banks that are not covered by the 

current Guidelines but that become 

covered banks on the effective date of 

the final Guidelines will have 12 

months to develop their recovery plan 

and an additional 12 months to comply 

with the testing provision. Banks or 

other financial institutions that become 

covered banks after the effective date of 

the final Guidelines will have 12 

months to develop their recovery plan 

and an additional 12 months to comply 

with the testing provision. These 

compliance dates provide banks and 

other financial institutions that are or 

become covered banks under the final 

Guidelines with sufficient time and 

flexibility to both develop a testing 

framework and conduct testing, and 

based on our supervisory experience, 

they strike the appropriate balance 

between the time needed to satisfy the 

final Guidelines and the risks that 

recovery planning is designed to 

address. The agency believes this 

addresses the other comments about the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 84259 

19One commenter asked a bank-specific question 

about how the proposed compliance dates would 

affect a bank that recently became subject to the 

current Guidelines (i.e., crossed the $250 billion 

threshold) but has not yet completed its recovery 

plan under the currently applicable compliance 

date. Any bank in this unique situation may contact 

the appropriate OCC Supervisory Office for 

assistance in determining the applicable 

compliance dates. 

20 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521. 

21When the OCC proposed changes to the current 

Guidelines, as required, the agency submitted the 

changes to the OMB. Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.11(c), 

the OMB filed a comment on the submission, 

instructing that the proposed changes would be 

reviewed again upon finalization of the Guidelines. 

22This number includes burden hours for the 

implementation of the testing standard, which may 

occur during or after the 12-month period following 

the effective date of the final Guidelines. 

23 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

24Based on data accessed using FINDRS on 

September 12, 2024. 

25Consistent with the General Principles of 

Affiliation, 13 CFR 121.103(a), the OCC counts the 

assets of affiliated financial institutions when 

determining if it should classify an institution as a 

small entity. The OCC used December 31, 2023, to 

determine size because a ‘‘financial institution’s 

assets are determined by averaging the assets 

reported on its four quarterly financial statements 

for the preceding year.’’ See footnote 8 of the U.S. 

Small Business Administration’s Table of 

Standards. 

26 2 U.S.C. 1532. 

proposed compliance dates discussed 

above.19

In the proposal, the OCC also asked 

whether it should reserve authority to 

adjust an otherwise-applicable 

compliance date. In response, one 

commenter noted that if the OCC did so, 

it should reserve authority to both 

lengthen and shorten the applicable 

timeframes but should not specifically 

reference the context in which it might 

be appropriate to use this reservation of 

authority because the referenced 

examples could be interpreted as highly 

risky. 

The OCC has determined that an 

additional reservation of authority for 

compliance date adjustments is 

unnecessary, as the agency already has 

sufficient tools to address this issue. For 

example, as a condition of approving a 

merger, the OCC can require that a bank 

comply with the Guidelines on a 

timeline other than the one specified in 

paragraph I.B. Therefore, the final 

Guidelines do not contain any changes 

in response to this question. 

E. Other 

In addition to the changes discussed 

above, the OCC has made technical and 

clarifying changes to the final 

Guidelines. 

III. Regulatory Analysis 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA),20 the OCC may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is 

not required to respond to, an 

information collection unless it displays 

a currently valid Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) control number. The 

OMB previously approved the 

collection of information in the current 

Guidelines, which are found in 12 CFR 

part 30, appendix E, at paragraphs II.B., 

II.C., and III. Specifically, paragraph 

II.B. lists the elements of the recovery 

plan, which are an overview of the 

covered bank; triggers; options for 

recovery; impact assessments; escalation 

procedures; management reports; 

communication procedures; and other 

information. Paragraph II.C. addresses 

the relationship of the plan to other 

covered bank processes and 

coordination with other plans, 

including the processes and plans of its 

bank holding company. Paragraph III. 

outlines management’s and the board’s 

responsibilities. 

The final Guidelines include changes 

to the information collection.21

Specifically, the threshold for applying 

the final Guidelines is reduced from 

$250 billion to $100 billion in average 

total consolidated assets. The final 

Guidelines also establish a testing 

standard, which provides that a covered 

bank should test its recovery plan. 

Additionally, the final Guidelines 

clarify the role of non-financial risk 

(including operational and strategic 

risk) in recovery planning. 

The OCC has submitted the following 

revised information collection to the 

OMB for review. 

Title: OCC Guidelines Establishing 

Standards for Recovery Planning by 

Certain Large Insured National Banks, 

Insured Federal Savings Associations, 

and Insured Federal Branches. 

OMB Control No.: 1557–0333. 

Affected Public: Businesses or other 

for-profit organizations. 

Estimated Burden: 

Frequency of Response: On occasion. 

Total Number of Respondents: 21. 

Total Burden per Respondent: 32,017 

hours.22

Total Burden for Collection: 672,360 

hours. 

The OCC did not receive any PRArelated comments. The agency has a 

continuing interest in the public’s 

opinions of information collections. 

Within 30 days of publication of this 

document, commenters may submit 

comments regarding the burden 

estimate, or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, to 

the address listed in the ADDRESSES

caption in the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. All comments will become 

a matter of public record. Written 

comments and recommendations for the 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

document to www.reginfo.gov/public/ 

do/PRAMain. Find this information 

collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 

30-day Review—Open for Public 

Comments’’ or using the search 

function. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In general, the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) 23 requires an agency, in 

connection with a proposed and final 

rulemaking, to prepare a Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis describing the 

impact of the rule on small entities, 

which are defined by the U.S. Small 

Business Administration for purposes of 

the RFA to include commercial banks 

and savings institutions with total assets 

of $850 million or less and trust 

companies with total assets of $47 

million or less. However, a Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis is not required if 

the agency certifies that the rulemaking 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities and publishes its certification 

and a short explanatory statement in the 

Federal Register along with its 

rulemaking. 

The OCC currently supervises 

approximately 942 IDIs,24 of which 636 

are small entities.25 The final Guidelines 

do not impact any small entities because 

they only apply to banks with average 

total consolidated assets of $100 billion 

or more. Accordingly, the OCC certifies 

that the final Guidelines will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Under section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA),26 the OCC prepares a 

budgetary impact statement before 

promulgating a rulemaking that 

includes any Federal mandate that may 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more (currently $183 

million, as adjusted annually for 

inflation) in any one year. The OCC has 

determined that the expenditures 

associated with the final Guidelines’ 

mandates will be approximately $86.7 

million. Therefore, the OCC concludes 

that the final Guidelines will not result 

in an expenditure of $183 million or 

more annually by State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector. Accordingly, the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
84260 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

27 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. 

28 5 U.S.C. 553(d). 

29 12 U.S.C. 4802(a). 

OCC has not prepared the budgetary 

impact statement described above. 

Congressional Review Act 

For purposes of the Congressional 

Review Act,27 the OMB determines 

whether a final rule constitutes a major 

rule. If a rule is deemed a major rule by 

the OMB, the Congressional Review Act 

generally provides that the rule may not 

take effect until at least 60 days 

following its publication. The 

Congressional Review Act defines a 

‘‘major rule’’ as any rule that the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

the OMB finds has resulted in or is 

likely to result in (1) an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more; 

(2) a major increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies or geographic regions; or (3) 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and 

export markets. The OCC submitted the 

final Guidelines to the OMB for this 

major rule determination, and the OMB 

determined that the final Guidelines are 

not a major rule. As required by the 

Congressional Review Act, the OCC is 

submitting the appropriate report to 

Congress and the Government 

Accountability Office for review. 

Administrative Procedure Act 

The Administrative Procedure Act 28

requires that publication of a 

substantive rule generally be made not 

less than 30 days before its effective 

date. Consistent with this requirement, 

the final Guidelines will be effective on 

January 1, 2025, which is more than 30 

days after their publication in the 

Federal Register. 

Riegle Community Development and 

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 

Pursuant to section 302(a) of the 

Riegle Community Development and 

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994,29

in determining the effective date and 

administrative compliance requirements 

for new regulations that impose 

additional reporting, disclosure, or other 

requirements on IDIs, the OCC 

considers, consistent with the principles 

of safety and soundness and the public 

interest: (1) any administrative burdens 

that the rule will place on depository 

institutions, including small depository 

institutions and customers of depository 

institutions and (2) the benefits of a 

rulemaking. The OCC has considered 

the administrative burdens that the final 

Guidelines will place on IDIs, including 

small depository institutions and their 

customers, and the benefits of the final 

Guidelines. The agency believes that the 

effective date of January 1, 2025, is 

appropriate. 

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 30 

Banks, Banking, Consumer protection, 

National banks, Privacy, Safety and 

soundness, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority and Issuance 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, and under the authority of 12 

U.S.C. 93a and 12 U.S.C. 1831p–1, 

chapter I of title 12 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 30—SAFETY AND SOUNDESS 

STANDARDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 30 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1, 93a, 371, 1462a, 

1463, 1464, 1467a, 1818, 1828, 1831p–1, 

1881–1884, 3102(b) and 5412(b)(2)(B); 15 

U.S.C. 1681s, 1681w, 6801, and 6805(b)(1). 

■ 2. Amend appendix E by: 

■ a. Revising and republishing 

paragraph I.B. 

■ b. In paragraph I.C.1.a., removing the 

text ‘‘$250 billion’’ and adding the text 

‘‘$100 billion’’ in its place; and 

■ c. Revising and republishing 

paragraphs I.E. and II. 

The revisions and republications read 

as follows: 

Appendix E to Part 30—OCC 

Guidelines Establishing Standards for 

Recovery Planning by Certain Large 

Insured National Banks, Insured 

Federal Savings Associations, and 

Insured Federal Branches 

* * * * * 

I. Introduction 

* * * * * 

B. Compliance Date 

1. A covered bank with average total 

consolidated assets, calculated according to 

paragraph I.E.1. of this appendix, equal to or 

greater than $250 billion as of January 1, 

2025, should be in compliance with this 

appendix on January 1, 2025, except that the 

bank should be in compliance with: 

a. the amended provisions on non-financial 

risk within 12 months from January 1, 2025, 

and 

b. paragraph II.D. of this appendix within 

18 months from January 1, 2025. 

2. A covered bank with average total 

consolidated assets, calculated according to 

paragraph I.E.1. of this appendix, equal to or 

greater than $100 billion but less than $250 

billion as of January 1, 2025, should be in 

compliance with this appendix within 12 

months from January 1, 2025, except that the 

bank should be in compliance with 

paragraph II.D. of this appendix within 24 

months from January 1, 2025. 

3. A financial institution that is not a 

covered bank as of January 1, 2025, but 

which subsequently becomes a covered bank 

should comply with this appendix within 12 

months of becoming a covered bank, except 

that the bank should be in compliance with 

paragraph II.D. of this appendix within 24 

months of becoming a covered bank. 

* * * * * 

E. Definitions 

1. Average total consolidated assets means 

the average of total consolidated assets of the 

bank or the covered bank, as reported on the 

bank’s or the covered bank’s Consolidated 

Reports of Condition and Income for the four 

most recent consecutive quarters. 

2. Bank means any insured national bank, 

insured Federal savings association, or 

insured Federal branch of a foreign bank. 

3. Covered bank means any bank: 

a. With average total consolidated assets 

equal to or greater than $100 billion; 

b. With average total consolidated assets 

less than $100 billion if the bank was 

previously a covered bank, unless the OCC 

determines otherwise; or 

c. With average total consolidated assets 

less than $100 billion, if the OCC determines 

that such bank is highly complex or 

otherwise presents a heightened risk as to 

warrant the application of this appendix 

pursuant to paragraph I.C.1.a. of this 

appendix. 

4. Recovery means timely and appropriate 

action that a covered bank takes to remain a 

going concern when it is experiencing or is 

likely to experience considerable financial 

stress or non-financial stress. A covered bank 

in recovery has not yet deteriorated to the 

point where liquidation or resolution is 

imminent. 

5. Recovery plan means a plan that 

identifies triggers and options for responding 

to a wide range of severe internal and 

external stress scenarios to restore a covered 

bank that is in recovery to financial strength 

and viability in a timely manner. The options 

should maintain the confidence of market 

participants, and neither the plan nor the 

options may assume or rely on any 

extraordinary government support. 

6. Trigger means a quantitative or 

qualitative indicator of the risk or existence 

of severe financial stress or non-financial 

stress, the breach of which should always be 

escalated to senior management or the board 

of directors (or appropriate committee of the 

board of directors), as appropriate, for 

purposes of initiating a response. The breach 

of any trigger should result in timely notice 

accompanied by sufficient information to 

enable management of the covered bank to 

take corrective action. 

II. Recovery Plan 

A. Recovery plan. Each covered bank 

should develop and maintain a recovery plan 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 84261 

1 12 U.S.C. 1828(a). 

that is specific to that covered bank and 

appropriate for its individual size, risk 

profile, activities, and complexity, including 

the complexity of its organizational and legal 

entity structure. When developing and 

maintaining its recovery plan, each covered 

bank should appropriately consider both 

financial risk and non-financial risk 

(including operational and strategic risk). 

B. Elements of recovery plan. A recovery 

plan under paragraph II.A. of this appendix 

should include the following elements: 

1. Overview of covered bank. A recovery 

plan should describe the covered bank’s 

overall organizational and legal entity 

structure, including its material entities, 

critical operations, core business lines, and 

core management information systems. The 

plan should describe interconnections and 

interdependencies: 

(i) Across business lines within the 

covered bank; 

(ii) With affiliates in a bank holding 

company structure; 

(iii) Between a covered bank and its foreign 

subsidiaries; and 

(iv) With critical third parties. 

2. Triggers. A recovery plan should 

identify financial triggers and non-financial 

triggers that appropriately reflect the covered 

bank’s particular vulnerabilities. 

3. Options for recovery. A recovery plan 

should identify a wide range of credible 

options that a covered bank could undertake 

to restore financial strength and viability, 

thereby allowing the bank to continue to 

operate as a going concern and to avoid 

liquidation or resolution. A recovery plan 

should explain how the covered bank would 

carry out each option and describe the timing 

required for carrying out each option. The 

recovery plan should specifically identify the 

recovery options that require regulatory or 

legal approval. 

4. Impact assessments. For each recovery 

option, a covered bank should assess and 

describe how the option would affect the 

covered bank. This impact assessment and 

description should specify the procedures 

the covered bank would use to maintain the 

financial strength and viability of its material 

entities, critical operations, and core business 

lines for each recovery option. For each 

option, the recovery plan’s impact 

assessment should address the following: 

a. The effect on the covered bank’s capital, 

liquidity, funding, and profitability; 

b. The effect on the covered bank’s material 

entities, critical operations, and core business 

lines, including reputational impact; 

c. The effect on the covered bank’s risk 

profile as a result of changes to its financial 

risk and non-financial risk; and 

d. Any legal or market impediment or 

regulatory requirement that must be 

addressed or satisfied in order to implement 

the option. 

5. Escalation procedures. A recovery plan 

should clearly outline the process for 

escalating decision-making to senior 

management or the board of directors (or an 

appropriate committee of the board of 

directors), as appropriate, in response to the 

breach of any trigger. The recovery plan 

should also identify the departments and 

persons responsible for executing the 

decisions of senior management or the board 

of directors (or an appropriate committee of 

the board of directors). 

6. Management reports. A recovery plan 

should require reports that provide senior 

management or the board of directors (or an 

appropriate committee of the board of 

directors) with sufficient data and 

information to make timely decisions 

regarding the appropriate actions necessary 

to respond to the breach of a trigger. 

7. Communication procedures. A recovery 

plan should provide that the covered bank 

notify the OCC of any significant breach of 

a trigger and any action taken or to be taken 

in response to such breach and should 

explain the process for deciding when a 

breach of a trigger is significant. A recovery 

plan also should address when and how the 

covered bank will notify persons within the 

organization and other external parties of its 

action under the recovery plan. The recovery 

plan should specifically identify how the 

covered bank will obtain required regulatory 

or legal approvals. 

8. Other information. A recovery plan 

should include any other information that 

the OCC communicates in writing directly to 

the covered bank regarding the covered 

bank’s recovery plan. 

C. Relationship to other processes; 

coordination with other plans. The covered 

bank should integrate its recovery plan into 

its risk governance functions. The covered 

bank also should align its recovery plan with 

its other plans, such as its strategic; 

operational (including business continuity 

and resilience program); contingency; capital 

(including stress testing); liquidity; and 

resolution planning. The covered bank’s 

recovery plan should be specific to that 

covered bank. The covered bank also should 

coordinate its recovery plan with any 

recovery and resolution planning efforts by 

the covered bank’s holding company, so that 

the plans are consistent with and do not 

contradict each other. 

D. Testing. Each covered bank should test 

its recovery plan periodically but not less 

than annually and following any significant 

changes to the recovery plan made in 

response to a material event. Testing should 

validate the effectiveness of the recovery 

plan, including by considering each element 

set forth in paragraph II.B. of this appendix, 

and should be appropriate for the bank’s 

individual size, risk profile, activities, and 

complexity, including the complexity of its 

organizational and legal entity structure. 

Each covered bank should revise its recovery 

plan as appropriate following completion of 

testing. 

* * * * * 

Michael J. Hsu, 

Acting Comptroller of the Currency. 

[FR Doc. 2024–24402 Filed 10–21–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–33–P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

12 CFR Part 328 

RIN 3064–AF26 

FDIC Official Signs and Advertising 

Requirements, False Advertising, 

Misrepresentation of Insured Status, 

and Misuse of the FDIC’s Name or 

Logo 

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation (FDIC). 

ACTION: Final rule; delay of compliance 

date. 

SUMMARY: On December 20, 2023, the 

FDIC adopted a final rule that, among 

other things, amended the FDIC’s sign 

and advertising requirements for 

insured depository institutions (IDIs). 

The amendments made by the final rule 

took effect on April 1, 2024; however, 

full compliance with the amendments 

was extended to January 1, 2025. 

The FDIC is delaying the compliance 

date for the new sign and advertising 

requirements for IDIs in the final rule to 

May 1, 2025. This delay will provide 

additional opportunity for IDIs to 

establish processes and systems, and 

make technological updates, necessary 

to implement the new regulatory 

requirements. 

DATES: The compliance date for the 

amendments to subpart A of 12 CFR 

part 328 in the final rule published at 

89 FR 3504 on January 18, 2024, is 

delayed to May 1, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Division of Depositor and Consumer 

Protection: Luke H. Brown, Associate 

Director, 202–898–3842, LuBrown@

FDIC.gov; Meron Wondwosen, Chief, 

Supervisory Policy, 202–898–7211, 

MeWondwosen@FDIC.gov; Edward J. 

Hof, Senior Policy Analyst, 202–898– 

7213, EdwHof@FDIC.gov. Legal 

Division: Chantal Hernandez, Counsel, 

202–898–7388, ChHernandez@

FDIC.gov; Shane Bogusz, Attorney, 202– 

898–6571, SBogusz@FDIC.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 20, 2023, the FDIC Board of 

Directors adopted a final rule revising 

the sign and advertising regulations 

implementing section 18(a) of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act.1 On 

January 18, 2024 (89 FR 3504), the final 

rule was published in the Federal 

Register. 

The final rule became effective on 

April 1, 2024, and required full 

compliance with the rule by January 1, 

2025. Based upon feedback from IDIs 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1