Regulatory Publication and Review Under the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996
Notice of regulatory review; request for comments.
CFR Part: "12 CFR Chapter I"; "12 CFR Chapter II"; "12 CFR Chapter III"
RIN Number: "RIN 3064-ZA39"
Citation: "89 FR 8084"
Document Number: "Docket ID OCC-2023-0016"; "Docket No. OP-1828"
Page Number: "8084"
"Proposed Rules"
Agency: "
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA), the OCC, Board, and
DATES:
Written comments must be received no later than
ADDRESSES: Comments should be directed to: OCC: Commenters are encouraged to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Please use the title "Regulatory Publication and Review Under the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996" to facilitate the organization and distribution of the comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
* Federal eRulemaking Portal--Regulations.gov: Go to https://regulations.gov/. Enter "Docket ID OCC-2023-0016" in the Search Box and click "Search." Public comments can be submitted via the "Comment" box below the displayed document information or by clicking on the document title and then clicking the "Comment" box on the top-left side of the screen. For help with submitting effective comments, please click on "Commenter's Checklist." For assistance with the Regulations.gov site, please call 1-866-498-2945 (toll free) Monday-Friday,
* Mail: Chief Counsel's Office, Attention: Comment Processing,
* Hand Delivery/Courier:
Instructions: You must include "OCC" as the agency name and "Docket ID OCC-2023-0016" in your comment. In general, the OCC will enter all comments received into the docket and publish the comments on the Regulations.gov website without change, including any business or personal information provided such as name and address information, email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this action by the following method:
* Viewing Comments Electronically--Regulations.gov: Go to https://regulations.gov/. Enter "Docket ID OCC-2023-0016" in the Search Box and click "Search." Click on the "Dockets" tab and then the document's title. After clicking the document's title, click the "Browse All Comments" tab. Comments can be viewed and filtered by clicking on the "Sort By" drop-down on the right side of the screen or the "Refine Comments Results" options on the left side of the screen. Supporting materials can be viewed by clicking on the "Browse Documents" tab. Click on the "Sort By" drop-down on the right side of the screen or the "Refine Results" options on the left side of the screen checking the "Supporting & Related Material" checkbox. For assistance with the Regulations.gov site, please call 1-866-498-2945 (toll free) Monday-Friday,
The docket may be viewed after the close of the comment period in the same manner as during the comment period.
Board: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. OP-1828 by any of the following methods:
* Agency Website: https://www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments at https://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.
* Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
* Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number in the subject line of the message.
* Fax: 202-452-3819 or 202-452-3102.
* Mail:
Public Inspection: In general, all public comments will be made available on the Board's website at www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as submitted, and will not be modified to remove confidential, contact or any identifiable information. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper in Room M-4365A,
* Agency Website: https://www.fdic.gov/resources/regulations/federal-register-publications/. Follow instructions for submitting comments on the
* Mail:
* Hand Delivery/Courier: Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard station at the rear of the
* Email: [email protected]. Include "EGRPRA" in the subject line of the message.
Public Inspection: Comments received, including any personal information provided, may be posted without change to https://www.fdic.gov/resources/regulations/federal-register-publications/. Commenters should submit only information that the commenter wishes to make available publicly. The
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
OCC:
Board:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
FOOTNOTE 1 12 U.S.C. 3311. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 2 The
FOOTNOTE 3 The
Consistent with its approach during the first and second EGRPRA reviews, NCUA will separately issue notices and requests for comment on its rules. The
FOOTNOTE 4 Insured depository institutions are also subject to regulations that are not reviewed under the EGRPRA process because they were not prescribed by the agencies. Examples include rules for which rulemaking authority was transferred to the
EGRPRA also requires the
II. The EGRPRA Review's Targeted Focus
The EGRPRA regulatory review provides an opportunity for the public and the agencies to look at groups of related regulations and to identify opportunities for burden reduction. /5/ For example, the EGRPRA review may facilitate the identification of statutes and regulations that share similar goals or complementary methods where one or more agencies could eliminate the overlapping regulatory requirements. Alternatively, commenters may identify regulations or statutes that impose requirements that are no longer consistent with the way business is conducted and may warrant revision or elimination.
FOOTNOTE 5 See supra note 1. END FOOTNOTE
The EGRPRA review also provides the agencies and the public with an opportunity to consider how to reduce the impact on community banks or their holding companies. The agencies are aware of the role that these institutions play in providing consumers and businesses across the nation with essential financial services and access to credit. The agencies are especially concerned about the impact of requirements on these smaller institutions. The agencies understand that when a new regulation is issued or a current regulation amended, smaller institutions may have to devote a significant amount of their resources to determine if and how the regulation will affect them. Through the public comment process, the EGRPRA review can help the agencies identify and target regulatory changes to reduce impacts on these smaller institutions.
Burden reduction must be compatible with consumer protection, the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions, their affiliates, and the financial system as a whole. Burden reduction also must be consistent with the agencies' statutory mandates, many of which require the issuance of regulations. EGRPRA recognizes that effective burden reduction may require statutory changes. Accordingly, as part of this review, we specifically ask the public to comment on the relationship among burden reduction, regulatory requirements, policy objectives, and statutory mandates. We also seek quantitative data about the impact of rules, where available.
We note that the agencies must consider regulatory burden each time an agency proposes, adopts, or amends a rule. For example, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 /6/ and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, /7/ the agencies assess each rulemaking with respect to the burdens the rule might impose. The agencies also invite the public to comment on proposed rules as required by the Administrative Procedure Act. /8/
FOOTNOTE 6 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 7 5 U.S.C. 610. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 8 5 U.S.C. 551-559. END FOOTNOTE
III. The EGRPRA Review Process
Taken together for purposes of EGRPRA, the agencies' regulations covering insured depository institutions encompass more than 100 subjects. /9/ Consistent with the EGRPRA statute and past practice, the agencies have grouped these regulations into the following 12 categories listed in alphabetical order: Applications and Reporting; Banking Operations; Capital; Community Reinvestment Act; Consumer Protection; /10/ Directors, Officers and Employees; International Operations; Money Laundering; Powers and Activities; Rules of Procedure; Safety and Soundness; and Securities. These categories were used during the prior EGRPRA reviews. The agencies determined the categories by sorting the regulations by type and sought to have no category be too large or broad. These categories remain useful for the review, and the agencies have not modified the categories for purposes of this review.
FOOTNOTE 9 Consistent with EGRPRA's focus on reducing burden on insured depository institutions, the agencies have not included their internal, organizational, or operational regulations in this review. These regulations impose minimal, if any, burden on insured depository institutions. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 10 The agencies are seeking comment only on consumer protection regulations for which they retain rulemaking authority for insured depository institutions and holding companies under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (Dodd-Frank Act). END FOOTNOTE
Over the next two years, the agencies plan to publish four
To assist the public's understanding of how the agencies have organized the EGRPRA review, the agencies have prepared a chart that lists the categories of regulations with the three categories of regulations addressed in this
The agencies will review the comments received and determine whether further action is appropriate with respect to the regulations. The agencies will consult and coordinate with each other and expect to generally make this determination jointly, as appropriate, in the case of rules that have been issued on an interagency basis. Similarly, as appropriate, the agencies will undertake any rulemaking to amend or repeal those rules on an interagency basis. For rules issued by a single agency, the issuing agency will review the comments received and independently determine whether amendments to or repeal of its rules are appropriate.
IV. Request for Comments on the First Three Categories of Regulations: Applications and Reporting, Powers and Activities, and International Operations
The agencies are requesting comment on regulations in three specific categories to identify outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome requirements imposed on insured depository institutions and their holding companies. The agencies will solicit comment on all rules finalized by the agencies before the publication of the last EGRPRA notice in the series. In addition to comments on regulations in the first three categories generally, the agencies are requesting comments on certain specific regulations described below within the first three categories issued since the last EGRPRA review. Where possible, the agencies ask commenters to cite to specific regulatory language or provisions. The agencies also welcome suggested alternative provisions or language in support of a comment, where appropriate. The agencies will consider comments submitted anonymously.
Specific Issues for Commenters To Consider
The agencies specifically invite comment on the following issues as they pertain to the agencies' Applications and Reporting, Powers and Activities, and International Operations rules addressed in this notice. We will ask these same questions for each notice we issue in connection with the EGRPRA process.
* Need and purpose of the regulations.
o Question 1: Have there been changes in the financial services industry, consumer behavior, or other circumstances that cause any regulations in these categories to be outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome? If so, please identify the regulations, provide any available quantitative analyses or data, and indicate how the regulations should be amended.
o Question 2: Do any of these regulations impose burdens not required by their underlying statutes? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Overarching approaches/flexibilities.
o Question 3: With respect to the regulations in these categories, could an agency use a different regulatory approach to lessen the burden imposed by the regulations and achieve statutory intent?
o Question 3: Do any of these rules impose unnecessarily inflexible requirements? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Cumulative effects.
o Question 4: Looking at the regulations in a category as a whole, are there any requirements that are redundant, inconsistent, or overlapping in such a way that taken together, impose an unnecessary burden that could potentially be addressed? If so, please identify those regulations, provide any available quantitative analyses or data, and indicate how the regulations should be amended.
* Effect on competition.
o Question 5: Do any of the regulations in these categories create competitive disadvantages for one part of the financial services industry compared to another or for one type of insured depository institution compared to another? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Reporting, recordkeeping, and disclosure requirements.
o Question 6: Do any of the regulations in these categories impose outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome reporting, recordkeeping, or disclosure requirements on insured depository institutions or their holding companies?
o Question 7: Could an insured depository institution or its holding company fulfill any of these requirements through new technologies (if they are not already permitted to do so) and experience a burden reduction? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Unique characteristics of a type of institution.
o Question 8: Do any of the regulations in these categories impose requirements that are unwarranted by the unique characteristics of a particular type of insured depository institution or holding company? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Clarity.
o Question 9: Are the regulations in these categories clear and easy to understand?
o Question 10: Are there specific regulations for which clarification is needed? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
* Impact to community banks and other small, insured depository institutions.
o Question 11: Are there regulations in these categories that impose outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome requirements on a substantial number of community banks, their holding companies, or other small, insured depository institutions or holding companies?
o Question 12: Have the agencies issued regulations pursuant to a common statute that, as applied by the agencies, create redundancies or impose inconsistent requirements?
o Question 13: Should any of these regulations issued pursuant to a common statute be amended or repealed to minimize this impact? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
o Question 14: Have the effects of any regulations in these categories changed over time that now have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small, insured depository institutions or holding companies? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended. The agencies seek information on (1) the continued need for the rule; (2) the complexity of the rule; (3) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and (4) the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.
* Scope of rules.
o Question 15: Is the scope of each rule in these categories consistent with the intent of the underlying statute(s)?
o Questions 16: Could the agencies amend the scope of a rule to clarify its applicability or reduce the burden, while remaining faithful to statutory intent? If so, please identify the regulations and indicate how they should be amended.
Specific Interagency Regulations Issued Since the Last EGRPRA Review
* Expanded Examination Cycle for
FOOTNOTE 11 See Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 115-174, 132 Stat. 1296 (2018). END FOOTNOTE
* Reduced Reporting for Covered Depository Institutions. In
FOOTNOTE 12 84 FR 29050 (
* Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities. The agencies have issued and modified provisions related to margin and capital requirements for covered swap entities since the last EGRPRA review. /13/
FOOTNOTE 13 80 FR 74839 (
* Amendments to the Regulations Implementing Section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act Regarding Proprietary Trading and Relationships with Covered Funds. In
FOOTNOTE 14 12 U.S.C. 1851. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 15 See EGRRCPA sections 203, 204. These provisions were effective upon EGRRCPA's enactment. END FOOTNOTE
* Computer-Security Incident Notification Requirements. In
FOOTNOTE 16 86 FR 66424 (
Specific OCC Regulations Issued Since the Last EGRPRA Review
* Integration of Applications and Reporting rules and Powers and Activities rules for Federal Savings Associations and National Banks. In
FOOTNOTE 17 85 FR 80404 (
FOOTNOTE 18 85 FR 83686 (
* Question 17: Are there additional rules that could be integrated, amended, or removed?
* Covered Savings Associations Provisions. In 2019, as required by the EGRRCPA, /19/ the OCC established standards and procedures for Federal savings associations that elected to operate as a covered savings association under Section 5a of the Home Owners' Loan Act. /20/
FOOTNOTE 19 12 U.S.C. 1464a. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 20 84 FR 23991 (
Specific Board Regulations Issued Since the Last EGRPRA Review
* Modified Capital Planning Requirements for Certain Holding Companies. In 2021, the Board adopted a final rule to modify the requirements in the Board's capital plan rule for firms with assets of
FOOTNOTE 21 86 FR 7927 (
Specific FDIC Regulations Issued Since the Last EGRPRA Review
* Transferred Regulations from the
FOOTNOTE 22 Final rulemakings include: 78 FR 76721 (
* Amendments to International Banking Regulations (Part 347). In
* Incorporation of Existing Statement of Policy Regarding Requests for Participation in the Affairs of an
FOOTNOTE 23 12 U.S.C. 1829. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 24 On
* Rule Regarding Parent Companies of Industrial Banks and Industrial Loan Companies (Part 354). In
V. The Agencies' Review of Regulations Under Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Consistent with past practice, the [agencies] will use the EGRPRA review to satisfy their respective obligations under Section 610 of the RFA. /25/ To that end, for each rule that has a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities issued in the last 10 years, the [agencies] invite comment on (1) the continued need for the rule; (2) the complexity of the rule; (3) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and (4) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule. The purpose of the review will be to determine whether such rules should be continued without change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any significant economic impact of the rules upon a substantial number of such small entities.
FOOTNOTE 25 Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 610, imposes a continuing obligation on the agencies to review regulations that may have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities, within 10 years after a final rulemaking is published. A subset of the rules the agencies will review under EGRPRA will also be reviewed under the Section 610 review criteria. The agencies will indicate which rules are subject to Section 610 review. The factors the agencies consider in evaluating a rule under 5 U.S.C. 610 are (1) the continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of complaints or comments received concerning the rule from the public; (3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with other Federal rules, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules; and (5) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule. END FOOTNOTE
The agencies have not identified any rules pertaining to Applications and Reporting, Powers and Activities, and International Operations that would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The agencies will consider public comments submitted through the EGRPRA review process and agency experience to identify regulations where the agencies can reduce burdens that have a significant impact on a substantial number of small, insured depository institutions. /26/
FOOTNOTE 26 The review will be consistent with the requirements of a Regulatory Flexibility Act, Section 610 review. The [agencies] will determine whether particular rules should be continued without change, amended, or rescinded, consistent with the objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any significant economic impact of the rules on a substantial number of small, insured depository institutions. END FOOTNOTE
BILLING CODE 4810-33-; 6210-01-; 6714-01-P
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
See illustration in Original Document.
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
By order of the
Secretary of the Board.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Dated at
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-02016 Filed 2-5-24;
BILLING CODE 4810-33-; 6210-01; 6714-01-C
AM Best Assigns Issue Credit Rating to Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company’s Surplus Note
5 THINGS TO KNOW: What is earthquake insurance and is it worth it? [McAlester News-Capital, Okla.]
Advisor News
- Equitable launches 403(b) pooled employer plan to support nonprofits
- Financial FOMO is quietly straining relationships
- GDP growth to rebound in 2027-2029; markets to see more volatility in 2026
- Health-related costs are the greatest threat to retirement security
- Social Security literacy is crucial for advisors
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- Smart annuity planning can benefit long-term tax planning
- Agam Capital Announces the Continued Growth of Agam ISAC’s Bermuda Platform
- Best’s Special Report: Analysis Shows Drastic Shift in Life Insurance Reserves Toward Annuity Products, and a Slide in Credit Quality
- MetLife to Announce First Quarter 2026 Results
- CT commissioner: 70% of policyholders covered in PHL liquidation plan
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Study Findings from Wake Forest University School of Medicine Broaden Understanding of Insurance (Medicare’s 60th Anniversary: Policy, Politics and Payments): Insurance
- New Findings in Managed Care Described from Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute (National Turnaround Time Trends for Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries, 2014-2023): Managed Care
- Study Findings on Cancer Published by Researchers at Department of Epidemiology (Health Insurance as a Mediator of Neighborhood Deprivation and Pediatric Cancer Survival: An Analysis of State Cancer Registry Data): Cancer
- No vote on bill requiring health insurance to cover infertility treatment
- Cost pressures are driving health care tradeoffs
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- How improving the customer experience can build trust
- AI won’t solve the workforce crisis; here’s what will
- Agam Capital Announces the Continued Growth of Agam ISAC’s Bermuda Platform
- An Application for the Trademark “PREMIER ACCESS” Has Been Filed by The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America: The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America
- AM Best Assigns Credit Ratings to North American Fire & General Insurance Company Limited and North American Life Insurance Company Limited
More Life Insurance News