Amendment of the Debt Guarantee Program To Provide for the Establishment of a Limited Six-Month Emergency Guarantee Facility, 54743-54749 [E9-25555]
Download as PDF
54743
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 74, No. 204
Friday, October 23, 2009
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Part 370
RIN 3064–AD37
Amendment of the Debt Guarantee
Program To Provide for the
Establishment of a Limited Six-Month
Emergency Guarantee Facility
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: To ensure an orderly phaseout of the Debt Guarantee Program
(DGP), a component of the Temporary
Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP),
the FDIC is establishing a limited
emergency guarantee facility. For most
insured depository institutions and
other entities participating in the DGP,
the Debt Guarantee Program will
conclude on October 31, 2009, with the
FDIC’s guarantee expiring no later than
December 31, 2012. To the extent that
certain of those entities become unable
to issue non-guaranteed debt to replace
maturing senior unsecured debt because
of market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond their control, the
emergency guarantee facility will be
available on an application basis. In
order to utilize the emergency guarantee
facility, an entity must apply to, and
receive prior approval from, the FDIC. If
the application is approved, the FDIC
will guarantee the applicant’s senior
unsecured debt issued on or before
April 30, 2010. Debt guaranteed under
the emergency guarantee facility will be
subject to an annualized assessment rate
equal to a minimum of 300 basis points.
DATES: The final rule becomes effective
on October 23, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (For
questions or comments related to
applications) Lisa D. Arquette,
Associate Director, Division of
Supervision and Consumer Protection,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
(202) 898–8633 or larquette@fdic.gov;
Serena L. Owens, Associate Director,
Supervision and Applications Branch,
Division of Supervision and Consumer
Protection, (202) 898–8996 or
sowens@fdic.gov; Gail Patelunas,
Deputy Director, Division of Resolutions
and Receiverships, (202) 898–6779 or
gpatelunas@fdic.gov; Donna Saulnier,
Manager, Assessment Policy Section,
Division of Finance, (703) 562–6167 or
dsaulnier@fdic.gov; A. Ann Johnson,
Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898–3573
or aajohnson@fdic.gov; Ryan K.
Clougherty, Senior Attorney, Legal
Division, (202) 898–3843 or
rclougherty@fdic.gov; or Robert C. Fick,
Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898–8962
or rfick@fdic.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The FDIC adopted the TLGP in
October 2008 following a determination
of systemic risk by the Secretary of the
Treasury (after consultation with the
President) that was supported by
recommendations from the FDIC and
the Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System (Federal Reserve).1 The
TLGP is part of a coordinated effort by
the FDIC, the U.S. Department of the
Treasury (Treasury), and the Federal
Reserve to address unprecedented
disruptions in the credit markets and
the resultant difficulty of many financial
institutions to obtain funds and to make
loans to creditworthy borrowers. On
October 23, 2008, the FDIC’s Board of
Directors (Board) authorized the
publication in the Federal Register of an
interim rule that outlined the structure
of the TLGP.2 Designed to assist in the
stabilization of the nation’s financial
system, the FDIC’s TLGP is composed of
two distinct components: The DGP and
the Transaction Account Guarantee
Program (TAG program). Under the
DGP, the FDIC guarantees certain senior
unsecured debt issued by participating
entities. Under the TAG program, the
FDIC guarantees all funds held in
qualifying noninterest-bearing
transaction accounts at participating
insured depository institutions (IDIs).3
The DGP initially permitted
participating entities to issue FDICguaranteed senior unsecured debt until
June 30, 2009, with the FDIC’s guarantee
for such debt to expire on the earlier of
the maturity of the debt (or the
conversion date, for mandatory
convertible debt) or June 30, 2012.
To reduce the potential for market
disruptions at the conclusion of the DGP
and to begin the orderly phase-out of the
program, on May 29, 2009 the Board
issued a final rule that extended for four
months the period during which certain
participating entities could issue FDICguaranteed debt.4 All IDIs and those
other participating entities that had
issued FDIC-guaranteed debt on or
before April 1, 2009 were permitted to
participate in the extended DGP without
application to the FDIC. Other
participating entities that received
approval from the FDIC also were
permitted to participate in the extended
DGP. The expiration of the guarantee
period was also extended from June 30,
2012 to December 31, 2012. As a result,
all such participating entities were
permitted to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
through and including October 31, 2009,
with the FDIC’s guarantee expiring on
the earliest of the debt’s mandatory
conversion date (for mandatory
convertible debt), the stated maturity
date, or December 31, 2012.
With over $600 billion in guaranteed
debt having been issued by 118 entities,
the TLGP has been an important factor
in restoring liquidity and confidence in
the banking system. The program
enabled banking organizations to meet
financing needs at affordable terms
during a period of system-wide turmoil.
Recently, credit and liquidity conditions
have become less stressed. Narrowing
1 See Section 13(c)(4)(G) of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act (FDI Act), 12 U.S.C. 1823(c)(4)(G).
The determination of systemic risk triggered the
FDIC’s authority—‘‘in its sole discretion and upon
such terms and conditions as the [FDIC’s] Board of
Directors may prescribe—to take actions to avoid or
mitigate serious adverse effects on economic
conditions or financial stability.’’ See also Section
9(a) Tenth of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1819(a)Tenth.
The FDIC implemented the TLGP in response.
2 73 FR 64179 (October 29, 2008). This interim
rule was finalized and a final rule was published
in the Federal Register on November 26, 2008. 73
FR 72244 (November 26, 2008).
3 On June 23, 2009, the Board proposed two
alternatives for phasing out the TAG. The first
alternative provided that the TAG would expire on
December 31, 2009, as required by the terms of the
existing rule. The second alternative provided for
a limited six-month extension to that program.
Following consideration of the comments submitted
in response to the two alternatives, on August 26,
2009, the Board adopted and approved for
publication in the Federal Register a final rule
providing for a six-month extension of the TAG
program, through June 30, 2010. See 74 FR 45093
(September 1, 2009).
4 74 FR 26521 (June 3, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
54744
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
spreads on both TLGP debt and nonguaranteed debt indicate that access to
funding has improved. Only a few
entities have issued TLGP debt during
the extended DGP period, and recently
several banking organizations have
successfully issued non-guaranteed
debt. The total amount of FDICguaranteed debt outstanding as of
October 1, 2009 under the TLGP is $300
billion.
Noting the evidence that the domestic
credit and liquidity markets are
beginning to normalize, on September 9,
2009, the Board authorized publication
of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that
proposed two alternatives for
concluding the DGP.5
II. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Proposed Rule) presented two
alternatives for concluding the FDIC’s
guarantee of senior unsecured debt
under the DGP, Alternative A and
Alternative B.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
A. Alternative A
Alternative A would have preserved
the expiration dates for the issuance
periods and for the duration of the
guarantees under the DGP. Thus, all IDIs
participating in the DGP and other
participating entities that had either (i)
issued guaranteed debt before April 1,
2009, or (ii) had not issued guaranteed
debt before April 1, 2009, but had
received the FDIC’s permission to issue
guaranteed debt through October 31,
2009 would be permitted to issue FDICguaranteed senior unsecured debt
through October 31, 2009. The FDIC’s
guarantee for such debt issuances would
expire no later than December 31, 2012.
B. Alternative B
Like Alternative A, Alternative B
provided that the basic DGP would
expire as structured under the existing
regulation. However, Alternative B also
proposed the establishment of a limited,
six-month emergency guarantee facility
upon expiration of the DGP on October
31, 2009.
The emergency guarantee facility
under Alternative B was intended to
address a participating entity’s inability
to replace maturing senior unsecured
debt with non-guaranteed debt as a
result of market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the control of the
participating entity. Under this
emergency guarantee facility, certain
participating entities could apply to the
FDIC for permission to issue FDICguaranteed debt after October 31, 2009.
If the FDIC approved an entity’s request,
5 74
FR 47489 (September 16, 2009).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
the FDIC would guarantee the entity’s
senior unsecured debt issued after
October 31, 2009, through and including
April 30, 2010. Any such approval
would be subject to such restrictions
and conditions as the FDIC deemed
appropriate including, but not limited
to, a pledge of collateral, and limitations
on executive compensation, bonuses, or
the payment of dividends. Under
Alternative B, the FDIC would assess a
fee using an annualized assessment rate
equal to at least 300 basis points on any
FDIC-guaranteed debt issued by entities
under the emergency guarantee facility.
The FDIC would reserve the right to
increase the assessment rate on a caseby-case basis, depending upon the risks
presented by the issuing entity. The
FDIC’s guarantee of principal and
interest payments for senior unsecured
debt issuances approved under the
emergency guarantee facility would
extend through the earliest of the
mandatory conversion date (for
mandatory convertible debt), the stated
maturity date, or December 31, 2012.
Under Alternative B, all of the terms
and provisions of the FDIC’s guarantee
under the DGP would apply to such
debt except as amended by the final
rule. Further, under Alternative B, there
would be no effect on any conditions
that the FDIC may have placed on the
issuance of debt by an IDI or other entity
participating in the DGP. Any IDI
participating in the DGP and any other
entity participating in the DGP that has
issued FDIC-guaranteed debt by
September 9, 2009, would be permitted
to apply to use this emergency
guarantee facility.
III. Summary of Comments Received
The FDIC requested comments on all
aspects of the Proposed Rule. The FDIC
specifically requested that commenters
indicate a preference for either
Alternative A or Alternative B. The
FDIC also sought comments on whether,
under Alternative B, eligibility for the
emergency guarantee facility should be
limited to participating IDIs and to those
other entities that had issued FDICguaranteed debt on or before September
9, 2009. In response to the request, the
FDIC received four (4) comments from
the following: One comment (1) from an
individual; one comment (1) from an
industry association; and two comments
(2) from two separate groups of LL.M.
candidates at a law school. A summary
of the comments the FDIC received
follows.
The individual commenter expressed
the belief that the DGP provides a
valuable service and, therefore, should
not be concluded as currently
structured. The commenter noted that
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the DGP has value as a support
mechanism regardless of whether it is
under-utilized.
A banking industry association
commented in support of Alternative B
as the most appropriate phase-out of the
DGP. Specifically, the association
expressed support for allowing access to
the emergency guarantee facility on a
limited case-by-case basis for emergency
circumstances. The association also
noted that domestic credit and liquidity
markets have begun to normalize and
the number of entities issuing debt
under the DGP has decreased. The
association expressed the opinion that
access to the emergency guarantee
facility should be limited to IDIs or
other entities that have issued FDICguaranteed senior unsecured debt on or
before September 9, 2009. The
association also supported a robust
participation fee and noted that such a
fee could both encourage a winding
down of the DGP and generate increased
TLGP revenue.
The FDIC also received comment
letters from two groups of law students.
Both groups supported the adoption of
Alternative B as the most appropriate
phase-out of the DGP, and both also
requested that any final rule provide the
FDIC with the discretion to decrease the
proposed 300 basis points assessment
rate.
The FDIC is establishing the
emergency guarantee facility to serve as
a mechanism to phase-out the DGP, it is
not intended to encourage indefinite
participation. The FDIC believes that
establishing a 300 basis point minimum
assessment rate will provide a more
effective incentive for participating
entities to wean themselves off of the
FDIC’s guarantee program.
Consequently, the FDIC has decided to
retain the 300 basis point minimum
assessment rate.
Regarding access to the emergency
guarantee facility, one student group
supported restricting access to the
emergency guarantee facility as
proposed in Alternative B, noting that
such a restriction would both provide
an adequate safeguard against
dependency and ensure that the facility
is available only in severe
circumstances. The second student
group recommended that the FDIC
expand the emergency guarantee facility
eligibility to all financial institutions
originally eligible under the DGP. This
group asserted that expanding eligibility
would protect the DIF, perpetuate the
objectives of the TLGP, help deserving
nonparticipating institutions avoid
receivership, grant the FDIC greater
discretion, and result in minimal
additional costs to the FDIC.
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
As noted above, the FDIC is
establishing the emergency guarantee
facility to phase-out the DGP in an
orderly manner. Expanding access to all
entities originally eligible would be
inconsistent with that goal. As a result,
the FDIC believes that limiting the
eligibility as provided in Alternative B
is the more appropriate way to achieve
the goal of the emergency guarantee
facility.
The two student groups also
expressed a number of additional
concerns regarding the proposed
Alternative B. One group recommended
that a final rule adopting Alternative B
should include mandatory end-use
restrictions, such as limitations on
executive compensation. This group
also recommended that the application
requirements for access to the
emergency guarantee facility include a
statement identifying any changes from
all prior plans for the retirement of
FDIC-guaranteed debt that an applicant
had submitted to the FDIC under the
DGP. Moreover, this group
recommended requiring that
applications for the emergency
guarantee facility include a business
plan that states clear objectives for
avoiding use of the emergency guarantee
facility in the future. The second group
expressed concern that Alternative B
includes overly-broad language when
describing the types of situations that
would warrant granting access to the
emergency guarantee facility. The group
recommended that the FDIC provide
clearer guidelines and principles
outlining the kind of financial
challenges that can be construed as
stemming from market disruption. The
group also recommended that the FDIC
provide greater guidance on how
participation in the emergency
guarantee facility would impact the
participant’s disclosures, raising the
question of whether an applicant that
has been denied access to the
emergency guarantee facility must
disclose the fact that it has been denied
such access.
The FDIC believes that the emergency
guarantee facility as designed can
adequately address the concerns
underlying these suggestions. In order to
be effective, the emergency guarantee
facility must be available to handle a
variety of adverse circumstances,
including some that have not yet been
encountered or even forseen. Providing
too narrow a description of the
circumstances when the facility would
be available could limit its effectiveness.
The FDIC also believes that imposing
too many mandatory requirements
could also be counterproductive. The
FDIC needs flexibility in responding to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
these situations. Since the FDIC can
impose any condition it deems
appropriate and can, of course, decide
not to approve an entity’s use of the
emergency guarantee facility, the FDIC
believes that it has the ability to address
these concerns and the flexibility to
effectively respond to unforeseen
circumstances.
IV. The Final Rule
The FDIC is adopting the proposal
described in Alternative B as a final
rule. As discussed below, the final rule
will allow the basic DGP to expire on
October 31, 2009 as currently
structured. However, the final rule will
also establish a limited six-month
emergency guarantee facility upon the
expiration of the basic DGP. The FDIC
believes this approach provides the
most appropriate phase-out of the basic
DGP.
A. Expiration of Debt Guarantee
Program
Under the final rule, the DGP will
expire as currently structured under
existing regulation. Thus, all IDI’s
participating in the DGP and other
participating entities that had either
(i) issued guaranteed debt before April
1, 2009, or (ii) had not issued
guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009,
but had received FDIC’s permission to
issue guaranteed debt through October
31, 2009, are permitted to issue FDICguaranteed senior unsecured debt
through October 31, 2009. The FDIC’s
guarantee for such debt issuances will
expire no later than December 31, 2012.
B. Emergency Guarantee Facility
Additionally, the final rule establishes
a limited six-month emergency
guarantee facility upon the expiration of
the basic DGP. The emergency guarantee
facility addresses an entity’s inability to
replace maturing senior unsecured debt
with non-guaranteed debt as a result of
market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the control of the
participating entity. Under the final
rule, the FDIC will guarantee senior
unsecured debt issued after October 31,
2009, subject to the FDIC’s prior
approval on a case-by-case basis,
through April 30, 2010 by certain
entities participating in the DGP; such
guarantee will be subject to such
restrictions and conditions that the
FDIC deems appropriate. The duration
of the FDIC’s guarantee of senior
unsecured debt issuances approved
under the emergency guarantee facility
will extend through the earliest of the
mandatory conversion date (for
mandatory convertible debt), the stated
maturity date, or December 31, 2012. All
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
54745
of the terms and provisions of the DGP
that are not amended by this final rule
will apply to such debt issuances. The
final rule does not affect any conditions
that the FDIC has placed on the issuance
of debt by an IDI or other entity
participating in the DGP.
Any IDI participating in the DGP and
any other entity participating in the
DGP that has issued FDIC-guaranteed
debt by September 9, 2009, is permitted
to apply to use the emergency guarantee
facility.
i. Application Requirements for
Participation in the Emergency
Guarantee Facility
The final rule requires prior approval
by the FDIC before an entity may
participate in the emergency guarantee
facility. Applications to participate in
the emergency guarantee facility must
be submitted to the Director of the
Division of Supervision and Consumer
Protection on or before April 30, 2010.
FDIC prior approval to participate in the
emergency guarantee facility will be
granted on a case-by-case basis subject
to such terms and conditions as the
FDIC deems appropriate.
Under the final rule, participation in
the emergency guarantee facility is
limited. Only those eligible entities that
demonstrate an inability to issue nonguaranteed debt to replace maturing
senior unsecured debt as a result of
market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the entity’s
control may apply. The final rule
requires that applications to participate
in the emergency guarantee facility
include the following: A projection of
the sources and uses of funds through
December 31, 2012; a summary of the
entity’s contingency plans; a description
of any collateral that the entity can
make available to secure the entity’s
obligation to reimburse the FDIC for any
payments made pursuant to the
guarantee; a description of the plans for
retirement of the FDIC-guaranteed debt;
a description of the market disruptions
or other circumstances beyond the
entity’s control that prevent the entity
from replacing maturing debt with nonguaranteed debt; a description of
management’s efforts to mitigate the
effects of such disruptions or
circumstances; conclusive evidence that
demonstrates the entity’s inability to
issue non-guaranteed debt; and any
other relevant information that the FDIC
deems appropriate.
ii. Participation Fee
Under the final rule, the FDIC will
assess a fee equal to the amount of the
debt to be guaranteed times the number
of years (or portions thereof) from
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
54746
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
issuance date through the earliest of the
mandatory conversion date (for
mandatory convertible debt), the stated
maturity date, or December 31, 2012
times an assessment rate of at least 300
basis points on any guaranteed debt
issued under the emergency guarantee
facility. The FDIC reserves the right to
increase the fee on a case-by-case basis,
depending upon the risks presented by
the issuing entity. The FDIC believes
that the fee established under the final
rule will provide an appropriate
deterrent to applications based on other,
less severe circumstances or concerns.
Under the final rule, a participating
entity may be required to pledge
sufficient collateral to ensure the
repayment of any principal and interest
payments made by the FDIC under the
emergency guarantee facility, subject to
any other conditions and restrictions
that the FDIC deems appropriate. Such
conditions and restrictions may include,
for example, limiting executive
compensations, bonuses, or the payment
of dividends.
V. Regulatory Analysis and Procedure
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
A. Administrative Procedure Act
The process of amending Part 370 by
means of this final rule is governed by
the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). Section 553(d)(3) of the APA
provides that the publication of a rule
shall be made not less than 30 days
before its effective date, except ‘‘as
otherwise provided by the agency for
good cause found and published with
the rule.’’ 6
When it issued the interim rule and
the final rule initially implementing the
TLGP, the FDIC invoked this good cause
exception based on the severe financial
conditions that threatened the stability
of the nation’s economy generally and
the banking system in particular.7
Recently, credit and liquidity conditions
have become less stressed. Narrowing
spreads on both TLGP debt and nonguaranteed debt indicate that access to
funding has improved. Only a few
entities have issued TLGP debt during
the extended DGP period, and recently
several banking organizations have
successfully issued non-guaranteed
debt. In order to continue the orderly
phase out of the basic DGP and to
ensure that the creation of the
emergency guarantee facility occurs at
the conclusion of the basic DGP on
October 31, 2009, the FDIC finds that
good cause exists for an immediate
effective date for the final rule.
B. Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act
The Riegle Community Development
and Regulatory Improvement Act
(RCDRIA) provides that any new
regulations or amendments to
regulations prescribed by a Federal
banking agency that impose additional
reporting, disclosures, or other new
requirements on IDIs shall take effect on
the first day of a calendar quarter which
begins on or after the date on which the
regulations are published in final form,
unless the agency determines, for good
cause published with the rule, that the
rule should become effective before
such time.8 For the same reasons as
discussed above, the FDIC finds that
good cause exists for an immediate
effective date for the final rule.
C. Small Business Regulator
Enforcement Fairness Act
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ within the
meaning of the relevant sections of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et
seq. As required by SBREFA, the FDIC
will file appropriate reports with
Congress and the Government
Accountability Office.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), the FDIC must prepare a final
regulatory flexibility analysis in
connection with the promulgation of a
final rule,9 or certify that the final rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.10 For purposes of the RFA
analysis or certification, financial
institutions with total assets of $175
million or less are considered to be
‘‘small entities.’’ For reasons discussed
below, the FDIC certifies that the final
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Currently, 4,394 IDIs participate in
the DGP, of which approximately 2,120
(or approximately 48 percent) are small
entities. Under the final rule, all 2,120
IDIs that would be considered small
entities for purposes of this analysis are
eligible to apply to access the
emergency guarantee facility. As a
result, the FDIC asserts that the final
rule may affect a substantial number of
IDIs that are small entities that
participate in the DGP.
Nevertheless, the FDIC has
determined that the final rule’s
65
8 12
7 See
95
U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
74 FR 26521 (June 3, 2009) and 73 FR 72244
(Nov. 26, 2008).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
U.S.C. 4802.
U.S.C. 604.
10 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
economic impact on small entities will
not be significant for the following
reasons. The emergency guarantee
facility is designed to be accessed on an
emergency case-by-case basis by IDIs
(and other entities that issued debt
under the DGP) only if such entities are
unable to replace maturing debt as a
result of market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the entities’
control. Eighty-one IDIs have issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt through the DGP
since the program’s inception. It is
unlikely that a significant number of
IDIs (or other qualifying entities) would
satisfy the requirements to issue FDICguaranteed debt during such emergency
circumstances. Accordingly, the final
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), an agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. This Final Rule
implements Alternative B of the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, which
establishes an emergency guarantee
facility to ensure an orderly phase-out of
the debt guarantee component of the
Temporary Liquidity Guarantee
Program. Alternative B includes, in
section 370.3(h)(viii), an application
requirement for IDIs and non-IDIs
wishing to access the emergency
guarantee facility. In conjunction with
publication of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the FDIC submitted to
OMB a request for clearance of the
paperwork burden associated with the
application requirement in Alternative
B. That request is still pending.
The proposed rule document
requested comment on the estimated
paperwork burden. However, none of
the comments received addressed the
estimated paperwork burden. Therefore,
the FDIC has not altered its initial
burden estimates. The estimated burden
for the application requirement, as set
forth in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Final Rule, is as
follows:
Title: ‘‘Temporary Liquidity
Guarantee Program—Emergency
Guarantee Facility.’’
OMB Number: 3064—NEW.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by IDIs—8.
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by non-IDIs
that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under
the DGP—4.
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Frequency of Response: Application
to access emergency guarantee facility
submitted by IDIs—once.
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by non-IDIs
that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under
the DGP—once.
Affected Public: IDIs; thrift holding
companies, bank and financial holding
companies, and affiliates of IDIs that
issued debt under the DGP.
Average Time per Response:
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by IDIs—4
hours.
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by non-IDIs
that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under
the DGP—4 hours.
Estimated Annual Burden:
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by IDIs—32
hours.
Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by non-IDIs
that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under
the DGP—16 hours.
Total Annual Burden—48 hours.
Comment Request: The FDIC has an
ongoing interest in public comments on
its collections of information, including
comments on: (1) Whether this
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the FDIC’s
functions, including whether the
information has practical utility; (2) the
accuracy of the estimates of the burden
of the information collection, including
the validity of the methodologies and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the
information collection on respondents,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Comments may
be submitted to the FDIC by any of the
following methods:
• https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/
laws/federal/propose.html.
• E-mail: comments@fdic.gov.
Include the name and number of the
collection in the subject line of the
message.
• Mail: Leneta Gregorie (202–898–
3719), Counsel, Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20429.
• Hand Delivery: Comments may be
hand-delivered to the guard station at
the rear of the 550 17th Street Building
(located on F Street), on business days
between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
A copy of the comment may also be
submitted to the OMB Desk Officer for
the FDIC, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, New
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
Executive Office Building, Room 3208,
Washington, DC 20503. All comments
should refer to the ‘‘Temporary
Liquidity Guarantee Program—
Emergency Guarantee Facility (OMB No.
3064—New)’’.
F. Solicitation of Comments on Use of
Plain Language
Section 722 of the Gramm-LeachBliley Act, Public Law 106–102, 113
Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999),
requires the federal banking agencies to
use plain language in all proposed and
final rules published after January 1,
2000. In issuing the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking the FDIC requested
comment on how to make the regulation
easier to understand. The FDIC received
one comment in response to the request.
The comment supported the FDIC’s use
of plain language in the NPR.
G. The Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999—
Assessment of Federal Regulations and
Policies on Families
The FDIC has determined that the
Final Rule will not affect family wellbeing within the measure of section 654
of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act,
enacted as part of the Omnibus
Consolidated and Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act of
1999 (Pub. L. 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681).
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 370
Banks, Banking, Bank deposit
insurance, Holding companies, National
banks, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Savings associations.
■ For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation amends 12 CFR part 370 as
follows:
PART 370—TEMPORARY LIQUIDITY
GUARANTEE PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for part 370
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1813(l), 1813(m),
1817(i), 1818, 1819(a)(Tenth), 1820(f),
1821(a), 1821(c), 1821(d), 1823(c)(4).
2. Amend § 370.2 by revising
paragraph (n) to read as follows:
■
§ 370.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Issuance period.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(n)(2) of this section, the term ‘‘issuance
period’’ means
(i) With respect to the issuance, by a
participating entity that is either an
insured depository institution, an entity
that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt
before April 1, 2009, or an entity that
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
54747
has been approved pursuant to
§ 370.3(h) to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
after June 30, 2009, and on or before
October 31, 2009, of:
(A) Mandatory convertible debt, the
period from February 27, 2009, to and
including October 31, 2009, and
(B) All other senior unsecured debt,
the period from October 14, 2008, to and
including October 31, 2009; and
(ii) With respect to the issuance, by
any other participating entity, of
(A) Mandatory convertible debt, the
period from February 27, 2009, to and
including June 30, 2009, and
(B) All other senior unsecured debt,
the period from October 14, 2008, to and
including June 30, 2009.
(2) The ‘‘issuance period’’ for a
participating entity that has been
approved to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
pursuant to § 370.3(k) of this part is the
period after October 31, 2009, and on or
before April 30, 2010.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 370.3 as follows:
■ a. Revise paragraph (d)(2);
■ b. Revise paragraphs (h)(1) through
(h)(3), (h)(5), and (h)(6); and
■ c. Add paragraph (k), to read as
follows:
§ 370.3
Debt Guarantee Program
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(2) With respect to debt that is issued
on or after April 1, 2009, by a
participating entity that is either an
insured depository institution, a
participating entity that has issued
guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, a
participating entity that has been
approved pursuant to § 370.3(h) to issue
guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, and
on or before October 31, 2009, or a
participating entity that has been
approved pursuant to § 370.3(k) to issue
guaranteed debt after October 31, 2009,
the guarantee expires on the earliest of
the mandatory conversion date (for
mandatory convertible debt), the
maturity date of the debt, or December
31, 2012.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Applications for exceptions,
eligibility, and issuance of certain debt.
(1) The following requests require
written application to the FDIC and the
appropriate Federal banking agency of
the entity or the entity’s lead affiliated
insured depository institution:
(i) A request by a participating entity
to establish, increase, or decrease its
debt guarantee limit,
(ii) A request by an entity that
becomes an eligible entity after October
13, 2008, for an increase in its
presumptive debt guarantee limit of
zero,
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
54748
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
(iii) A request by a non-participating
surviving entity in a merger transaction
to opt in to either the debt guarantee
program or the transaction account
guarantee program,
(iv) A request by an affiliate of an
insured depository institution to
participate in the debt guarantee
program,
(v) A request by a participating entity
to issue FDIC-guaranteed mandatory
convertible debt,
(vi) A request by a participating entity
that is neither an insured depository
institution nor an entity that has issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1,
2009, to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
after June 30, 2009, and on or before
October 31, 2009,
(vii) A request by a participating
entity to issue senior unsecured nonguaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, and
(viii) A request by a participating
entity to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
after October 31, 2009 under the
Emergency Guarantee Facility pursuant
to paragraph (k) of this section.
(2) Each letter application must
describe the details of the request,
provide a summary of the applicant’s
strategic operating plan, describe the
proposed use of the debt proceeds, and
(i) With respect to an application for
approval of the issuance of mandatory
convertible debt, must also include:
(A) The proposed date of issuance,
(B) The total amount of the mandatory
convertible debt to be issued,
(C) The mandatory conversion date,
(D) The conversion rate (i.e., the total
number of shares of common stock that
will result from the conversion divided
by the total dollar amount of the
mandatory convertible debt to be
issued),
(E) Confirmation that all applications
and all notices required under the Bank
Holding Company Act of 1956, as
amended, the Home Owners’ Loan Act,
as amended, or the Change in Bank
Control Act, as amended, have been
submitted to the applicant’s appropriate
Federal banking agency in connection
with the proposed issuance, and
(F) Any other relevant information
that the FDIC deems appropriate;
(ii) With respect to an application
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(vi) of this
section to extend the period for issuance
of FDIC-guaranteed debt to and
including October 31, 2009, the entity’s
plans for the retirement of the
guaranteed debt, a description of the
entity’s financial history, current
condition, and future prospects, and any
other relevant information that the FDIC
deems appropriate;
(iii) With respect to an application
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(vii) of this
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
section to issue senior unsecured nonguaranteed debt, a summary of the
applicant’s strategic operating plan and
the entity’s plans for the retirement of
any guaranteed debt; and
(iv) With respect to an application
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(viii) of this
section to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
under the Emergency Guarantee
Facility, a projection of the sources and
uses of funds through December 31,
2012, a summary of the entity’s
contingency plans, a description of the
collateral that an entity can make
available to secure the entity’s
obligation to reimburse the FDIC for any
payments made pursuant to the
guarantee, a description of the plans for
retirement of the FDIC-guaranteed debt,
a description of the market disruptions
or other circumstances beyond the
entity’s control that prevent the entity
from replacing maturing debt with nonguaranteed debt, a description of
management’s efforts to mitigate the
effects of such disruptions or
circumstances, conclusive evidence that
demonstrates an entity’s inability to
issue non-guaranteed debt, and any
other relevant information.
(3) In addition to any other relevant
factors that the FDIC deems appropriate,
the FDIC will consider the following
factors in evaluating applications filed
pursuant to paragraph (h) of this
section:
(i) For applications pursuant to
paragraphs (h)(1)(i), (h)(1)(ii), (h)(1)(iii),
and (h)(1)(v) of this section: The
proposed use of the proceeds; the
financial condition and supervisory
history of the eligible/surviving entity;
(ii) For applications pursuant to
paragraph (h)(1)(iv) of this section: The
proposed use of the proceeds; the extent
of the financial activity of the entities
within the holding company structure;
the strength, from a ratings perspective
of the issuer of the obligations that will
be guaranteed; the size and extent of the
activities of the organization;
(iii) For applications pursuant to
paragraph (h)(1)(vi) of this section: The
proposed use of the proceeds; the
entity’s plans for the retirement of the
guaranteed debt, the entity’s financial
history, current condition, future
prospects, capital, management, and the
risk presented to the FDIC;
(iv) For applications pursuant to
paragraph (h)(1)(vii) of this section: The
entity’s plans for the retirement of the
guaranteed debt; and
(v) For applications pursuant to
paragraph (h)(1)(viii) of this section, the
applicant’s strategic operating plan, the
proposed use of the debt proceeds, the
entity’s plans for the retirement of the
FDIC-guaranteed debt, the entity’s
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
contingency plans, the nature and
extent of the market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the entity’s
control that prevent the entity from
replacing maturing debt with nonguaranteed debt, the collateral that an
entity can make available to secure the
entity’s obligation to reimburse the FDIC
for any payments made pursuant to the
guarantee, management’s efforts to
mitigate the effects of such conditions or
circumstances, the evidence that
demonstrates an entity’s inability to
issue non-guaranteed debt, and the risk
presented to the FDIC.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) The filing deadlines for certain
applications are:
(i) At the same time the merger
application is filed with the appropriate
Federal banking agency, for an
application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(iii) of this section (which must
include a copy of the merger
application);
(ii) October 31, 2009, for an
application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(v) of this section that is filed by
a participating entity that is either an
insured depository institution, an entity
that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt
before April 1, 2009, or an entity that
has been approved pursuant to
paragraph (h) of this section to issue
FDIC-guaranteed debt after June 30,
2009, and on or before October 31, 2009;
(iii) June 30, 2009, for an application
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(v) of this
section that is filed by a participating
entity other than an entity described in
paragraph (h)(5)(ii) of this section;
(iv) June 30, 2009, for an application
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(vi); and
(v) April 30, 2010, for applications
pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(viii).
(6) In granting its approval of an
application filed pursuant to paragraph
(h) of this section the FDIC may impose
any conditions it deems appropriate,
including without limitation,
requirements that the issuer
(i) Hedge any foreign currency risk, or
(ii) Pledge collateral to secure the
issuer’s obligation to reimburse the
FDIC for any payments made pursuant
to the guarantee.
(iii) Limit executive compensation
and bonuses, and/or
(iv) Limit or refrain from the payment
of dividends.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) Emergency Guarantee Facility. In
the event that a participating entity that
is either an insured depository
institution or an entity that has issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt on or before
September 9, 2009 is unable, after
October 31, 2009, to issue non-
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
guaranteed debt to replace maturing
senior unsecured debt as a result of
market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the entity’s
control, the participating entity may,
with the FDIC’s prior approval under
paragraph (h) of this section, issue
FDIC-guaranteed debt after October 31,
2009, and on or before April 30, 2010.
Any such issuance is subject to all of the
terms and conditions imposed by the
FDIC in its approval decision as well as
all of the provisions of this part,
including without limitation, the
payment of the applicable assessment
and compliance with the disclosure
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 370.5 as follows:
■ a. Revise paragraph (f); and
■ b. Revise paragraph (h)(2), to read as
follows:
§ 370.5
Participation.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Except as provided in paragraphs
(g), (j), and (k) of § 370.3, participating
entities are not permitted to select
which newly issued senior unsecured
debt is guaranteed debt; all senior
unsecured debt issued by a participating
entity up to its debt guarantee limit
must be issued and identified as FDICguaranteed debt as and when issued.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) Each participating entity that is
either an insured depository institution,
an entity that has issued FDICguaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, an
entity that has been approved pursuant
to § 370.3(h) to issue FDIC-guaranteed
debt after June 30, 2009, and on or
before October 31, 2009, or a
participating entity that has been
approved pursuant to § 370.3(k) to issue
FDIC-guaranteed debt after October 31,
2009, must include the following
disclosure statement in all written
materials provided to lenders or
creditors regarding any senior
unsecured debt that is issued by it
during the applicable issuance period
and that is guaranteed under the debt
guarantee program:
This debt is guaranteed under the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s
Temporary Liquidity Guarantee
Program and is backed by the full faith
and credit of the United States. The
details of the FDIC guarantee are
provided in the FDIC’s regulations, 12
CFR Part 370, and at the FDIC’s Web
site, https://www.fdic.gov/tlgp. [If the
debt being issued is mandatory
convertible debt, add: The expiration
date of the FDIC’s guarantee is the
earlier of the mandatory conversion
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:34 Oct 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
date or December 31, 2012]. [If the debt
being issued is any other senior
unsecured debt, add: The expiration
date of the FDIC’s guarantee is the
earlier of the maturity date of the debt
or December 31, 2012.]
*
*
*
*
*
5. Amend § 370.6 as follows:
■ a. Revise paragraph (d)(1); and
■ b. Add paragraph (i), to read as
follows:
54749
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 514
[Docket No. FDA–2009–N–0436]
■
§ 370.6 Assessments under the Debt
Guarantee Program.
New Animal Drug Applications
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending the
regulations regarding new animal drug
applications (NADAs). Specifically, this
direct final rule is being issued to
provide that NADAs shall be submitted
in the described form, as appropriate for
the particular submission. Currently, the
regulation requires that all NADAs
contain the same informational sections
and does not explicitly provide the
appropriate flexibility needed to address
the development of all types of new
animal drug products. This amendment
will allow the agency to appropriately
review safety and effectiveness data
submitted to support the approval of
new animal drug products. FDA is
amending the regulations in accordance
with its direct final rule procedures.
The
For debt with a maturity or
annualized
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
time period to conversion
assessment
Register, we are publishing a
date of—
rate (in basis
companion proposed rule, under FDA’s
points) is—
usual procedure for notice-andcomment rulemaking, to provide a
180 days or less (excluding
overnight debt) ..................
50 procedural framework to finalize the
181–364 days .......................
75 rule in the event the agency receives any
365 days or greater ..............
100 significant adverse comments and
withdraws this direct final rule. The
companion proposed rule and this
*
*
*
*
*
direct final rule are substantively
(i) Assessment for debt issued under
identical.
the Emergency Guarantee Facility. The
DATES: This rule is effective March 8,
amount of the assessment for FDIC2010. Submit written comments on or
guaranteed debt issued pursuant to
before January 6, 2010. If FDA receives
§ 370.3(k) of this part is equal to the
amount of the debt times the term of the no significant adverse comments within
the specified comment period, the
debt (or in the case of mandatory
agency will publish a document
convertible debt, the time period to
confirming the effective date of the final
conversion) times an annualized
rule in the Federal Register within 30
assessment rate of 300 basis points, or
days after the comment period on this
such greater rate as the FDIC may
direct final rule ends. If timely
determine in its decision approving
significant adverse comments are
such issuance.
received, the agency will publish a
By order of the Board of Directors.
document in the Federal Register
withdrawing this direct final rule before
Dated at Washington, DC, this 20th day of
October 2009.
its effective date.
Robert E. Feldman,
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2009–N–
Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit
0436 by any of the following methods:
Insurance Corporation.
Electronic Submissions
[FR Doc. E9–25555 Filed 10–22–09; 8:45 am]
Submit electronic comments in the
BILLING CODE 6714–01–P
following ways:
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Amount of assessments for debt
within the debt guarantee limit
(1) Calculation of assessment. Subject
to paragraphs (d)(3) and (h) of this
section, and except as provided in
paragraph (i) of this section, the amount
of assessment will be determined by
multiplying the amount of FDICguaranteed debt times the term of the
debt or, in the case of mandatory
convertible debt, the time period from
issuance to the mandatory conversion
date, times an annualized assessment
rate determined in accordance with the
following table.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 204 (Friday, October 23, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54743-54749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25555]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 204 / Friday, October 23, 2009 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 54743]]
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
12 CFR Part 370
RIN 3064-AD37
Amendment of the Debt Guarantee Program To Provide for the
Establishment of a Limited Six-Month Emergency Guarantee Facility
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To ensure an orderly phase-out of the Debt Guarantee Program
(DGP), a component of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP),
the FDIC is establishing a limited emergency guarantee facility. For
most insured depository institutions and other entities participating
in the DGP, the Debt Guarantee Program will conclude on October 31,
2009, with the FDIC's guarantee expiring no later than December 31,
2012. To the extent that certain of those entities become unable to
issue non-guaranteed debt to replace maturing senior unsecured debt
because of market disruptions or other circumstances beyond their
control, the emergency guarantee facility will be available on an
application basis. In order to utilize the emergency guarantee
facility, an entity must apply to, and receive prior approval from, the
FDIC. If the application is approved, the FDIC will guarantee the
applicant's senior unsecured debt issued on or before April 30, 2010.
Debt guaranteed under the emergency guarantee facility will be subject
to an annualized assessment rate equal to a minimum of 300 basis
points.
DATES: The final rule becomes effective on October 23, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (For questions or comments related to
applications) Lisa D. Arquette, Associate Director, Division of
Supervision and Consumer Protection, (202) 898-8633 or
larquette@fdic.gov; Serena L. Owens, Associate Director, Supervision
and Applications Branch, Division of Supervision and Consumer
Protection, (202) 898-8996 or sowens@fdic.gov; Gail Patelunas, Deputy
Director, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, (202) 898-6779 or
gpatelunas@fdic.gov; Donna Saulnier, Manager, Assessment Policy
Section, Division of Finance, (703) 562-6167 or dsaulnier@fdic.gov; A.
Ann Johnson, Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898-3573 or
aajohnson@fdic.gov; Ryan K. Clougherty, Senior Attorney, Legal
Division, (202) 898-3843 or rclougherty@fdic.gov; or Robert C. Fick,
Counsel, Legal Division, (202) 898-8962 or rfick@fdic.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The FDIC adopted the TLGP in October 2008 following a determination
of systemic risk by the Secretary of the Treasury (after consultation
with the President) that was supported by recommendations from the FDIC
and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal
Reserve).\1\ The TLGP is part of a coordinated effort by the FDIC, the
U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury), and the Federal Reserve to
address unprecedented disruptions in the credit markets and the
resultant difficulty of many financial institutions to obtain funds and
to make loans to creditworthy borrowers. On October 23, 2008, the
FDIC's Board of Directors (Board) authorized the publication in the
Federal Register of an interim rule that outlined the structure of the
TLGP.\2\ Designed to assist in the stabilization of the nation's
financial system, the FDIC's TLGP is composed of two distinct
components: The DGP and the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAG
program). Under the DGP, the FDIC guarantees certain senior unsecured
debt issued by participating entities. Under the TAG program, the FDIC
guarantees all funds held in qualifying noninterest-bearing transaction
accounts at participating insured depository institutions (IDIs).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Section 13(c)(4)(G) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
(FDI Act), 12 U.S.C. 1823(c)(4)(G). The determination of systemic
risk triggered the FDIC's authority--``in its sole discretion and
upon such terms and conditions as the [FDIC's] Board of Directors
may prescribe--to take actions to avoid or mitigate serious adverse
effects on economic conditions or financial stability.'' See also
Section 9(a) Tenth of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1819(a)Tenth. The FDIC
implemented the TLGP in response.
\2\ 73 FR 64179 (October 29, 2008). This interim rule was
finalized and a final rule was published in the Federal Register on
November 26, 2008. 73 FR 72244 (November 26, 2008).
\3\ On June 23, 2009, the Board proposed two alternatives for
phasing out the TAG. The first alternative provided that the TAG
would expire on December 31, 2009, as required by the terms of the
existing rule. The second alternative provided for a limited six-
month extension to that program. Following consideration of the
comments submitted in response to the two alternatives, on August
26, 2009, the Board adopted and approved for publication in the
Federal Register a final rule providing for a six-month extension of
the TAG program, through June 30, 2010. See 74 FR 45093 (September
1, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DGP initially permitted participating entities to issue FDIC-
guaranteed senior unsecured debt until June 30, 2009, with the FDIC's
guarantee for such debt to expire on the earlier of the maturity of the
debt (or the conversion date, for mandatory convertible debt) or June
30, 2012.
To reduce the potential for market disruptions at the conclusion of
the DGP and to begin the orderly phase-out of the program, on May 29,
2009 the Board issued a final rule that extended for four months the
period during which certain participating entities could issue FDIC-
guaranteed debt.\4\ All IDIs and those other participating entities
that had issued FDIC-guaranteed debt on or before April 1, 2009 were
permitted to participate in the extended DGP without application to the
FDIC. Other participating entities that received approval from the FDIC
also were permitted to participate in the extended DGP. The expiration
of the guarantee period was also extended from June 30, 2012 to
December 31, 2012. As a result, all such participating entities were
permitted to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt through and including October
31, 2009, with the FDIC's guarantee expiring on the earliest of the
debt's mandatory conversion date (for mandatory convertible debt), the
stated maturity date, or December 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 74 FR 26521 (June 3, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With over $600 billion in guaranteed debt having been issued by 118
entities, the TLGP has been an important factor in restoring liquidity
and confidence in the banking system. The program enabled banking
organizations to meet financing needs at affordable terms during a
period of system-wide turmoil. Recently, credit and liquidity
conditions have become less stressed. Narrowing
[[Page 54744]]
spreads on both TLGP debt and non-guaranteed debt indicate that access
to funding has improved. Only a few entities have issued TLGP debt
during the extended DGP period, and recently several banking
organizations have successfully issued non-guaranteed debt. The total
amount of FDIC-guaranteed debt outstanding as of October 1, 2009 under
the TLGP is $300 billion.
Noting the evidence that the domestic credit and liquidity markets
are beginning to normalize, on September 9, 2009, the Board authorized
publication of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposed two
alternatives for concluding the DGP.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 74 FR 47489 (September 16, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Proposed Rule) presented two
alternatives for concluding the FDIC's guarantee of senior unsecured
debt under the DGP, Alternative A and Alternative B.
A. Alternative A
Alternative A would have preserved the expiration dates for the
issuance periods and for the duration of the guarantees under the DGP.
Thus, all IDIs participating in the DGP and other participating
entities that had either (i) issued guaranteed debt before April 1,
2009, or (ii) had not issued guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, but
had received the FDIC's permission to issue guaranteed debt through
October 31, 2009 would be permitted to issue FDIC-guaranteed senior
unsecured debt through October 31, 2009. The FDIC's guarantee for such
debt issuances would expire no later than December 31, 2012.
B. Alternative B
Like Alternative A, Alternative B provided that the basic DGP would
expire as structured under the existing regulation. However,
Alternative B also proposed the establishment of a limited, six-month
emergency guarantee facility upon expiration of the DGP on October 31,
2009.
The emergency guarantee facility under Alternative B was intended
to address a participating entity's inability to replace maturing
senior unsecured debt with non-guaranteed debt as a result of market
disruptions or other circumstances beyond the control of the
participating entity. Under this emergency guarantee facility, certain
participating entities could apply to the FDIC for permission to issue
FDIC-guaranteed debt after October 31, 2009. If the FDIC approved an
entity's request, the FDIC would guarantee the entity's senior
unsecured debt issued after October 31, 2009, through and including
April 30, 2010. Any such approval would be subject to such restrictions
and conditions as the FDIC deemed appropriate including, but not
limited to, a pledge of collateral, and limitations on executive
compensation, bonuses, or the payment of dividends. Under Alternative
B, the FDIC would assess a fee using an annualized assessment rate
equal to at least 300 basis points on any FDIC-guaranteed debt issued
by entities under the emergency guarantee facility. The FDIC would
reserve the right to increase the assessment rate on a case-by-case
basis, depending upon the risks presented by the issuing entity. The
FDIC's guarantee of principal and interest payments for senior
unsecured debt issuances approved under the emergency guarantee
facility would extend through the earliest of the mandatory conversion
date (for mandatory convertible debt), the stated maturity date, or
December 31, 2012. Under Alternative B, all of the terms and provisions
of the FDIC's guarantee under the DGP would apply to such debt except
as amended by the final rule. Further, under Alternative B, there would
be no effect on any conditions that the FDIC may have placed on the
issuance of debt by an IDI or other entity participating in the DGP.
Any IDI participating in the DGP and any other entity participating in
the DGP that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt by September 9, 2009,
would be permitted to apply to use this emergency guarantee facility.
III. Summary of Comments Received
The FDIC requested comments on all aspects of the Proposed Rule.
The FDIC specifically requested that commenters indicate a preference
for either Alternative A or Alternative B. The FDIC also sought
comments on whether, under Alternative B, eligibility for the emergency
guarantee facility should be limited to participating IDIs and to those
other entities that had issued FDIC-guaranteed debt on or before
September 9, 2009. In response to the request, the FDIC received four
(4) comments from the following: One comment (1) from an individual;
one comment (1) from an industry association; and two comments (2) from
two separate groups of LL.M. candidates at a law school. A summary of
the comments the FDIC received follows.
The individual commenter expressed the belief that the DGP provides
a valuable service and, therefore, should not be concluded as currently
structured. The commenter noted that the DGP has value as a support
mechanism regardless of whether it is under-utilized.
A banking industry association commented in support of Alternative
B as the most appropriate phase-out of the DGP. Specifically, the
association expressed support for allowing access to the emergency
guarantee facility on a limited case-by-case basis for emergency
circumstances. The association also noted that domestic credit and
liquidity markets have begun to normalize and the number of entities
issuing debt under the DGP has decreased. The association expressed the
opinion that access to the emergency guarantee facility should be
limited to IDIs or other entities that have issued FDIC-guaranteed
senior unsecured debt on or before September 9, 2009. The association
also supported a robust participation fee and noted that such a fee
could both encourage a winding down of the DGP and generate increased
TLGP revenue.
The FDIC also received comment letters from two groups of law
students. Both groups supported the adoption of Alternative B as the
most appropriate phase-out of the DGP, and both also requested that any
final rule provide the FDIC with the discretion to decrease the
proposed 300 basis points assessment rate.
The FDIC is establishing the emergency guarantee facility to serve
as a mechanism to phase-out the DGP, it is not intended to encourage
indefinite participation. The FDIC believes that establishing a 300
basis point minimum assessment rate will provide a more effective
incentive for participating entities to wean themselves off of the
FDIC's guarantee program. Consequently, the FDIC has decided to retain
the 300 basis point minimum assessment rate.
Regarding access to the emergency guarantee facility, one student
group supported restricting access to the emergency guarantee facility
as proposed in Alternative B, noting that such a restriction would both
provide an adequate safeguard against dependency and ensure that the
facility is available only in severe circumstances. The second student
group recommended that the FDIC expand the emergency guarantee facility
eligibility to all financial institutions originally eligible under the
DGP. This group asserted that expanding eligibility would protect the
DIF, perpetuate the objectives of the TLGP, help deserving
nonparticipating institutions avoid receivership, grant the FDIC
greater discretion, and result in minimal additional costs to the FDIC.
[[Page 54745]]
As noted above, the FDIC is establishing the emergency guarantee
facility to phase-out the DGP in an orderly manner. Expanding access to
all entities originally eligible would be inconsistent with that goal.
As a result, the FDIC believes that limiting the eligibility as
provided in Alternative B is the more appropriate way to achieve the
goal of the emergency guarantee facility.
The two student groups also expressed a number of additional
concerns regarding the proposed Alternative B. One group recommended
that a final rule adopting Alternative B should include mandatory end-
use restrictions, such as limitations on executive compensation. This
group also recommended that the application requirements for access to
the emergency guarantee facility include a statement identifying any
changes from all prior plans for the retirement of FDIC-guaranteed debt
that an applicant had submitted to the FDIC under the DGP. Moreover,
this group recommended requiring that applications for the emergency
guarantee facility include a business plan that states clear objectives
for avoiding use of the emergency guarantee facility in the future. The
second group expressed concern that Alternative B includes overly-broad
language when describing the types of situations that would warrant
granting access to the emergency guarantee facility. The group
recommended that the FDIC provide clearer guidelines and principles
outlining the kind of financial challenges that can be construed as
stemming from market disruption. The group also recommended that the
FDIC provide greater guidance on how participation in the emergency
guarantee facility would impact the participant's disclosures, raising
the question of whether an applicant that has been denied access to the
emergency guarantee facility must disclose the fact that it has been
denied such access.
The FDIC believes that the emergency guarantee facility as designed
can adequately address the concerns underlying these suggestions. In
order to be effective, the emergency guarantee facility must be
available to handle a variety of adverse circumstances, including some
that have not yet been encountered or even forseen. Providing too
narrow a description of the circumstances when the facility would be
available could limit its effectiveness. The FDIC also believes that
imposing too many mandatory requirements could also be
counterproductive. The FDIC needs flexibility in responding to these
situations. Since the FDIC can impose any condition it deems
appropriate and can, of course, decide not to approve an entity's use
of the emergency guarantee facility, the FDIC believes that it has the
ability to address these concerns and the flexibility to effectively
respond to unforeseen circumstances.
IV. The Final Rule
The FDIC is adopting the proposal described in Alternative B as a
final rule. As discussed below, the final rule will allow the basic DGP
to expire on October 31, 2009 as currently structured. However, the
final rule will also establish a limited six-month emergency guarantee
facility upon the expiration of the basic DGP. The FDIC believes this
approach provides the most appropriate phase-out of the basic DGP.
A. Expiration of Debt Guarantee Program
Under the final rule, the DGP will expire as currently structured
under existing regulation. Thus, all IDI's participating in the DGP and
other participating entities that had either (i) issued guaranteed debt
before April 1, 2009, or (ii) had not issued guaranteed debt before
April 1, 2009, but had received FDIC's permission to issue guaranteed
debt through October 31, 2009, are permitted to issue FDIC-guaranteed
senior unsecured debt through October 31, 2009. The FDIC's guarantee
for such debt issuances will expire no later than December 31, 2012.
B. Emergency Guarantee Facility
Additionally, the final rule establishes a limited six-month
emergency guarantee facility upon the expiration of the basic DGP. The
emergency guarantee facility addresses an entity's inability to replace
maturing senior unsecured debt with non-guaranteed debt as a result of
market disruptions or other circumstances beyond the control of the
participating entity. Under the final rule, the FDIC will guarantee
senior unsecured debt issued after October 31, 2009, subject to the
FDIC's prior approval on a case-by-case basis, through April 30, 2010
by certain entities participating in the DGP; such guarantee will be
subject to such restrictions and conditions that the FDIC deems
appropriate. The duration of the FDIC's guarantee of senior unsecured
debt issuances approved under the emergency guarantee facility will
extend through the earliest of the mandatory conversion date (for
mandatory convertible debt), the stated maturity date, or December 31,
2012. All of the terms and provisions of the DGP that are not amended
by this final rule will apply to such debt issuances. The final rule
does not affect any conditions that the FDIC has placed on the issuance
of debt by an IDI or other entity participating in the DGP.
Any IDI participating in the DGP and any other entity participating
in the DGP that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt by September 9, 2009,
is permitted to apply to use the emergency guarantee facility.
i. Application Requirements for Participation in the Emergency
Guarantee Facility
The final rule requires prior approval by the FDIC before an entity
may participate in the emergency guarantee facility. Applications to
participate in the emergency guarantee facility must be submitted to
the Director of the Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection on
or before April 30, 2010. FDIC prior approval to participate in the
emergency guarantee facility will be granted on a case-by-case basis
subject to such terms and conditions as the FDIC deems appropriate.
Under the final rule, participation in the emergency guarantee
facility is limited. Only those eligible entities that demonstrate an
inability to issue non-guaranteed debt to replace maturing senior
unsecured debt as a result of market disruptions or other circumstances
beyond the entity's control may apply. The final rule requires that
applications to participate in the emergency guarantee facility include
the following: A projection of the sources and uses of funds through
December 31, 2012; a summary of the entity's contingency plans; a
description of any collateral that the entity can make available to
secure the entity's obligation to reimburse the FDIC for any payments
made pursuant to the guarantee; a description of the plans for
retirement of the FDIC-guaranteed debt; a description of the market
disruptions or other circumstances beyond the entity's control that
prevent the entity from replacing maturing debt with non-guaranteed
debt; a description of management's efforts to mitigate the effects of
such disruptions or circumstances; conclusive evidence that
demonstrates the entity's inability to issue non-guaranteed debt; and
any other relevant information that the FDIC deems appropriate.
ii. Participation Fee
Under the final rule, the FDIC will assess a fee equal to the
amount of the debt to be guaranteed times the number of years (or
portions thereof) from
[[Page 54746]]
issuance date through the earliest of the mandatory conversion date
(for mandatory convertible debt), the stated maturity date, or December
31, 2012 times an assessment rate of at least 300 basis points on any
guaranteed debt issued under the emergency guarantee facility. The FDIC
reserves the right to increase the fee on a case-by-case basis,
depending upon the risks presented by the issuing entity. The FDIC
believes that the fee established under the final rule will provide an
appropriate deterrent to applications based on other, less severe
circumstances or concerns. Under the final rule, a participating entity
may be required to pledge sufficient collateral to ensure the repayment
of any principal and interest payments made by the FDIC under the
emergency guarantee facility, subject to any other conditions and
restrictions that the FDIC deems appropriate. Such conditions and
restrictions may include, for example, limiting executive
compensations, bonuses, or the payment of dividends.
V. Regulatory Analysis and Procedure
A. Administrative Procedure Act
The process of amending Part 370 by means of this final rule is
governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Section 553(d)(3)
of the APA provides that the publication of a rule shall be made not
less than 30 days before its effective date, except ``as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the
rule.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When it issued the interim rule and the final rule initially
implementing the TLGP, the FDIC invoked this good cause exception based
on the severe financial conditions that threatened the stability of the
nation's economy generally and the banking system in particular.\7\
Recently, credit and liquidity conditions have become less stressed.
Narrowing spreads on both TLGP debt and non-guaranteed debt indicate
that access to funding has improved. Only a few entities have issued
TLGP debt during the extended DGP period, and recently several banking
organizations have successfully issued non-guaranteed debt. In order to
continue the orderly phase out of the basic DGP and to ensure that the
creation of the emergency guarantee facility occurs at the conclusion
of the basic DGP on October 31, 2009, the FDIC finds that good cause
exists for an immediate effective date for the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 74 FR 26521 (June 3, 2009) and 73 FR 72244 (Nov. 26,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act
The Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act
(RCDRIA) provides that any new regulations or amendments to regulations
prescribed by a Federal banking agency that impose additional
reporting, disclosures, or other new requirements on IDIs shall take
effect on the first day of a calendar quarter which begins on or after
the date on which the regulations are published in final form, unless
the agency determines, for good cause published with the rule, that the
rule should become effective before such time.\8\ For the same reasons
as discussed above, the FDIC finds that good cause exists for an
immediate effective date for the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 12 U.S.C. 4802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Small Business Regulator Enforcement Fairness Act
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
final rule is not a ``major rule'' within the meaning of the relevant
sections of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996
(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. As required by SBREFA, the FDIC will
file appropriate reports with Congress and the Government
Accountability Office.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the FDIC must prepare a
final regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the
promulgation of a final rule,\9\ or certify that the final rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.\10\ For purposes of the RFA analysis or certification,
financial institutions with total assets of $175 million or less are
considered to be ``small entities.'' For reasons discussed below, the
FDIC certifies that the final rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 5 U.S.C. 604.
\10\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, 4,394 IDIs participate in the DGP, of which
approximately 2,120 (or approximately 48 percent) are small entities.
Under the final rule, all 2,120 IDIs that would be considered small
entities for purposes of this analysis are eligible to apply to access
the emergency guarantee facility. As a result, the FDIC asserts that
the final rule may affect a substantial number of IDIs that are small
entities that participate in the DGP.
Nevertheless, the FDIC has determined that the final rule's
economic impact on small entities will not be significant for the
following reasons. The emergency guarantee facility is designed to be
accessed on an emergency case-by-case basis by IDIs (and other entities
that issued debt under the DGP) only if such entities are unable to
replace maturing debt as a result of market disruptions or other
circumstances beyond the entities' control. Eighty-one IDIs have issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt through the DGP since the program's inception. It
is unlikely that a significant number of IDIs (or other qualifying
entities) would satisfy the requirements to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt
during such emergency circumstances. Accordingly, the final rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. This Final Rule
implements Alternative B of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which
establishes an emergency guarantee facility to ensure an orderly phase-
out of the debt guarantee component of the Temporary Liquidity
Guarantee Program. Alternative B includes, in section 370.3(h)(viii),
an application requirement for IDIs and non-IDIs wishing to access the
emergency guarantee facility. In conjunction with publication of the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FDIC submitted to OMB a request for
clearance of the paperwork burden associated with the application
requirement in Alternative B. That request is still pending.
The proposed rule document requested comment on the estimated
paperwork burden. However, none of the comments received addressed the
estimated paperwork burden. Therefore, the FDIC has not altered its
initial burden estimates. The estimated burden for the application
requirement, as set forth in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Final Rule, is as follows:
Title: ``Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program--Emergency Guarantee
Facility.''
OMB Number: 3064--NEW.
Estimated Number of Respondents: Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by IDIs--8.
Application to access emergency guarantee facility submitted by
non-IDIs that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under the DGP--4.
[[Page 54747]]
Frequency of Response: Application to access emergency guarantee
facility submitted by IDIs--once.
Application to access emergency guarantee facility submitted by
non-IDIs that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under the DGP--once.
Affected Public: IDIs; thrift holding companies, bank and financial
holding companies, and affiliates of IDIs that issued debt under the
DGP.
Average Time per Response: Application to access emergency
guarantee facility submitted by IDIs--4 hours.
Application to access emergency guarantee facility submitted by
non-IDIs that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under the DGP--4 hours.
Estimated Annual Burden: Application to access emergency guarantee
facility submitted by IDIs--32 hours.
Application to access emergency guarantee facility submitted by
non-IDIs that issued FDIC-guaranteed debt under the DGP--16 hours.
Total Annual Burden--48 hours.
Comment Request: The FDIC has an ongoing interest in public
comments on its collections of information, including comments on: (1)
Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the FDIC's functions, including whether the information
has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the estimates of the burden
of the information collection, including the validity of the
methodologies and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Comments may be submitted to the FDIC
by any of the following methods:
https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/federal/propose.html.
E-mail: comments@fdic.gov. Include the name and number of
the collection in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Leneta Gregorie (202-898-3719), Counsel, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20429.
Hand Delivery: Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard
station at the rear of the 550 17th Street Building (located on F
Street), on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
A copy of the comment may also be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer
for the FDIC, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 3208,
Washington, DC 20503. All comments should refer to the ``Temporary
Liquidity Guarantee Program--Emergency Guarantee Facility (OMB No.
3064--New)''.
F. Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language
Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Public Law 106-102, 113
Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999), requires the federal banking agencies
to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after
January 1, 2000. In issuing the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking the FDIC
requested comment on how to make the regulation easier to understand.
The FDIC received one comment in response to the request. The comment
supported the FDIC's use of plain language in the NPR.
G. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999--
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
The FDIC has determined that the Final Rule will not affect family
well-being within the measure of section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, enacted as part of the Omnibus
Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999
(Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681).
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 370
Banks, Banking, Bank deposit insurance, Holding companies, National
banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation amends 12 CFR part 370 as follows:
PART 370--TEMPORARY LIQUIDITY GUARANTEE PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 370 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1813(l), 1813(m), 1817(i), 1818,
1819(a)(Tenth), 1820(f), 1821(a), 1821(c), 1821(d), 1823(c)(4).
0
2. Amend Sec. 370.2 by revising paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 370.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
(n) Issuance period.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (n)(2) of this section, the
term ``issuance period'' means
(i) With respect to the issuance, by a participating entity that is
either an insured depository institution, an entity that has issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, or an entity that has been
approved pursuant to Sec. 370.3(h) to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt after
June 30, 2009, and on or before October 31, 2009, of:
(A) Mandatory convertible debt, the period from February 27, 2009,
to and including October 31, 2009, and
(B) All other senior unsecured debt, the period from October 14,
2008, to and including October 31, 2009; and
(ii) With respect to the issuance, by any other participating
entity, of
(A) Mandatory convertible debt, the period from February 27, 2009,
to and including June 30, 2009, and
(B) All other senior unsecured debt, the period from October 14,
2008, to and including June 30, 2009.
(2) The ``issuance period'' for a participating entity that has
been approved to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt pursuant to Sec. 370.3(k)
of this part is the period after October 31, 2009, and on or before
April 30, 2010.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 370.3 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(2);
0
b. Revise paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(3), (h)(5), and (h)(6); and
0
c. Add paragraph (k), to read as follows:
Sec. 370.3 Debt Guarantee Program
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) With respect to debt that is issued on or after April 1, 2009,
by a participating entity that is either an insured depository
institution, a participating entity that has issued guaranteed debt
before April 1, 2009, a participating entity that has been approved
pursuant to Sec. 370.3(h) to issue guaranteed debt after June 30,
2009, and on or before October 31, 2009, or a participating entity that
has been approved pursuant to Sec. 370.3(k) to issue guaranteed debt
after October 31, 2009, the guarantee expires on the earliest of the
mandatory conversion date (for mandatory convertible debt), the
maturity date of the debt, or December 31, 2012.
* * * * *
(h) Applications for exceptions, eligibility, and issuance of
certain debt.
(1) The following requests require written application to the FDIC
and the appropriate Federal banking agency of the entity or the
entity's lead affiliated insured depository institution:
(i) A request by a participating entity to establish, increase, or
decrease its debt guarantee limit,
(ii) A request by an entity that becomes an eligible entity after
October 13, 2008, for an increase in its presumptive debt guarantee
limit of zero,
[[Page 54748]]
(iii) A request by a non-participating surviving entity in a merger
transaction to opt in to either the debt guarantee program or the
transaction account guarantee program,
(iv) A request by an affiliate of an insured depository institution
to participate in the debt guarantee program,
(v) A request by a participating entity to issue FDIC-guaranteed
mandatory convertible debt,
(vi) A request by a participating entity that is neither an insured
depository institution nor an entity that has issued FDIC-guaranteed
debt before April 1, 2009, to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt after June 30,
2009, and on or before October 31, 2009,
(vii) A request by a participating entity to issue senior unsecured
non-guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, and
(viii) A request by a participating entity to issue FDIC-guaranteed
debt after October 31, 2009 under the Emergency Guarantee Facility
pursuant to paragraph (k) of this section.
(2) Each letter application must describe the details of the
request, provide a summary of the applicant's strategic operating plan,
describe the proposed use of the debt proceeds, and
(i) With respect to an application for approval of the issuance of
mandatory convertible debt, must also include:
(A) The proposed date of issuance,
(B) The total amount of the mandatory convertible debt to be
issued,
(C) The mandatory conversion date,
(D) The conversion rate (i.e., the total number of shares of common
stock that will result from the conversion divided by the total dollar
amount of the mandatory convertible debt to be issued),
(E) Confirmation that all applications and all notices required
under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, the Home
Owners' Loan Act, as amended, or the Change in Bank Control Act, as
amended, have been submitted to the applicant's appropriate Federal
banking agency in connection with the proposed issuance, and
(F) Any other relevant information that the FDIC deems appropriate;
(ii) With respect to an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(vi) of this section to extend the period for issuance of FDIC-
guaranteed debt to and including October 31, 2009, the entity's plans
for the retirement of the guaranteed debt, a description of the
entity's financial history, current condition, and future prospects,
and any other relevant information that the FDIC deems appropriate;
(iii) With respect to an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(vii) of this section to issue senior unsecured non-guaranteed
debt, a summary of the applicant's strategic operating plan and the
entity's plans for the retirement of any guaranteed debt; and
(iv) With respect to an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(viii) of this section to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt under the
Emergency Guarantee Facility, a projection of the sources and uses of
funds through December 31, 2012, a summary of the entity's contingency
plans, a description of the collateral that an entity can make
available to secure the entity's obligation to reimburse the FDIC for
any payments made pursuant to the guarantee, a description of the plans
for retirement of the FDIC-guaranteed debt, a description of the market
disruptions or other circumstances beyond the entity's control that
prevent the entity from replacing maturing debt with non-guaranteed
debt, a description of management's efforts to mitigate the effects of
such disruptions or circumstances, conclusive evidence that
demonstrates an entity's inability to issue non-guaranteed debt, and
any other relevant information.
(3) In addition to any other relevant factors that the FDIC deems
appropriate, the FDIC will consider the following factors in evaluating
applications filed pursuant to paragraph (h) of this section:
(i) For applications pursuant to paragraphs (h)(1)(i), (h)(1)(ii),
(h)(1)(iii), and (h)(1)(v) of this section: The proposed use of the
proceeds; the financial condition and supervisory history of the
eligible/surviving entity;
(ii) For applications pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(iv) of this
section: The proposed use of the proceeds; the extent of the financial
activity of the entities within the holding company structure; the
strength, from a ratings perspective of the issuer of the obligations
that will be guaranteed; the size and extent of the activities of the
organization;
(iii) For applications pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(vi) of this
section: The proposed use of the proceeds; the entity's plans for the
retirement of the guaranteed debt, the entity's financial history,
current condition, future prospects, capital, management, and the risk
presented to the FDIC;
(iv) For applications pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(vii) of this
section: The entity's plans for the retirement of the guaranteed debt;
and
(v) For applications pursuant to paragraph (h)(1)(viii) of this
section, the applicant's strategic operating plan, the proposed use of
the debt proceeds, the entity's plans for the retirement of the FDIC-
guaranteed debt, the entity's contingency plans, the nature and extent
of the market disruptions or other circumstances beyond the entity's
control that prevent the entity from replacing maturing debt with non-
guaranteed debt, the collateral that an entity can make available to
secure the entity's obligation to reimburse the FDIC for any payments
made pursuant to the guarantee, management's efforts to mitigate the
effects of such conditions or circumstances, the evidence that
demonstrates an entity's inability to issue non-guaranteed debt, and
the risk presented to the FDIC.
* * * * *
(5) The filing deadlines for certain applications are:
(i) At the same time the merger application is filed with the
appropriate Federal banking agency, for an application pursuant to
paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section (which must include a copy of the
merger application);
(ii) October 31, 2009, for an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(v) of this section that is filed by a participating entity that
is either an insured depository institution, an entity that has issued
FDIC-guaranteed debt before April 1, 2009, or an entity that has been
approved pursuant to paragraph (h) of this section to issue FDIC-
guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, and on or before October 31, 2009;
(iii) June 30, 2009, for an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(v) of this section that is filed by a participating entity other
than an entity described in paragraph (h)(5)(ii) of this section;
(iv) June 30, 2009, for an application pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(vi); and
(v) April 30, 2010, for applications pursuant to paragraph
(h)(1)(viii).
(6) In granting its approval of an application filed pursuant to
paragraph (h) of this section the FDIC may impose any conditions it
deems appropriate, including without limitation, requirements that the
issuer
(i) Hedge any foreign currency risk, or
(ii) Pledge collateral to secure the issuer's obligation to
reimburse the FDIC for any payments made pursuant to the guarantee.
(iii) Limit executive compensation and bonuses, and/or
(iv) Limit or refrain from the payment of dividends.
* * * * *
(k) Emergency Guarantee Facility. In the event that a participating
entity that is either an insured depository institution or an entity
that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt on or before September 9, 2009 is
unable, after October 31, 2009, to issue non-
[[Page 54749]]
guaranteed debt to replace maturing senior unsecured debt as a result
of market disruptions or other circumstances beyond the entity's
control, the participating entity may, with the FDIC's prior approval
under paragraph (h) of this section, issue FDIC-guaranteed debt after
October 31, 2009, and on or before April 30, 2010. Any such issuance is
subject to all of the terms and conditions imposed by the FDIC in its
approval decision as well as all of the provisions of this part,
including without limitation, the payment of the applicable assessment
and compliance with the disclosure requirements.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 370.5 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (f); and
0
b. Revise paragraph (h)(2), to read as follows:
Sec. 370.5 Participation.
* * * * *
(f) Except as provided in paragraphs (g), (j), and (k) of Sec.
370.3, participating entities are not permitted to select which newly
issued senior unsecured debt is guaranteed debt; all senior unsecured
debt issued by a participating entity up to its debt guarantee limit
must be issued and identified as FDIC-guaranteed debt as and when
issued.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) Each participating entity that is either an insured depository
institution, an entity that has issued FDIC-guaranteed debt before
April 1, 2009, an entity that has been approved pursuant to Sec.
370.3(h) to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt after June 30, 2009, and on or
before October 31, 2009, or a participating entity that has been
approved pursuant to Sec. 370.3(k) to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt after
October 31, 2009, must include the following disclosure statement in
all written materials provided to lenders or creditors regarding any
senior unsecured debt that is issued by it during the applicable
issuance period and that is guaranteed under the debt guarantee
program:
This debt is guaranteed under the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation's Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program and is backed by
the full faith and credit of the United States. The details of the FDIC
guarantee are provided in the FDIC's regulations, 12 CFR Part 370, and
at the FDIC's Web site, https://www.fdic.gov/tlgp. [If the debt being
issued is mandatory convertible debt, add: The expiration date of the
FDIC's guarantee is the earlier of the mandatory conversion date or
December 31, 2012]. [If the debt being issued is any other senior
unsecured debt, add: The expiration date of the FDIC's guarantee is the
earlier of the maturity date of the debt or December 31, 2012.]
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 370.6 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(1); and
0
b. Add paragraph (i), to read as follows:
Sec. 370.6 Assessments under the Debt Guarantee Program.
* * * * *
(d) Amount of assessments for debt within the debt guarantee limit
(1) Calculation of assessment. Subject to paragraphs (d)(3) and (h)
of this section, and except as provided in paragraph (i) of this
section, the amount of assessment will be determined by multiplying the
amount of FDIC-guaranteed debt times the term of the debt or, in the
case of mandatory convertible debt, the time period from issuance to
the mandatory conversion date, times an annualized assessment rate
determined in accordance with the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The annualized
assessment
For debt with a maturity or time period to conversion rate (in basis
date of-- points) is--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
180 days or less (excluding overnight debt)............. 50
181-364 days............................................ 75
365 days or greater..................................... 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(i) Assessment for debt issued under the Emergency Guarantee
Facility. The amount of the assessment for FDIC-guaranteed debt issued
pursuant to Sec. 370.3(k) of this part is equal to the amount of the
debt times the term of the debt (or in the case of mandatory
convertible debt, the time period to conversion) times an annualized
assessment rate of 300 basis points, or such greater rate as the FDIC
may determine in its decision approving such issuance.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 20th day of October 2009.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. E9-25555 Filed 10-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P