5946 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

refund or credit excess funds to 

handlers, as prescribed by § 993.81(c). 

Anticipated assessment income 

collected during 2004–05 would be 

adequate to cover authorized expenses. 

The grower price for the 2004–05 crop 

year is expected to average about $750 

per salable ton of dried prunes. Based 

on an estimated 47,203 salable tons of 

dried prunes, assessment revenue 

during the 2004–05 crop year is 

expected to be less than 1 percent of the 

total expected grower revenue. 

This action would increase the 

assessment obligation imposed on 

handlers. While assessments impose 

some additional costs on handlers, the 

costs are minimal and uniform on all 

handlers. Some of the additional costs 

may be passed on to producers. 

However, these costs would be offset by 

the benefits derived by the operation of 

the marketing order. In addition, the 

committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the California 

dried prune industry and all interested 

persons were invited to attend the 

meeting and participate in committee 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

committee meetings, the December 8, 

2004, meeting was a public meeting and 

all entities, both large and small, were 

able to express views on this issue. 

Finally, interested persons are invited to 

submit information on the regulatory 

and informational impacts of this action 

on small businesses. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California dried prune handlers. As 

with all Federal marketing order 

programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/

fv/moab/html. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to Jay 

Guerber at the previously mentioned 

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Thirty days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2004–05 crop year began on August 1, 

2004, and the marketing order requires 

that the rate of assessment for each crop 

year apply to all assessable prunes 

handled during such crop year; (2) the 

committee needs to have sufficient 

funds to pay its expenses which are 

incurred on a continuous basis; and (3) 

handlers are aware of this action which 

was unanimously recommended by the 

committee at a public meeting and is 

similar to other assessment rate actions 

issued in past years.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993 

Marketing agreements, Plums, Prunes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 993 is proposed to 

be amended as follows:

PART 993—DRIED PRUNES 

PRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 993 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 993.347 is revised to read 

as follows:

§ 993.347 Assessment rate. 

On and after August 1, 2004, an 

assessment rate of $6.00 per ton is 

established for California dried prunes.

Dated: January 31, 2005. 

Kenneth C. Clayton, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service.

[FR Doc. 05–2153 Filed 2–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION 

ADMINISTRATION 

12 CFR Chap. VII 

Request for Burden Reduction 

Recommendation; Safety and 

Soundness and Anti-Money 

Laundering Regulations; Economic 

Growth and Regulatory Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1996 Review

AGENCY: National Credit Union 

Administration (NCUA).

ACTION: Notice of regulatory review; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The NCUA Board is 

continuing its review of its regulations 

to identify outdated, unnecessary, or 

unduly burdensome regulatory 

requirements imposed on federallyinsured credit unions pursuant to the 

Economic Growth and Regulatory 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 

(EGRPRA). Today, NCUA requests 

comments and suggestions on ways to 

reduce burden in rules that govern 

safety and soundness and anti-money 

laundering, consistent with our 

statutory obligations. All comments are 

welcome. 

We will analyze the comments 

received and propose burden reducing 

changes to our regulations where 

appropriate. Some suggestions for 

burden reduction might require 

legislative changes. Where legislative 

changes would be required, we will 

consider the suggestions in 

recommending appropriate changes to 

Congress.

DATES: Comment must be received on or 

before May 5, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods (Please 

send comments by one method only): 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• NCUA Web Site: http://

www.ncua.gov/

RegulationsOpinionsLaws/

proposed_regs/proposed_regs.html.

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Address to 

regcomments@ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your 

name] Comments on Fourth EGRPRA 

Notice’’ in the e-mail subject line. 

• Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the 

subject line described above for e-mail. 

• Mail: Address to Mary Rupp, 

Secretary of the Board, National Credit 

Union Administration, 1775 Duke 

Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–

3428. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

mail address.

Public inspection: All public 

comments are available on the agency’s 

Web site at http://www.ncua.gov/

RegulationsOpinionsLaws/comments as 

submitted, except as may not be 

possible for technical reasons. Public 

comments will not be edited to remove 

any identifying or contact information. 

Paper copies of comments may be 

inspected in NCUA’s law library, at 

1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia 

22314, by appointment weekdays 

between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. To make an 

appointment, call (703) 518–6546 or 

send an e-mail to OGC_Mail@ncua.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross 

P. Kendall, Staff Attorney, Office of 

General Counsel, at the above address or 

telephone (703) 518–6562.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction 

NCUA seeks public comment and 

suggestions on ways it can reduce 

regulatory burdens consistent with our 

statutory obligations. Today, we request 

input to help identify which 

requirements in two regulatory 

categories—Safety and Soundness and 

Anti-Money Laundering—are outdated, 

unnecessary, or unduly burdensome. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 5947

1Pub. Law 104–208, div. A, title II, section 2222, 

110 Stat. 3009–414; codified at 12 U.S.C. 3311.

The rules in these categories are listed 

in a chart at the end of this notice. The 

EGRPRA review supplements and 

complements the reviews of regulations 

that NCUA conducts under other laws 

and its internal policies. 

We specifically invite comment on 

the following issues: Whether statutory 

changes are needed; whether the 

regulations contain requirements that 

are not needed to serve the purposes of 

the statutes they implement; the extent 

to which the regulations may adversely 

affect competition; the cost of 

compliance associated with reporting, 

recordkeeping, and disclosure 

requirements, particularly on small 

credit unions; whether any regulatory 

requirements are inconsistent or 

redundant; and whether any regulations 

are unclear. 

In drafting this notice, the NCUA 

participated as part of the EGRPRA 

planning process with the Office of the 

Comptroller of the Currency, Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation, and Office of Thrift 

Supervision (Agencies). Because of the 

unique circumstances of federallyinsured credit unions and their 

members, NCUA is issuing a separate 

notice from the four bank regulatory 

agencies, which are issuing a joint 

notice. NCUA’s notice is consistent and 

comparable with the joint notice, except 

on issues that are unique to credit 

unions. For example, unlike the bank 

regulators, NCUA does not have a 

regulatory category governing securities 

activities, and so its notice makes no 

reference to that subject. 

II. 

A. The EGRPRA Review Requirements 

and NCUA’s Proposed Plan 

This notice is part of the regulatory 

review required by section 2222 of 

EGRPRA.1 The NCUA described the 

review requirements in our initial 

Federal Register notice, published on 

July 3, 2003 (68 FR 39863). As we noted 

at that time, we anticipate that the 

EGRPRA review’s overall focus on the 

‘‘forest’’ of regulations will offer a new 

perspective in identifying opportunities 

to reduce regulatory burden. We must, 

of course, assure that the effort to reduce 

regulatory burden is consistent with 

applicable statutory mandates and 

provides for the continued safety and 

soundness of federally-insured credit 

unions and appropriate consumer 

protections.

The EGRPRA review required that 

NCUA categorize our regulations by 

type. Our July 3, 2003, Federal Register

publication identified ten broad 

categories for our regulations. 

The categories are:

1. Applications and Reporting 

2. Powers and Activities 

3. Agency Programs 

4. Capital 

5. Consumer Protection 

6. Corporate Credit Unions 

7. Directors, Officers and Employees 

8. Money Laundering 

9. Rules of Procedure 

10. Safety and Soundness

To spread the work of commenting on 

and reviewing the categories of rules 

over a reasonable period of time, we 

proposed to publish one or more 

categories of rules approximately every 

six months between 2003 and 2006 and 

provide a 90-day comment period for 

each publication. We asked for 

comment on all aspects of our plan, 

including: The categories, the rules in 

each category, and the order in which 

we should review the categories. 

Because the NCUA was eager to begin 

reducing unnecessary burden where 

appropriate, our initial notice also 

published the first two categories of 

rules for comment (Applications and 

Reporting and Powers and Activities). 

NCUA published its second notice, 

soliciting comment on consumer 

protection rules in the lending area, on 

February 4, 2004 (69 FR 5300), and its 

third notice, relating to other consumer 

protection rules, on July 8, 2004 (69 FR 

41202). All our covered categories of 

rules must be published for comment 

and reviewed by the end of September 

2006.

The EGRPRA review then requires the 

Agencies to: (1) Publish a summary of 

the comments we received, identifying 

and discussing the significant issues 

raised in them; and (2) eliminate 

unnecessary regulatory requirements. 

Within 30 days after the Agencies 

publish the comment summary and 

discussion, the Federal Financial 

Institutions Examination Council 

(FFIEC), which is an interagency body 

to which all of the Agencies belong, 

must submit a report to Congress. This 

report will summarize significant issues 

raised by the public comments and the 

relative merits of those issues. It will 

also analyze whether the appropriate 

federal financial institution regulatory 

agency can address the burdens by 

regulation, or whether the burdens must 

be addressed by legislation. 

B. Public Response and NCUA’s Current 

Plan 

NCUA received eight comments in 

response to its first notice, four 

comments in response to its second 

notice, and six in response to the third 

notice. The comments have been posted 

on the interagency EGRPRA Web site, 

http://www.EGRPRA.gov, and can be 

viewed by clicking on ‘‘Comments.’’ We 

are actively reviewing the feedback 

received about specific ways to reduce 

regulatory burden, as well as conducting 

our own analyses. Because the main 

purpose of this notice is to request 

comment on the next category of 

regulations, we will not discuss specific 

recommendations that we have received 

in response to our earlier notices here. 

However, as we develop initiatives to 

reduce burden on specific subjects in 

the future—whether through regulatory, 

legislative, or other channels—we will 

discuss the public’s recommendations 

that relate to our proposed actions. 

On June 22, 2004, NCUA Chairman 

JoAnn Johnson testified about regulatory 

reform before the Senate Committee on 

Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. 

Representatives from the federal 

banking agencies also testified, as did 

key private sector representatives from 

the financial institution industry. On 

August 27, Senator Mike Crapo, who is 

leading a financial services regulatory 

reform effort for the Senate Banking 

Committee, released a matrix detailing 

more than 130 burden reduction 

proposals that were made at the June 

2004 hearing. 

III. Request for Comment on Safety and 

Soundness and Anti-Money Laundering 

Rules Category 

NCUA is asking the public to identify 

the ways in which the rules in the 

category of safety and soundness and 

anti-money laundering may be outdated, 

unnecessary, or unduly burdensome. If 

the implementation of a comment 

would require modifying a statute that 

underlies the regulation, the comment 

should, if possible, identify the needed 

statutory change. The rules in this 

category are listed in the chart below. 

We note that the U.S. Treasury 

Department also administers rules 

under the Bank Secrecy Act that apply 

to Federal credit unions. These rules are 

beyond the jurisdiction of the NCUA. To 

the extent, however, that we receive 

comment raising significant issues about 

these rules, we will assure that the 

issues are identified in the FFIEC report 

to Congress and will notify the Treasury 

Department of the substance of the 

comments. 

We encourage comments that not only 

deal with individual rules or 

requirements but also pertain to certain 

product lines. A product line approach 

is consistent with EGRPRA’s focus on 

how rules interact, and may be 

5948 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 23 / Friday, February 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

especially helpful in exposing 

redundant or potentially inconsistent 

regulatory requirements. We recognize 

that commenters using a product line 

approach may want to make 

recommendations about rules that are 

not in our current request for comment. 

They should do so since the EGRPRA 

categories are designed to stimulate 

creative approaches rather than limiting 

them. We note, in this respect, that 

NCUA included both its lending and 

investment rules in its first EGRPRA 

notice (68 FR 39863, July 3, 2003), and 

that the same rules are included with 

this notice as well. The first notice 

solicited comment on the category of 

Powers and Activities, while in this 

notice we are focused on Safety and 

Soundness issues. Because aspects of 

both rules fall into each category, we are 

including them for this second time. 

There are several other rules, which we 

have placed in other categories, that also 

involve safety and soundness. Finally, 

we note that, as related to state 

chartered, federally insured credit 

unions, the inclusion of subpart B of 12 

CFR part 748 in this category is a 

shorthand reference to a number of rules 

codified elsewhere in our regulations 

that have a significant safety and 

soundness impact. Comment is invited 

on all of these rules.

Specific issues to consider. While all 

comments are welcome, NCUA 

specifically invites comment on the 

following issues: 

• Need for statutory change. Do any 

of the statutory requirements underlying 

these regulations impose redundant, 

conflicting or otherwise unduly 

burdensome requirements? Are there 

less burdensome alternatives? 

• Need and purpose of the 

regulations. Are the regulations 

consistent with the purposes of the 

statutes that they implement? Have 

circumstances changed so that the 

regulation is no longer necessary? Do 

changes in the financial products and 

services offered to consumers suggest a 

need to revise certain regulations or 

statutes? Do any of the regulations 

impose compliance burdens not 

required by the statutes they 

implement? 

• General approach/flexibility.

Generally, is there a different approach 

to regulating that NCUA could use that 

would achieve statutory goals while 

imposing less burden? Do any of the 

regulations in this category or the 

statutes underlying them impose 

unnecessarily inflexible requirements? 

• Effect of the regulations on 

competition. Do any of the regulations 

in this category or the statutes 

underlying them create competitive 

disadvantages for credit unions 

compared to another part of the 

financial services industry? 

• Reporting, recordkeeping and 

disclosure requirements. Do any of the 

regulations in this category or the 

statutes underlying them impose 

particularly burdensome reporting, 

recordkeeping or disclosure 

requirements? Are any of these 

requirements similar enough in purpose 

and use so that they could be 

consolidated? What, if any, of these 

requirements could be fulfilled 

electronically to reduce their burden? 

Are any of the reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements 

unnecessary to demonstrate compliance 

with the law? 

• Consistency and redundancy. Do 

any of the regulations in this category 

impose inconsistent or redundant 

regulatory requirements that are not 

warranted by the purposes of the 

regulation? 

• Clarity. Are the regulations in this 

category drafted in clear and easily 

understood language? 

• Burden on small insured 

institutions. NCUA has a particular 

interest in minimizing burden on small 

insured credit unions (those with less 

than $10 million in assets). More than 

half of federally-insured credit unions 

are small—having $10 million in assets 

or less—as defined by NCUA in 

Interpretative Ruling and Policy 

Statement 03–2, Developing and 

Reviewing Government Regulations. 

NCUA solicits comment on how any 

regulations in this category could be 

changed to minimize any significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small credit unions. 

NCUA appreciates the efforts of all 

interested parties to help us eliminate 

outdated, unnecessary or unduly 

burdensome regulatory requirements. 

IV. Regulations About Which Burden 

Reduction Recommendations Are 

Requested Currently

SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS AND ANTIMONEY LAUNDERING RULES

Subject 

Code of Federal

Regulations

(CFR) Citation 

Lending ............................ 12 CFR 701.21. 

Investments ...................... 12 CFR part 703. 

Supervisory Committee 

Audits and Verifications.

12 CFR part 715. 

Security Programs ........... 12 CFR 748.0. 

Guidelines for Safeguarding Member Information.12 CFR 748, appendix A. 

Records Preservation 

Program and Record 

Retention Index.

12 CFR part 749. 

SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS AND ANTIMONEY LAUNDERING RULES—Continued

Subject 

Code of Federal

Regulations

(CFR) Citation 

Appraisals ........................ 12 CFR part 722. 

Examination ..................... 12 CFR 741.1. 

Rules that Apply to Federally insured state-chartered credit unions.12 CFR part 741, 

subpart B. 

Report of Crimes or Suspected Crimes.12 CFR 748.1(c). 

Bank Secrecy Act ............ 12 CFR 748.2. 

By the National Credit Union 

Administration Board on January 25, 2005. 

Mary Rupp, 

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 05–2205 Filed 2–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–129709–03] 

RIN 1545–BC34 

Prohibited Allocations of Securities in 

an S Corporation

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed 

rulemaking by cross-reference to 

temporary regulations and notice of 

public hearing. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

corrections to a notice of proposed 

rulemaking that was published in the 

Federal Register on December 17, 2004 

(69 FR 75492), relating to prohibited 

allocations of securities in an S 

Corporation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Ricotta at (202) 622–6060 (not a toll-free 

number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The notice of proposed rulemaking 

(REG–129709–03) that is the subject of 

this correction is under section 409 of 

the Internal Revenue Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published the notice of proposed 

rulemaking (REG–129709–03), contains 

errors that may prove to be misleading 

and are in need of clarification.