Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules 15881

1NUREG/BR–0058, ‘‘Regulatory Analysis

Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission,’’ Rev. 1, May 1984. A draft Rev. 2 of

this report was issued for comment in August 1993,

and should be published as final report in the near

future.

2NUREG/CR–3568, ‘‘A Handbook for ValueImpact Assessment,’’ December 1983. The

document is currently undergoing revision and will

tentatively be titled the ‘‘Regulatory Analysis

Technical Evaluation Handbook.’’

Note: Copies of NUREG/BR–0058 and NUREG/

CR–3568 may be purchased from the

Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Mail Stop SSOP, Washington, DC

20402–9328. Copies are also available from the

National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port

Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. A copy is also

available for inspection and copying for a fee in the

NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW.

(Lower Level), Washington, DC 20555–0001.

Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

as appropriate;

(iv) A regulatory analysis. For

information on the form and content of

a regulatory analysis see NUREG/BR–

00581 and NUREG/CR–3568;2

(v) Supporting information that

responds to 10 CFR 50.109(c), the

Backfit rule where applicable; and

(vi) A guidance document in the form

of a Regulatory Guide when necessary

(Note that a Regulatory Guide is usually

provided for a performance based

regulation).

(e) The petitioner may request the

Commission to suspend all or part of

any licensing proceeding to which the

petitioner is a party pending disposition

of the petition for rulemaking.

(f) If it is determined that the petition

includes the information required by

paragraphs (c) and, if petitioner elects,

(d)(2) of this section and is complete,

the Director, Division of Freedom of

Information and Publications Services,

or designee, will assign a docket number

to the petition, will cause the petition to

be formally docketed, and will deposit

a copy of the docketed petition in the

Commission’s Public Document Room.

Public comment may be requested by

publication of a notice of the docketing

of the petition in the Federal Register,

or, in appropriate cases, may be invited

for the first time upon publication in the

Federal Register of a proposed rule

developed in response to the petition.

Publication will be limited by the

requirements of section 181 of the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,

and may be limited by order of the

Commission.

(g) If it is determined by the Executive

Director for Operations that the petition

does not include the information

required by paragraphs (c) and, if

applicable, (d)(2) of this section and is

incomplete, the petitioner will be

notified of that determination and the

respects in which the petition is

deficient and will be accorded an

opportunity to submit additional data.

Ordinarily this determination will be

made within 30 days from the date of

receipt of the petition by the Office of

the Secretary of the Commission. If the

petitioner does not submit additional

data to correct the deficiency within 90

days from the date of notification to the

petitioner that the petition is

incomplete, the petition may be

returned to the petitioner without

prejudice to the right of the petitioner to

file a new petition.

(h) The Director, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications

Services, Office of Administration, will

prepare on a semiannual basis a

summary of petitions for rulemaking

before the Commission, including the

status of each petition. A copy of the

report will be available for public

inspection and copying for a fee in the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level),

Washington, DC.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 22nd day of

March 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Andrew L. Bates,

Acting Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 95–7563 Filed 3–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 225

[Regulation Y; Docket No. R–0872]

Bank Holding Companies and Change

in Bank Control

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Board is proposing to

amend its Regulation Y to eliminate the

need for a bank holding company to file

a request with the Board for a

determination under section 2(g)(3) of

the Bank Holding Company Act that it

no longer controls shares or assets that

it has sold to a third party with

financing if: The purchaser is not an

affiliate or principal shareholder of the

divesting holding company, or a

company controlled by the principal

shareholder; and there are no officers,

directors, trustees or beneficiaries of the

acquiror in common with or subject to

control by the divesting company. The

Board believes that the elimination of

the requirement for a determination of

control for these types of divestitures

will reduce the regulatory burden on

bank holding companies without

undermining the purposes of the Bank

Holding Company Act. This proposal

has been identified in connection with

the Board’s continuing effort to

eliminate obsolete or unnecessary

regulations or applications.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before April 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

Docket No. R–0872 and may be mailed

to William W. Wiles, Secretary, Board of

Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, 20th Street and Constitution

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20551.

Comments also may be delivered to

Room B–2222 of the Eccles Building

between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m.

weekdays, or to the guard station in the

Eccles Building courtyard on 20th Street

NW. (between Constitution Avenue and

C Street NW.) at any time. Comments

may be inspected in Room MP–500 of

the Martin Building between 9:00 a.m.

and 5:00 p.m. weekdays, except as

provided in 12 CFR 261.8 of the Board’s

rules regarding availability of

information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pamela G. Nardolilli, Senior Attorney

(202/452–3289), Legal Division, Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System. For the hearing impaired only,

Telecommunication Device for the Deaf

(TDD), Dorothea Thompson (202/452–

3544), Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, 20th and C Streets

NW., Washington, D.C. 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

section 2(g)(3) of the Bank Holding

Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1841(g)), shares

transferred by a bank holding company

to any transferee where the transferee is

indebted to the transferor or has one or

more officers, directors, trustees, or

beneficiaries in common with the

transferor, are deemed to be controlled

by the transferor unless the Board, after

an opportunity for a hearing, determines

that the transferor is not capable of

controlling the transferee. The Board

proposes to amend § 225.32 of the

Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.32) to

exempt from the presumption of control

those divestitures where a bank holding

company is financing the sale of assets

or shares that it acquired so long as (i)

the property is not sold to an affiliate or

principal shareholder of the divesting

holding company, or a company

controlled by such a principal

shareholder; and (ii) there are no

officers, directors, trustees, or

beneficiaries of the acquiror in common

with or subject to control by the

divesting company.

A review of the 2(g)(3) determinations

over the past ten years indicates that

almost all control determinations under
15882 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / Proposed Rules

that section have arisen from bank

holding companies selling property they

acquired in satisfaction of a debt

previously contracted (‘‘dpc property’’)

where the bank holding company was

trying to recoup its losses on a loan from

the sale of the collateral. In these cases,

the record indicates that the divestitures

and financing arrangements have been

conducted on an arm’s-length basis, and

there is no evidence of divesting

companies exercising control of the

assets after the sale. In other cases

where a bank holding company sold an

asset or subsidiary that it had acquired

in the normal course of business and

financed the sale of the asset or

subsidiary, the assets were sold because,

in most cases, the bank holding

company was no longer interested in

engaging in that business.

The elimination of the requirement to

obtain a control determination will

reduce the regulatory burden on bank

holding companies without eliminating

the Board’s ability to supervise any

attempt to control the divested asset in

the future. Although the Board would

no longer require a bank holding

company to obtain a control

determination, the Board, through the

examination process, can review the

authority under which a bank holding

company controls the asset in question,

and take appropriate supervisory action

if any unlawful control is found to

persist. In addition, the Board would

continue to require a divesting company

to obtain a 2(g)(3) determination if: (i)

The asset were transferred to an affiliate

or principal shareholder of the divesting

holding company, or a company

controlled by the principal shareholder;

or (ii) an interlock existed between the

divesting company and the acquiring

person. In these cases, staff believes that

there is a greater potential for continued

control by the bank holding company

that should be reviewed. The General

Counsel will continue to review these

divestitures on a case by case basis to

determine if a control determination is

appropriate.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.), the Board certifies that the

proposed amendment will not have a

significant adverse economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities

and that any impact on those entities

should be positive. The amendments

would reduce regulatory burdens

imposed by Regulation Y, and the

amendment would have no particular

adverse effect on other entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

No collection of information pursuant

to section 3504(h) of the Paperwork

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)

is contained in these changes.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 225

Administrative practice and

procedure, Banks, banking, Federal

Reserve System, Holding companies,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Securities.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Board proposes to amend

12 CFR part 225 as set forth below:

PART 225—BANK HOLDING

COMPANIES AND CHANGE IN BANK

CONTROL (REGULATION Y)

1. The authority citation for 12 CFR

part 225 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(13), 1818,

1831i, 1831p–1, 1843(c)(8), 1844(b), 1972(l),

3106, 3108, 3310, 3331–3351, 3907, and

3909.

2. In § 225.32, paragraph (a)(2) is

redesignated as paragraph (a)(3) and a

new paragraph (a)(2) is added to read as

follows:

§ 225.32 Divestiture proceedings.

(a) * * *

(2) The presumption of control in

paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section shall

not apply to the sale or divestiture of

assets or voting securities by a divesting

company if:

(i) The acquiring person is not an

affiliate or a principal shareholder of the

divesting company, or a company

controlled by such a principal

shareholder; and

(ii) The acquiring person does not

have any officer, director, trustee, or

beneficiary in common with or subject

to control by the divesting company.

* * * * *

By order of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, March 22, 1995.

William W. Wiles,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 95–7518 Filed 3–27–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 334

RIN 3064–AB06

Contracts Adverse to Safety and

Soundness of Insured Depository

Institutions

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is

withdrawing its proposed rule which

would have implemented the statutory

prohibition on contracts that adversely

affect the safety or soundness of insured

depository institutions. The statutory

provision remains in place and

unchanged. The FDIC has decided to

withdraw the proposed rule because the

existence of adverse contracts involving

insured institutions has decreased

considerably since the proposed rule

was issued for public comment on April

1, 1991, because of the overwhelmingly

negative comments received from the

industry to the proposal, and because of

an FDIC policy statement that

recommends the withdrawal of

proposed rules that have not been acted

upon by the FDIC Board of Directors

within nine months of the date of

proposal. Many of the negative

comments received in response to the

proposal expressed the view that such a

regulation would create unnecessary

regulatory burden and that the Federal

banking agencies already possess the

necessary supervisory authority to deal

with adverse contracts. Since the type of

activity that the proposed rule was

intended to eliminate (i.e., abuses

involving contracts made by or on

behalf of an insured institution that

seriously jeopardize or misrepresent its

safety and soundness) has been

substantially reduced through greater

industry awareness and use of

alternative supervisory actions by the

Federal banking agencies, there appears

to be no need to promulgate such a

regulation at this time. However, the

FDIC may decide at a later date to

publish a new proposal if it determines

that the existence of adverse contracts

has increased or that such action is

otherwise necessary or appropriate.

DATES: The withdrawal of proposed Part

334 is made on March 28, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert F. Miailovich, Associate Director,

Division of Supervision, (202) 898–

6918; Michael D. Jenkins, Examination

Specialist, Division of Supervision,

(202) 898–6896; or Gwen E. Factor,

Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898–

8522, Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation, 550 17th Street NW.,

Washington, D.C. 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 225 of the Financial

Institutions Reform, Recovery, and

Enforcement Act of 1989 added new

section 30 to the Federal Deposit