[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 3, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26521-26525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12943]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 370

RIN 3064-AD37


Amendment of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program To Extend 
the Debt Guarantee Program and To Impose Surcharges on Assessments for 
Certain Debt Issued on or After April 1, 2009

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FDIC is issuing this final rule to amend the Temporary 
Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) by providing a limited extension of 
the Debt Guarantee Program (DGP) for insured depository institutions 
(IDIs) participating in the DGP. The extended DGP also applies to other 
participating entities; however, other participating entities that did 
not issue FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009 are required to 
submit an application to and obtain approval from the FDIC to 
participate in the extended DGP. The final rule imposes surcharges on 
certain debt issued on or after April 1, 2009. Any surcharge collected 
will be deposited into the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF or Fund). The 
final rule also establishes an application process whereby entities 
participating in the extended DGP may apply to issue non-FDIC-
guaranteed debt during the extension period. The final rule restates 
without change the interim rule published in the Federal Register by 
the FDIC on March 23, 2009.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 74 FR 12078 (March 23, 2009).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective June 3, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark L. Handzlik, Senior Attorney, 
Legal Division, (202) 898-3990 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c61646d6268766065674c6a68656f226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e78a8f8689839d8b8e8ca781838e84c9808891">[email protected]</span></a>; Robert C. Fick, 
Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898-8962 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ff8d99969c94bf999b969cd1989089"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4436222d272f0422202d276a232b32">[email protected]</span></a>; A. Ann 
Johnson, Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898-3573 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e687878c898e88958988a680828f85c8818990"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bfdeded5d0d7d1ccd0d1ffd9dbd6dc91d8d0c9">[email protected]</span></a>; 
(for questions or comments related to applications) Lisa D Arquette, 
Associate Director, Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection, 
(202) 898-8633 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9ff3feedeeeafaebebfadff9fbf6fcb1f8f0e9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="503c312221253524243510363439337e373f26">[email protected]</span></a>; Serena L. Owens, Associate 
Director, Supervision and Applications Branch, Division of Supervision 
and Consumer Protection, (202) 898-8996 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d0a3bfa7b5bea390b6b4b9b3feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1b68746c7e75685b7d7f7278357c746d">[email protected]</span></a>; Gail 
Patelunas, Deputy Director, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, 
(202) 898-6779 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e384938297868f968d8290a385878a80cd848c95"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3354435247565f465d52407355575a501d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>; Donna Saulnier, Manager, 
Assessment Policy Section, Division of Finance, (703) 562-6167 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8eeafdeffbe2e0e7ebfccee8eae7eda0e9e1f8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dabea9bbafb6b4b3bfa89abcbeb3b9f4bdb5ac">[email protected]</span></a>; or Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Bank and Regulatory 
Policy Section, Division of Insurance and Research, (202) 898-8967 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f59886819699949c87b593919c96db929a83"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fc918f889f909d958ebc9a98959fd29b938a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. Background

    The FDIC adopted the TLGP in October 2008 following a determination 
of systemic risk by the Secretary of the Treasury (after consultation 
with the President) that was supported by recommendations from the FDIC 
and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal 
Reserve).\2\ The TLGP is part of a coordinated effort by the FDIC, the 
U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury), and the Federal Reserve to 
address unprecedented disruptions in credit markets and the resultant 
inability of financial institutions to fund themselves and make loans 
to creditworthy borrowers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Section 13(c)(4)(G) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act 
(FDI Act), 12 U.S.C. 1823(c)(4)(G). The determination of systemic 
risk authorized the FDIC to take actions to avoid or mitigate 
serious adverse effects on economic conditions or financial 
stability, and the FDIC implemented the TLGP in response.
    Section 9(a) Tenth of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1819(a)Tenth, 
provides additional authority for the establishment of the TLGP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The steps taken to stabilize the nation's financial system by the 
Congress, the Treasury, and the federal banking agencies have improved 
conditions in the U.S. credit markets. While liquidity in the financial 
markets has not returned to pre-crisis levels, the TLGP debt guarantee 
program has benefited participating IDIs, bank and certain savings and 
loan holding companies, and certain of their affiliates by improving 
their options for short-term and intermediate-term funding.
    On March 17, 2009, the FDIC's Board of Directors (Board) adopted an 
interim rule that amended the TLGP by providing for a limited extension 
of the DGP, imposing surcharges on assessments for certain debt issued 
on or after April 1, 2009, and providing procedures to enable 
participating entities to issue certain non-guaranteed debt.\3\ This 
amendment was designed to reduce market disruption at the conclusion of 
the TLGP by facilitating the orderly phase-out of the DGP and 
encouraging participating entities to use the limited extension of the 
DGP to plan for a successful return to sources of non-FDIC-guaranteed 
funding markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 74 FR 12078 (March 23, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The Interim Rule

    On March 17, 2009, the FDIC's Board adopted an interim rule with 
request for comment that amended the TLGP by providing for a limited 
extension of the DGP, surcharges for certain debt issuances, and 
procedures for participating entities to issue certain non-guaranteed 
debt. The interim rule was published in the Federal Register on March 
23, 2009. As discussed in the section that follows, commenters 
generally favored the interim rule. Accordingly, the FDIC is 
implementing the interim rule as a final rule without change.

III. Summary of Comments

    The FDIC received two comments on the interim rule from groups 
representing the banking industry. Both commenters supported the 
amendments to the DGP made in the interim rule.
    The commenters specifically endorsed the surcharges placed on 
certain FDIC-guaranteed debt and made applicable to all participating 
entities that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt after April 1, 2009. In the 
event of the diminution of the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) caused by 
TLGP losses, if any, the commenters noted that only IDIs would be 
required to fund a special assessment to replenish the DIF, though IDIs 
have not been the primary users of the program.\4\ Depositing 
surcharges directly into the DIF was viewed by these commenters as an 
appropriate recognition of the possible exposure that all IDIs, both 
participating and non-participating, could face in the event of losses 
caused by the TLGP. The commenters also welcomed the potential for a 
corresponding decrease in standard assessments for IDIs that could 
result from the deposit of the surcharges into the DIF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Section 204(d) of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act 
of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-22), enacted on May 20, 2009, authorized the 
FDIC to impose a special assessment on depository institution 
holding companies (with the concurrence of the Secretary of the 
Treasury) to recover losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund arising 
from action taken or assistance provided with respect to an insured 
depository institution following a system risk determination made 
pursuant to section 13(c)(4)(G)(i) of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Act.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 26522]]

    One commenter applauded the FDIC's efforts to unwind the DGP as 
described in the interim rule. The commenter favorably noted that the 
interim rule encouraged participating entities to return to the non-
FDIC-guaranteed debt market by, for example, establishing procedures 
for issuing non-FDIC-guaranteed debt during the extended DGP and 
implementing the aforementioned surcharges.
    Noting the changes that have occurred in the TLGP since its 
inception in October 2008, one commenter suggested that the FDIC 
provide a second opportunity for eligible entities to opt-in to the 
program. As the FDIC stated in the interim rule, the purpose of the 
amendments to the TLGP are to ensure an orderly phase-out of the 
program. Providing a second opportunity to opt-in to the DGP would be 
contrary to this effort. The FDIC believes that the TLGP has provided 
reliable and cost-efficient liquidity support to financial institutions 
with demonstrated funding needs. Institutions that have elected to opt-
out of the TLGP are perceived as less likely to have such funding needs 
and, therefore, the FDIC believes that providing a second opportunity 
to opt-in to the DGP--as the program winds down--would be of marginal 
benefit to the industry.
    One commenter suggested that the interim rule be revised to permit 
an IDI with capacity under its existing debt limit to transfer that 
capacity to its holding company so that the guaranteed debt could be 
issued by the holding company rather than by the IDI. Under the TLGP, 
debt guarantee limits were based on the liquidity needs of an entity as 
determined by senior unsecured debt outstanding on September 30, 2008 
(or 2 percent of liabilities for IDIs without any outstanding senior 
unsecured debt on September 30, 2008). Holding companies that regularly 
issued debt on behalf of its subsidiary IDIs presumably would have had 
such debt outstanding on September 30, 2008, and their debt guarantee 
limits for purposes of the TLGP would have been established 
accordingly. The purpose of the TLGP was not to establish a new or 
expanded debt market for holding companies. Instead, a primary focus of 
the TLGP was to encourage interbank lending. Without case-by-case 
analysis, the FDIC believes it would be inconsistent with the purpose 
of the TLGP to permit any holding company that had not previously 
issued debt on behalf of its subsidiary IDI to rely on its IDI's debt 
limit to establish or enhance its own debt issuances. The FDIC notes, 
however, that part 370 permits any participating entity to request an 
increase in its debt guarantee limit, and the FDIC will continue to 
consider such applications on a case-by-case basis.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 12 CFR 370.3(h)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. The Final Rule

    The FDIC has implemented the interim rule as a final rule without 
change. As discussed below, the final rule restates the three primary 
amendments to the TLGP announced in the interim rule: it provides for a 
limited extension of the DGP; imposes surcharges on assessments for 
certain debt issuances; and establishes procedures whereby a 
participating entity can apply to issue certain debt that is not 
guaranteed by the FDIC.

A. Extension of the Debt Guarantee Program for IDIs Participating in 
the TLGP

    Under the version of the DGP that existed before the interim rule 
was issued, participating entities were permitted to issue senior 
unsecured debt until June 30, 2009. The FDIC guarantee for such this 
debt extended until the earlier of the maturity of the debt or June 30, 
2012.
    Like the interim rule, the final rule provides a limited four-month 
extension for the issuance of debt under the DGP and is consistent with 
extensions to other liquidity programs recently announced by the 
Federal Reserve.\6\ The final rule permits all IDIs participating in 
the DGP to issue FDIC-guaranteed senior unsecured debt until October 
31, 2009. For debt issued on or after April 1, 2009, the final rule 
restates without change those provisions of the interim rule that 
extended the FDIC's guarantee until the earliest of the opt-out date, 
the maturity of the debt, the mandatory conversion date for mandatory 
convertible debt, or December 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 2009 Monetary Press Release, Release Date: February 3, 2009, 
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20090203a.htm (last visited February 20, 2009) (announcing four-
month extensions until October 2009 of six liquidity programs 
originally scheduled to expire in April 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Extension of the Debt Guarantee Program for Other Entities 
Participating in the TLGP

    As with the interim rule, the final rule permits other 
participating entities that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 
2009, to participate in the extended DGP without application. However, 
other participating entities that did not issue FDIC-guaranteed debt 
before April 1, 2009, are required to apply to and receive approval 
from the FDIC to participate in the extended DGP.\7\ The deadline for 
submitting an application to participate in the extended DGP continues 
to be June 30, 2009. The FDIC will review such applications on a case-
by-case basis. Absent such application and approval, the FDIC's 
guarantee will expire for such entities no later than June 30, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Unlike IDIs (for whom the FDIC has either primary or backup 
supervision authority) and other participating entities that issued 
debt before April 1, 2009 (for whom the FDIC is aware of current 
debt issuances and the evolving financial condition of those 
entities), for other participating entities that did not issue debt 
before April 1, 2009, the FDIC has chosen to mitigate its risk 
during the extension period by establishing an application process 
that will enable the FDIC to become more familiar with the current 
financial situation for these entities and with their plans for 
issuing debt during the extension period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule will not change a participating entity's existing 
debt guarantee limit or affect any conditions that the FDIC may have 
placed on the issuance of debt by an IDI or other participating entity. 
In addition, the FDIC reiterates that, consistent with prudent 
liquidity management practices, issuance levels under the DGP should be 
consistent with existing funding plans and estimated liquidity needs. 
The chart that follows provides a summary of the relevant dates for 
entities that participate (and those that do not participate) in the 
extended DGP.

[[Page 26523]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Guarantee expiration
                                           Application date            Issue date                  date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDIs currently participating in the    Not required to submit   Senior unsecured debt    For debt issued on or
 DGP, and other participating           an application to        may be issued no later   after April 1, 2009,
 entities that have issued FDIC-        participate in the       than Oct. 31, 2009.      FDIC-guarantee of
 guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009.  extension of the DGP.                             senior unsecured debt
                                                                                          expires on the
                                                                                          earliest of the
                                                                                          mandatory conversion
                                                                                          date for mandatory
                                                                                          convertible debt, the
                                                                                          stated date of
                                                                                          maturity, or Dec. 31,
                                                                                          2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other participating entities that      Application due on or    With FDIC approval,      For debt issued on or
 have not issued FDIC-guaranteed debt   before June 30, 2009.    senior unsecured debt    after April 1, 2009,
 before April 1, 2009, which have                                may be issued no later   with FDIC approval,
 received approval to participate in                             than Oct. 31, 2009.      FDIC-guarantee of
 the extension of the DGP.                                                                senior unsecured debt
                                                                                          expires on the
                                                                                          earliest of the
                                                                                          mandatory conversion
                                                                                          date for mandatory
                                                                                          convertible debt, the
                                                                                          stated date of
                                                                                          maturity, or Dec. 31,
                                                                                          2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other participating entities           N/A....................  Senior unsecured debt    FDIC-guarantee of
 currently participating in the DGP,                             may be issued no later   senior unsecured debt
 but not participating in the                                    than June 30, 2009.      expires on the
 extension of the DGP.                                                                    earliest of the
                                                                                          mandatory conversion
                                                                                          date for mandatory
                                                                                          convertible debt, the
                                                                                          stated date of
                                                                                          maturity, or June 30,
                                                                                          2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Surcharges on Assessments for Certain Debt Issued on or After April 
1, 2009

    As with the interim rule, surcharges provided for in the final rule 
will continue to be imposed on an annualized basis and apply only to 
FDIC-guaranteed debt with maturities (or, in the case of mandatory 
convertible debt, time periods to conversion) of at least one year; the 
assessment rates for shorter term FDIC-guaranteed debt remain 
unchanged, as do the rates for guaranteed debt issued before April 1, 
2009.
    For FDIC-guaranteed debt with maturities (or, in the case of 
mandatory convertible debt, time periods to conversion) of at least one 
year issued on or after April 1, 2009, until and including June 30, 
2009, and maturing on or before June 30, 2012, the annualized surcharge 
on the assessments continues to be 10 basis points for IDIs and 20 
basis points for other participating entities, as provided for in the 
interim rule.
    Like the interim rule, the final rule also imposes an additional 
surcharge on assessments for FDIC-guaranteed debt issued under the 
extended DGP--that is, FDIC-guaranteed debt issued after June 30, 2009 
and on or before October 31, 2009, or FDIC-guaranteed debt issued on or 
after April 1, 2009 with a maturity date after June 30, 2012. The 
annualized surcharge on the assessments for IDIs is 25 basis points. 
For other participating entities that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under 
the DGP before April 1, 2009 (and for such entities that did not issue 
FDIC-guaranteed debt under the DGP before April 1, 2009, but that have 
been approved by the FDIC to participate in the extended DGP), the 
annualized surcharge on assessments is 50 basis points.
    The final rule provides that the surcharges on assessments imposed 
on both IDIs and other participating entities remain the same as 
provided for in the interim rule.\8\ As such, the surcharges for IDIs 
would remain slightly lower than those imposed on other entities 
participating in the DGP. The FDIC believes that this differential 
remains appropriate because entities other than IDIs, for which the 
FDIC has limited supervisory authority, present more uncertainty to the 
FDIC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Recent amendments to the FDI Act provide the FDIC with 
additional authority to make special emergency assessments of both 
IDIs and depository institution holding companies (with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of the Treasury), if necessary. See 
footnote 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unlike other TLGP fees, which are reserved for possible TLGP losses 
and not generally available for DIF purposes, the amount of any 
surcharge collected in connection with the extended DGP will be 
deposited into the DIF and used by the FDIC when calculating the 
reserve ratio of the Fund. The FDIC has every expectation that the TLGP 
will pay for itself and has set TLGP fees accordingly.
    The surcharge provisions recognize that a relatively small portion 
of the industry is actively using the DGP, but all IDIs ultimately bear 
the risk that a systemic risk assessment might be necessary to recover 
any excess losses attributable to the program. The surcharge is 
intended to compensate the DIF members, even those that did not issue 
FDIC-guaranteed debt, by increasing funds deposited directly into the 
DIF, for bearing the risk that TLGP fees will be insufficient and that 
a systemic risk assessment will be levied.
    The surcharges also are intended to reduce the subsidy provided by 
the DGP and to encourage institutions to seek funding in ways that do 
not involve government guarantees, so that the DGP can be unwound in an 
orderly fashion. The DGP extension also partially addresses potential 
competitive disparities with similar programs in other countries. The 
FDIC anticipates that the amount of revenue that the surcharge produces 
will enable the FDIC to reduce the amount of the special assessment 
provided for in the interim rule adopted on February 27, 2009.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 74 FR 9525 (March 4, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Opportunity To Apply To Issue Non-Guaranteed Debt

    As with the interim rule, the final rule provides that any entities 
participating in the extended DGP may apply to the FDIC to issue non-
FDIC-guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009. If approved, such entities 
may issue non-guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, with any maturity 
and without paying any additional fee to the FDIC.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Some participating entities elected to pay a fee to issue 
long-term non-guaranteed debt that could mature beyond June 30, 
2012, pursuant to 12 CFR 370.6(f). These entities may continue to 
issue long-term non-guaranteed debt without additional application 
to the FDIC.
    If those entities are eligible to participate in the extension 
of the TLGP, the final rule, like the interim rule, requires such 
entities to apply to, and obtain the prior approval of, the FDIC in 
order to issue non-guaranteed debt that matures before June 30, 
2012. No additional fee would be payable to the FDIC in order to 
issue such debt.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 26524]]

V. Regulatory Analysis and Procedure

A. Administrative Procedure Act

    The process of amending Part 370 by means of this final rule is 
governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Pursuant to section 
553(b)(B) of the APA, general notice and opportunity for public comment 
are not required with respect to a rule making when an agency for good 
cause finds that ``notice and public procedure thereon are 
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 
Consistent with section 553(b)(B) of the APA, in publishing the interim 
rule, the FDIC invoked the good cause exception based on the 
unprecedented disruption in credit markets resulting from the severe 
financial conditions that threaten the nation's economy and the 
stability of the banking system. (Nonetheless, the FDIC solicited 
comments on the interim rule, and has fully considered the comments 
that were submitted.) For similar reasons, the FDIC confirms that the 
good cause exception, provided for in section 553(b)(B) of the APA, 
applies to the final rule.
    Section 553(d)(3) of the APA provides that the publication of a 
rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its effective date, 
except ``* * * (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause 
found and published with the rule.'' For reasons that supported its 
invocation of the good cause exception to section 553(b)(B) of the APA, 
the FDIC relied upon the good cause exception to section 553(d)(3) and 
published the interim rule with an immediate effective date. For 
similar reasons, the FDIC invokes the good cause exception provided for 
in section 553(d)(3) and provides for an immediate effective date for 
this final rule.

B. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act

    The Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act 
(RCDRIA) provides that any new regulations or amendments to regulations 
prescribed by a Federal banking agency that impose additional 
reporting, disclosures, or other new requirements on IDIs shall take 
effect on the first day of a calendar quarter which begins on or after 
the date on which the regulations are published in final form, unless 
the agency determines, for good cause published with the rule, that the 
rule should become effective before such time.\11\ For the same reasons 
discussed above, the FDIC finds that good cause exists for an immediate 
effective date for the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 12 U.S.C. 4802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this 
final rule is not a ``major rule'' within the meaning of the relevant 
sections of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996 
(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. As required by SBREFA, the FDIC will 
file the appropriate reports with Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office so that the interim rule may be reviewed.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, Sept. 19, 1980) 
(RFA) applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general 
notice of proposed rule making pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b). As 
discussed above, consistent with section 553(b)(B) of the APA, the FDIC 
has determined for good cause that general notice and opportunity for 
public comment would be impracticable and contrary to the public 
interest. Therefore, the RFA, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(2), does not 
apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The interim rule 
contained two reporting requirements that revised an existing OMB-
approved information collection, entitled the ``Temporary Liquidity 
Guarantee Program (OMB No. 3064-0166). Both reporting requirements are 
retained in the final rule. Specifically, section 370.3(h)(1)(vi) 
requires certain participating entities that did not issue FDIC-
guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009 and that wish to participate in 
the extended DGP to submit a written application to the FDIC. Any such 
application must be submitted on or before June 30, 2009. In addition, 
section 370.3(h)(1)(vii) requires certain participating entities that 
wishes to issue non-FDIC-guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, to submit 
a written application to the FDIC. The estimated burden for the new 
applications, as set forth in the interim and final rules, is as 
follows:
    Title: Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program.
    OMB Number: 3064-0166.
    Estimated Number of Respondents:

    Application to issue non-guaranteed debt--1,000.
    Application by a certain participating entity that has not issued 
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, to participate in the 
extended DGP-25.
    Frequency of Response:
    Application to issue non-guaranteed debt--once.
    Application by a certain participating entity that has not issued 
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, to participate in the 
extended DGP--once.
    Affected Public: IDIs, thrift holding companies, bank and financial 
holding companies, and affiliates of IDIs.
    Average time per response:
    Application to issue non-guaranteed debt--2 hours.
    Application by a certain participating entity that has not issued 
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, to participate in the 
extended DGP--2 hours.
    Estimated Annual Burden:
    Application to issue non-guaranteed debt--2,000 hours.
    Application by a certain participating entity that has not issued 
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, to participate in the 
extended DGP--50 hours.
    Previous annual burden--2,201,625 hours.
    Total new burden--2,050.
    Total annual burden--2,203,675 hours.
    On March 17, 2009, the FDIC requested and received approval under 
OMB's emergency clearance procedures to revise the Temporary Liquidity 
Guarantee Program information collection to incorporate the paperwork 
burden associated with applications to issue non-guaranteed debt and 
applications to participate in the extended DGP. The interim rule 
document requested comment on the paperwork burden; however, no 
responsive comments to this request were received. With issuance of the 
final rule, the FDIC will follow its request for OMB approval under 
emergency clearance procedures with a request for approval under normal 
clearance procedures, including an initial 60-day request, and 
subsequent 30-day request, for comments on: (1) Whether this collection 
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the FDIC's 
functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) 
the accuracy of the estimates of the burden of the information 
collection, including the validity of the methodologies and assumptions 
used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the

[[Page 26525]]

burden of the information collection on respondents, including through 
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology. Pending publication of the initial 60-day 
notice, interested parties are invited to submit written comments on 
the estimated burden for applications to issue non-guaranteed debt and 
to participate in the extended DGP by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/federal/propose.html.
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#85e6eae8e8e0ebf1f6c5e3e1ece6abe2eaf3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4979b9999919a8087b492909d97da939b82">[email protected]</span></a>. Include the name and number of 
the collection in the subject line of the message.
    <bullet> Mail: Leneta Gregorie (202-898-3719), Counsel, Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20429.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery: Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard 
station at the rear of the 550 17th Street Building (located on F 
Street), on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
A copy of the comment may also be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer for 
the FDIC, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 3208, 
Washington, DC 20503. All comments should refer to the name and number 
of the collection.

F. Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language

    Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Public Law 106-102, 113 
Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999), requires the federal banking agencies 
to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after 
January 1, 2000. The FDIC invites your comments on how to make this 
regulation easier to understand. For example:
    <bullet> Has the FDIC organized the material to suit your needs? If 
not, how could this material be better organized?
    <bullet> Are the requirements in the regulation clearly stated? If 
not, how could the regulation be more clearly stated?
    <bullet> Does the regulation contain language or jargon that is not 
clear? If so, which language requires clarification?
    <bullet> Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the regulation easier to 
understand? If so, what changes to the format would make the regulation 
easier to understand?
    <bullet> What else could the FDIC do to make the regulation easier 
to understand?

G. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999--
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families

    The FDIC has determined that this final rule will not affect family 
well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act, enacted as part of the Omnibus 
Consolidated and Emergency and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 
Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681).

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 370

    Banks, Banking, Bank deposit insurance, Holding companies, National 
banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.


0
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 12 CFR Part 370, which was 
published at 74 FR 12078 on March 23, 2009, is adopted as a final rule 
without change.

    Dated at Washington, DC, this 29th day of May 2009.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    By order of the Board of Directors.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-12943 Filed 6-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>