Financial Interests of Appointive Directors, 15627-15633 [E7-5973]
Download as PDF
15627
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 62
Monday, April 2, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD
12 CFR Part 915
[No. 2007–05]
RIN 3069–AB34
Financial Interests of Appointive
Directors
AGENCY:
Federal Housing Finance
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance
Board (Finance Board) is proposing to
clarify the types of financial interests a
Federal Home Loan Bank (Bank)
appointive director may own in a Bank
member. The proposal would
incorporate into Finance Board rules its
long-standing policy that financial
interests in a Bank member acquired
though ownership of shares of a
diversified mutual fund are permissible
holdings for an appointive director. The
proposal would extend the rationale for
permitting mutual fund investments to
other types of vehicles and accounts
that share certain of the same key
features as mutual funds and thus are
unlikely to pose a risk of conflict of
interest for an appointive director. The
proposal also would set forth additional
criteria to define when owning shares of
a holding company, or having other
types of financial interests in a member,
would be permissible for an appointive
director.
DATES: The Finance Board will accept
written comments on the proposed rule
on or before May 17, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the
Finance Board using any one of the
following methods:
E-mail: comments@fhfb.gov.
Fax: 202–408–2580.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Federal Housing
Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street NW.,
Washington DC 20006, Attention: Public
Comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. If
you submit your comment to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
Neil
R. Crowley, Acting General Counsel,
crowleyn@fhfb.gov or 202–408–2990; or
Thomas E. Joseph, Senior AttorneyAdvisor, Office of General Counsel,
josepht@fhfb.gov or 202–408–2512. You
can send regular mail to the Federal
Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street
NW., Washington, DC 20006.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Board.
ACTION:
Federal eRulemaking Portal, please also
send it by e-mail to the Finance Board
at comments@fhfb.gov to ensure timely
receipt by the agency. Include the
following information in the subject line
of your submission: Federal Housing
Finance Board. Proposed Rule:
Financial Interests of Appointive
Directors. RIN Number 3069-AB34.
Docket Number 2007–05.
We will post all public comments we
receive without change, including any
personal information you provide, such
as your name and address, on the
Finance Board Web site at https://
www.fhfb.gov/
Default.aspx?Page=93&Top=93.
I. Background
Section 7(a) of the Federal Home Loan
Bank Act (Bank Act) (12 U.S.C. 1427(a)),
provides for management of each Bank
by a board of directors of at least 14
persons, with 8 directors elected by the
members and 6 directors appointed by
the Finance Board. This provision also
states that any individual appointed by
the Finance Board may not, ‘‘during
such Bank director’s term of office,
serve as an officer of any Federal Home
Loan Bank or a director or officer of any
member of a Bank, or hold shares, or
any other financial interest in, any
member of a Bank.’’ 1 The provision
concerning the qualifications for
appointive directors was added to the
Bank Act by section 706 of the Finance
Institutions Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) (Pub.
L. 101–73, 103 Stat. 183 (Aug. 9, 1989)).
In adopting the FIRREA amendments,
Congress indicated that it did not intend
these conflict of interest provisions to
preclude an appointive director from
1 Should an appointive directorship become
vacant during the term of the appointment because
the director no longer meets any of the statutory or
regulatory requirements for serving on a Bank’s
board or for any other reason, section 7(f) of the
Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 1427(f)) authorizes the Finance
Board to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the
unexpired term.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
investing in a diversified mutual fund
that in turn may own shares in a Bank
member. See H.R. Conf. Rep. 101–209 at
430 (1989). The Bank Act, however,
does not further define the terms
‘‘shares’’ or ‘‘financial interests,’’ nor
does it otherwise indicate how the
provision should be applied. As a result,
the Finance Board has had to interpret
these terms whenever prospective
appointive directors have asked whether
certain of their investments were
permissible under this provision. The
Finance Board has provided guidance to
these individuals in the past on a caseby-case basis, as well as through its
regulations.
In January 1990, the Finance Board
adopted an interim final rule
implementing the FIRREA appointive
director and conflict of interest
provision. See Interim Final Rule:
Election of Directors; Eligibility
Requirements, 55 FR 1393 (Jan. 18,
1990), codified at 12 CFR 932.18 (1991).
The Finance Board later modified this
rule somewhat based on the comments
it received on the interim final rule. See
Final Rule: Eligibility and Financial
Disclosure Requirements for Directors of
the Federal Home Loan Banks, 56 FR
55205 (Oct. 25, 1991). The rule, as
amended in October 1991, provided
among other things, that no appointive
director may during his or her term of
office have a financial interest in any
member (or a subsidiary or nondiversified holding company thereof, or
affiliate of such holding company) of the
Bank on whose board the director
served.2 It also specifically defined a
financial interest to include the
ownership or control, either directly or
indirectly, of any shares of common or
2 See 56 FR at 55220. The 1991 amendments
clarified the prohibition on serving on the board of,
or ownership in, a member, member subsidiary or
a non-diversified holding company of a member or
affiliate of such holding company to make clear that
the term ‘‘member’’ meant only a member of the
Bank on whose board an appointive director served
and not a member of another Bank. See 56 FR at
55206–207. The 1991 amendments also added a
definition for the term ‘‘diversified holding
company’’ that read:
A holding company whose member subsidiary
and related activities, as specified in 12 U.S.C.
1467a(c)(2), represented on either an actual or pro
forma basis less than fifty (50) percent of both its
consolidated net worth and its consolidated net
earnings at the close of its preceding fiscal year. For
purposes of the foregoing, consolidated net worth
and consolidated net earnings shall be determined
in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. 56 FR at 55219.
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
15628
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
preferred capital stock, any other equity
security, any debt security or obligation
(except deposit or savings accounts)
including subordinated debt, but
allowed an appointive director to hold
such interests if they arose solely
through ownership of shares or other
investment units of one or more
diversified mutual funds (as defined in
section 5(a) and (b)(1) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940, as amended).3
The rule also prohibited an appointive
director from having other financial
relationships, including loans or other
extensions of credit, with a member of
the Bank on whose board the director
served, or with the member’s subsidiary,
or its non-diversified holding company
(or an affiliate of such holding
company), which were not transacted in
the ordinary course of business and on
normal commercial terms, as discussed
in the rule itself. 56 FR at 55220.
In 1998, the Finance Board
substantially revised its rules governing
elective and appointive directors.4
Among other things, the 1998
amendments required the Banks to
adopt conflict of interest policies that
applied to both elective and appointive
directors. The rule specifically required
the conflict of interest policy to prohibit
an appointive director from serving as
an officer of any Bank or as an officer
or director of any member or from
owning any equity or debt security
issued by a member or from having any
other financial interest in a member. See
63 FR at 65690.
The 1998 revisions also deleted the
detailed provisions addressing
appointive director qualifications and
prohibited financial interests in favor of
more general references to the Bank Act
and somewhat more general definitions
of terms such as ‘‘financial interests.’’
The new definition of ‘‘financial
interests’’ specifically excluded deposit
or savings accounts maintained with a
member and loans and other extensions
of credit from a member so long as they
were obtained in the normal course of
business on terms generally available to
the public. See 63 FR at 65691. Among
the provisions that were dropped in
1998, however, was the one that
specifically had allowed an appointive
director to hold shares or other financial
interests in a member if they arose
3 56 FR at 55219, 55220. The definition of
‘‘financial interest’’ applied if the interest was held
by an appointive director or director candidate or
by his or her immediate family member and related
interests, or the related interest of the immediate
family member. 56 FR at 55219.
4 See Final Rule: Election of Federal Home Loan
Bank Directors, 63 FR 65683 (Nov. 30, 1998). These
rules are now found in part 915 of the Finance
Board’s regulations (12 CFR part 915).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
solely through ownership of one or
more diversified mutual funds.
Notwithstanding that change, the
Finance Board has continued to
interpret section 7(a) as it had done
previously, and has allowed appointive
directors to have indirect financial
interests in a member if held through
ownership of shares of a diversified
mutual fund.
The conflict of interest rules for
appointive directors remain
substantively the same as adopted in
1998, and currently are found at 12 CFR
§ 915.11. The Finance Board recently
adopted an interim final rule to address
procedures for how appointive directors
are selected.5 Under the new
procedures, the boards of directors of
each Bank have to submit to the Finance
Board a list of individuals who could
serve in appointive directorships. Along
with the list, the Banks must submit
information regarding each individual’s
eligibility and qualifications to serve as
a Bank director.
II. Analysis of the Proposed Rule
A. Reasons for the Proposed Changes
The recent changes in the selection
process for appointive directors have
prompted questions to the Finance
Board about whether specific
investments held by potential
candidates would be barred by section
7(a), and thus would have to be sold if
the person were to accept an
appointment to the board of a Bank.
These questions have brought to light
the extent to which developments in the
financial services marketplace in recent
years have created different types of
investment accounts and investment
vehicles that either did not exist when
FIRREA was enacted or were not as
widely held as they are today, and for
which the Finance Board has not
previously provided formal guidance.
The Finance Board believes that the
lack of a rule providing clear guidance
as to what investments are encompassed
by the terms ‘‘shares’’ and ‘‘financial
interests’’ could cause some potential
appointive director candidates to
decline to consider an appointive
directorship for fear that they would be
required to divest certain investments in
order to accept the position. Any such
divestiture could prove financially
costly and disruptive to their personal
5 See Interim Final Rule: Federal Home Loan
Bank Appointive Directors, 72 FR 3028 (Jan. 24,
2007) (adopting new § 915.10). The Finance Board
also solicited comments on this interim final rule.
The Finance Board considered the comments
received and adopted a final rule to address the
selection process at the same meeting in which it
approved this proposed rule for publication in the
Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
financial planning strategies. At the
same time, the Finance Board
recognizes that as the Banks have
become involved in more complex
financial activities, it is important that
some of a Bank’s individual appointive
directors have more sophisticated skills
and a deeper understanding of financial
markets to provide strong oversight.
Such persons can bring business and
leadership skills to the boards that will
complement the skills and expertise
brought by the elective directors and the
community interest directors. In some
cases, persons who possess those
analytical skills and related business
experience may also be sophisticated
investors in their own right and have
investments that go beyond traditional
stock, bond, and mutual fund holdings.
The possibility that persons who can
bring needed skills and experience to
the board of a Bank might be
discouraged from serving as appointive
directors due to uncertainty about how
the conflict of interest limitations may
apply to their investments has caused
the Finance Board to consider whether
it should amend its regulations. The
Finance Board hopes that in updating
these provisions, a new rule will better
reflect the range of investments or
investment vehicles (beyond traditional
investments) through which an
appointive director may obtain some
interest in a member but which, because
of the director’s lack of control over the
investment or the minimal value of the
interest obtained, would not present
concerns that should disqualify such
individual from serving as an
appointive director. Thus, the Finance
Board is proposing this rule in an
attempt to balance the need to assure
that appointive directors do not have
actual or apparent conflicts that would
undermine their ability to represent the
public interest against the need to
attract a sufficient pool of candidates
with sophisticated skills in areas such
as housing and finance to build boards
of directors capable of overseeing the
Banks as they evolve and undertake new
activities.
The proposal is based primarily on
the Finance Board’s experience to date
in administering section 7(a) and the
questions raised about potential
conflicts as a result of interests in
various investment vehicles and
strategies. The Finance Board recognizes
that it has had only limited experience
in dealing with the types of investment
products that are available in today’s
financial marketplace, particularly those
that are available to high net worth
individuals. In order to craft a final rule
that will strike an appropriate balance
between allowing investments that
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
share key characteristics associated with
mutual fund shares, which were
permitted by Congress, and barring
investments that are more like direct
ownership interests in member stock,
the Finance Board will benefit greatly
from the perspectives of persons more
familiar with the universe of investment
products currently available.
Accordingly, the Finance Board
welcomes all comments on how to
further refine the proposal to assure that
the rule will not unintentionally allow
individuals to hold investments that
may create conflicts with their duties as
appointive directors but still remain
flexible enough not to create
unnecessary barriers to finding
candidates with the skills and
experience to be strong Bank directors.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
B. Proposed Rule Changes
General. The Finance Board is
proposing to add a new paragraph (f) to
§ 915.10 of its rules to address the issues
described above.6 The proposed
provision first would set out the general
prohibition against an appointive
director owning any debt or equity
securities issued by, or otherwise having
any financial interest in, a member of
the Bank on whose board the director
serves. The provision also would restate
the statutory requirements that an
appointive director may not serve as an
officer of any Bank or as an officer or
director of any member of the Bank on
whose board the director serves.7 This
proposed language closely follows the
wording of section 7(a) of the Bank Act
and the requirements of current
§ 915.11(a)(2) of the Finance Board’s
rules.8 The proposal goes on to describe
certain types of investments or
contractual relationships that would not
be deemed to constitute shares or
financial interests in a member for
purposes of determining whether an
appointive director may hold such
interests while serving on the board of
a Bank.
The Finance Board emphasizes that
because it is not proposing to amend the
6 As already noted, § 915.10 sets forth the new
process for the selection of appointive directors.
7 For purposes of applying the prohibitions on
financial interests in a member and on serving as
an officer or director of a member, the Finance
Board interprets the term ‘‘member’’ broadly to
include the member institutions itself, as well as
any subsidiary, holding company and affiliate. See
Federal Home Loan Bank Appointive Director
Application Form, Statutory Eligibility
Requirements § 4, Conflict of Interests (reproduced
at 72 FR at 3033). The Finance Board currently
intends to continue to interpret the term ‘‘member’’
in this broad manner.
8 See 12 U.S.C. 1427(a) and 12 CFR § 915.11(a)(2).
As discussed in the next section, the Finance Board
also is proposing conforming changes to
§ 915.11(a)(2) of its rules.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
broad definition of ‘‘financial interests’’
now contained in § 915.11(f)(2), the
proposed rule would not change the
extent to, or the manner in which an
individual Bank’s disclosure and
recusal policies must address the types
of investments or activities identified in
proposed § 915.10(f), even if the
investments themselves would no
longer be deemed to disqualify an
individual from serving as an
appointive director. See 12 CFR
§§ 915.11(b) and (f)(2). The Finance
Board views continued application of
the rules related to the Bank’s recusal
and disclosures policies to the types of
investments identified in proposed
§ 915.10(f) as an additional safeguard to
assure that these investments would not
create a conflict of interest. The Finance
Board, however, requests comments on
whether this approach is appropriate or
if some modification to §§ 915.11(b) and
(f)(2) may be warranted. The Finance
Board also requests comment on
whether it should require appointive
directors to disclose their financial
holdings to the Banks as part of their
application so the Banks can verify that
the investments—including the vehicles
and accounts described below—do not
create a conflict that would be barred by
section 7(a).
Investment Vehicles. Both the
legislative history of FIRREA and the
Finance Board’s prior regulations
expressly permitted an appointive
director to own shares of a diversified
mutual fund that in turn owned debt or
equity securities issued by a member of
the Bank on whose board the director
served. The legislative history offers
scant insight into the intent of Congress
in adding this provision, but the use of
the term ‘‘diversified mutual fund’’
appears to reflect a view that an
appointive director can own indirectly
securities he or she cannot own directly
under certain circumstances. Thus, in
the case of mutual funds, indirect
ownership of member securities would
be permissible, provided the securities
are owned by a legally distinct entity
(the fund), and the investment decisions
are made by that entity (or by an
investment adviser acting on its behalf),
and the appointive director lacks any
control over the purchase or sale of the
securities owned by the entity. The
proposed rule is intended to include
within the universe of permissible
investments other types of investment
vehicles and accounts that share those
key concepts, and thus should pose no
greater risk of conflict than would exist
in the case of ownership of shares
through a mutual fund.
Accordingly, proposed § 915.11(f)(1)
would allow an appointive director to
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15629
own shares or other interests in certain
investment vehicles, which in turn may
own equity or debt securities issued by
a member of the director’s Bank,
without violating section 7(a) of the
Bank Act. In order for such an
investment to be permissible, the
investment vehicle must be a legally
separate entity and the appointive
director must not control the investment
vehicle or play any role in the selection
of the entity’s underlying investments.
By providing that the investment
vehicle must be organized as a ‘‘legally
recognized entity,’’ the proposal would
require that the vehicle be a corporation,
limited partnership, trust, or similar
entity that is recognized as having its
own corporate existence under state law
and is legally separate and distinct from
the individual appointive director. As
drafted, the provision would include
registered investment companies
(mutual funds) as well as limited
partnership interests and other passive
interests in distinct entities, even if
those investment vehicles were not
required to register under the
Investment Company Act.
The proposal would require that an
appointive director not control the
investment entity or be involved in
decisions involving investments or
trading strategies, which is intended to
assure that the director could not direct
the entity to purchase or sell member
securities or otherwise manipulate
trading based on knowledge acquired as
a result of the individual’s duties on the
Bank’s board. Because a general partner
typically is deemed under state law to
have the ability to control or otherwise
act on behalf of either a general or
limited partnership, a general
partnership interest would not be
permissible under this proposal.
Investment Accounts. Since the
Congress adopted the limitation on
appointive directors’ financial interests
in 1989, the financial investment
marketplace has evolved considerably.
It has come to the attention of the
Finance Board that among the
investment alternatives used with much
greater frequency by the investing
public are arrangements that, while
structured differently than mutual
funds, are functionally similar,
especially with respect to the client’s
lack of control over the investment
decisions for the portfolio. Such
investments may have somewhat
differing structures and may have
different names depending on the
company offering the investment. One
such investment alternative has been
described as a ‘‘managed account’’ or a
‘‘separately managed account.’’ Persons
using these accounts may direct the
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
15630
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
investment adviser to allocate the
portfolio among certain classes of assets,
such as growth stocks, value stocks,
bonds, or foreign equities, but do not
direct the purchase or sale of securities
within those asset classes. A key
distinction between a mutual fund and
a managed account is that in the former
case the investor owns shares of the
fund, which in turn owns the portfolio
securities in its own name, whereas in
the latter case the investor will own the
portfolio securities in his or her own
name. A key similarity between the two
is that in both cases the investor plays
no role in the purchase or sale of the
portfolio securities, as a typical
requirement of the managed account is
that the investor must confer full
investment discretion on the investment
adviser that manages the portfolio.
Proposed § 915.10(f)(2) is intended to
allow appointive directors to hold
securities of a member through such an
account, based principally on the
requirement that the director would
have no control over the acquisition of
securities for the account. Thus, the
proposal would deem any debt or equity
securities issued by a member that an
appointive director owns through
accounts where the director has no
investment discretion not to constitute
shares or financial interests in a
member. To qualify for the exclusion
under the proposed provision, however,
the account would have to be managed
by an investment adviser registered with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission under the Investment
Advisers Act, the appointive director
would have to pay a fee to the adviser
for the advisory services that are
provided as an integral component of
the account, and the director would
have to give the adviser complete
discretion to buy or sell all securities in
the account. The Finance Board believes
that where an appointive director has
turned over all investment decisions
regarding the portfolio to a professional
adviser and is not otherwise involved in
the investment decisions concerning the
account to have no greater interest in
the member securities, in a practical
sense, than does a director who owns
such securities indirectly through a
mutual fund. To further assure that the
director could not indirectly influence
the purchase or sale of securities within
the portfolio, the proposal provides that
the director could not be affiliated with
the investment adviser and could not
otherwise have control over the choice
of securities acquired for the account.
Given these proposed safeguards
(coupled with the continued application
of current disclosure and recusal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
policies), the Finance Board views
accounts covered by this proposed
provision as not presenting risks of a
conflict of interest greater than those
posed by investments in mutual funds
or similar investments.
In applying this provision, an
investor’s right to identify broad
financial goals or broad investment
strategies or asset classes (e.g.,
aggressive growth, value investing, etc.)
would not constitute sufficient
investment discretion to violate section
7(a), so long as the strategies would not
allow a director to direct the purchase
of individual securities. The Finance
Board understands that persons
investing through such accounts
sometimes are able to direct an
investment adviser not to purchase
securities issued by a particular
company, such as where the investor is
an officer or director of a publicly
traded company and instructs the
adviser not to purchase any securities
issued by that company. In such
circumstances, the Finance Board
would not be inclined to view that
limited right to identify specific
companies whose securities should be
excluded from the account as violating
the statute or the proposed rule. If the
type of account held by an appointive
director gives the director the ability to
identify securities to sell on an ad hoc
basis or based on current market
conditions, however, such an
arrangement would confer significant
investment discretion in the client, and
thus would not fall within the proposed
exclusion established by this provision.
Holding Companies. Section 7(a) of
the Bank Act speaks in terms of shares
or other financial interests in ‘‘any
member’’ of the Bank, but does not refer
expressly to treatment of securities
issued by a holding company for a
member. In the current financial
services sector, many depository
institutions are owned by one or more
holding companies and thus do not
issue their own equity securities to the
public. Although the statute does not
address this matter, the Finance Board
previously had regulations that
effectively exempted securities issued
by certain holding companies from the
reach of section 7(a). Under that
regulation, which was in effect from
1991 to 1998, securities issued by a
diversified holding company were
permissible investments for an
appointive director. A bank holding
company or a savings and loan holding
company was deemed to be
‘‘diversified’’ for these purposes if less
than 50 percent of its net worth and net
earnings, on a consolidated basis, were
attributable to the depository
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
institutions that it controlled. See n.2.
The Finance Board is proposing to
adopt a similar test for determining
whether an appointive director may
own securities issued by a holding
company that controls one or more
members of the Bank on whose board
the director serves.
Accordingly, proposed § 915.10(f)(3)
would deem debt or equity securities
issued by a holding company that
controls one or more members to not
constitute ‘‘shares’’ or ‘‘financial
interests’’ in a member, provided that
the assets of all members of the Bank
that are controlled by the holding
company constitute less than 25 percent
of the total assets of the holding
company, on a consolidated basis. The
Finance Board believes that where the
assets of the institutions that are
members of the Bank on whose board
the director sits constitute less than 25
percent of the total assets of a holding
company, the debt or equity instruments
issued by the holding company
represent interests that are
predominately something other than an
interest in a member.
The Finance Board believes the
proposed standard limiting members’
assets to less than 25 percent of the
consolidated assets would be more
restrictive than the standard applied
under the former the definition of
‘‘diversified holding company’’ (i.e., 50
percent of consolidated net worth and
net earnings). The Finance Board also
believes the proposed standard would
be easier to apply and would be less
subject to fluctuations over time (so that
companies would be less likely to shift
status under the exclusion from year-toyear). Nonetheless, the Finance Board
specifically seeks comments on how
best to measure the relative sizes of the
holding company and its member
subsidiaries (i.e., a percentage of assets
or a percentage of capital or earnings)
and whether some threshold other than
25 percent would be appropriate.
Moreover, while proposed
§ 915.10(f)(3) would deem interests in
certain holding companies not to
constitute shares or financial interests in
a member, the proposed provision does
not deal with other relationships with a
holding company. Given the current
practice, however, the Finance Board
would not permit an appointive director
to serve as an officer or director of any
holding company that controls a
member, even if the member constitutes
less than 25 percent of the assets of the
holding company.9 It would appear to
9 While the prohibition on an appointive director
serving as an officer or director of a holding
company or an affiliate or a subsidiary of a member
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
be incompatible with the independence
expected of an appointive director and
the public interests the director is
expected to serve to allow that person
simultaneously to serve as an officer or
director of any holding company that
controlled any member of the Bank. As
an appointive director, the individual
would owe fiduciary duties to the Bank
and the Finance Board does not believe
that an appointive director also should
owe fiduciary duties to a member or its
holding company. These competing
duties could make it difficult for the
appointive director to competently serve
in either capacity. The Finance Board is
requesting comment on whether it
should apply the same standard for
determining if a holding company’s
securities are permissible investments
for an appointive director to other types
of relationships, such as service as a
director or officer of such company or
contractual relationships with, or
receipt of income from, such company.
Loans and Deposits. Proposed
§ 915.10(f)(4) would provide that loans
from, or deposits in, a member would
not constitute a financial interest in the
member if the transaction occurs in the
normal course of business and on terms
that are no more favorable than those
available under like circumstances to
members of the public. This provision
does not represent a change in current
Finance Board practices. Loans and
deposits meeting the proposed criteria
already are excluded from the definition
of financial interest contained in
§ 915.11(f)(2) and holding such loans
and deposits does not currently
disqualify a candidate from
consideration for an appointive
directorship. See 12 CFR § 915.11(f)(2);
see also Federal Home Loan Bank
Appointive Director Application Form,
Statutory Eligibility Requirements § 4,
Conflict of Interest. Such items also had
been permitted under the prior
regulations. See, e.g., 56 FR at 55220
(adopting §§ 931.30 and 932.18 of the
Finance Board’s rules).
Contractual Relationships. There have
been instances in the past in which
individuals have asked if certain
contractual relationships with a
member, such as those associated with
serving as legal counsel or as auditor,
is not set out in the current rules, it has been agency
policy to interpret the term ‘‘member’’ for purposes
of applying the conflict of interest rules broadly to
refer to the member itself, any subsidiary or affiliate
of the member or any holding company of the
member. See n.7. As previously noted, this
interpretation currently is embodied in the
explanation addressing conflict of interest provided
in the application form for appointive directors, but
the Finance Board specifically is requesting
comment as to whether this interpretation should
be clearly incorporated into the text of its rules.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
would constitute a financial interest in
the member that is prohibited by section
7(a).10 The answers to such questions
are largely dependent on the facts of
each case, and typically have been
addressed by staff on a case-by-case
basis. Although it is not practicable to
create a regulation that would address
all such circumstances, the Finance
Board believes that the regulations
could be revised to establish a type of
safe harbor for contractual relationships
that do not contribute a significant
amount to the person’s income.
Accordingly, proposed § 915.11(f)(5)
would establish a presumption that an
appointive director’s contractual
relationships with members of the Bank
would not constitute a financial interest
in a member if the money paid to the
person under such contracts in any
calendar year constitutes less than 10
percent of the appointive director’s
adjusted gross income for that year.
The Finance Board would intend the
director to calculate his or her adjusted
gross income for the purposes of this
proposed test in the same manner as
would be done for federal tax purposes.
The Finance Board would also expect
the director to aggregate all amounts
earned (or to be earned) under contracts
with all members of the Bank on whose
board the director serves in determining
the amount due the director for
purposes of applying the proposed test.
Given the attribution provision in
proposed § 915.11(f)(6), if an appointive
director’s spouse has contractual
relationships with Bank members, the
amounts due under those contracts also
would be combined with those of the
director (and the adjusted gross income
would represent that of both the director
and the spouse) to determine if the
contracts exceed the 10 percent
threshold. If only the director’s spouse
had a contract with Bank members, the
adjusted gross income used in applying
the test would be that of the spouse
only.
The proposed rule also would require
an appointive director to disclose all
contractual relationships with members
of the Bank on whose board the director
serves (or will serve) whether or not the
amounts due exceed 10 percent of the
director’s adjusted gross income, as well
as those of a spouse. Where the amounts
due under such contracts would be 10
percent or more of the director’s
adjusted gross income, the proposed
rule would require the Finance Board to
10 As already noted, when determining if a
contractual relationship with a member exists, the
Finance Board would interpret the term ‘‘member’’
broadly to include a member itself, any subsidiary
or affiliate of a member, and any holding company
of a member. See n.7 and n.9.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15631
determine on a case-by-case basis
whether the contractual relationships
represent a financial interest that would
disqualify an individual from serving as
an appointive director. In making the
determination, the Finance Board would
consider, among other things, if the
contractual relationships may result in
the appointive director not fairly
representing the public interest when
considering matters that come before the
board or otherwise causing the director
to be partial toward or biased against
any member or otherwise partial in his
or her judgment. In weighing this
matter, the Finance Board would
consider whether the contractual
relationships may create an appearance
of partiality in deciding if the
contractual relationship may disqualify
a person from holding an appointive
directorship.
Attribution. Proposed § 915.10(f)(6)
would establish that debt or equity
securities owned by a spouse or minor
child of an appointive director are
attributed to the appointive director for
purposes of complying with proposed
§ 915.10(f). This proposed provision
also would make clear that any
contractual relationships between a
member and the spouse of a director
would be attributed to the appointive
director. How the calculation would be
performed to determine whether such
contracts exceeded the proposed
threshold in § 915.10(f)(5) has already
been discussed above. The Finance
Board has not included minor children
in the proposed attribution provision
with regard to contracts because it
would not expect that minor children
would, or could legally, enter into such
agreements. The Finance Board believes
that the financial interests of a spouse
or minor child of a director would be so
closely aligned with the interests of the
director that these proposed attribution
provisions are fair and are generally
consistent with how attribution
provisions dealing with conflict of
interests and similar matters are
generally structured.
C. Other Conforming Amendments
The Finance Board also is proposing
amendments to § 915.11(a)(2) to
conform this provision to the changes
proposed in new § 915.10(f). As now
written, § 915.11(a)(2), given the broad
definition of financial interest in
§ 915.11, could be read to require the
Banks to adopt policies for appointive
directors that would be more restrictive
with regard to allowable investments
than the changes proposed in
§ 915.10(f). Because the Bank Act
provides the Finance Board the sole
discretion to select appointive directors,
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
15632
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
the Finance Board would not intend the
Banks to apply more restrictive criteria
in determining when an appointive
director may hold certain investments
than that set forth in the Finance Board
rules and policies. Thus, proposed
§ 915.11(a)(2) would state that a Bank’s
conflict of interest policy must require
appointive directors to comply with
§ 915.10(f).
The Finance Board also is proposing
to delete §§ 915.16 and 915.17, which
applied only to election cycles that
occurred between 1999 and 2001 and
primarily were needed to implement
changes made by the Gramm-LeachBliley Act 11 to the Bank Act’s election
and director provisions. Thus, the
regulatory provisions in §§ 915.16 and
915.17 no longer serve any purpose and
are not applicable to current or future
election cycles. Similarly, the Finance
Board is proposing to delete Appendix
A to part 915, which includes matrices
that were created in conjunction with
earlier elections and appointments and
related to the directorships of the Banks.
Over the past few years, as part of its
annual designation of elective
directorships, the Finance Board has
created updated versions of these
matrices to reflect the revised board
structure for each Bank for that year,
and expects to continue to create new
matrices as part of each annual
designation exercise. Because the
matrices in Appendix A relate to prior
years and have been superseded by
more current versions, it no longer is
necessary to include them in the
regulations.
III. Paperwork Reduction Act
The appointive director application
form is part of the information
collection entitled ‘‘Federal Home Loan
Bank Directors.’’ Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has assigned control
number 3069–0002, which is due to
expire on November 30, 2007. The
Finance Board and the Banks use the
information contained in the
application form to determine whether
prospective appointive Bank directors
satisfy the statutory and regulatory
eligibility requirements and are well
qualified to serve as a Bank director.
Only individuals meeting these
requirements may serve as Bank
directors. See 12 U.S.C. 1427. The
proposed rule, if adopted as a final rule,
would not make substantive or material
modifications to the ‘‘Federal Home
Loan Bank Directors’’ information
11 Pub. L. No. 106–102, 133 Stat. 1338 (Nov. 12,
1999).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
collection. Consequently, the Finance
Board has not submitted any
information to OMB for review.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rule would apply only
to the Banks and to individuals who
may be willing to serve as Bank
appointive directors. Neither the Banks
nor individuals come within the
meaning of ‘‘small entities’’ as defined
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA).
See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). Thus, in accordance
with section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), the Finance Board hereby
certifies that the proposed rule, if
promulgated as a final rule, will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Lists of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 915
Conflict of interests, Elections,
Federal home loan banks, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Finance Board is
proposing to amend 12 CFR Part 915 as
follows:
PART 915—BANK DIRECTOR
ELIGIBILITY, APPOINTMENT, AND
ELECTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 915
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3), 1422b(a),
1426, 1427, and 1432.
2. Amend § 915.10 by adding a new
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 915.10
Selection of appointive directors.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Financial interests. Except as
otherwise provided in this section, an
appointive director may not own any
debt or equity securities issued by, or
have any other financial interest in, a
member of the Bank on whose board the
director serves. An appointive director
also may not serve as an officer or
director of any member of the Bank on
whose board the director serves or serve
as an officer of any Bank.
(1) Investment vehicles. An
appointive director’s investment in a
legally recognized entity that owns debt
or equity securities issued by a member
shall not be deemed to constitute the
shares or other financial interests in a
member, provided that the appointive
director does not control the entity and
plays no role in the purchase or sale of
the securities owned by the entity.
(2) Investment accounts. Debt or
equity securities owned by an
appointive director through an account
managed by an investment adviser
registered under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–1
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
et seq.), for which the director pays a fee
for advisory services and with respect to
which the director has given the
investment adviser complete discretion
to buy and sell all securities in the
account, shall not be deemed to
constitute the shares or other financial
interests in a member, provided that the
appointive director is not affiliated with
the investment adviser and has no
control over the selection of securities
acquired for the account.
(3) Holding companies. Debt or equity
securities issued by a holding company
that controls one or more members of
the Bank on whose board an appointive
director serves shall not be deemed to
constitute the shares or other financial
interest in a member, provided that the
assets of all such members constitute
less than 25 percent of the assets of the
holding company, on a consolidated
basis.
(4) Loans and deposits. Loans
obtained from a member and money
placed on deposit with a member shall
not be deemed to constitute a financial
interest in a member, provided that the
transactions occur in the normal course
of business of the member and are on
terms that are no more favorable than
those that would be available under like
circumstances to members of the public.
(5) Contractual relationships. Any
contractual relationship between an
appointive director and one or more
members of the Bank on whose board an
appointive director serves, under which
the director has a contractual right to
the payment of money, shall be
presumed not to constitute a financial
interest in a member if the amount due
to the director under such contracts in
any calendar year is less than 10 percent
of the director’s adjusted gross income
for that calendar year. An appointive
director with any such contractual
relationships, or any contractual
relationship involving amounts greater
than the above threshold, shall disclose
the relationship to the board of directors
of the Bank and to the Finance Board.
The Finance Board shall determine, on
a case by case basis, whether any
contractual relationships greater than
the above threshold constitutes a
financial interest in a member.
(6) Attribution. Any debt or equity
securities owned by the spouse or minor
children of an appointive director shall
be attributed to the director for purposes
of complying with this section, as shall
be any contractual relationships
between a member and the spouse of an
appointive director.
3. Amend § 915.11 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
§ 915.11 Conflict of interests policy for
Bank directors.
(a) Adoption of conflict of interest
policy. Each Bank shall adopt a written
conflict of interest policy that shall
apply to all Bank directors. At a
minimum, the conflict of interest policy
of each Bank shall:
(1) Require the directors to administer
the affairs of the Bank fairly and
impartially and without discrimination
in favor of or against any member or
nonmember borrower;
(2) Require appointive directors to
comply with § 915.10(f) of this part;
(3) Prohibit the use of a director’s
official position for personal gain;
(4) Require directors to disclose actual
or apparent conflict of interests and
establish procedures for addressing such
conflicts;
(5) Provide internal controls to ensure
that reports are filed and that conflicts
are disclosed and resolved in
accordance with this section; and
(6) Establish procedures to monitor
compliance with the conflict of interests
policy.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 915.16
[Removed]
4. Remove § 915.16.
§ 915.17
[Removed]
5. Remove § 915.17.
Appendix A to Part 915—[Removed]
6. Remove Appendix A to part 915.
Dated: March 27, 2007.
By the Board of Directors of the Federal
Housing Finance Board.
Ronald A. Rosenfeld,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. E7–5973 Filed 3–30–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6725–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–27348; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–015–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Diamond
Aircraft Industries GmbH Model DA 40
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Mar 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
products listed above. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:
Abnormal manufacturing variations of the
universal joints in combination with
mechanical wear can lead to a joint failure
and subsequent disconnection between
selector and the fuel valve. This result in a
loss of capability to select the fuel tank for
supply. This condition might remain
unrecognised by the pilot and can result in
fuel starvation during flight and/or
unavailability of emergency fuel shutoff.
The proposed AD would require actions
that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by May 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or in
person at the Docket Management
Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this
proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the
Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–
5227) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4145; fax: (816) 329–4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Streamlined Issuance of AD
The FAA is implementing a new
process for streamlining the issuance of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15633
ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined
process will allow us to adopt MCAI
safety requirements in a more efficient
manner and will reduce safety risks to
the public. This process continues to
follow all FAA AD issuance processes to
meet legal, economic, Administrative
Procedure Act, and Federal Register
requirements. We also continue to meet
our technical decision-making
responsibilities to identify and correct
unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated
products.
This proposed AD references the
MCAI and related service information
that we considered in forming the
engineering basis to correct the unsafe
condition. The proposed AD contains
text copied from the MCAI and for this
reason might not follow our plain
language principles.
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2007–27348; Directorate Identifier
2007–CE–015–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued AD No. 2006–
0067, dated March 24, 2006 (referred to
after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:
Abnormal manufacturing variations of the
universal joints in combination with
mechanical wear can lead to a joint failure
and subsequent disconnection between
selector and the fuel valve. This result in a
loss of capability to select the fuel tank for
supply. This condition might remain
unrecognised by the pilot and can result in
fuel starvation during flight and/or
unavailability of emergency fuel shutoff.
Revision History:
This inspection was initially addressed by
Austrian AD A–2004–003. The design of the
fuel selector/fuel valve universal joint has
than been changed by design change M–M
E:\FR\FM\02APP1.SGM
02APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 62 (Monday, April 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15627-15633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5973]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 62 / Monday, April 2, 2007 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 15627]]
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD
12 CFR Part 915
[No. 2007-05]
RIN 3069-AB34
Financial Interests of Appointive Directors
AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance Board.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance Board (Finance Board) is proposing
to clarify the types of financial interests a Federal Home Loan Bank
(Bank) appointive director may own in a Bank member. The proposal would
incorporate into Finance Board rules its long-standing policy that
financial interests in a Bank member acquired though ownership of
shares of a diversified mutual fund are permissible holdings for an
appointive director. The proposal would extend the rationale for
permitting mutual fund investments to other types of vehicles and
accounts that share certain of the same key features as mutual funds
and thus are unlikely to pose a risk of conflict of interest for an
appointive director. The proposal also would set forth additional
criteria to define when owning shares of a holding company, or having
other types of financial interests in a member, would be permissible
for an appointive director.
DATES: The Finance Board will accept written comments on the proposed
rule on or before May 17, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Finance Board using any one of the
following methods:
E-mail: comments@fhfb.gov.
Fax: 202-408-2580.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Federal Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street
NW., Washington DC 20006, Attention: Public Comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. If you submit your comment to the
Federal eRulemaking Portal, please also send it by e-mail to the
Finance Board at comments@fhfb.gov to ensure timely receipt by the
agency. Include the following information in the subject line of your
submission: Federal Housing Finance Board. Proposed Rule: Financial
Interests of Appointive Directors. RIN Number 3069-AB34. Docket Number
2007-05.
We will post all public comments we receive without change,
including any personal information you provide, such as your name and
address, on the Finance Board Web site at https://www.fhfb.gov/
Default.aspx?Page=93&Top=93.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil R. Crowley, Acting General
Counsel, crowleyn@fhfb.gov or 202-408-2990; or Thomas E. Joseph, Senior
Attorney-Advisor, Office of General Counsel, josepht@fhfb.gov or 202-
408-2512. You can send regular mail to the Federal Housing Finance
Board, 1625 Eye Street NW., Washington, DC 20006.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 7(a) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act) (12
U.S.C. 1427(a)), provides for management of each Bank by a board of
directors of at least 14 persons, with 8 directors elected by the
members and 6 directors appointed by the Finance Board. This provision
also states that any individual appointed by the Finance Board may not,
``during such Bank director's term of office, serve as an officer of
any Federal Home Loan Bank or a director or officer of any member of a
Bank, or hold shares, or any other financial interest in, any member of
a Bank.'' \1\ The provision concerning the qualifications for
appointive directors was added to the Bank Act by section 706 of the
Finance Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989
(FIRREA) (Pub. L. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183 (Aug. 9, 1989)). In adopting
the FIRREA amendments, Congress indicated that it did not intend these
conflict of interest provisions to preclude an appointive director from
investing in a diversified mutual fund that in turn may own shares in a
Bank member. See H.R. Conf. Rep. 101-209 at 430 (1989). The Bank Act,
however, does not further define the terms ``shares'' or ``financial
interests,'' nor does it otherwise indicate how the provision should be
applied. As a result, the Finance Board has had to interpret these
terms whenever prospective appointive directors have asked whether
certain of their investments were permissible under this provision. The
Finance Board has provided guidance to these individuals in the past on
a case-by-case basis, as well as through its regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Should an appointive directorship become vacant during the
term of the appointment because the director no longer meets any of
the statutory or regulatory requirements for serving on a Bank's
board or for any other reason, section 7(f) of the Bank Act (12
U.S.C. 1427(f)) authorizes the Finance Board to fill the vacancy for
the remainder of the unexpired term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In January 1990, the Finance Board adopted an interim final rule
implementing the FIRREA appointive director and conflict of interest
provision. See Interim Final Rule: Election of Directors; Eligibility
Requirements, 55 FR 1393 (Jan. 18, 1990), codified at 12 CFR 932.18
(1991). The Finance Board later modified this rule somewhat based on
the comments it received on the interim final rule. See Final Rule:
Eligibility and Financial Disclosure Requirements for Directors of the
Federal Home Loan Banks, 56 FR 55205 (Oct. 25, 1991). The rule, as
amended in October 1991, provided among other things, that no
appointive director may during his or her term of office have a
financial interest in any member (or a subsidiary or non-diversified
holding company thereof, or affiliate of such holding company) of the
Bank on whose board the director served.\2\ It also specifically
defined a financial interest to include the ownership or control,
either directly or indirectly, of any shares of common or
[[Page 15628]]
preferred capital stock, any other equity security, any debt security
or obligation (except deposit or savings accounts) including
subordinated debt, but allowed an appointive director to hold such
interests if they arose solely through ownership of shares or other
investment units of one or more diversified mutual funds (as defined in
section 5(a) and (b)(1) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as
amended).\3\ The rule also prohibited an appointive director from
having other financial relationships, including loans or other
extensions of credit, with a member of the Bank on whose board the
director served, or with the member's subsidiary, or its non-
diversified holding company (or an affiliate of such holding company),
which were not transacted in the ordinary course of business and on
normal commercial terms, as discussed in the rule itself. 56 FR at
55220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 56 FR at 55220. The 1991 amendments clarified the
prohibition on serving on the board of, or ownership in, a member,
member subsidiary or a non-diversified holding company of a member
or affiliate of such holding company to make clear that the term
``member'' meant only a member of the Bank on whose board an
appointive director served and not a member of another Bank. See 56
FR at 55206-207. The 1991 amendments also added a definition for the
term ``diversified holding company'' that read:
A holding company whose member subsidiary and related
activities, as specified in 12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(2), represented on
either an actual or pro forma basis less than fifty (50) percent of
both its consolidated net worth and its consolidated net earnings at
the close of its preceding fiscal year. For purposes of the
foregoing, consolidated net worth and consolidated net earnings
shall be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. 56 FR at 55219.
\3\ 56 FR at 55219, 55220. The definition of ``financial
interest'' applied if the interest was held by an appointive
director or director candidate or by his or her immediate family
member and related interests, or the related interest of the
immediate family member. 56 FR at 55219.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1998, the Finance Board substantially revised its rules
governing elective and appointive directors.\4\ Among other things, the
1998 amendments required the Banks to adopt conflict of interest
policies that applied to both elective and appointive directors. The
rule specifically required the conflict of interest policy to prohibit
an appointive director from serving as an officer of any Bank or as an
officer or director of any member or from owning any equity or debt
security issued by a member or from having any other financial interest
in a member. See 63 FR at 65690.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Final Rule: Election of Federal Home Loan Bank
Directors, 63 FR 65683 (Nov. 30, 1998). These rules are now found in
part 915 of the Finance Board's regulations (12 CFR part 915).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1998 revisions also deleted the detailed provisions addressing
appointive director qualifications and prohibited financial interests
in favor of more general references to the Bank Act and somewhat more
general definitions of terms such as ``financial interests.'' The new
definition of ``financial interests'' specifically excluded deposit or
savings accounts maintained with a member and loans and other
extensions of credit from a member so long as they were obtained in the
normal course of business on terms generally available to the public.
See 63 FR at 65691. Among the provisions that were dropped in 1998,
however, was the one that specifically had allowed an appointive
director to hold shares or other financial interests in a member if
they arose solely through ownership of one or more diversified mutual
funds. Notwithstanding that change, the Finance Board has continued to
interpret section 7(a) as it had done previously, and has allowed
appointive directors to have indirect financial interests in a member
if held through ownership of shares of a diversified mutual fund.
The conflict of interest rules for appointive directors remain
substantively the same as adopted in 1998, and currently are found at
12 CFR Sec. 915.11. The Finance Board recently adopted an interim
final rule to address procedures for how appointive directors are
selected.\5\ Under the new procedures, the boards of directors of each
Bank have to submit to the Finance Board a list of individuals who
could serve in appointive directorships. Along with the list, the Banks
must submit information regarding each individual's eligibility and
qualifications to serve as a Bank director.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Interim Final Rule: Federal Home Loan Bank Appointive
Directors, 72 FR 3028 (Jan. 24, 2007) (adopting new Sec. 915.10).
The Finance Board also solicited comments on this interim final
rule. The Finance Board considered the comments received and adopted
a final rule to address the selection process at the same meeting in
which it approved this proposed rule for publication in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Analysis of the Proposed Rule
A. Reasons for the Proposed Changes
The recent changes in the selection process for appointive
directors have prompted questions to the Finance Board about whether
specific investments held by potential candidates would be barred by
section 7(a), and thus would have to be sold if the person were to
accept an appointment to the board of a Bank. These questions have
brought to light the extent to which developments in the financial
services marketplace in recent years have created different types of
investment accounts and investment vehicles that either did not exist
when FIRREA was enacted or were not as widely held as they are today,
and for which the Finance Board has not previously provided formal
guidance.
The Finance Board believes that the lack of a rule providing clear
guidance as to what investments are encompassed by the terms ``shares''
and ``financial interests'' could cause some potential appointive
director candidates to decline to consider an appointive directorship
for fear that they would be required to divest certain investments in
order to accept the position. Any such divestiture could prove
financially costly and disruptive to their personal financial planning
strategies. At the same time, the Finance Board recognizes that as the
Banks have become involved in more complex financial activities, it is
important that some of a Bank's individual appointive directors have
more sophisticated skills and a deeper understanding of financial
markets to provide strong oversight. Such persons can bring business
and leadership skills to the boards that will complement the skills and
expertise brought by the elective directors and the community interest
directors. In some cases, persons who possess those analytical skills
and related business experience may also be sophisticated investors in
their own right and have investments that go beyond traditional stock,
bond, and mutual fund holdings.
The possibility that persons who can bring needed skills and
experience to the board of a Bank might be discouraged from serving as
appointive directors due to uncertainty about how the conflict of
interest limitations may apply to their investments has caused the
Finance Board to consider whether it should amend its regulations. The
Finance Board hopes that in updating these provisions, a new rule will
better reflect the range of investments or investment vehicles (beyond
traditional investments) through which an appointive director may
obtain some interest in a member but which, because of the director's
lack of control over the investment or the minimal value of the
interest obtained, would not present concerns that should disqualify
such individual from serving as an appointive director. Thus, the
Finance Board is proposing this rule in an attempt to balance the need
to assure that appointive directors do not have actual or apparent
conflicts that would undermine their ability to represent the public
interest against the need to attract a sufficient pool of candidates
with sophisticated skills in areas such as housing and finance to build
boards of directors capable of overseeing the Banks as they evolve and
undertake new activities.
The proposal is based primarily on the Finance Board's experience
to date in administering section 7(a) and the questions raised about
potential conflicts as a result of interests in various investment
vehicles and strategies. The Finance Board recognizes that it has had
only limited experience in dealing with the types of investment
products that are available in today's financial marketplace,
particularly those that are available to high net worth individuals. In
order to craft a final rule that will strike an appropriate balance
between allowing investments that
[[Page 15629]]
share key characteristics associated with mutual fund shares, which
were permitted by Congress, and barring investments that are more like
direct ownership interests in member stock, the Finance Board will
benefit greatly from the perspectives of persons more familiar with the
universe of investment products currently available. Accordingly, the
Finance Board welcomes all comments on how to further refine the
proposal to assure that the rule will not unintentionally allow
individuals to hold investments that may create conflicts with their
duties as appointive directors but still remain flexible enough not to
create unnecessary barriers to finding candidates with the skills and
experience to be strong Bank directors.
B. Proposed Rule Changes
General. The Finance Board is proposing to add a new paragraph (f)
to Sec. 915.10 of its rules to address the issues described above.\6\
The proposed provision first would set out the general prohibition
against an appointive director owning any debt or equity securities
issued by, or otherwise having any financial interest in, a member of
the Bank on whose board the director serves. The provision also would
restate the statutory requirements that an appointive director may not
serve as an officer of any Bank or as an officer or director of any
member of the Bank on whose board the director serves.\7\ This proposed
language closely follows the wording of section 7(a) of the Bank Act
and the requirements of current Sec. 915.11(a)(2) of the Finance
Board's rules.\8\ The proposal goes on to describe certain types of
investments or contractual relationships that would not be deemed to
constitute shares or financial interests in a member for purposes of
determining whether an appointive director may hold such interests
while serving on the board of a Bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ As already noted, Sec. 915.10 sets forth the new process
for the selection of appointive directors.
\7\ For purposes of applying the prohibitions on financial
interests in a member and on serving as an officer or director of a
member, the Finance Board interprets the term ``member'' broadly to
include the member institutions itself, as well as any subsidiary,
holding company and affiliate. See Federal Home Loan Bank Appointive
Director Application Form, Statutory Eligibility Requirements Sec.
4, Conflict of Interests (reproduced at 72 FR at 3033). The Finance
Board currently intends to continue to interpret the term ``member''
in this broad manner.
\8\ See 12 U.S.C. 1427(a) and 12 CFR Sec. 915.11(a)(2). As
discussed in the next section, the Finance Board also is proposing
conforming changes to Sec. 915.11(a)(2) of its rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Finance Board emphasizes that because it is not proposing to
amend the broad definition of ``financial interests'' now contained in
Sec. 915.11(f)(2), the proposed rule would not change the extent to,
or the manner in which an individual Bank's disclosure and recusal
policies must address the types of investments or activities identified
in proposed Sec. 915.10(f), even if the investments themselves would
no longer be deemed to disqualify an individual from serving as an
appointive director. See 12 CFR Sec. Sec. 915.11(b) and (f)(2). The
Finance Board views continued application of the rules related to the
Bank's recusal and disclosures policies to the types of investments
identified in proposed Sec. 915.10(f) as an additional safeguard to
assure that these investments would not create a conflict of interest.
The Finance Board, however, requests comments on whether this approach
is appropriate or if some modification to Sec. Sec. 915.11(b) and
(f)(2) may be warranted. The Finance Board also requests comment on
whether it should require appointive directors to disclose their
financial holdings to the Banks as part of their application so the
Banks can verify that the investments--including the vehicles and
accounts described below--do not create a conflict that would be barred
by section 7(a).
Investment Vehicles. Both the legislative history of FIRREA and the
Finance Board's prior regulations expressly permitted an appointive
director to own shares of a diversified mutual fund that in turn owned
debt or equity securities issued by a member of the Bank on whose board
the director served. The legislative history offers scant insight into
the intent of Congress in adding this provision, but the use of the
term ``diversified mutual fund'' appears to reflect a view that an
appointive director can own indirectly securities he or she cannot own
directly under certain circumstances. Thus, in the case of mutual
funds, indirect ownership of member securities would be permissible,
provided the securities are owned by a legally distinct entity (the
fund), and the investment decisions are made by that entity (or by an
investment adviser acting on its behalf), and the appointive director
lacks any control over the purchase or sale of the securities owned by
the entity. The proposed rule is intended to include within the
universe of permissible investments other types of investment vehicles
and accounts that share those key concepts, and thus should pose no
greater risk of conflict than would exist in the case of ownership of
shares through a mutual fund.
Accordingly, proposed Sec. 915.11(f)(1) would allow an appointive
director to own shares or other interests in certain investment
vehicles, which in turn may own equity or debt securities issued by a
member of the director's Bank, without violating section 7(a) of the
Bank Act. In order for such an investment to be permissible, the
investment vehicle must be a legally separate entity and the appointive
director must not control the investment vehicle or play any role in
the selection of the entity's underlying investments. By providing that
the investment vehicle must be organized as a ``legally recognized
entity,'' the proposal would require that the vehicle be a corporation,
limited partnership, trust, or similar entity that is recognized as
having its own corporate existence under state law and is legally
separate and distinct from the individual appointive director. As
drafted, the provision would include registered investment companies
(mutual funds) as well as limited partnership interests and other
passive interests in distinct entities, even if those investment
vehicles were not required to register under the Investment Company
Act.
The proposal would require that an appointive director not control
the investment entity or be involved in decisions involving investments
or trading strategies, which is intended to assure that the director
could not direct the entity to purchase or sell member securities or
otherwise manipulate trading based on knowledge acquired as a result of
the individual's duties on the Bank's board. Because a general partner
typically is deemed under state law to have the ability to control or
otherwise act on behalf of either a general or limited partnership, a
general partnership interest would not be permissible under this
proposal.
Investment Accounts. Since the Congress adopted the limitation on
appointive directors' financial interests in 1989, the financial
investment marketplace has evolved considerably. It has come to the
attention of the Finance Board that among the investment alternatives
used with much greater frequency by the investing public are
arrangements that, while structured differently than mutual funds, are
functionally similar, especially with respect to the client's lack of
control over the investment decisions for the portfolio. Such
investments may have somewhat differing structures and may have
different names depending on the company offering the investment. One
such investment alternative has been described as a ``managed account''
or a ``separately managed account.'' Persons using these accounts may
direct the
[[Page 15630]]
investment adviser to allocate the portfolio among certain classes of
assets, such as growth stocks, value stocks, bonds, or foreign
equities, but do not direct the purchase or sale of securities within
those asset classes. A key distinction between a mutual fund and a
managed account is that in the former case the investor owns shares of
the fund, which in turn owns the portfolio securities in its own name,
whereas in the latter case the investor will own the portfolio
securities in his or her own name. A key similarity between the two is
that in both cases the investor plays no role in the purchase or sale
of the portfolio securities, as a typical requirement of the managed
account is that the investor must confer full investment discretion on
the investment adviser that manages the portfolio.
Proposed Sec. 915.10(f)(2) is intended to allow appointive
directors to hold securities of a member through such an account, based
principally on the requirement that the director would have no control
over the acquisition of securities for the account. Thus, the proposal
would deem any debt or equity securities issued by a member that an
appointive director owns through accounts where the director has no
investment discretion not to constitute shares or financial interests
in a member. To qualify for the exclusion under the proposed provision,
however, the account would have to be managed by an investment adviser
registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the
Investment Advisers Act, the appointive director would have to pay a
fee to the adviser for the advisory services that are provided as an
integral component of the account, and the director would have to give
the adviser complete discretion to buy or sell all securities in the
account. The Finance Board believes that where an appointive director
has turned over all investment decisions regarding the portfolio to a
professional adviser and is not otherwise involved in the investment
decisions concerning the account to have no greater interest in the
member securities, in a practical sense, than does a director who owns
such securities indirectly through a mutual fund. To further assure
that the director could not indirectly influence the purchase or sale
of securities within the portfolio, the proposal provides that the
director could not be affiliated with the investment adviser and could
not otherwise have control over the choice of securities acquired for
the account. Given these proposed safeguards (coupled with the
continued application of current disclosure and recusal policies), the
Finance Board views accounts covered by this proposed provision as not
presenting risks of a conflict of interest greater than those posed by
investments in mutual funds or similar investments.
In applying this provision, an investor's right to identify broad
financial goals or broad investment strategies or asset classes (e.g.,
aggressive growth, value investing, etc.) would not constitute
sufficient investment discretion to violate section 7(a), so long as
the strategies would not allow a director to direct the purchase of
individual securities. The Finance Board understands that persons
investing through such accounts sometimes are able to direct an
investment adviser not to purchase securities issued by a particular
company, such as where the investor is an officer or director of a
publicly traded company and instructs the adviser not to purchase any
securities issued by that company. In such circumstances, the Finance
Board would not be inclined to view that limited right to identify
specific companies whose securities should be excluded from the account
as violating the statute or the proposed rule. If the type of account
held by an appointive director gives the director the ability to
identify securities to sell on an ad hoc basis or based on current
market conditions, however, such an arrangement would confer
significant investment discretion in the client, and thus would not
fall within the proposed exclusion established by this provision.
Holding Companies. Section 7(a) of the Bank Act speaks in terms of
shares or other financial interests in ``any member'' of the Bank, but
does not refer expressly to treatment of securities issued by a holding
company for a member. In the current financial services sector, many
depository institutions are owned by one or more holding companies and
thus do not issue their own equity securities to the public. Although
the statute does not address this matter, the Finance Board previously
had regulations that effectively exempted securities issued by certain
holding companies from the reach of section 7(a). Under that
regulation, which was in effect from 1991 to 1998, securities issued by
a diversified holding company were permissible investments for an
appointive director. A bank holding company or a savings and loan
holding company was deemed to be ``diversified'' for these purposes if
less than 50 percent of its net worth and net earnings, on a
consolidated basis, were attributable to the depository institutions
that it controlled. See n.2. The Finance Board is proposing to adopt a
similar test for determining whether an appointive director may own
securities issued by a holding company that controls one or more
members of the Bank on whose board the director serves.
Accordingly, proposed Sec. 915.10(f)(3) would deem debt or equity
securities issued by a holding company that controls one or more
members to not constitute ``shares'' or ``financial interests'' in a
member, provided that the assets of all members of the Bank that are
controlled by the holding company constitute less than 25 percent of
the total assets of the holding company, on a consolidated basis. The
Finance Board believes that where the assets of the institutions that
are members of the Bank on whose board the director sits constitute
less than 25 percent of the total assets of a holding company, the debt
or equity instruments issued by the holding company represent interests
that are predominately something other than an interest in a member.
The Finance Board believes the proposed standard limiting members'
assets to less than 25 percent of the consolidated assets would be more
restrictive than the standard applied under the former the definition
of ``diversified holding company'' (i.e., 50 percent of consolidated
net worth and net earnings). The Finance Board also believes the
proposed standard would be easier to apply and would be less subject to
fluctuations over time (so that companies would be less likely to shift
status under the exclusion from year-to-year). Nonetheless, the Finance
Board specifically seeks comments on how best to measure the relative
sizes of the holding company and its member subsidiaries (i.e., a
percentage of assets or a percentage of capital or earnings) and
whether some threshold other than 25 percent would be appropriate.
Moreover, while proposed Sec. 915.10(f)(3) would deem interests in
certain holding companies not to constitute shares or financial
interests in a member, the proposed provision does not deal with other
relationships with a holding company. Given the current practice,
however, the Finance Board would not permit an appointive director to
serve as an officer or director of any holding company that controls a
member, even if the member constitutes less than 25 percent of the
assets of the holding company.\9\ It would appear to
[[Page 15631]]
be incompatible with the independence expected of an appointive
director and the public interests the director is expected to serve to
allow that person simultaneously to serve as an officer or director of
any holding company that controlled any member of the Bank. As an
appointive director, the individual would owe fiduciary duties to the
Bank and the Finance Board does not believe that an appointive director
also should owe fiduciary duties to a member or its holding company.
These competing duties could make it difficult for the appointive
director to competently serve in either capacity. The Finance Board is
requesting comment on whether it should apply the same standard for
determining if a holding company's securities are permissible
investments for an appointive director to other types of relationships,
such as service as a director or officer of such company or contractual
relationships with, or receipt of income from, such company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ While the prohibition on an appointive director serving as
an officer or director of a holding company or an affiliate or a
subsidiary of a member is not set out in the current rules, it has
been agency policy to interpret the term ``member'' for purposes of
applying the conflict of interest rules broadly to refer to the
member itself, any subsidiary or affiliate of the member or any
holding company of the member. See n.7. As previously noted, this
interpretation currently is embodied in the explanation addressing
conflict of interest provided in the application form for appointive
directors, but the Finance Board specifically is requesting comment
as to whether this interpretation should be clearly incorporated
into the text of its rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loans and Deposits. Proposed Sec. 915.10(f)(4) would provide that
loans from, or deposits in, a member would not constitute a financial
interest in the member if the transaction occurs in the normal course
of business and on terms that are no more favorable than those
available under like circumstances to members of the public. This
provision does not represent a change in current Finance Board
practices. Loans and deposits meeting the proposed criteria already are
excluded from the definition of financial interest contained in Sec.
915.11(f)(2) and holding such loans and deposits does not currently
disqualify a candidate from consideration for an appointive
directorship. See 12 CFR Sec. 915.11(f)(2); see also Federal Home Loan
Bank Appointive Director Application Form, Statutory Eligibility
Requirements Sec. 4, Conflict of Interest. Such items also had been
permitted under the prior regulations. See, e.g., 56 FR at 55220
(adopting Sec. Sec. 931.30 and 932.18 of the Finance Board's rules).
Contractual Relationships. There have been instances in the past in
which individuals have asked if certain contractual relationships with
a member, such as those associated with serving as legal counsel or as
auditor, would constitute a financial interest in the member that is
prohibited by section 7(a).\10\ The answers to such questions are
largely dependent on the facts of each case, and typically have been
addressed by staff on a case-by-case basis. Although it is not
practicable to create a regulation that would address all such
circumstances, the Finance Board believes that the regulations could be
revised to establish a type of safe harbor for contractual
relationships that do not contribute a significant amount to the
person's income. Accordingly, proposed Sec. 915.11(f)(5) would
establish a presumption that an appointive director's contractual
relationships with members of the Bank would not constitute a financial
interest in a member if the money paid to the person under such
contracts in any calendar year constitutes less than 10 percent of the
appointive director's adjusted gross income for that year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As already noted, when determining if a contractual
relationship with a member exists, the Finance Board would interpret
the term ``member'' broadly to include a member itself, any
subsidiary or affiliate of a member, and any holding company of a
member. See n.7 and n.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Finance Board would intend the director to calculate his or her
adjusted gross income for the purposes of this proposed test in the
same manner as would be done for federal tax purposes. The Finance
Board would also expect the director to aggregate all amounts earned
(or to be earned) under contracts with all members of the Bank on whose
board the director serves in determining the amount due the director
for purposes of applying the proposed test. Given the attribution
provision in proposed Sec. 915.11(f)(6), if an appointive director's
spouse has contractual relationships with Bank members, the amounts due
under those contracts also would be combined with those of the director
(and the adjusted gross income would represent that of both the
director and the spouse) to determine if the contracts exceed the 10
percent threshold. If only the director's spouse had a contract with
Bank members, the adjusted gross income used in applying the test would
be that of the spouse only.
The proposed rule also would require an appointive director to
disclose all contractual relationships with members of the Bank on
whose board the director serves (or will serve) whether or not the
amounts due exceed 10 percent of the director's adjusted gross income,
as well as those of a spouse. Where the amounts due under such
contracts would be 10 percent or more of the director's adjusted gross
income, the proposed rule would require the Finance Board to determine
on a case-by-case basis whether the contractual relationships represent
a financial interest that would disqualify an individual from serving
as an appointive director. In making the determination, the Finance
Board would consider, among other things, if the contractual
relationships may result in the appointive director not fairly
representing the public interest when considering matters that come
before the board or otherwise causing the director to be partial toward
or biased against any member or otherwise partial in his or her
judgment. In weighing this matter, the Finance Board would consider
whether the contractual relationships may create an appearance of
partiality in deciding if the contractual relationship may disqualify a
person from holding an appointive directorship.
Attribution. Proposed Sec. 915.10(f)(6) would establish that debt
or equity securities owned by a spouse or minor child of an appointive
director are attributed to the appointive director for purposes of
complying with proposed Sec. 915.10(f). This proposed provision also
would make clear that any contractual relationships between a member
and the spouse of a director would be attributed to the appointive
director. How the calculation would be performed to determine whether
such contracts exceeded the proposed threshold in Sec. 915.10(f)(5)
has already been discussed above. The Finance Board has not included
minor children in the proposed attribution provision with regard to
contracts because it would not expect that minor children would, or
could legally, enter into such agreements. The Finance Board believes
that the financial interests of a spouse or minor child of a director
would be so closely aligned with the interests of the director that
these proposed attribution provisions are fair and are generally
consistent with how attribution provisions dealing with conflict of
interests and similar matters are generally structured.
C. Other Conforming Amendments
The Finance Board also is proposing amendments to Sec.
915.11(a)(2) to conform this provision to the changes proposed in new
Sec. 915.10(f). As now written, Sec. 915.11(a)(2), given the broad
definition of financial interest in Sec. 915.11, could be read to
require the Banks to adopt policies for appointive directors that would
be more restrictive with regard to allowable investments than the
changes proposed in Sec. 915.10(f). Because the Bank Act provides the
Finance Board the sole discretion to select appointive directors,
[[Page 15632]]
the Finance Board would not intend the Banks to apply more restrictive
criteria in determining when an appointive director may hold certain
investments than that set forth in the Finance Board rules and
policies. Thus, proposed Sec. 915.11(a)(2) would state that a Bank's
conflict of interest policy must require appointive directors to comply
with Sec. 915.10(f).
The Finance Board also is proposing to delete Sec. Sec. 915.16 and
915.17, which applied only to election cycles that occurred between
1999 and 2001 and primarily were needed to implement changes made by
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act \11\ to the Bank Act's election and director
provisions. Thus, the regulatory provisions in Sec. Sec. 915.16 and
915.17 no longer serve any purpose and are not applicable to current or
future election cycles. Similarly, the Finance Board is proposing to
delete Appendix A to part 915, which includes matrices that were
created in conjunction with earlier elections and appointments and
related to the directorships of the Banks. Over the past few years, as
part of its annual designation of elective directorships, the Finance
Board has created updated versions of these matrices to reflect the
revised board structure for each Bank for that year, and expects to
continue to create new matrices as part of each annual designation
exercise. Because the matrices in Appendix A relate to prior years and
have been superseded by more current versions, it no longer is
necessary to include them in the regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Pub. L. No. 106-102, 133 Stat. 1338 (Nov. 12, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Paperwork Reduction Act
The appointive director application form is part of the information
collection entitled ``Federal Home Loan Bank Directors.'' Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has assigned control number 3069-0002,
which is due to expire on November 30, 2007. The Finance Board and the
Banks use the information contained in the application form to
determine whether prospective appointive Bank directors satisfy the
statutory and regulatory eligibility requirements and are well
qualified to serve as a Bank director. Only individuals meeting these
requirements may serve as Bank directors. See 12 U.S.C. 1427. The
proposed rule, if adopted as a final rule, would not make substantive
or material modifications to the ``Federal Home Loan Bank Directors''
information collection. Consequently, the Finance Board has not
submitted any information to OMB for review.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rule would apply only to the Banks and to individuals
who may be willing to serve as Bank appointive directors. Neither the
Banks nor individuals come within the meaning of ``small entities'' as
defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). See 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
Thus, in accordance with section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
the Finance Board hereby certifies that the proposed rule, if
promulgated as a final rule, will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Lists of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 915
Conflict of interests, Elections, Federal home loan banks,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Finance Board is
proposing to amend 12 CFR Part 915 as follows:
PART 915--BANK DIRECTOR ELIGIBILITY, APPOINTMENT, AND ELECTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 915 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3), 1422b(a), 1426, 1427, and
1432.
2. Amend Sec. 915.10 by adding a new paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 915.10 Selection of appointive directors.
* * * * *
(f) Financial interests. Except as otherwise provided in this
section, an appointive director may not own any debt or equity
securities issued by, or have any other financial interest in, a member
of the Bank on whose board the director serves. An appointive director
also may not serve as an officer or director of any member of the Bank
on whose board the director serves or serve as an officer of any Bank.
(1) Investment vehicles. An appointive director's investment in a
legally recognized entity that owns debt or equity securities issued by
a member shall not be deemed to constitute the shares or other
financial interests in a member, provided that the appointive director
does not control the entity and plays no role in the purchase or sale
of the securities owned by the entity.
(2) Investment accounts. Debt or equity securities owned by an
appointive director through an account managed by an investment adviser
registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1
et seq.), for which the director pays a fee for advisory services and
with respect to which the director has given the investment adviser
complete discretion to buy and sell all securities in the account,
shall not be deemed to constitute the shares or other financial
interests in a member, provided that the appointive director is not
affiliated with the investment adviser and has no control over the
selection of securities acquired for the account.
(3) Holding companies. Debt or equity securities issued by a
holding company that controls one or more members of the Bank on whose
board an appointive director serves shall not be deemed to constitute
the shares or other financial interest in a member, provided that the
assets of all such members constitute less than 25 percent of the
assets of the holding company, on a consolidated basis.
(4) Loans and deposits. Loans obtained from a member and money
placed on deposit with a member shall not be deemed to constitute a
financial interest in a member, provided that the transactions occur in
the normal course of business of the member and are on terms that are
no more favorable than those that would be available under like
circumstances to members of the public.
(5) Contractual relationships. Any contractual relationship between
an appointive director and one or more members of the Bank on whose
board an appointive director serves, under which the director has a
contractual right to the payment of money, shall be presumed not to
constitute a financial interest in a member if the amount due to the
director under such contracts in any calendar year is less than 10
percent of the director's adjusted gross income for that calendar year.
An appointive director with any such contractual relationships, or any
contractual relationship involving amounts greater than the above
threshold, shall disclose the relationship to the board of directors of
the Bank and to the Finance Board. The Finance Board shall determine,
on a case by case basis, whether any contractual relationships greater
than the above threshold constitutes a financial interest in a member.
(6) Attribution. Any debt or equity securities owned by the spouse
or minor children of an appointive director shall be attributed to the
director for purposes of complying with this section, as shall be any
contractual relationships between a member and the spouse of an
appointive director.
3. Amend Sec. 915.11 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
[[Page 15633]]
Sec. 915.11 Conflict of interests policy for Bank directors.
(a) Adoption of conflict of interest policy. Each Bank shall adopt
a written conflict of interest policy that shall apply to all Bank
directors. At a minimum, the conflict of interest policy of each Bank
shall:
(1) Require the directors to administer the affairs of the Bank
fairly and impartially and without discrimination in favor of or
against any member or nonmember borrower;
(2) Require appointive directors to comply with Sec. 915.10(f) of
this part;
(3) Prohibit the use of a director's official position for personal
gain;
(4) Require directors to disclose actual or apparent conflict of
interests and establish procedures for addressing such conflicts;
(5) Provide internal controls to ensure that reports are filed and
that conflicts are disclosed and resolved in accordance with this
section; and
(6) Establish procedures to monitor compliance with the conflict of
interests policy.
* * * * *
Sec. 915.16 [Removed]
4. Remove Sec. 915.16.
Sec. 915.17 [Removed]
5. Remove Sec. 915.17.
Appendix A to Part 915--[Removed]
6. Remove Appendix A to part 915.
Dated: March 27, 2007.
By the Board of Directors of the Federal Housing Finance Board.
Ronald A. Rosenfeld,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. E7-5973 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6725-01-P