11432 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 

will be prohibited from selling or 

distributing the products whose labels 

include the terminated uses identified 

in Table 2 of Unit II, except for export 

consistent with FIFRA section 17 or for 

proper disposal. 

Persons other than the registrant may 

sell, distribute, or use existing stocks of 

canceled products and products whose 

labels include the terminated uses until 

supplies are exhausted, provided that 

such sale, distribution, or use is 

consistent with the terms of the 

previously approved labeling on, or that 

accompanied, the canceled products 

and terminated uses. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. 

Dated: February 18, 2022. 

Marietta Echeverria, 

Acting Director, Registration Division, Office 

of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04232 Filed 2–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

Notice to All Interested Parties of 

Intent To Terminate Receivership 

Notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or 

Receiver) as Receiver for the institution 

listed below intends to terminate its 

receivership for said institution. 

NOTICE OF INTENT TO TERMINATE RECEIVERSHIP

Fund Receivership name City State 

Date of 

appointment 

of receiver 

10488 ................ First National Bank ............................................... Edinburg ............................................................... TX 09/13/2013 

The liquidation of the assets for the 

receivership has been completed. To the 

extent permitted by available funds and 

in accordance with law, the Receiver 

will be making a final dividend 

payment to proven creditors. 

Based upon the foregoing, the 

Receiver has determined that the 

continued existence of the receivership 

will serve no useful purpose. 

Consequently, notice is given that the 

receivership shall be terminated, to be 

effective no sooner than thirty days after 

the date of this notice. If any person 

wishes to comment concerning the 

termination of the receivership, such 

comment must be made in writing, 

identify the receivership to which the 

comment pertains, and sent within 

thirty days of the date of this notice to: 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 

Division of Resolutions and 

Receiverships, Attention: Receivership 

Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan 

Street, Dallas, TX 75201. 

No comments concerning the 

termination of this receivership will be 

considered which are not sent within 

this time frame. 

(Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1819) 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Dated at Washington, DC, on February 23, 

2022. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04205 Filed 2–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Change in Bank Control Notices; 

Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or 

Bank Holding Company 

The notificants listed below have 

applied under the Change in Bank 

Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and 

§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 

CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank 

or bank holding company. The factors 

that are considered in acting on the 

applications are set forth in paragraph 7 

of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). 

The public portions of the 

applications listed below, as well as 

other related filings required by the 

Board, if any, are available for 

immediate inspection at the Federal 

Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at 

the offices of the Board of Governors. 

This information may also be obtained 

on an expedited basis, upon request, by 

contacting the appropriate Federal 

Reserve Bank and from the Board’s 

Freedom of Information Office at 

https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/ 

request.htm. Interested persons may 

express their views in writing on the 

standards enumerated in paragraph 7 of 

the Act. 

Comments regarding each of these 

applications must be received at the 

Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of 

the Board of Governors, Ann E. 

Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th 

Street and Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20551–0001, or TDD 

(202) 263–4869, not later than March 16, 

2022. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of 

Minneapolis (Chris P. Wangen, 

Assistant Vice President), 90 Hennepin 

Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 

55480–0291. Comments can also be sent 

electronically to MA@mpls.frb.org: 

1. The LeGare Revocable Trust dated 

July 23, 2018, Greg LeGare and Elaine 

LeGare, as trustees, all of Osseo, 

Wisconsin; Bradley LeGare and Sharon 

LeGare, both of St. Charles, Illinois; 

Jeffrey P. LeGare, Lucas, Texas; Jennifer 

LeGare, Eau Claire, Wisconsin; and 

Pamela LeGare-Van Hout, Appleton, 

Wisconsin; to become the LeGare Group, 

a group acting in concert, to retain 

voting shares of Platinum Bancorp, Inc., 

and thereby indirectly retain voting 

shares of Platinum Bank, both of 

Oakdale, Minnesota. This notice 

replaces FR Doc. 2022–03603, published 

on 02–18–2022 at 87 FR 9347. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, February 23, 2022. 

Michele Taylor Fennell, 

Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04204 Filed 2–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Comment Request 

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System. 

ACTION: Notice, request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System (Board) invites 

comment on a proposal to extend for 

three years, with revision, the Capital 

Assessments and Stress Testing Reports 

(FR Y–14A/Q/M; OMB No. 7100–0341). 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before May 2, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by FR Y–14A/Q/M, by any of 

the following methods: 

• Agency Website: https://

www.federalreserve.gov/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments at 

https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/ 

foia/proposedregs.aspx. 

• Email: regs.comments@

federalreserve.gov. Include the OMB 

number or FR number in the subject line 

of the message. 

• Fax: (202) 452–3819 or (202) 452– 

3102. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 11433 

1The estimated number of respondents for the FR 

Y–14M is lower than for the FR Y–14Q and FR Y– 

14A because, in recent years, certain respondents to 

the FR Y–14A and FR Y–14Q have not met the 

materiality thresholds to report the FR Y–14M due 

to their lack of mortgage and credit activities. The 

Board expects this situation to continue for the 

foreseeable future. 

2 In certain circumstances, a firm may be required 

to re-submit its capital plan. See 12 CFR 225.8(e)(4); 

12 CFR 238.170(e)(4). Firms that must re-submit 

their capital plan generally also must provide a 

revised FR Y–14A in connection with their 

resubmission. 

• Mail: Ann E. Misback, Secretary, 

Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System, 20th Street and 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20551. 

All public comments are available 

from the Board’s website at https://

www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/ 

proposedregs.aspx as submitted, unless 

modified for technical reasons or to 

remove personally identifiable 

information at the commenter’s request. 

Accordingly, comments will not be 

edited to remove any confidential 

business information, identifying 

information, or contact information. 

Public comments may also be viewed 

electronically or in paper in Room M– 

4365A, 2001 C St NW, Washington, DC 

20551, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. 

on weekdays. For security reasons, the 

Board requires that visitors make an 

appointment to inspect comments. You 

may do so by calling (202) 452–3684. 

Upon arrival, visitors will be required to 

present valid government-issued photo 

identification and to submit to security 

screening in order to inspect and 

photocopy comments. 

Additionally, commenters may send a 

copy of their comments to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) Desk 

Officer for the Federal Reserve Board, 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget, New Executive Office Building, 

Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20503, or by fax to 

(202) 395–6974. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Federal Reserve Board Clearance 

Officer—Nuha Elmaghrabi—Office of 

the Chief Data Officer, Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Washington, DC 20551, (202) 

452–3829. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board 

authority under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and 

assign OMB control numbers to 

collections of information conducted or 

sponsored by the Board. In exercising 

this delegated authority, the Board is 

directed to take every reasonable step to 

solicit comment. In determining 

whether to approve a collection of 

information, the Board will consider all 

comments received from the public and 

other agencies. 

During the comment period for this 

proposal, a copy of the proposed PRA 

OMB submission, including the draft 

reporting form and instructions, 

supporting statement, and other 

documentation, will be made available 

on the Board’s public website at https:// 

www.federalreserve.gov/apps/ 

reportforms/review.aspx or may be 

requested from the agency clearance 

officer, whose name appears above. 

Final versions of these documents will 

be made available at https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, if 

approved. 

Request for Comment on Information 

Collection Proposal 

The Board invites public comment on 

the following information collections, 

which are being reviewed under 

authority delegated by the OMB under 

the PRA. Comments are invited on the 

following: 

a. Whether the proposed collections 

of information are necessary for the 

proper performance of the Board’s 

functions, including whether the 

information has practical utility; 

b. The accuracy of the Board’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

information collections, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; 

c. Ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; 

d. Ways to minimize the burden of 

information collection on respondents, 

including through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology; and 

e. Estimates of capital or startup costs 

and costs of operation, maintenance, 

and purchase of services to provide 

information. 

At the end of the comment period, the 

comments and recommendations 

received will be analyzed to determine 

the extent to which the Board should 

modify the proposal. 

Proposal Under OMB Delegated 

Authority To Extend for Three Years, 

With Revision, the Following 

Information Collections 

Report title: Capital Assessments and 

Stress Testing Reports. 

Agency form number: FR Y–14A/Q/ 

M. 

OMB control number: 7100–0341. 

Frequency: Annually, quarterly, and 

monthly. 

Respondents: These collections of 

information are applicable to bank 

holding companies (BHCs), U.S. 

intermediate holding companies (IHCs), 

and savings and loan holding 

companies (SLHCs) with $100 billion or 

more in total consolidated assets, as 

based on: (i) The average of the firm’s 

total consolidated assets in the four 

most recent quarters as reported 

quarterly on the firm’s Consolidated 

Financial Statements for Holding 

Companies (FR Y–9C); or (ii) if the firm 

has not filed an FR Y–9C for each of the 

most recent four quarters, then the 

average of the firm’s total consolidated 

assets in the most recent consecutive 

quarters as reported quarterly on the 

firm’s FR Y–9C. Reporting is required as 

of the first day of the quarter 

immediately following the quarter in 

which the respondent meets this asset 

threshold, unless otherwise directed by 

the Board. 

Estimated number of respondents: FR 

Y–14A/Q: 36; FR Y–14M: 34; 1 FR Y–14 

On-going Automation Revisions: 36; FR 

Y–14 Attestation On-going: 8. 

Estimated average hours per response: 

FR Y–14A: 1,330 hours; FR Y–14Q: 

1,999 hours; FR Y–14M: 1,071 hours; FR 

Y–14 On-going Automation Revisions: 

480 hours; FR Y–14 Attestation Ongoing: 2,560 hours. 

Estimated annual burden hours: FR 

Y–14A: 47,880 hours; FR Y–14Q: 

287,852 hours; FR Y–14M: 436,968 

hours; FR Y–14 On-going Automation 

Revisions: 17,280 hours; FR Y–14 

Attestation On-going: 20,480 hours. 

General description of report: This 

family of information collections is 

composed of the following three reports: 

• The annual FR Y–14A collects 

quantitative projections of balance 

sheet, income, losses, and capital across 

a range of macroeconomic scenarios and 

qualitative information on 

methodologies used to develop internal 

projections of capital across scenarios.2

• The quarterly FR Y–14Q collects 

granular data on various asset classes, 

including loans, securities, trading 

assets, and pre-provision net revenue 

(PPNR) for the reporting period. 

• The monthly FR Y–14M is 

comprised of three retail portfolio- and 

loan-level schedules, and one detailed 

address-matching schedule to 

supplement two of the portfolio- and 

loan-level schedules. 

The data collected through the FR Y– 

14A/Q/M reports (FR Y–14 reports) 

provide the Board with the information 

needed to help ensure that large firms 

have strong, firm-wide risk 

measurement and management 

processes supporting their internal 

assessments of capital adequacy and 

that their capital resources are 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
11434 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 

3See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test Publications: 

2021 Stress Test Scenarios (Washington: Board of 

Governors, February 2021), https://

www.federalreserve.gov/publications/stress-testscenarios-february-2021.htm. 

4 86 FR 7927 (February 3, 2021). 

5 12 CFR 225.8. 

6SLHC requirements for submitting the capital 

information required in these schedules for the 

2022 cycle is forthcoming. 

7For an example of these instructions, see Board 

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 

Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review 2020 

Summary Instructions (Washington: Board of 

Governors, March 2020), https://

www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/ 

files/bcreg20200304a3.pdf. 8 12 CFR part 217. 

sufficient, given their business focus, 

activities, and resulting risk exposures. 

The data within the reports are used to 

set firms’ stress capital buffer (SCB) 

requirements. The data are also used to 

support other Board supervisory efforts 

aimed at enhancing the continued 

viability of large firms, including 

continuous monitoring of firms’ 

planning and management of liquidity 

and funding resources, as well as 

regular assessments of credit risk, 

market risk, and operational risk, and 

associated risk management practices. 

Information gathered in this data 

collection is also used in the 

supervision and regulation of 

respondent financial institutions. 

Respondent firms are currently required 

to complete and submit up to 17 filings 

each year: One annual FR Y–14A filing, 

four quarterly FR Y–14Q filings, and 12 

monthly FR Y–14M filings. Compliance 

with the information collection is 

mandatory. 

Proposed revisions: The proposed 

revisions would enable the Board to 

better identify risk as part of the stress 

test, to better facilitate data 

reconciliation, and to mitigate 

ambiguity within the instructions. Data 

reconciliation is an important step in 

the stress testing analysis conducted by 

the Federal Reserve, as it ensures values 

are being reported consistently across 

firms. Consistent data leads to 

consistent treatment for stress testing 

purposes, which is critical, as stress 

testing is used to determine a firm’s 

capital requirements via the SCB 

requirement. The Board also proposes 

revisions and clarifications to the 

instructions. All proposed revisions 

would be effective for the September 30, 

2022, report date for the FR Y–14Q and 

FR Y–14M, and for the December 31, 

2022, report date for the FR Y–14A. 

General 

The Board proposes to change the asof date of the fourth quarter, unstressed 

submissions of FR Y–14Q, Schedules F 

(Trading) and L (Counterparty). Per the 

FR Y–14Q instructions, firms are 

required to report these schedules the 

earlier of fifty-two calendar days 

following the date on which they are 

notified of the global market shock 

(GMS) date, or March 15. The 

instructions also state that unless the 

Board requires the data to be provided 

over a different weekly period, firms 

may provide these data as of the most 

recent date that corresponds to their 

weekly internal risk reporting cycle as 

long as it falls before the as-of date. The 

Board proposes to revise the 

instructions to allow firms to use the 

most recent date that corresponds to 

their weekly internal risk reporting 

cycles as long as it falls within the same 

calendar week as the as-of date. This 

change would provide firms with more 

flexibility in reporting these schedules 

and would correspond to guidance 

provided in the Dodd-Frank Act Stress 

Test Publications: 2021 Stress Test 

Scenarios document.3

Capital 

Savings and Loan Holding Companies 

On February 3, 2021, the Board 

adopted a final rule 4 to tailor the 

requirements in the Board’s capital plan 

rule 5 based on risk. As part of the final 

rule, the Board adopted several 

revisions, notably that SLHCs would be 

subject to capital planning requirements 

beginning with the 2022 stress testing 

and capital planning cycle (cycle). 

Previously, SLHCs were not required to 

submit FR Y–14Q, Schedule C 

(Regulatory capital instruments) and 

Schedule D (Regulatory capital) because 

they were not subject to capital 

planning requirements. However, given 

that SLHCs will now be subject to these 

requirements, the Board proposes to 

require SLHCs to submit these 

schedules.6 This revision would align 

with the spirit of the capital plan rule. 

Assumptions Associated With 

Comprehensive Capital Analysis and 

Review (CCAR) Submissions 

The FR Y–14A, Schedule A 

(Summary) instructions describe when 

firms must use ‘‘planned capital 

actions’’ and ‘‘alternative capital 

actions,’’ but do not define either term 

or list the required assumptions for 

reported capital actions. Because the 

Board did not release CCAR 

instructions 7 for the 2021 cycle, it 

instead issued a CCAR Q&A (GEN0500) 

that contained the definitions and 

assumptions of capital actions required 

per the capital plan rule. The Board 

proposes to incorporate the definitions 

and assumptions of ‘‘planned capital 

actions’’ and ‘‘alternative capital 

actions’’ previously contained in CCAR 

Q&A GEN0500 into the FR Y–14A 

instructions to provide clarity regarding 

the meaning of these terms. 

Under the supervisory severely 

adverse (SSA) scenario CCAR 

submission, firms are required to 

include the effects of planned business 

plan changes (BPCs) and use planned 

capital actions. Per the Board’s capital 

rule,8 if a firm does not stay above its 

minimum capital requirements, 

including regulatory capital buffers that 

may encompass the SCB requirement, 

then it is subject to automatic 

restrictions on capital distributions and 

discretionary bonus payments. 

Requiring firms to assume that their 

planned BPCs and planned capital 

actions will occur under stressed 

conditions has resulted in unrealistic 

projections, as some or all of the 

planned capital actions would not be 

able to materialize if firms dropped into 

their regulatory capital buffers over the 

course of the projection horizon. Under 

the Internal stress scenario, firms are 

required to only include the effects of 

planned BPCs that the firm anticipates 

occurring, given the scenario, and to use 

alternative capital actions. To improve 

comparability between the CCAR 

Summary submissions under the 

Internal stress and SSA scenarios, the 

Board proposes to revise the planned 

BPC and capital action assumptions of 

the Summary CCAR submission under 

the SSA scenario to match those of the 

Internal stress scenario. 

Firms are required to incorporate the 

effects of planned, material BPCs in 

their CCAR submissions of the 

Summary schedule. The instructions do 

not specify whether firms must also 

include the effects of planned, 

immaterial BPCs that firms anticipate 

occurring over the projection horizon 

under baseline or stressed conditions. 

For clarity, the Board is proposing to 

revise the instructions to give firms the 

option to include the effects of planned, 

immaterial BPCs in their CCAR 

Summary submissions. Inclusion of the 

effects of planned, material BPCs in 

CCAR Summary submissions will still 

be required. 

Other Proposed Changes 

The Board often provides firms the 

option to phase in the effects of new 

accounting standards or other changes 

that affect the calculation of regulatory 

capital through the use of transition 

provisions (e.g., transitioning the impact 

of current expected credit loss 

methodology (CECL) adoption on 

regulatory capital). Firms must report 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 11435 

9See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test 2021: 

Supervisory Stress Test Methodology (Washington: 

Board of Governors, April 2021), https://

www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2021- 

april-supervisory-stress-test-methodology.pdf. 

10See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test 2021: 

Supervisory Stress Test Methodology (Washington: 

Board of Governors, April 2021), https://

www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2021- 

april-supervisory-stress-test-methodology.pdf. 

regulatory capital items on FR Y–14Q, 

Schedule D (Regulatory Capital) 

exclusive of the effects of transition 

provisions, whereas regulatory capital 

items on FR Y–9C, Schedule HC–R 

(Regulatory Capital) may be reported 

inclusive of transition provisions if 

firms elect to apply the transition 

provisions. As described in the DoddFrank Act Stress Test 2021: Supervisory 

Stress Test Methodology document,9 the 

Board adjusts the numerator and 

denominator of the supervisory stress 

test capital calculations to align with the 

capital rule, which includes the effects 

of transition provisions. To ensure 

consistency with regulatory capital 

balances that are used in the capital 

calculations of the supervisory stress 

test and to improve comparability across 

the capital schedules of the FR Y–14Q 

and FR Y–9C, the Board proposes to 

revise Schedule D to remove the 

requirement that firms exclude the 

effects of transition provisions. 

Firms currently report the carrying 

value of capital instruments at quarterend in Column I (‘‘Carrying value, as of 

quarter-end’’) of FR Y–14Q, Schedule 

C.1 (Regulatory capital instruments as of 

quarter end). On this schedule, firms 

also report some components that affect 

the carrying value, such as the fair value 

of swaps associated with the capital 

instrument (Column K). Not all 

categories of components that affect the 

carrying value have their own item, and 

some components may only be 

applicable to certain capital 

instruments. The Board proposes to add 

an item to capture all other changes that 

affect the carrying value of an 

instrument that are not currently 

captured by the existing component 

items. This item would enhance data 

reconciliation efforts for Schedule C.1. 

Firms report repurchases and 

redemptions on both FR Y–14A, 

Schedule C (Regulatory capital 

instruments) and FR Y–14Q, Schedule C 

(Regulatory capital instruments). The FR 

Y–14A, Schedule C instructions require 

firms to report repurchases and 

redemptions as negative values. The FR 

Y–14Q, Schedule C instructions do not 

specify how to report repurchases and 

redemptions, and so, there is diversity 

in practice across firms. For consistency 

between the reports, the Board proposes 

to require repurchases and redemptions 

to be reported as negative values on FR 

Y–14Q, Schedule C. 

Firms report dividends on FR Y–14A, 

Schedule A.1.d (Capital) and Schedule 

C. The instructions for dividend items 

on Schedules A.1.d and C reference 

definitions on FR Y–9C, Schedule HI–A 

(Changes in holding company equity 

capital). On Schedule HI–A, firms report 

values on a year-to-date basis, while 

most items on Schedules A.1.d and C 

are reported on a quarter-to-date basis. 

As a result, some firms have reported 

dividend items on a year-to-date basis, 

while others report values on a quarterto-date basis. To remove ambiguity, the 

Board proposes to revise the 

instructions for the following items to 

specify that these items must be 

reported on a quarter-to-date basis: 

• ‘‘Cash dividends declared on 

preferred stock’’ (Schedule A.1.d, item 

12; Schedule C item 116); and 

• ‘‘Cash dividends declared on 

common stock’’ (Schedule A.1.d, items 

13 and 117; Schedule C, item 117). 

Firms are required to report issuances 

of capital and subordinated debt 

instruments on FR Y–14Q, Schedule C.3 

(Regulatory capital and subordinated 

debt instruments issuances during 

quarter). The instructions do not specify 

whether subordinated debt instruments 

that were acquired must be reported on 

Schedule C.3. Such instruments were 

not issued by a firm but are new to a 

firm’s balance sheet. Given that these 

instruments are new to a firm’s balance 

sheet, the Board proposes to revise the 

instructions to state that subordinated 

debt instruments acquired via a merger 

or acquisition must be reported on 

Schedule C.3. The Board proposes to 

further clarify that firms must also 

report on Schedule C.3 situations in 

which a Committee on Uniform 

Securities Identification Procedures 

(CUSIP) number for a subordinated debt 

instrument changes, even if the terms of 

the instrument did not change. This 

revision would ensure that CUSIP 

number changes are properly captured. 

Firms are required to report the 

unamortized discounts/premiums, fees, 

and foreign exchange translation 

impacts as of quarter-end in Column J 

of FR Y–14Q, Schedule C.1. However, 

there is inconsistency across firms in 

terms of whether discounts and 

premiums must be reported as positive 

or negative values. To remove 

ambiguity, the Board proposes to clarify 

that unamortized amounts of discounts 

must be reported as positive values and 

unamortized amounts of premiums 

must be reported as negative values. 

These revisions would standardize the 

reporting of this item. 

To further enhance data reconciliation 

efforts, the Board proposes to add four 

items to FR Y–14Q, Schedule C.1. The 

specific items the Board proposes to add 

are: 

• ‘‘Interest expense for the quarter 

(net of swaps);’’ 

• ‘‘Interest expense for the quarter 

(with swaps, excluding any gains or 

losses due to the fair value adjustment 

of ASC 185/FAS 133 hedges);’’ 

• ‘‘Interest expense for the quarter 

(with swaps, this number should 

reconcile to the quarterly number 

reported in FR Y–9C BHCK4397 for all 

subordinated debt instruments);’’ and 

• ‘‘Fair value adjustment at the 

quarter end for subordinated debt 

securities that are carried at fair value.’’ 

The addition of these items would 

ensure that balances on Schedule C.1 

are properly reconciled for use in 

supervisory models. With the addition 

of these items, the Board also proposes 

to remove the following four items from 

Schedules C.1 and C.3, as they would 

no longer be needed: 

• ‘‘Y–9C BHCK4602 reconciliation’’ 

(Column N of Schedule C.1); 

• ‘‘Currency of foreign exchange swap 

payment’’ (Column LL of Schedule C.3); 

• ‘‘Notional amount of foreign 

exchange swap ($ Million)’’ (Column 

MM of Schedule C.3); and 

• ‘‘Exchange rate implied by foreign 

exchange swap’’ (Column NN of 

Schedule C.3). 

Securities 

Firms are required to report the 

amount of allowance for credit losses in 

FR Y–14Q, Schedule B.1 (Securities 1— 

main schedule). However, the 

instructions for this item do not specify 

whether amounts must be reported as 

positive or negative values. To improve 

the consistency of reporting across 

firms, the Board proposes to revise the 

instructions to indicate that the 

allowance for credit losses on Schedule 

B.1 must be reported as a positive 

number. This revision would better 

enable the Board to compare reported 

values, as all values would be reported 

in the same manner. 

Trading 

As mentioned in the Dodd-Frank Act 

Stress Test 2021: Supervisory Stress Test 

Methodology document,10 the Board 

adjusts a firm’s trading profit and loss 

to estimate losses on private equity 

investments in affordable housing that 

qualify as public welfare investments 

under Regulation Y. The data used to 

make this adjustment is currently 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
11436 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 

11For reporting public welfare investments made 

at the bank holding company level, an affordable 

housing private equity investment would be 

recognized by the Federal Reserve if it also qualifies 

under 12 CFR 225.28(b)(12) and 12 CFR 225.127. 

For reporting public welfare investments made at 

the bank level, an affordable housing private equity 

investment would be recognized by the Federal 

Reserve if it also qualifies under the applicable 

public welfare investment criteria of the bank’s 

primary Federal regulator. 

12 85 FR 56607 (September 14, 2020). 13 84 FR 70529 (December 23, 2019). 

collected through a supplemental 

collection, and the Board proposes to 

formalize this supplemental collection 

by incorporating its key elements into 

FR Y–14Q, Schedule F.24 (Private 

equity). This proposal would require 

firms to isolate and report private equity 

exposures that qualify as public welfare 

investments in new line items. The 

instructions would specify that a public 

welfare investment is defined as an 

equity investment in corporations or 

projects designed primarily to promote 

community welfare, such as the 

economic rehabilitation and 

development of low-income areas.11

Incorporating this supplemental 

collection into FR Y–14Q, Schedule F 

(Trading) would allow for more 

standardized reporting, which is crucial 

to ensure private equity investments in 

affordable housing that qualify as public 

welfare investments are treated the same 

across firms. 

The Board also proposes to make 

clarifications to the Schedule F 

instructions regarding the reporting of 

accrual loan and fair value option (FVO) 

loan hedges across Schedule F, the 

reporting of interest rate basis risk on 

Schedule F.6 (Rates DV01), and limiting 

the allowable units used to report 

interest rate sensitivities on Schedule 

F.7 (Rates Vega). These clarifications 

would remove ambiguity around the 

reporting of hedges on Schedule F and 

would standardize reporting of interest 

rate information, which would improve 

data comparability across firms. 

Counterparty 

Client-Cleared Derivative Exposures 

Beginning with the June 30, 2021, asof date, firms became required to 

include client-cleared derivative 

exposures in FR Y–14Q, Schedule L 

(Counterparty).12 Exposures to clientcleared derivatives are excluded from 

the calculation of stressed losses. As 

part of Schedule L.5 (Derivatives and 

securities financing transaction profile), 

firms are required to rank their top 25 

exposures by certain counterparty 

methodologies. Client-cleared derivative 

exposures are currently excluded from 

these rankings. The Board proposes to 

require firms to rank their top 25 

exposures for client-cleared derivatives 

on Schedule L.5. This new ranking 

would enable the Board to continue to 

exclude exposures to client-cleared 

derivatives from the calculation for 

stressed losses and would provide more 

insight into the size and diversity of 

these exposures. As part of this revision, 

the Board would also modify the 

instructions to reinforce that exposures 

to client-cleared derivatives must be 

excluded from other top 25 rankings. 

Counterparty Identification 

Firms are required to report 

counterparty attribute information (e.g., 

legal entity identifier (LEI), industry 

code, etc.) at the counterparty legal 

entity level on FR Y–14Q, Schedule L. 

The Board proposes to require firms to 

report counterparty attribute 

information at the consolidated/parent 

level in addition to the counterparty 

legal entity level. Collecting this 

information at the consolidated/parent 

level would enable the Board to better 

identify exposures to parent and 

subsidiary entities within the same 

organizational structure, which would 

allow for a more robust analysis of 

counterparty exposure. This more 

robust analysis would improve the 

Board’s ability to evaluate the 

counterparty risk faced by firms. 

Additional/Offline Credit Valuation 

Adjustment (CVA) Reserves 

Firms are currently required to report 

‘‘trades not captured’’ in the 

‘‘Additional/offline CVA Reserves’’ item 

of FR Y–14Q, Schedule L.1.e (Aggregate 

CVA data by ratings and 

collateralization). ‘‘Trades not captured’’ 

refers to trades or counterparties for 

which CVA is computed outside of a 

firm’s regular CVA system, which could 

occur due to the complexity or novelty 

of a particular trade. Such trades would 

not be captured in Schedules L.2 (EE 

[Expected exposure] profile by 

counterparty) or L.3 (Credit quality by 

counterparty) due to the custom CVA 

approximation methodology of these 

trades. The instructions for the 

‘‘Additional/offline CVA Reserves’’ item 

require firms to report exposures to 

counterparties only at the aggregate 

level. Several firms report significant 

portions of their counterparty exposures 

as additional/offline CVA reserves. The 

Board proposes to require firms to 

report these exposures by rating, which 

is more granular than the current 

requirements, to better understand, 

identify, and monitor risks associated 

with exposures reported in this item. 

Such data would provide a more 

complete picture of counterparty 

exposures at firms with significant 

amounts reported as additional/offline 

CVA reserves. 

Unstressed vs. Stressed Counterparty 

Submissions 

Firms are required to report 

unstressed data on Schedule L quarterly 

and are required to report stressed data 

on this schedule annually. The 

Schedule L instructions note that for 

unstressed submissions, firms must only 

include exposures in certain subschedules for which the firm computes 

CVA for its public financial statement 

reported under U.S. generally accepted 

accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) or 

applicable standard. However, for 

stressed submissions, firms must also 

include transactions that would not 

typically require CVA for public 

financial statement reporting under U.S. 

GAAP or applicable standard (e.g., fullyor over- collateralized derivatives). 

Therefore, the scope of reported 

exposures is larger for stressed 

submissions. 

The scope of reported exposures on 

FR Y–14Q, Schedule L expanded for 

data as of June 30, 2020, to include 

securities financing transactions 

(SFTs).13 This additional scope of 

transactions increases the divide 

between the transactions reported on 

unstressed submissions compared to 

those reported on stressed submissions. 

As a result of this greater divide and to 

better compare the impact of stressed 

conditions on a firm’s counterparty 

exposures, the Board proposes to 

require aggregate unstressed CVA 

related exposures to be reported 

together with stressed exposures in 

Schedule L.1.e. This data would give 

the Board a more complete 

understanding of firms’ counterparty 

credit risk, as it would enable the Board 

to directly compare the same exposures 

under unstressed and stressed 

conditions. 

Wrong-Way and Right-Way Risk 

Across Schedule L, firms are required 

to report wrong-way risk and right-way 

risk exposures. Wrong-way risk arises 

when the exposure to a counterparty is 

adversely correlated with the credit 

quality of that counterparty. Right-way 

risk occurs when this situation is 

reversed. When wrong-way risk is 

directly connected to a particular 

counterparty (e.g., the counterparty’s 

rating was downgraded), it is referred to 

as specific wrong-way risk. Due to 

questions received from reporting firms, 

the Board proposes to clarify how to 

report occurrences of specific wrongway risk. The Board proposes to require 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 11437 

14Appendix B of 12 CFR 252. 

15 12 CFR 217.2. 

firms to assume zero for the value of the 

received collateral during the 

calculation of both stressed and 

unstressed net current exposure when 

specific wrong-way risk is present in the 

collateral. This revision would align 

with the principle of conservatism in 

the Board’s Stress Testing Policy 

Statement.14

The Board also proposes to 

incorporate the response to FR Y–14 

Q&A #1374 to remove ambiguity 

regarding the reporting of right-way risk 

on Schedule L. Specifically, the Board 

would revise the instructions to require 

firms to exclude stressed exposures on 

trades where the exposure is eliminated 

upon default of the counterparty. This 

revision would ensure that only true 

exposures are captured on Schedule L. 

Discount Factor 

Firms are required to report the 

discount factor used to calculate 

stressed and unstressed CVA on 

Schedule L.2. The instructions for this 

item mention the London Interbank 

Offered Rate (LIBOR), which was 

discontinued at the end of 2021. Given 

this, the Board proposes to generalize 

the language to instead mention the 

reference or benchmark rate used to 

discount the expected exposure in a 

firm’s CVA model. This revision would 

allow for more flexibility since LIBOR 

was discontinued. 

Unique Identifiers 

The general instructions of Schedule 

L state that unique identifiers (e.g., 

Counterparty ID) and names must be 

consistent across all sub-schedules. 

However, the Board has identified 

several cases in which this requirement 

has not been met. To reinforce this 

requirement, the Board proposes to add 

language to the instructions for 

Schedules L.2 and L.3 to remove any 

potential uncertainty in reporting 

unique identifiers. This revision would 

result in more consistent reporting 

across Schedule L. 

Collateral 

Firms are required to report the total 

unstressed mark-to-market value of 

collateral of derivatives on Schedule 

L.5.1 (Derivative and SFT information 

by counterparty legal entity and netting 

set/agreement). The instructions note 

that all collateral reported must be 

eligible financial collateral. The Board 

clarified through FR Y–14 Q&A #1155 

that eligible financial collateral refers to 

the definition of ‘‘financial collateral’’ in 

the Board’s capital rule.15 To mitigate 

confusion, the Board proposes to 

incorporate the response to Q&A #1155 

into the Schedule L.5.1 instructions. 

Firms are also required to report the 

type of non-cash collateral or initial 

margin (e.g., corporate debt) allowed 

under a given agreement in the ‘‘NonCash Collateral Type’’ item of Schedule 

L.5.1. The instructions for this item only 

mention posted collateral in terms of 

what must be reported. In response to 

questions from reporting firms, the 

Board proposes to require firms to 

include all non-cash collateral or initial 

margin that was posted or received in 

actuality as opposed to only those 

allowed under a given agreement. This 

revision would reduce ambiguity 

surrounding what to report and would 

also provide the Board with a more 

encompassing view of the non-cash 

collateral involved in applicable 

transactions. This more encompassing 

view would result in more accurate loss 

calculations and would enhance risk 

monitoring. 

Credit Support Annexes (CSAs) 

On Schedule L.5.1, firms are required 

to indicate in the ‘‘CSA contractual 

features (non-vanilla)’’ item whether 

any transactions conducted under a 

given CSA agreement have any nonvanilla contractual features (e.g., 

downgrade triggers). However, the 

instructions for this item do not specify 

how firms should report transactions 

that have vanilla contractual features. 

The Board proposes to clarify that for 

such transactions, firms must report 

‘‘NA’’ in this item. 

Due to questions from reporting firms, 

the Board also proposes to clarify that 

the ‘‘CSA contractual features (nonvanilla)’’ item applies to any nonstandard market terms inclusive of 

features such as minimum threshold 

amounts (MTAs), changes to MTAs, 

additional termination events, and 

ratings-based thresholds. This revision 

would remove uncertainty regarding 

what features are considered nonvanilla for purposes of this item. 

Reporting Scope 

On Schedules L.1–L.3, top 

counterparties are identified based on 

the exposure amount at a consolidated 

counterparty level for ranking purposes 

in determining top 95% stressed or 

unstressed CVA. The Board has received 

several questions regarding the scope of 

this reporting, including consistency 

across schedules. To remove ambiguity, 

the Board proposes to clarify that if a 

consolidated or parent counterparty is 

selected as top 95% of CVA, then a 

firm’s exposures to all the 

counterparties and legal entities 

associated with the consolidated or 

parent counterparty must be included 

and reported in L.1 (Derivatives profile 

by counterparty and aggregate across all 

counterparties), rather than including 

only counterparties and legal entities 

with which the firm has a CVA. In 

comparison, the firm can report in 

Schedules L.2 and L.3 the exposure 

information limited to the legal entities 

and/or netting sets with which the firm 

has a CVA. These revisions would 

provide a more complete view of 

counterparty exposures faced by firms 

and would incorporate responses to FR 

Y–14 Q&As #1180 and #1190 into the 

Schedule L instructions. 

Per FR Y–14 Q&A #1181, Schedules 

L.1.a and L.1.b (Top consolidated/ 

parent counterparties comprising 95% 

of firm unstressed CVA, ranked by 

unstressed and stressed CVA, 

respectively) must be reported at the 

legal entity level, at a minimum. This is 

also true for Schedules L.2 and L.3. The 

Board has received several questions 

from reporting firms regarding 

providing data at the netting set or subnetting level. In light of these questions, 

the Board proposes to clarify that firms 

may choose to report these schedules at 

the netting set or sub-netting set level. 

Note that the Schedule L instructions 

specify that if a firm chooses to report 

one of these schedules at the netting set 

or sub-netting set level, then it must 

report all of them at that level. 

Gross Current Exposure 

In several places on Schedule L.1, 

firms are required to report the gross 

current exposure of given transactions. 

Gross current exposure is defined as 

pre-collateral exposure after bilateral 

counterparty netting. The Board has 

received questions from reporting firms 

on whether fair-valued SFTs should be 

in scope for reporting in the gross 

current exposure items. The questioners 

note that the definition provided applies 

to derivatives but does not apply to 

SFTs. The Board clarified in FR Y–14 

Q&A #1279 that gross current exposure 

items only apply to derivatives and 

must be left blank for SFTs. The Board 

proposes to incorporate this response 

into the Schedule L.1 instructions. 

Minimum Transfer Amounts 

Firms are required to report the 

minimum amounts that must be 

transferred to the counterparty and to 

the reporting firm in the event of a 

margin call in Schedule L.5.1. Due to 

observed diversity in reporting, the 

Board proposes to specify that firms 

must report the U.S. dollar equivalent of 

values reported in these items, as 

opposed to the non-U.S. dollar local 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
11438 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 

16 84 FR 70529 (December 23, 2019). 

currency associated with a particular 

CSA. This revision would standardize 

the units reported in this item and 

improve comparability across 

exposures. 

Other Revisions 

The instructions for Schedule L.5 

state that for positions with no legal 

netting set agreement, mark-to-market 

amounts can be aggregated and reported 

as a single record. The instructions 

further state that firms must report ‘‘N’’ 

in the ‘‘Legal Enforceability’’ item and 

‘‘None’’ in the ‘‘Netting Set ID’’ item for 

such aggregated records. In the case of 

the ‘‘Legal Enforceability’’ item, these 

instructions are redundant and in the 

case of the ‘‘Netting Set ID’’ item, they 

conflict with language provided later in 

the Schedule L.5 instructions. The 

Board proposes to remove the 

redundant and conflicting language 

from Schedule L.5, which would clarify 

that firms must only report ‘‘NA’’ in the 

‘‘Netting Set ID’’ item for positions with 

no legal agreement. This revision would 

incorporate the response from FR Y–14 

Q&A #1383 into the Schedule L 

instructions. 

Firms are required to report mark-tomarket amounts that reflect the positive 

or negative contribution to an exposure 

upon counterparty default and close-out 

netting in Schedule L.5. The Board has 

received questions from reporting firms 

about whether this language applies to 

both derivatives and SFTs. Reporting 

firms have also asked the Board how to 

report in line with the instructions in 

cases where close-out netting for SFTs 

is not enforceable (i.e., the SFT mark-tomarket received cannot be netted 

against the amount posted when 

calculating current exposure). The 

Board clarified in FR Y–14 Q&A #1386 

that the language regarding reporting 

mark-to-market amounts that reflect the 

positive or negative contribution to an 

exposure upon counterparty default and 

close-out netting only applies to 

derivatives and not to SFTs. In this FR 

Y–14 Q&A, the Board also clarified that 

firms must report zero in cases where 

the SFT close-out netting is not 

enforceable. The Board proposes to 

incorporate the response in FR Y–14 

Q&A #1386 into the instructions by (1) 

revising the Schedule L.5 general 

instructions to specify that the language 

reflecting the positive or negative 

contribution to exposure upon 

counterparty default only applies to 

derivatives, and (2) revising the 

‘‘Unstressed Mark-to-Market Received 

(SFTs)’’ and ‘‘Stressed Mark-to-Market 

Received (SFTs)’’ items of Schedule 

L.5.1 to specify that in cases where the 

close-out netting is not enforceable, 

firms must report zero. Relatedly, since 

the Board is proposing to revise the 

Schedule L.5 general instructions to 

specify reporting for derivatives, the 

Board also proposes to revise the 

instructions for the stressed and 

unstressed mark-to-market received and 

posted SFT items on Schedule L.5.1 to 

clarify that these items must be reported 

as positive values. 

Firms became required to include 

exposures to client-cleared derivatives 

in Schedule L.5 for the June 30, 2021, 

as-of date. As part of this requirement, 

firms must report SFT exposures when 

a firm acts as an agent on behalf of a 

client for which lender indemnification 

has been provided against the 

borrower’s default. Due to observed 

diversity in reporting practices, the 

Board proposes to revise the Schedule 

L.5 instructions to clarify that firms 

must also include SFT exposures when 

the firm acts as an agent on behalf of a 

client for which a credit guarantee has 

been provided against the borrower’s 

default. This revision would reinforce 

the original intent of adding the 

reporting of exposures to client-cleared 

derivatives to Schedule L.5, in that it 

would require firms to report their 

indirect exposures to clients when 

credit risk is present, regardless of 

whether that exposure arises from a 

lender indemnification or a credit 

guarantee. 

Firms are required to report stressed 

CVA values on Schedules L.1 and L.5.1. 

On Schedule L.1, the instructions state 

that firms must report the full 

revaluation of asset-side CVA under 

stressed conditions. On Schedule L.5.1, 

the instructions state that firms must 

only include stressed CVA as it relates 

to derivatives. For consistency across 

Schedule L, the Board proposes to 

revise the ‘‘Stressed CVA’’ item of 

Schedule L.5.1 to require firms to 

include stressed CVA as it relates to 

SFTs, as well as continue to include 

stressed CVA as it relates to derivatives. 

This revision would allow the Board to 

get a more complete and consistent 

picture of CVA exposure across 

reporting firms. 

Wholesale 

Internal Risk Rating 

Firms began reporting FR Y–14Q, 

Schedule H.4 (Internal risk rating) as of 

March 31, 2020.16 On this schedule, 

firms are required to report the ratings 

used in their internal risk rating system, 

as well as a description of each rating. 

There has been a wide variety of 

internal ratings and descriptions 

provided, which has made evaluations 

across firms difficult. To improve 

comparability of internal ratings 

reported in this schedule, the Board 

proposes to add three items: Minimum 

probability of default, maximum 

probability of default, and the 

calculation method of the probability of 

default (i.e., calculated through the 

cycle or as a point-in-time value). The 

minimum and maximum probability of 

default items would allow the Board to 

assess credit risk more easily across 

firms by providing benchmark values 

for internal ratings. The type of 

probability of default item would 

provide critical information for how the 

minimum and maximum values are 

calculated (e.g., point in time 

calculation). The addition of these items 

would enhance wholesale risk 

monitoring. 

Undrawn Commitments 

Firms are required to report the 

interest rate charged on the credit 

facility for corporate and commercial 

real estate (CRE) loans on FR Y–14Q, 

Schedule H.1 and H.2, items 38 and 27, 

respectively. The instructions require 

the reporting of the most conservative 

interest rate for fully undrawn facilities, 

which was intended to accommodate a 

scenario in which there are multiple 

interest rate options, and the actual 

interest rate would not be known until 

the loan was drawn. However, reporting 

firms have asked how to report a second 

scenario where a facility is comprised of 

multiple lines of credit, each with a 

separate interest rate. The Board 

proposes to clarify the reporting 

requirements for these two scenarios in 

the instructions to improve consistency 

and mitigate confusion. For the first 

scenario, the Board proposes to clarify 

that the instruction to report the most 

conservative interest rate only applies to 

situations where the obligor has a 

choice of interest rates and one is 

chosen when the line is drawn. For the 

second scenario, the instructions would 

require firms to report the dollarweighted average interest rate that 

approximates the overall rate as if the 

credit facility were funded and fully 

drawn on the reporting date. 

Update Property Type Options 

Firms currently report the property 

type of their CRE loans on FR Y–14Q, 

Schedule H.2, in item 9 (‘‘Property 

Type’’). While this item contains 

multiple property type options, the 

structure of the CRE market has changed 

since these initial property type options 

were implemented for this item. More 

specifically, over the past decade, there 

has been rapid growth in the healthcare 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 11439 

and assisted living industry, resulting in 

demographic changes, as well as in 

e-commerce platforms, which rely on 

warehouses for storage. The existing 

property type options do not separately 

break out these industries, and these 

CRE loans are commingled with other 

property types in other options. The 

Board proposes to update the property 

type options to include ‘‘Healthcare/ 

Assisted Living’’ and ‘‘Warehouse/ 

Distribution.’’ This revision would 

improve risk identification within the 

CRE portfolio. 

Clarify Informal ‘‘Advised Lines’’ 

Exclusion 

On FR Y–14Q, Schedule H.1, the 

instructions for corporate loan 

population state to exclude informal 

‘‘advised lines,’’ but the current 

definition of this term is ambiguous, 

potentially resulting in the exclusion of 

more commitments than there should 

be. The Board proposes to modify the 

language to clarify that only lines of 

credit that are unknown to the customer 

must be excluded from Schedule H.1. 

This modification would ensure that all 

applicable commitments are reported, 

other than the clearly defined 

exclusions. 

Retail 

Credit Score Reporting Requirements 

Firms are required to report the 

origination credit bureau score for the 

primary account holder and the 

refreshed credit bureau score for 

domestic credit card account holders on 

FR Y–14M, Schedule D (Domestic credit 

card) in items 38 and 40, respectively. 

For both items, the instructions allow 

firms to map an internal credit score 

used to determine the primary account 

holder’s creditworthiness to a 

commercial credit score for cases in 

which a commercial credit score was 

not obtained or was not being used to 

evaluate the creditworthiness of the 

primary account holder. The ability to 

map an internal credit score to a 

commercial credit score has resulted in 

reporting inconsistencies, due to the 

subjectivity of the mapping. To 

standardize the reporting of credit 

scores, the Board proposes to revise the 

language in the instructions for both 

items to require firms to report a 

commercial credit score if one was 

available at origination or refresh for the 

primary account holder. The Board 

proposes to further revise the 

instructions to state that if a commercial 

credit score was not available at the 

time of origination or refresh and if the 

underwriting decision was based on an 

internal score, then firms would be 

required to map their internal credit 

scores to commercial credit scores. 

Firms are also required to report the 

FICO score range of the credit score of 

the borrower at origination in the 

‘‘Original commercially available credit 

bureau score or equivalent’’ segment 

variable on all sub-schedules of FR Y– 

14Q, Schedule A (Retail). The 

instructions for this segment variable 

allow the reporting of an internal credit 

score mapped to a commercial credit 

score if an internal score was used in 

the original underwriting decision. To 

also standardize credit score reporting 

on Schedule A, the Board proposes to 

require firms to report a commercial 

credit score if one was available at 

origination. Firms would be required to 

map their internal credit scores or nonFICO commercial credit scores to FICO 

credit scores if a FICO credit score was 

not available at origination. 

Additionally, the instructions for this 

segment variable require firms to report 

in FICO credit score ranges and state 

that upon request, the Federal Reserve 

will provide ranges for other 

commercial credit scores. However, to 

further standardize the reporting of 

credit scores, the Board proposes to 

remove this sentence from the 

instructions. Removing this sentence 

would require firms to create their own 

mappings from their internal credit 

scores or from non-FICO commercial 

credit scores to FICO credit scores. 

Loans in Forbearance or Other Loss 

Mitigation Situations 

The coronavirus disease 2019 

(COVID) event caused an increase in 

loans in forbearance or other loss 

mitigation situations (collectively, ‘‘loss 

mitigation’’). These loans have different 

risk characteristics than other loans 

reported on the FR Y–14M. While there 

are some loss mitigation items on the FR 

Y–14M, the Board observed during the 

COVID event that there are still data 

gaps, and several loss mitigation items 

did not have the flexibility to capture 

loss mitigation in the face of 

occurrences such as the COVID event. 

To fill observed data gaps, the Board 

proposes to add a ‘‘Workout Type 

Started’’ item to Schedule A (Domestic 

first lien) and Schedule B (Domestic 

home equity), as well as an ‘‘Actual 

Payment Amount’’ item to Schedule A. 

The ‘‘Workout Type Started’’ item 

would be used in conjunction with the 

‘‘Workout Type Completed’’ item 

(Schedule A, item 77; Schedule B, item 

61) and would allow the Board to track 

any changes to the loss mitigation plans 

of the loan once a loan has undergone 

loss mitigation. The ‘‘Actual Payment 

Amount’’ item would allow the Board to 

track actual payments made on loans, 

which would enable the Board to better 

monitor activity on loans in loss 

mitigation. Note that this item is only 

being proposed to be added to Schedule 

A because an equivalent item already 

exists on Schedule B (item 68). 

Firms are required to report the 

principal deferred amount and the 

principal write-down amount in items 

87 and 89, respectively, of Schedule A. 

Per the instructions, these items are 

only reported if the loan has been 

modified. During the COVID event, 

certain loans were not modified but did 

experience principal deferrals and 

write-downs. However, these amounts 

were not reported on Schedule A due to 

the requirement that the loans be 

modified. To expand the circumstances 

under which firms would report these 

items, the Board proposes to remove the 

requirement that these items only be 

reported if loans are modified. 

Relatedly, the Board proposes to rename 

item 87 to ‘‘Deferred Amount’’ to 

capture all deferred amounts, not just 

those related to the loan principal. 

Finally, the Board proposes to revise 

the reporting options to the 

‘‘Modification Type’’ and ‘‘Workout 

Type Completed’’ items (Schedule A, 

items 74 and 77, respectively; Schedule 

B, items 77 and 61, respectively) to add 

flexibility to enable these items to apply 

to a broader set of occurrences, such as 

the COVID event. These revisions would 

enable the Board to better monitor loss 

mitigation loans. 

Other Revisions 

Firms currently flag whether portfolio 

loans are held-for-investment (HFI) and 

measured at fair value under the FVO or 

are held-for-sale (HFS) in item 130 

(‘‘HFI FVO/HFS Flag’’) of Schedule A. 

However, the actual fair-value amount is 

not reported on Schedule A. Firms are 

required to report the aggregate fairvalue amounts of HFS loans and HFI 

loans measured under the FVO on FR 

Y–14Q, Schedule J (Retail FVO/HFS). 

For data reconciliation across the FR Y– 

14M and FR Y–14Q, as well as for 

monitoring purposes, the Board is 

proposing to add a new field to 

Schedule A to capture the fair-value 

amount of HFS loans and HFI loans 

measured under the FVO. 

Additionally, on both Schedule A and 

Schedule B, there is an item that 

captures the adjustable-rate mortgage 

(ARM) index (Schedule A, item 32; 

Schedule B, item 29). This item does not 

include options for the Bloomberg 

Short-Term Bank Yield (BSBY) rate. The 

Board proposes to revise this item to 

include several BSBY options, to allow 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
11440 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 

17 12 U.S.C. 1844(b) and 1844(c). 

18 12 U.S.C. 5365(i). 

19See 12 U.S.C. 5365(i)(1). Annual supervisory 

stress tests are required for bank holding companies 

with $250 billion or more in total consolidated 

assets. ‘‘Periodic’’ supervisory stress tests are 

required for bank holding companies with $100 

billion or more, but less than $250 billion, in total 

consolidated assets. 12 U.S.C. 5365 note. 

20See 12 U.S.C. 5365(i)(2). Bank holding 

companies with $250 billion or more in total 

consolidated assets and financial companies with 

more than $250 billion in total consolidated assets 

must conduct ‘‘periodic’’ stress tests. 

21 12 U.S.C. 1467a(b). 

22 12 U.S.C 1844(c). 

23 12 U.S.C. 5311(a)(1) and 5365. Section 

102(a)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 

5311(a)(1), defines ‘‘bank holding company’’ for 

purposes of Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act to include 

foreign banking organizations that are treated as 

bank holding companies under section 8(a) of the 

International Banking Act of 1978, 12 U.S.C. 

3106(a). The Board has required, pursuant to 

section 165(b)(1)(B)(iv) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 

U.S.C. 5365(b)(1)(B)(iv), certain foreign banking 

organizations subject to section 165 of the DoddFrank Act to form U.S. intermediate holding 

companies. Accordingly, the parent foreign-based 

organization of a U.S. IHC is treated as a BHC for 

purposes of the BHC Act and section 165 of the 

Dodd-Frank Act. Because section 5(c) of the BHC 

Act authorizes the Board to require reports from 

subsidiaries of BHCs, section 5(c) provides 

authority to require U.S. IHCs to report the 

information contained in the FR Y–14 reports. 

24 12 U.S.C. 5365 note. 

25The Board’s Final Rule referenced in section 

401(g) of EGRRCPA specifically stated that the 

Board would require IHCs to file the FR Y–14 

reports. See 79 FR 17240, 17304 (March 27, 2014). 

firms to identify loans using this index 

rate. 

The Board also proposes to remove 

several items from Schedule A, as they 

are no longer needed, assuming that the 

aforementioned revisions to Schedule A 

are implemented (items proposed for 

removal would be redundant). 

Specifically, the Board proposes to 

remove the following items: 

• ‘‘Capitalization’’ (item 81); 

• ‘‘Duration of Modification’’ (item 

83); 

• ‘‘Interest Rate Reduced’’ (item 98); 

• ‘‘Term Extended’’ (item 100); 

• ‘‘P&I Amount Before Modification’’ 

(item 101); 

• ‘‘P&I Amount After Modification’’ 

(item 102); 

• ‘‘Remaining Term Before 

Modification’’ (item 105); and 

• ‘‘Remaining Term After 

Modification’’ (item 106). 

Firms are required to report the cohort 

default rate (CDR) of student loans on 

FR Y–14Q, Schedule A.10 (Student 

Loan). There are several CDR buckets, 

one of which requires reporting in cases 

in which the CDR is greater than 10 

percent (item 16). However, the 

instructions don’t specify how to report 

cases when the CDR is equal to 10 

percent. For completeness, the Board 

proposes to rename and revise item 16 

to clarify that firms must also include in 

this item balances for which the CDR 

equals 10 percent. 

Balances 

Firms are required to report quarterend balances of bank cards and charge 

cards on FR Y–14Q, Schedule M.1 

(Quarter-end balances) in items 3.a and 

3.b, respectively. The instructions do 

not define bank or charge cards, but in 

general, bank cards and charge cards 

differ in two key ways. First, bank cards 

allow holders to spend up to their credit 

limits during each billing cycle, while 

charge cards typically have no preset 

spending limits. Second, bank cards 

allow holders to pay outstanding 

balances over time, while charge cards 

must be fully paid off each billing cycle. 

There are some products that have 

features of both bank and charge cards, 

in that only a portion of the outstanding 

balance can be rolled over to the next 

billing cycle. Products with features of 

both bank and charge cards have caused 

inconsistent reporting across firms. To 

remove ambiguity, the Board proposes 

to better clarify which products must be 

reported as charge cards in the 

instructions. 

Firms are required to report quarterend balances of small/medium 

enterprise (SME) cards in item 2.c (SME 

cards and corporate cards) on Schedule 

M.1. The instructions define SME cards 

as ‘‘credit card accounts where the loan 

is underwritten with the sole proprietor 

or primary business as an applicant.’’ 

The instructions also refer to several FR 

Y–9C items where SME cards and 

corporate cards are reported. Firms are 

required to report the applicable 

balances of SME cards and corporate 

cards in item 2.c that are reported in the 

referenced FR Y–9C items. The item 2.c 

instructions do not reference FR Y–9C, 

Schedule HC–C, item 9.a (Loans to 

nondepository financial institutions). 

Upon review, the Board has determined 

that certain card balances reported in 

Schedule HC–C, item 9.a could be 

included in Schedule M.1, item 2.c. 

Therefore, the Board proposes to revise 

the instructions for Schedule M.1, item 

2.c to reference Schedule HC–C, item 

9.a. 

Legal authorization and 

confidentiality: The Board has the 

authority to require BHCs to file the FR 

Y–14 reports pursuant to sections 5(b) 

and 5(c) of the Bank Holding Company 

Act (BHC Act) 17 and section 165(i) of 

the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank 

Act) as amended by sections 401(a) and 

(e) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory 

Relief, and Consumer Protection Act 

(EGRRCPA).18 Section 5(b) of the BHC 

Act authorizes the Board to issue 

regulations and orders relating to capital 

requirements for bank holding 

companies. Section 5(c) of the BHC Act 

authorizes the Board to require a BHC 

and any subsidiary of such company to 

submit reports to keep the Board 

informed of its financial condition, 

systems for controlling financial and 

operating risks, transactions with 

depository institution subsidiaries of the 

BHC, and compliance with law. Section 

165(i)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act, as 

amended by the EGRRCPA, requires the 

Board to conduct supervisory stress 

tests of certain companies.19 Further, 

section 165(i)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

as amended by the EGRRCPA, requires 

the Board to issue regulations requiring 

certain companies to conduct companyrun stress tests.20

The Board has authority to require 

SLHCs file the FR Y–14 reports 

pursuant to section 10(b) of the Home 

Owners’ Loan Act (HOLA) as amended 

by section 369(8) and 604(h)(2) of the 

Dodd-Frank Act.21 Section 10(b) of 

HOLA, as amended, authorizes the 

Board to require savings and loan 

holding companies to file ‘‘such reports 

as may be required by the Board’’ 

containing ‘‘such information 

concerning the operations of such 

savings and loan holding company . . . 

as the Board may require.’’ 

The Board has authority to require 

IHCs file the FR Y–14 reports pursuant 

to section 5(c) of the BHC Act 22 and 

sections 102(a)(1) and 165 of the DoddFrank Act.23 In addition, section 401(g) 

of EGRRCPA 24 provides that the Board 

has the authority to establish enhanced 

prudential standards for foreign banking 

organizations with total consolidated 

assets of $100 billion or more, and 

clarifies that nothing in section 401 

‘‘shall be construed to affect the legal 

effect of the final rule of the Board . . . 

entitled ‘Enhanced Prudential Standard 

for [BHCs] and Foreign Banking 

Organizations’ (79 FR 17240 (March 27, 

2014)), as applied to foreign banking 

organizations with total consolidated 

assets equal to or greater than $100 

million.’’ 25

The FR Y–14 reports are mandatory. 

The information reported in the FR 

Y–14 reports is collected as part of the 

Board’s supervisory process, and 

therefore, such information is afforded 

confidential treatment pursuant to 

exemption 8 of the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) which protects 

information contained in ‘‘examination, 

operating, or condition reports’’ 

obtained in the bank supervisory 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2022 / Notices 11441 

26 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8). 

27 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). 

28Note that the Board may disclose a summary 

of the results of supervisory stress testing pursuant 

to 12 CFR 225.8(h)(5)(iii) and publishes a summary 

of the results of stress testing pursuant to 12 CFR 

252.46(b) and 12 CFR 238.134, which includes 

aggregate data. In addition, under the Board’s 

regulations, covered companies must also publicly 

disclose a summary of the results of stress testing. 

See 12 CFR 252.58; 12 CFR 238.146. The public 

disclosure requirement contained in 12 CFR 252.58 

for covered BHCs and covered IHCs is separately 

accounted for by the Board in the Paperwork 

Reduction Act clearance for FR YY (OMB No. 7100– 

0350) and the public disclosure requirement for 

covered SLHCs is separately accounted for in by the 

Board in the Paperwork Reduction Act clearance for 

FR LL (OMB No. 7100–0380). 

process.26 In addition, confidential 

commercial or financial information, 

which a submitter both customarily and 

actually treats as private, may be exempt 

from disclosure under exemption 4 of 

the FOIA.27 28

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, February 23, 2022. 

Michele Taylor Fennell, 

Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04194 Filed 2–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Toxic Substances and 

Disease Registry 

[30Day–22–0048] 

Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork 

Reduction Act Review 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, the Agency for 

Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 

(ATSDR) has submitted the information 

collection request titled ‘‘ATSDR 

Exposure Investigations (EIs)’’ to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval. ATSDR 

previously published a ‘‘Proposed Data 

Collection Submitted for Public 

Comment and Recommendations’’ 

notice on August 13, 2021 to obtain 

comments from the public and affected 

agencies. ATSDR did not receive 

comments related to the previous 

notice. This notice serves to allow an 

additional 30 days for public and 

affected agency comments. 

ATSDR will accept all comments for 

this proposed information collection 

project. The Office of Management and 

Budget is particularly interested in 

comments that: 

(a) Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

(b) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agencies estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; 

(d) Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including, through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses; and 

(e) Assess information collection 

costs. 

To request additional information on 

the proposed project or to obtain a copy 

of the information collection plan and 

instruments, call (404) 639–7570. 

Comments and recommendations for the 

proposed information collection should 

be sent within 30 days of publication of 

this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/ 

do/PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Direct written 

comments and/or suggestions regarding 

the items contained in this notice to the 

Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of 

Management and Budget, 725 17th 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20503 or by 

fax to (202) 395–5806. Provide written 

comments within 30 days of notice 

publication. 

Proposed Project 

ATSDR Exposure Investigations (EIs) 

(OMB Control No. 0923–0048, Exp. 04/ 

30/2022)—Extension—Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry 

(ATSDR). 

Background and Brief Description 

The Agency for Toxic Substances and 

Disease Registry (ATSDR) is requesting 

a three-year extension of ‘‘ATSDR 

Exposure Investigations (EIs)’’ (OMB 

Control No. 0923–0048, Exp. 04/30/ 

2022). This generic clearance allows the 

agency to conduct EIs, through methods 

developed by ATSDR. After a chemical 

release or suspected release into the 

environment, EIs are usually requested 

by officials of a state health agency, 

county health departments, the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), the general public, and ATSDR 

staff. EI results are used by public health 

professionals, environmental risk 

managers, and other decision makers to 

determine if current conditions warrant 

intervention strategies to minimize or 

eliminate human exposure. 

During the past three years, no EIs 

were completed. Instead, the ATSDR 

Office of Community Health and Hazard 

Assessment (OCHHA), using EI 

methods, completed eight Per- or 

Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Exposure 

Assessments (PFAS EAs) (OMB Control 

No. 0923–0059, Exp. 06/30/2022) at 

communities near U.S. military 

installations that used Aqueous Film 

Forming Foam (AFFF). The PFAS from 

the AFFF entered groundwater and 

impacted the drinking water in the 

nearby communities. In 2022, however, 

ATSDR is conducting a follow-up EI 

under this generic clearance ICR to 

supplement the PFAS EAs. This EI 

generic information collection (GenIC) 

will evaluate additional non-drinking 

water sources of environmental PFAS 

exposure in two of the former EA 

communities. 

The general EI methods are further 

described below. All of ATSDR’s 

targeted biological assessments (e.g., 

urine, blood) and some of the 

environmental investigations (e.g., air, 

water, soil, or food sampling) involve 

participants to determine whether they 

are or have been exposed to unusual 

levels of pollutants at specific locations 

(e.g., where people live, spend leisure 

time, or anywhere they might come into 

contact with contaminants under 

investigation). 

Questionnaires, appropriate to the 

specific contaminant, are generally 

needed in about half of the EIs (at most, 

approximately 12 per year) to assist in 

interpreting the biological or 

environmental sampling results. ATSDR 

collects contact information (e.g., name, 

address, phone number) to provide the 

participant with their individual results. 

ATSDR also collects information on 

other possible confounding sources of 

chemical(s) exposure such as medicines 

taken, foods eaten, hobbies, jobs, etc. In 

addition, ATSDR asks questions on 

recreational or occupational activities 

that could increase a participant’s 

exposure potential. That information 

represents an individual’s exposure 

history. 

The number of questions can vary 

depending on the number of chemicals 

being investigated, the route of exposure 

(e.g., breathing, eating, touching), and 

number of other sources of the 

chemical(s) (e.g., products used, jobs). 

We use approximately 12–20 questions 

about the pertinent environmental 

exposures per investigation. Typically, 

the number of participants in an 

individual EI ranges from 10 to 100. 

Participation is completely voluntary, 

and there are no costs to participants 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1