Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 3, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 26521 

1 74 FR 12078 (March 23, 2009). 

2See 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. 

3 74 FR 12078 (March 23, 2009). 

4Section 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. 

deposits of the next longer and shorter 

maturities offered in the market. 

Dated at Washington, DC, this 29th day of 

May, 2009. 

Authorized to be published in the Federal 

Register by Order of the Board of Directors 

of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Robert E. Feldman, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–12938 Filed 6–2–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

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 FDICguaranteed 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 nonFDIC-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

DATES: Effective June 3, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark L. Handzlik, Senior Attorney, 

Legal Division, (202) 898–3990 or 

mhandzlik@fdic.gov; Robert C. Fick, 

Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898–8962 

or rfick@fdic.gov; A. Ann Johnson, 

Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898–3573 

or aajohnson@fdic.gov; (for questions or 

comments related to applications) Lisa 

D Arquette, Associate Director, Division 

of Supervision and Consumer 

Protection, (202) 898–8633 or 

larquette@fdic.gov; Serena L. Owens, 

Associate Director, Supervision and 

Applications Branch, Division of 

Supervision and Consumer Protection, 

(202) 898–8996 or sowens@fdic.gov; Gail 

Patelunas, Deputy Director, Division of 

Resolutions and Receiverships, (202) 

898–6779 or gpatelunas@fdic.gov; 

Donna Saulnier, Manager, Assessment 

Policy Section, Division of Finance, 

(703) 562–6167 or dsaulnier@fdic.gov; 

or Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Bank and 

Regulatory Policy Section, Division of 

Insurance and Research, (202) 898–8967 

or mstclair@fdic.gov. 

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. 

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 shortterm 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 nonFDIC-guaranteed funding markets. 

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 nonparticipating, 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. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
26522 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 3, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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

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). 

7Unlike 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. 

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-FDICguaranteed 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 optin 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 optin 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 optin 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

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. 

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. 

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. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 3, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 26523 

8Recent 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. 

9See 74 FR 9525 (March 4, 2009). 10Some 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 longterm 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 

Continued 

Application date Issue date Guarantee expiration date 

IDIs currently participating in the 

DGP, and other participating entities that have issued FDICguaranteed debt before April 1, 

2009.

Not required to submit an application to participate in the extension of the DGP.Senior unsecured debt may be 

issued no later than Oct. 31, 

2009.

For debt issued on or after April 

1, 2009, FDIC-guarantee of 

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 

have not issued FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, 

which have received approval to 

participate in the extension of 

the DGP.

Application due on or before June 

30, 2009.

With FDIC approval, senior unsecured debt may be issued no 

later than Oct. 31, 2009.

For debt issued on or after April 

1, 2009, with FDIC approval, 

FDIC-guarantee of 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 currently participating in the DGP, 

but not participating in the extension of the DGP.

N/A ................................................ Senior unsecured debt may be 

issued no later than June 30, 

2009.

FDIC-guarantee of senior unsecured debt expires on the 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. 

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

D. Opportunity To Apply To Issue NonGuaranteed 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


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
26524 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 3, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

11 12 U.S.C. 4802. 

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. 

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 FDICguaranteed 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 FDICguaranteed 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 FDICguaranteed 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 FDICguaranteed 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 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 3, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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: 

• http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/ 

laws/federal/propose.html. 

• E-mail: comments@fdic.gov. 

Include the name and number of the 

collection in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Mail: Leneta Gregorie (202–898– 

3719), Counsel, Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20429. 

• 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-LeachBliley 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: 

• Has the FDIC organized the material 

to suit your needs? If not, how could 

this material be better organized? 

• Are the requirements in the 

regulation clearly stated? If not, how 

could the regulation be more clearly 

stated? 

• Does the regulation contain 

language or jargon that is not clear? If 

so, which language requires 

clarification? 

• 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? 

• 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 wellbeing 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. 

■ 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 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0314; FRL–8906–1] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Diego Air 

Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the San 

Diego Air Pollution Control District 

(SDAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). Rule 

27.1—Federal Requirements for the San 

Diego County Air Pollution Control 

District’s Alternative Mobile Source 

Emission Reduction Program Approved 

on September 8, 2000, will allow 

stationary sources to use emission 

reduction credits of nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) generated from mobile sources as 

New Source Review (NSR) offsets. We 

are approving Rule 27.1 under authority 

of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

3, 2009 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by July 

6, 2009. If we receive such comment, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that this rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0314, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

• E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shaheerah Kelly, Permits Office (AIR– 

3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, (415) 947–4156, 

kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES