Short-Term Investment Funds, 21057-21065 [2012-8467]
Download as PDF
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
temperature measurement point (TMP) on
the LED source shall be such that it has the
highest temperature in the LED lamp. In
general, the individual LED in the middle of
symmetric arrays is the hottest. For square,
rectangular, or circular arrays, the LED
closest to the center is typically the hottest.
For other configurations, manufacturers shall
sample several LEDs within the lamp to
identify the source with highest temperature.
The temporary hole for inserting the
thermocouple shall be tightly resealed during
testing with putty or other flexible sealant.
The temperature probes shall be in contact
with the TMP and permanently adhered. The
steady-state temperature shall be recorded
after the test has been running for at least
three hours, and three successive readings
taken at 15 minute intervals are within 1 °C
of one another and are still not rising. The
temperature measured during the ISTMT
should be the temperature at which lumen
maintenance data of the LED source is
obtained.
4.3.2. The lumen maintenance of the LED
sources shall be determined as specified in
section 7.0 of IES LM–80 (incorporated by
reference; see § 430.3) and section 4.3 of IES
TM–21 (incorporated by reference; see
§ 430.3). Additionally, the following
conditions shall be adhered to:
4.3.2.1. All case temperature (Ts) subsets of
the sample used for IES LM–80 (incorporated
by reference; see § 430.3) testing shall be of
the same CCT.
4.3.2.2. The drive current flowing through
the LED source during IES LM–80
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3)
testing shall be greater than or equal to the
subcomponent drive current employed in the
LED lamp.
4.3.2.3. For an LED lamp employing both
phosphor-converted white and single-color
LED packages, the lumen maintenance shall
be measured for a sample of LED arrays
incorporating both types of LED packages.
4.3.2.4. For LED arrays constructed as an
assembly of LED dies on a printed circuit
board or substrate (a.k.a. chip-on-board) with
one common phosphor layer overlaying all
dies, or with phosphor layers overlaying
individual dies with or without single-color
dies incorporated, a single IES LM–80
(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) test
shall represent the performance of a range of
LED array sizes, if all of the following are
satisfied:
4.3.2.4.1. IES LM–80 (incorporated by
reference; see § 430.3) testing has been
conducted on the largest LED array that the
manufacturer believes will be used in a
qualified product; and,
4.3.2.4.2. The average calculated currentper-die in the tested LED array is greater than
or equal to the average calculated currentper-die employed in the LED lamp.
4.3.2.5. For LED arrays constructed as an
assembly of LED packages on a printed
circuit board, each with their own phosphor
layer, the TMP temperature of the hottest
package in the array shall be used for lumen
maintenance projection purposes.
[FR Doc. 2012–8469 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
12 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. OCC–2011–0023]
RIN 1557–AD37
Short-Term Investment Funds
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Treasury (OCC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The OCC is requesting
comment on a proposal that would
revise the requirements imposed on
banks pursuant to 12 CFR
9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B), the short-term
investment fund (STIF) rule (STIF Rule).
The proposal would add safeguards
designed to address the risk of loss to a
STIF’s principal, including measures
governing the nature of a STIF’s
investments, ongoing monitoring of its
mark-to-market value and forecasting of
potential changes in its mark-to-market
value under adverse market conditions,
greater transparency and regulatory
reporting about a STIF’s holdings, and
procedures to protect fiduciary accounts
from undue dilution of their
participating interests in the event that
the STIF loses the ability to maintain a
stable net asset value (NAV).
DATES: Comments should be received on
or before June 8, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Because paper mail in the
Washington, DC area and at the OCC is
subject to delay, commenters are
encouraged to submit comments by the
Federal eRulemaking Portal or email, if
possible. Please use the title ‘‘ShortTerm Investment Funds’’ to facilitate
the organization and distribution of the
comments. You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal—
‘‘regulations.gov’’: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Click ‘‘Advanced
Search’’. Select ‘‘Document Type’’ of
‘‘Proposed Rule’’, and in ‘‘By Keyword
or ID’’ box, enter Docket ID ‘‘OCC–
2011–0023’’, and click ‘‘Search’’. If
proposed rules for more than one
agency are listed, in the ‘‘Agency’’
column, locate the notice of proposed
rulemaking for the OCC. Comments can
be filtered by Agency using the filtering
tools on the left side of the screen. In the
‘‘Actions’’ column, click on ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ or ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ to
submit or view public comments and to
view supporting and related materials
for this rulemaking action.
• Click on the ‘‘Help’’ tab on the
Regulations.gov home page to get
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21057
information on using Regulations.gov,
including instructions for submitting or
viewing public comments, viewing
other supporting and related materials,
and viewing the docket after the close
of the comment period.
• Email:
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov.
• Mail: Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency, 250 E Street SW., Mail
Stop 2–3, Washington, DC 20219.
• Fax: (202) 874–5274.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: 250 E Street
SW., Mail Stop 2–3, Washington, DC
20219.
Instructions: You must include
‘‘OCC’’ as the agency name and ‘‘Docket
ID OCC–2011–0023’’ in your comment.
In general, OCC will enter all comments
received into the docket and publish
them on the Regulations.gov Web site
without change, including any business
or personal information that you
provide such as name and address
information, email addresses, or phone
numbers. Comments received, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, are part of the public record
and subject to public disclosure. Do not
enclose any information in your
comment or supporting materials that
you consider confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may review comments and other
related materials that pertain to this
notice of proposed rulemaking by any of
the following methods:
• Viewing Comments Electronically:
Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Click
‘‘Advanced Search’’. Select ‘‘Document
Type’’ of ‘‘Public Submission’’, and in
‘‘By Keyword or ID’’ box enter Docket ID
‘‘OCC–2011–0023’’, and click ‘‘Search’’.
If comments from more than one agency
are listed, the ‘‘Agency’’ column will
indicate which comments were received
by the OCC. Comments can be filtered
by Agency using the filtering tools on
the left side of the screen.
• Viewing Comments Personally: You
may personally inspect and photocopy
comments at the OCC, 250 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC. For security reasons,
the OCC requires that visitors make an
appointment to inspect comments. You
may do so by calling (202) 874–4700.
Upon arrival, visitors will be required to
present valid government-issued photo
identification and to submit to security
screening in order to inspect and
photocopy comments.
• Docket: You may also view or
request available background
documents and project summaries using
the methods described above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
OCC: Joel Miller, Group Leader, Asset
Management (202) 874–4493, David
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
21058
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Barfield, NBE, Market Risk (202) 874–
1829, Patrick T. Tierney, Counsel,
Legislative and Regulatory Activities
Division (202) 874–5090, or Adam
Trost, Senior Attorney, Securities and
Corporate Practices Division (202) 874–
5210, Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, 250 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
I. Background
A. Short-Term Investment Funds (STIFs)
A Collective Investment Fund (CIF) is
a bank-managed fund that holds pooled
fiduciary assets that meet specific
criteria established by the OCC fiduciary
activities regulation at 12 CFR 9.18.
Each CIF is established under a ‘‘Plan’’
that details the terms under which the
bank manages and administers the
fund’s assets. The bank acts as a
fiduciary for the CIF and holds legal
title to the fund’s assets. Participants in
a CIF are the beneficial owners of the
fund’s assets. Each participant owns an
undivided interest in the aggregate
assets of a CIF; a participant does not
directly own any specific asset held by
a CIF.1
CIFs are designed to enhance
investment management capabilities by
combining assets from different
accounts into a single fund with a
specific investment strategy. By pooling
fiduciary assets, a bank may lower the
operational and administrative expenses
associated with investing fiduciary
assets and enhance risk management
and investment performance for the
participating accounts.
A fiduciary account’s investment in a
CIF is called a ‘‘participating interest.’’
Participating interests in a CIF are not
FDIC-insured and are not subject to
potential claims by a bank’s creditors. In
addition, a participating interest in a
CIF cannot be pledged or otherwise
encumbered in favor of a third party.
The general rule for valuation of a
CIF’s assets specifies that a CIF
admitting a fiduciary account (that is,
allowing the fiduciary account, in effect,
to purchase its proportionate interest in
the assets of the CIF) or withdrawing the
fiduciary account (that is, allowing the
fiduciary account, in effect, to redeem
the value of its proportionate interest in
the CIF) may only do so on the basis of
a valuation of the CIF’s assets, as of the
admission or withdrawal date, based on
the mark-to-market value of the CIF’s
assets.2 This general valuation rule is
1 12
CFR 9.18.
CFR 9.18(b)(5)(i). If the bank cannot readily
ascertain market value as of the valuation date, the
bank generally must use a fair value for the asset,
determined in good faith. 12 CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(A).
2 12
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
designed to protect all fiduciary
accounts participating in the CIF from
the risk that other accounts will be
admitted or withdrawn at valuations
that dilute the value of existing
participating interests in the CIF.
A STIF is a type of CIF that permits
a bank to value the STIF’s assets on an
amortized cost basis, rather than at
mark-to-market value, for purposes of
admissions and withdrawals. This is an
exception to the general rule of market
valuation. In order to qualify for this
exception, a STIF’s Plan must require
the bank to: (1) Maintain a dollarweighted average portfolio maturity of
90 days or less; (2) accrue on a straightline or amortized basis the difference
between the cost and anticipated
principal receipt on maturity; and (3)
hold the fund’s assets until maturity
under usual circumstances.3 These
conditions are designed to protect
fiduciary accounts from the risk of
dilution of the value of their
participating interests. In particular, by
limiting the STIF’s investments to
shorter-term assets and generally
requiring those assets to be held to
maturity, realized differences between
the amortized cost and mark-to-market
value of the assets will be rare, absent
atypical market conditions or an
impaired asset. As further discussed in
this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section, the amortized cost approach is
beneficial for many fiduciary accounts,
because some participants require that a
certain percentage of the assets held in
these accounts be in a liquid, low risk
investment.
The OCC’s STIF Rule governs STIFs
managed by national banks. In addition,
regulations adopted by the Office of
Thrift Supervision, now recodified as
OCC rules pursuant to Title III of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act,4 have long
required federal savings associations
(FSAs) to comply with the requirements
of the OCC’s STIF Rule.5 Thus, the
proposed revisions to the national bank
STIFs Rule would apply to a federal
savings association that establishes and
administers a STIF fund. As of
December 31, 2011, there was
approximately $112 billion invested in
STIFs administered by national banks
and there were no STIFs administered
by FSAs reported.6
3 12
CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B).
FR 48950 (2011).
5 12 CFR 150.260.
6 Fifteen national banks collectively reported
STIF investments that they administer. Based on
thrift financial report data, federal savings
associations administered no STIFs as of December
31, 2011. Other types of institutions managing
certain types of CIFs may also observe the
4 76
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The OCC is proposing to revise the
requirements of the STIF Rule. While
fiduciary accounts participating in a
STIF have an interest in the fund
maintaining a stable net asset value
(NAV), ultimately the participating
interests remain subject to the risk of
loss to a STIF’s principal. The OCC is
proposing additional safeguards
designed to address this risk in several
ways. These include measures
governing the nature of a STIF’s
investments, ongoing monitoring of the
STIF’s mark-to-market value and
assessment of potential changes in its
mark-to-market value under adverse
market conditions, greater transparency
and regulatory reporting about the
STIF’s holdings, and procedures to
protect fiduciary accounts from undue
dilution of their participating interests
in the event that the STIF loses the
ability to maintain a stable NAV.
B. Comparison to Other Products That
Seek To Maintain a Stable NAV
There are other types of funds that
seek to maintain a stable NAV. By far,
the most significant of these from a
financial market presence standpoint
are ‘‘money market mutual funds’’
(MMMFs). These funds are organized as
open-ended management investment
companies and are regulated by the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’) pursuant to the Investment
Company Act of 1940, particularly
pursuant to the provisions of SEC Rule
2a–7 thereunder (‘‘Rule 2a–7’’).7
requirements of the OCC’s STIF Rule. For example,
New York state law provides that all investments
in short-term investment common trust funds may
be valued at cost, if the plan of operation requires
that: (i) The type or category of investments of the
fund shall comply with the rules and regulations of
the Comptroller of the Currency pertaining to shortterm investment funds and (ii) in computing
income, the difference between cost of investment
and anticipated receipt on maturity of investment
shall be accrued on a straight-line basis. See N.Y.
Comp. Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 3, § 22.23 (2010).
Additionally, in order to retain their tax-exempt
status, common trust funds must operate in
compliance with § 9.18 as well as the federal tax
laws. See 26 U.S.C. 584. The OCC does not have
access to comprehensive data quantifying
investments held by STIF funds administered by
other types of institutions pursuant to legal
requirements incorporating the OCC’s STIF Rule.
Although the direct scope of the STIF Rule
provisions in section 9.18 of the OCC’s regulations
is national banks and Federal branches and
agencies of foreign banks acting in a fiduciary
capacity (12 CFR 9.1(c)), the nomenclature of the
STIF Rule refers simply to ‘‘banks.’’ For the sake of
convenience, the OCC proposes to continue this
approach and also applies the same convention to
the discussion of the STIF Rule in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
7 15 U.S.C. 80a; 17 CFR 270.2a–7. Because STIFs
are a form of collective investment fund, they are
generally exempt from the SEC’s rules under the
Investment Company Act. STIFs used exclusively
for (1) the collective investment of money by a bank
in its fiduciary capacity as trustee, executor,
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
MMMFs seek to maintain a stable share
price, typically $1.00 a share. In this
regard, they are similar to STIFs.
However, there are a number of
important differences between MMMFs
and STIFs; most significantly, MMMFs
are open to retail investors, whereas,
STIFs only are available to authorized
fiduciary accounts. MMMFs may be
offered to the investing public and have
become a popular product with retail
investors, corporate money managers,
and institutional investors seeking
returns equivalent to current short-term
interest rates in exchange for high
liquidity and the prospect of protection
against the loss of principal. In contrast
to the approximately $112 billion
currently held in STIFs administered by
national banks, MMMFs, as of December
2011, held approximately $2.7 trillion
dollars of investor assets.8
During the recent period of financial
market stress, beginning in 2007 and
stretching into 2009, certain types of
short-term debt securities frequently
held by MMMFs experienced unusually
high volatility. Concerns by investors
that their MMMFs could not maintain a
stable NAV eventually led to investor
redemptions out of those funds, and
some funds needed to liquidate sizeable
portions of their securities to meet
investor redemption requests. This flood
of redemption requests depressed
market prices for short-term debt
instruments, exacerbating the problem
for all types of stable NAV funds.
The President’s Working Group on
Financial Markets (‘‘PWG’’),9 after
reviewing the market turmoil during the
period 2007 through 2009,
recommended that the SEC strengthen
the regulation and monitoring of
MMMFs and also recommended that
bank regulators consider strengthening
the regulation and monitoring of other
types of products that seek to maintain
a stable NAV. The October 2010 report
from the PWG states: ‘‘[b]anking and
state insurance regulators might
consider additional restrictions to
mitigate systemic risk for bank common
and collective funds and other
investment pools that seek a stable NAV
administrator, or guardian and (2) the collective
investment of assets of certain employee benefit
plans are exempt from the Investment Company Act
under 15 U.S.C. 80a–3(c)(3) and (c)(11),
respectively. MMMFs are not subject to comparable
restrictions as to the type of participant who may
invest in the fund or the purpose of such
investment.
8 See https://www.ici.org/info/mm_data_2011.xls.
9 The PWG is comprised of the Secretary of the
Treasury, the Chairman of the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System, the Chairman of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, and the
Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
but that are exempt from registration
under sections 3(c)(3) and 3(c)(11) of the
ICA.’’ 10
Based on the market turmoil from
2007 through 2009 and the work done
by the PWG, among others, the SEC
adopted amendments to Rule 2a–7 to
strengthen the resilience of MMMFs.11
The OCC’s proposed changes to the
STIF Rule are informed by the SEC’s
revisions to Rule 2a–7, but differ in
certain respects in light of the
differences between the money market
mutual fund as an investment product
and the STIF, e.g., a bank’s fiduciary
responsibility to a STIF and
requirements limiting STIF
participation to eligible accounts under
the OCC’s fiduciary account regulation
at 12 CFR part 9.
II. Description of Proposed Changes to
the STIF Rule
The proposed changes to the STIF
Rule would enhance protections
provided to STIF participants and
reduce risks to banks that administer
STIFs. The proposed changes add new
requirements or amend existing
requirements that a CIF must meet to be
considered a STIF and value assets on
an amortized cost basis. The OCC
believes many banks that offer STIFs are
already engaged in the risk mitigation
efforts set forth in this proposed rule.
The proposed changes do not affect
the obligation that STIFs meet the CIF
requirements described in 12 CFR part
9, which allows national banks to
maintain and invest fiduciary assets,
consistent with applicable law.
Applicable law is defined as the law of
a state or other jurisdiction governing a
national bank’s fiduciary relationships,
any applicable Federal law governing
those relationships (e.g., ERISA, federal
tax, and securities laws), the terms of
the instrument governing a fiduciary
relationship, or any court order
pertaining to the relationship.12 Also,
national banks managing CIFs are
required to adopt and follow written
policies and procedures that are
adequate to maintain their fiduciary
activities in compliance with applicable
law.13 Additionally, the STIF Rule
10 Report of the President’s Working Group on
Financial Markets, Money Market Fund Reform
Options, p. 35 (Oct. 2010), see https://
www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/
Documents/
10.21%20PWG%20Report%20Final.pdf. See also
Financial Stability Oversight Council 2011 Annual
Report, p. 13 (July 2011) available at https://
www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/
FSOCAR2011.pdf.
11 See Money Market Fund Reform, 75 FR 10060
(Mar. 4, 2010).
12 12 CFR 9.2(b).
13 12 CFR 9.5.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21059
requires a STIF’s bank manager, at least
once during each calendar year, to
conduct a review of all assets of each
fiduciary account for which the bank
has investment discretion to evaluate
whether they are appropriate,
individually and collectively, for the
account.14 These examples of CIF
requirements applicable to STIFs are not
exclusive. Other requirements apply,
and a bank must comply will all
applicable requirements of 12 CFR part
9 when acting as a fiduciary for a CIF.
Banks administering a STIF would
need to revise the written plan required
by 12 CFR 9.18(b)(1) if this proposal is
adopted as a final rule.
A. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(A)
STIFs typically maintain stable NAVs
in order to meet the expectations of the
fund’s bank managers and participating
fiduciary accounts.15 To the extent a
bank fiduciary offers a STIF with a fund
objective of maintaining a stable NAV,
participating accounts and the OCC
expect those STIFs to maintain a stable
NAV using amortized cost. The proposal
would require a Plan to have as a
primary objective that the STIF operate
with a stable NAV of $1.00 per
participating interest.16
B. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(B)
The current STIF Rule requires the
bank managing the STIF 17 to maintain
a dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity of 90 days or less. The current
STIF Rule restricts the weighted average
maturity of the STIF’s portfolio in order
to limit the exposure of participating
fiduciary accounts to certain risks,
including interest rate risk. The
proposed rule would change the
maturity limits to further reduce such
risks. First, the proposal would reduce
the maximum weighted average
portfolio maturity permitted by the rule
from 90 days or less to 60 days or less.
Second, it would establish a new
14 12
CFR 9.6(c).
example, many STIF plan participants (e.g.,
pensions) have policies, procedures, and
operational systems that presume a stable NAV.
16 The OCC would expect banks to normalize and
treat stable NAVs operating at a multiple of a $1.00
(e.g., $10 NAV) or fraction of $1.00 (e.g., $0.5) as
operating with a NAV of $1.00 per participating
interest.
17 The current STIF Rule incorporates this and
other measures through requirements that the Plan
include provisions requiring the bank administering
the STIF to effectuate the measures with respect to
the STIF. The revisions proposed herein
incorporate additional measures through
requirements that the Plan include provisions
requiring the STIF to observe certain restrictions
and adopt certain procedures. In either case, it is
effectively the bank administering the STIF that
generally performs these measures, and for
convenience purposes, the Supplementary
Information section herein will describe it that way.
15 For
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
21060
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
maturity test that would limit the
portion of a STIF’s portfolio that could
be held in longer term variable- or
floating-rate securities.
1. Dollar-Weighted Average Portfolio
Maturity
The proposal would amend the
‘‘dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity’’ 18 requirement of the STIF
Rule to 60 days or less. Currently, banks
managing STIFs must maintain a dollarweighted average portfolio maturity of
90 days or less.19 Securities that have
shorter periods remaining until maturity
generally exhibit a lower level of price
volatility in response to interest rate and
credit spread fluctuations and, thus,
provide a greater assurance that the
STIF will continue to maintain a stable
value.
Having a portfolio weighted towards
securities with longer maturities poses
greater risks to participating accounts in
a STIF. For example, a longer dollarweighted average maturity period
increases a STIF’s exposure to interest
rate risk. Additionally, longer maturity
periods amplify the effect of widening
credit spreads on a STIF. Finally, a STIF
holding securities with longer maturity
periods generally is exposed to greater
liquidity risk because: (1) Fewer
securities mature and return principal
on a daily or weekly basis to be
available for possible fiduciary account
withdrawals, and (2) the fund may
experience greater difficulty in
liquidating these securities in a short
period of time at a reasonable price.
STIFs with a shorter portfolio
maturity period would be better able to
withstand increases in interest rates and
credit spreads without material
deviation from amortized cost.
Furthermore, in the event distress in the
short-term instrument market triggers
increasing rates of withdrawals from
STIFs, the STIFs would be better
positioned to withstand such
withdrawals as a greater portion of their
portfolios mature and return principal
on a daily or weekly basis and would
have greater ability to liquidate a
portion of their portfolio at a reasonable
price.
Question 1: What are the estimates of
the effects, if any, on STIF portfolios
and participating accounts from
reducing the maximum dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity permitted by
18 Generally, ‘‘dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity’’ means the average time it takes for
securities in a portfolio to mature, weighted in
proportion to the dollar amount that is invested in
the portfolio. Dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity measures the price sensitivity of fixedincome portfolios to interest rate changes.
19 12 CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B)(1).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
the rule from 90 to 60 days? The OCC
seeks commenters’ specific information
about the risk sensitivities associated
with current STIF portfolios, including
the current and month-end dollarweighted average maturity of these
funds since 2008.
2. Weighted Average Portfolio Life
Maturity
The proposal would add a new
maturity requirement for STIFs, which
would limit the dollar-weighted average
portfolio life maturity to 120 days or
less. The dollar-weighted average
portfolio life maturity would be
measured without regard to a security’s
interest rate reset dates and, thus, would
limit the extent to which a STIF could
invest in longer term securities that may
expose it to increased liquidity and
credit risk.
To determine compliance with the
dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity requirement of the current
STIF Rule, banks generally treat the
maturity of a portfolio security as the
period remaining until the date on
which the principal must
unconditionally be repaid according to
its terms (its final ‘‘legal’’ maturity) or,
in the case of a security called for
redemption, the date on which the
redemption payment must be made.
However, banks treat certain types of
securities, such as certain floating or
adjustable-rate securities, as having
shorter maturities equal to the time
remaining to the next interest rate reset
date.20 As a result, STIFs may treat
longer term adjustable-rate securities as
short-term securities. While adjustablerate securities held in these funds do
tend to protect a STIF against changes
in interest rates, they do not fully
protect against credit and liquidity risk
to the portfolio.
The traditional dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity measurement
in the current STIF Rule does not
require a STIF to limit these risks. For
this reason, the proposal would impose
a new dollar-weighted average portfolio
life maturity limitation on the structure
of a STIF to capture credit and liquidity
risk not encompassed by the dollarweighted average portfolio maturity
restriction. The proposal would require
that STIFs maintain a dollar-weighted
average portfolio life maturity of 120
days or less, which would provide a
reasonable balance between
strengthening the resilience of STIFs to
credit and liquidity risk while not
unduly restricting the bank’s ability to
invest the STIF’s fiduciary assets in a
20 See
PO 00000
infra note 22 and accompanying text.
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
diversified portfolio of short-term, high
quality debt securities.
The impact of a limit on the dollarweighted average life of a portfolio
would be on those STIFs that hold
certain longer term floating-rate
securities. For example, under the
current STIF Rule, a STIF with a
portfolio comprising 50 percent of
overnight repurchase agreements and 50
percent of two-year government agency
floating-rate obligations that reset daily
based on the federal funds rate would
have a dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity of one day. In contrast, by
applying a measurement that does not
recognize resets, the portfolio would
have a dollar-weighted average portfolio
life maturity of 365.5 days (i.e., half of
the portfolio has a one day maturity and
half has a two-year maturity), which
would be considerably longer than the
120-day limit of the proposal. Thus, the
dollar-weighted average portfolio life
maturity limitation would provide an
extra layer of protection for qualified
account participants against credit and
liquidity risk, particularly in volatile
markets.
Question 2: What are the effects, if
any, on STIF portfolios and
participating accounts of limiting the
portion of a fund’s portfolio that may be
held in longer term variable- or floatingrate securities? The OCC seeks
commenters’ specific information about
the risk sensitivities associated with the
current dollar-weighted average life
maturity of these funds.
3. Determination of Maturity Limits
In determining the dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity of STIFs
under the current rule, national banks
generally apply the same methodology
as required by the SEC for MMMFs
pursuant to Rule 2a–7. Dollar-weighted
average maturity under Rule 2a–7 is
calculated, as a general rule, by treating
each security’s maturity as the period
remaining until the date on which, in
accordance with the terms of the
security, the principal amount must be
unconditionally paid or, in the case of
a security called for redemption, the
date on which the redemption payment
must be made. Rule 2a–7 also provides
eight exceptions to this general rule. For
example, for certain types of variablerate securities, the date of maturity may
be the earlier of the date of the next
interest rate reset or the period
remaining until the principal can be
recovered through demand. For
repurchase agreements, the maturity is
the date on which the repurchase is
scheduled to occur, unless the repo is
subject to demand for repurchase, in
which case the maturity is the notice
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
period applicable to demand.21 The
proposal would include this approach
in the rule text for dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity and dollarweighted average portfolio life
maturity 22 for ease of administration
and implementation of the proposed
rule’s requirements.
Question 3: Is this approach for the
determination of maturity limits
appropriate, and if not, what alternative
approach should be used?
C. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(E)
To ensure that banks managing STIFs
include practices designed to limit the
amount of credit and liquidity risk to
which participating accounts in STIFs
are exposed, the proposal would require
adoption of portfolio and issuer
qualitative standards and concentration
restrictions. The OCC would expect
bank fiduciaries to identify, monitor,
and manage issuer and lower quality
investment concentrations and
implement procedures to perform
appropriate due diligence on all
concentration exposures as part of the
bank’s risk management policies and
procedures for each STIF. In addition to
standards imposed by applicable law,
the portfolio and issuer qualitative
standards and concentration restrictions
should take into consideration market
events and deterioration in an issuer’s
financial condition.
Question 4: Are defined portfolio
concentration limits necessary in order
for STIF managers and STIF
participants to ensure that a fund has
reduced its credit exposure to a specific
issuer? Commenters who assert that
portfolio concentration limits are
necessary should provide details
regarding the percent limits for specific
issuers or classes of issuers.
D. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(F)
Many banks process STIF withdrawal
requests within a short time frame, often
on the same day that the withdrawal
request is received, which necessitates
sufficient liquidity to meet such
21 See
17 CFR 270.2a–7(d)(1)–(8).
SEC’s Rule 2a–7 adopting release describes
the new weighted average life maturity calculation
as being based on the same methodology as the
weighted average maturity determination, but made
without reference to the set of maturity exceptions
the rule permits for certain interest rate
readjustments for specified types of assets under the
rule. 17 CFR 270.2a–7(c)(2)(iii). The OCC is
proposing the same maturity calculation, referring
to it as the dollar-weighted average portfolio life
maturity. The calculation bases a security’s
maturity on its stated final maturity date or, when
relevant, the date of the next demand feature when
the fund may receive payment of principal and
interest (such as a put feature). See 75 FR 10072
(Mar. 4, 2010) at footnote 154 and accompanying
text.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
22 The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
requests. By holding illiquid securities,
a STIF exposes itself to the risk that it
will be unable to satisfy withdrawal
requests promptly without selling
illiquid securities at a loss that, in turn,
could impair its ability to maintain a
stable NAV. Moreover, illiquid
securities are generally subject to greater
price volatility, exposing the STIF to
greater risk that its mark-to-market value
will deviate from its amortized cost
value. To address this concern, the
proposal would require adoption of
standards that include provisions to
address contingency funding needs.
E. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(G)
The proposal would require a bank
managing a STIF to adopt shadow
pricing procedures.23 These procedures
require the bank to calculate the extent
of the difference, if any, between the
mark-to-market NAV per participating
interest using available market
quotations (or an appropriate substitute
that reflects current market conditions)
from the STIF’s amortized cost value per
participating interest. In the event the
difference exceeds $0.005 per
participating interest,24 the bank must
take action to reduce dilution of
participating interests or other unfair
results to participating accounts in the
STIF, such as ceasing fiduciary account
withdrawals. The shadow pricing
procedures must occur at least on a
calendar week basis and more
frequently as determined by the bank
when market conditions warrant.
Question 5: Does the proposal differ
from banks’ current pricing practices? If
so, how? Question 6: Is the proposed
weekly shadow pricing frequency
appropriate? Question 7: Would another
reporting frequency be more appropriate
and, if so, what frequency and why?
F. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(H)
The proposal would require a bank
managing a STIF to adopt procedures
for stress testing the fund’s ability to
maintain a stable NAV for participating
interests. The proposal would require
the stress tests be conducted at such
intervals as an independent risk
manager or a committee responsible for
the STIF’s oversight determines to be
appropriate and reasonable in light of
current market conditions, but in no
case shall the interval be longer than a
23 Shadow pricing is the process of maintaining
two sets of valuation records—one that reflects the
value of a fund’s assets at amortized cost and the
other that reflects the market value of the fund’s
assets.
24 The proposal contemplates a stable NAV of
$1.00. If a STIF has a stable NAV that is different
than $1.00 it must adjust the reference value
accordingly.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21061
calendar month-end basis. The
independent risk manager or committee
members must be independent from the
STIF’s investment management. The
stress testing would be based upon
hypothetical events (specified by the
bank) that include, but are not limited
to, a change in short-term interest rates;
an increase in participating account
withdrawals; a downgrade of or default
on portfolio securities; and the
widening or narrowing of spreads
between yields on an appropriate
benchmark the fund has selected for
overnight interest rates and commercial
paper and other types of securities held
by the fund.
The proposal provides a bank with
flexibility to specify the scenarios or
assumptions on which the stress tests
are based, as appropriate to the risk
exposures of each STIF. Banks
managing STIFs should, for example,
consider procedures that require the
fund to test for the concurrence of
multiple hypothetical events, e.g.,
where there is a simultaneous increase
in interest rates and substantial
withdrawals.25
The proposal also would require a
stress test report be provided to the
independent risk manager or the
committee responsible for the STIF’s
oversight. The report would include: (1)
The date(s) on which the testing was
performed; (2) the magnitude of each
hypothetical event that would cause the
difference between the STIF’s mark-tomarket NAV calculated using available
market quotations (or appropriate
substitutes which reflect current market
conditions) and its NAV per
participating interest calculated using
amortized cost to exceed $0.005; and (3)
an assessment by the bank of the STIF’s
ability to withstand the events (and
concurrent occurrences of those events)
that are reasonably likely to occur
within the following year.
In addition, the proposal would
require that adverse stress testing results
are reported to the bank’s senior risk
management that is independent from
the STIF’s investment management.
The proposed stress testing
procedures would provide banks with a
better understanding of the risks to
which STIFs are exposed and would
give banks additional information that
can be used for managing those risks.
Question 8: Is the proposed
requirement that a STIF adopt
procedures for stress testing the fund’s
25 Where stress testing models are relied upon, a
bank should validate the models consistent with the
Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management
issued by the OCC and the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System. See OCC Bulletin
2011–12 (Apr. 4, 2011).
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
21062
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
ability to maintain a stable NAV for
participating interests appropriate? Why
so or why not? Question 9: In particular,
is the proposed monthly stress testing
frequency appropriate? Commenters
who assert that another frequency
would be more appropriate should
identify the alternative and provide a
supporting rationale.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
G. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(I)
The proposal would require banks
managing STIFs to disclose information
about fund level portfolio holdings to
STIF participants and to the OCC within
five business days after each calendar
month-end. Specifically, the bank
would be required to disclose the STIF’s
total assets under management
(securities and other assets including
cash, minus liabilities); the fund’s markto-market and amortized cost NAVs,
both with and without capital support
agreements; the dollar-weighted average
portfolio maturity; and dollar-weighted
average portfolio life maturity as of the
last business day of the prior calendar
month. The current STIF Rule does not
contain a similar disclosure
requirement.
Also, for each security held by the
STIF, as of the last business day of the
prior calendar month, the bank would
be required to disclose to STIF
participants and to the OCC within five
business days after each calendar
month-end at a security level: (1) The
name of the issuer; (2) the category of
investment; (3) the Committee on
Uniform Securities Identification
Procedures (CUSIP) number or other
standard identifier; (4) the principal
amount; (5) the maturity date for
purposes of calculating dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity; (6) the final
legal maturity date (taking into account
any maturity date extensions that may
be effected at the option of the issuer)
if different from the maturity date for
purposes of calculating dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity; (7) the
coupon or yield; and (8) the amortized
cost value.
Question 10: What is the estimate of
the burden, if any, associated with the
proposed security level disclosures to
STIF participants, specifically, whether
details about every security in the fund
should be disclosed? Question 11: What
disclosure formats could accomplish the
disclosure objective efficiently?
Question 12: What would be the impacts
on tax-qualified STIF participants of
monthly, detailed security-level
disclosures from the STIF, including
how STIF participants might use the
disclosed information?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
H. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(J)
The proposal would require a bank
that manages a STIF to notify the OCC
prior to or within one business day after
certain events. Those events are: (1) Any
difference exceeding $0.0025 between
the NAV and the mark-to-market value
of a STIF participating interest based on
current market factors; (2) when a STIF
has re-priced its NAV below $0.995 per
participating interest; (3) any
withdrawal distribution-in-kind of the
STIF’s participating interests or
segregation of portfolio participants; (4)
any delays or suspensions in honoring
STIF participating interest withdrawal
requests; (5) any decision to formally
approve the liquidation, segregation of
assets or portfolios, or some other
liquidation of the STIF; and (6) when a
national bank, its affiliate, or any other
entity provides a STIF financial support,
including a cash infusion, a credit
extension, a purchase of a defaulted or
illiquid asset, or any other form of
financial support in order to maintain a
stable NAV per participating interest.26
This proposed requirement to notify the
OCC prior to or within one business day
after these limited specific events would
permit the OCC to more effectively
supervise STIFs that are experiencing
liquidity or valuation stress.
To comply with this proposed
requirement, a bank would have to
calculate the mark-to-market value of a
STIF participating interest on a daily
basis.
Question 13: Is daily calculation of
mark-to-market value of a STIF
participating interest a feasible or
appropriate frequency to permit
effective monitoring and risk
management by, and supervision of,
STIFs experiencing liquidity or
valuation stress?
I. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(K)
The proposal would require banks
managing a STIF to adopt procedures
that in the event a STIF has re-priced its
NAV below $0.995 per participating
interest, the bank managing the STIF
shall calculate, redeem, and sell the
STIF’s participating interests at a price
based on the mark-to-market NAV.
Currently, the rule creates an incentive
for withdrawal of participating interests
if the mark-to-market NAV falls below
the stable NAV because the earlier
26 See Interagency Policy on Banks/Thrifts
Providing Financial Support to Funds Advised by
the Banking Organization or its Affiliates, OCC
Bulletin 2004–2 Attachment (Jan. 5, 2004)
(instructing banks that to avoid engaging in unsafe
and unsound banking practices, banks should adopt
appropriate policies and procedures governing
routine or emergency transactions with bank
advised investment funds).
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
withdrawals are more likely to receive
the full stable NAV payment. The
proposal removes this incentive, as once
the NAV is priced below $0.995, all
withdrawals of participating interests
will receive the mark-to-market NAV
instead of the stable NAV.
J. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(L)
The proposal would require a bank
managing a STIF to adopt procedures
for suspending redemptions and
initiating liquidation of a STIF as a
result of redemptions. The intent of the
proposal is to reduce the vulnerability
of participating accounts to the harmful
effects of extraordinary levels of
withdrawals, which can be
accomplished to some degree by
suspending withdrawals. These
suspensions only would be permitted in
limited circumstances when, as a result
of redemption, the bank has: (1)
Determined that the extent of the
difference between the STIF’s amortized
cost per participating interest and its
current mark-to-market NAV per
participating interest may result in
material dilution of participating
interests or other unfair results to
participating accounts; (2) formally
approved the liquidation of the STIF;
and (3) facilitated the fair and orderly
liquidation of the STIF to the benefit of
all STIF participants.
The OCC understands that
suspending withdrawals may impose
hardships on fiduciary accounts for
which the ability to redeem
participations is an important
consideration. Accordingly, the
proposed requirement is limited to
permitting suspension in extraordinary
circumstances when there is significant
risk of extraordinary withdrawal activity
to the detriment of other participating
accounts.
III. General Request for Comments
In addition to the specific requests for
comment outlined in this
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section, the
OCC is interested in receiving comments
on all aspects of this proposed rule.
IV. Community Bank Comment Request
The OCC also invites comments on
the impact of this proposal on
community banks. The OCC recognizes
that community banks operate with
more limited resources than larger
institutions and may present a different
risk profile. Question 14: How would the
proposal impact community banks’
current resources and available
personnel with the requisite expertise?
Question 15: How could the goals of the
proposal be achieved for community
banks through an alternative approach?
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
V. Solicitation of Comments on Use of
Plain Language
Section 722 of the Gramm-LeachBliley Act, Pub. L. 106–102, sec. 722,
113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999),
requires the OCC to use plain language
in all proposed and final rules
published after January 1, 2000. The
OCC invites your comments on how to
make this proposal easier to understand.
For example:
• Question 16: Have we organized the
material to suit your needs? If not, how
could this material be better organized?
• Question 17: Are the requirements
in the proposed regulation clearly
stated? If not, how could the regulation
be more clearly stated?
• Question 18: Does the proposed
regulation contain language or jargon
that is not clear? If so, which language
requires clarification?
• Question 19: Would a different
format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make
the regulation easier to understand? If
so, what changes to the format would
make the regulation easier to
understand?
• Question 20: What else could we do
to make the regulation easier to
understand?
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Request for Comment on Proposed
Information Collection
In accordance with section 3512 of
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3521), the OCC
may not conduct or sponsor, and a
respondent is not required to respond
to, an information collection unless it
displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number. The information collection
requirements contained in this notice of
proposed rulemaking have been
submitted to OMB for review and
approval under section 3506 of the PRA
and § 1320.11 of OMB’s implementing
regulations (5 CFR part 1320) as an
amendment to the OCC’s existing
collection for Fiduciary Activities (OMB
Control No. 1557–0140). The
information collection requirements are
found in §§ 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(E)–(L).
Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the OCC’s functions,
including whether the information has
practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the estimate of the
burden of the information collection,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
information collection on respondents,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or startup
costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information.
All comments will become a matter of
public record. Comments should be
addressed to: Communications Division,
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Public Information Room,
Mailstop 2–3, Attention: 1557–0140,
250 E Street SW., Washington, DC
20219. In addition, comments may be
sent by fax to 202–874–5274, or by
electronic mail to
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov. You may
personally inspect and photocopy
comments at the OCC, 250 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20219. For security
reasons, the OCC requires that visitors
make an appointment to inspect
comments. You may do so by calling
202–874–4700. Upon arrival, visitors
will be required to present valid
government-issued photo identification
and submit to security screening in
order to inspect and photocopy
comments.
Additionally, please send a copy of
your comments by mail to: OCC Desk
Officer, 1557–140, U.S. Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., #10235, Washington, DC
20503, or by fax to (202) 395–6974.
Proposed Information Collection
Title of Information Collection:
Fiduciary Activities.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Affected Public: Businesses or other
for-profit.
Respondents: National banks and
federal branches and agencies of foreign
banks.
OMB Control No.: 1557–0140.
Abstract: The rule would allow an
institution to value a STIF’s assets on a
cost basis, rather than mark-to-market
value for admissions and withdrawals if
the written plan requires the STIF to
adopt certain procedures and standards.
These procedures and standards
include: Portfolio and issuer qualitative
standards and restrictions; liquidity
standards; shadow pricing procedures;
procedures for stress testing the ability
to maintain a stable NAV and the testing
itself; procedures to make certain
disclosures for each security held and
issuance of the disclosures; procedures
to require notification to OCC regarding
certain events; procedures regarding re-
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21063
pricing events; and procedures for
suspending redemptions and initiating
liquidation of a STIF.
Estimated Burden for the Amendment
to the Collection:
Estimated Number of Respondents: 15
respondents administering 34 funds.
Estimated Burden per Fund: 846
hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
28,764 hours.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b) (RFA), the regulatory flexibility
analysis otherwise required under
section 603 of the RFA is not required
if the agency certifies that the proposed
rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
(defined for purposes of the RFA to
include banks and federal branches and
agencies with assets less than or equal
to $175 million and trust companies
with assets less than or equal to $ 7
million) and publishes its certification
and a short, explanatory statement in
the Federal Register along with its
proposed rule.
The Proposed Rule would have no
impact on any small national banks or
federal branches and agencies or trust
companies, as defined by the RFA. No
small national banks or federal branches
and agencies report management of
STIFs on their required regulatory
reports as of December 31, 2011.
Therefore, the OCC certifies that the
Proposed Rule would not, if
promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
C. OCC Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 Determination
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1532) requires the OCC to prepare a
budgetary impact statement before
promulgating a rule that includes a
federal mandate that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
in any one year (adjusted annually for
inflation). The OCC has determined that
this proposed rule will not result in
expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, or the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Accordingly, the OCC has not prepared
a budgetary impact statement.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 9
Estates, Investments, National banks,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Trusts and trustees.
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
21064
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, chapter I of title 12 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 9—FIDUCIARY ACTIVITIES OF
NATIONAL BANKS
1. The authority citation for part 9
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh), 92a, and
93a; 12 U.S.C. 78q, 78q–1, and 78w.
2. Section 9.18 is amended by revising
paragraph (b)(4)(ii) and by adding
paragraph (b)(4)(iii) to read as follows:
§ 9.18
Collective investment funds.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) General Method of Valuation.
Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(4)(iii) of this section, a bank shall
value each fund asset at mark-to-market
value as of the date set for valuation,
unless the bank cannot readily ascertain
mark-to-market value, in which case the
bank shall use a fair value determined
in good faith.
(iii) Short-term investment funds
(STIFs) Method of Valuation. A bank
may value a STIF’s assets on a cost
basis, rather than mark-to-market value
as provided in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of
this section, for purposes of admissions
and withdrawals, if the Plan includes
appropriate provisions, consistent with
this part, requiring the STIF to:
(A) Operate with a stable net asset
value of $1.00 per participating interest
as a primary fund objective;
(B) Maintain a dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity of 60 days or
less and a dollar-weighted average
portfolio life maturity of 120 days or
less as determined in the same manner
as is required by the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule
2a–7 for money market mutual funds
(17 CFR 270.2a–7);
(C) Accrue on a straight-line or
amortized basis the difference between
the cost and anticipated principal
receipt on maturity;
(D) Hold the STIF’s assets until
maturity under usual circumstances;
(E) Adopt portfolio and issuer
qualitative standards and concentration
restrictions;
(F) Adopt liquidity standards that
include provisions to address
contingency funding needs;
(G) Adopt shadow pricing procedures
that:
(1) Require the bank to calculate the
extent of difference, if any, of the markto-market net asset value per
participating interest using available
market quotations (or an appropriate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
substitute that reflects current market
conditions) from the STIF’s amortized
cost price per participating interest, at
least on a calendar week basis and more
frequently as determined by the bank
when market conditions warrant; and
(2) Require the bank, in the event the
difference calculated pursuant to this
subparagraph exceeds $0.005 per
participating interest, to take action to
reduce dilution of participating interests
or other unfair results to participating
accounts in the STIF;
(H) Adopt procedures for stress
testing the STIF’s ability to maintain a
stable net asset value per participating
interest that shall provide for:
(1) The periodic stress testing, at least
on a calendar month basis and at such
intervals as an independent risk
manager or a committee responsible for
the STIF’s oversight that consists of
members independent from the STIF’s
investment management determines
appropriate and reasonable in light of
current market conditions;
(2) Stress testing based upon
hypothetical events that include, but are
not limited to, a change in short-term
interest rates, an increase in participant
account withdrawals, a downgrade of or
default on portfolio securities, and the
widening or narrowing of spreads
between yields on an appropriate
benchmark the STIF has selected for
overnight interest rates and commercial
paper and other types of securities held
by the STIF;
(3) A stress testing report on the
results of such testing to be provided to
the independent risk manager or the
committee responsible for the STIF’s
oversight that consists of members
independent from the STIF’s investment
management that shall include: the
date(s) on which the testing was
performed; the magnitude of each
hypothetical event that would cause the
difference between the STIF’s mark-tomarket net asset value calculated using
available market quotations (or
appropriate substitutes which reflect
current market conditions) and its net
asset value per participating interest
calculated using amortized cost to
exceed $0.005; and an assessment by the
bank of the STIF’s ability to withstand
the events (and concurrent occurrences
of those events) that are reasonably
likely to occur within the following
year; and
(4) Reporting adverse stress testing
results to the bank’s senior risk
management that is independent from
the STIF’s investment management.
(I) Adopt procedures that require a
bank to disclose to STIF participants
and to the OCC’s Asset Management
Group, Credit & Market Risk Division,
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E St.
SW., Washington, DC 20219–0001,
within five business days after each
calendar month-end, the fund’s total
assets under management (securities
and other assets including cash, minus
liabilities); the fund’s mark-to-market
and amortized cost net asset values both
with and without capital support
agreements; the dollar-weighted average
portfolio maturity; the dollar-weighted
average portfolio life maturity of the
STIF as of the last business day of the
prior calendar month; and for each
security held by the STIF as of the last
business day of the prior calendar
month:
(1) The name of the issuer;
(2) The category of investment;
(3) The Committee on Uniform
Securities Identification Procedures
(CUSIP) number or other standard
identifier;
(4) The principal amount;
(5) The maturity date for purposes of
calculating dollar-weighted average
portfolio maturity;
(6) The final legal maturity date
(taking into account any maturity date
extensions that may be effected at the
option of the issuer) if different from the
maturity date for purposes of calculating
dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity;
(7) The coupon or yield; and
(8) The amortized cost value;
(J) Adopt procedures that require a
bank that administers a STIF to notify
the Asset Management Group, Credit &
Market Risk Division, Comptroller of the
Currency, 250 E St. SW., Washington,
DC 20219–0001 prior to or within one
business day thereafter of the following:
(1) Any difference exceeding $0.0025
between the net asset value and the
mark-to-market value of a STIF
participating interest as calculated using
the method set forth in paragraph
(b)(4)(iii)(G)(1) of this section;
(2) When a STIF has re-priced its net
asset value below $0.995 per
participating interest;
(3) Any withdrawal distribution-inkind of the STIF’s participating interests
or segregation of portfolio participants;
(4) Any delays or suspensions in
honoring STIF participating interest
withdrawal requests;
(5) Any decision to formally approve
the liquidation, segregation of assets or
portfolios, or some other liquidation of
the STIF; or
(6) In those situations when a bank,
its affiliate, or any other entity provides
a STIF financial support, including a
cash infusion, a credit extension, a
purchase of a defaulted or illiquid asset,
or any other form of financial support in
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules
order to maintain a stable net asset
value per participating interest;
(K) Adopt procedures that in the
event a STIF has re-priced its net asset
value below $0.995 per participating
interest, the bank administering the
STIF shall calculate, redeem, and sell
the STIF’s participating interests at a
price based on the mark-to-market net
asset value; and
(L) Adopt procedures that, in the
event a bank suspends or limits
withdrawals and initiates liquidation of
the STIF as a result of redemptions,
require the bank to:
(1) Determine that the extent of the
difference between the STIF’s amortized
cost per participating interest and its
mark-to-market net asset value per
participating interest may result in
material dilution of participating
interests or other unfair results to
participating accounts;
(2) Formally approve the liquidation
of the STIF; and
(3) Facilitate the fair and orderly
liquidation of the STIF to the benefit of
all STIF participants.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 2, 2012.
John Walsh,
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
[FR Doc. 2012–8467 Filed 4–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 721 and 799
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0520; FRL–9343–9]
RIN 2070–AJ66
Certain High Production Volume
Chemicals; Test Rule and Significant
New Use Rule; Fourth Group of
Chemicals; Notice of Public Meeting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; public meeting.
AGENCY:
EPA will hold a public
meeting on May 16, 2012, to give the
public an opportunity to comment on a
proposed test rule for 23 high
production volume (HPV) chemical
substances and a significant new use
rule (SNUR) for another 22 HPV
chemical substances under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). The test
rule would require manufacturers and
processors to develop screening-level
health, environmental, and fate data
based on the potential for substantial
exposures of workers and consumers to
the 23 HPV chemical substances, and
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Apr 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
the SNUR would require persons to file
a significant new use notice (SNUN)
with EPA prior to manufacturing,
importing, or processing any of the 22
HPV chemical substances for use in a
consumer product or for any use, or
combination of uses, that would be
reasonably likely to expose 1,000 or
more workers at a single-corporate
entity to the chemical substances. The
required notification would provide
EPA with the opportunity to evaluate
the intended use and, if necessary, to
prohibit or limit that activity before it
occurs. The opportunity to present oral
comment was offered in the proposed
rule and, in response to that offer, a
request to present oral comments was
received.
The meeting will be held on
Wednesday, May 16, 2012, from 1:30
p.m. to 5 p.m. Requests to participate in
the meeting must be received on or
before May 15, 2012.
To request accommodation of a
disability, please contact either
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATON CONTACT,
preferably at least 10 days prior to the
meeting, to give EPA as much time as
possible to process your request.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA East Rm. 1153, 1201 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington DC 20460–0001.
Requests to participate in the meeting,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0520,
may be submitted to either technical
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information contact: Robert
Jones or Paul Campanella, Chemical
Control Division (7405M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone numbers:
(202) 564–8161 and (202) 564–8091;
email addresses: jones.robert@epa.gov
and campanella.paul@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA–Hotline, ABVI–Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture (defined
by statute to include import) or process
any of the chemical substances that are
listed in 40 CFR 799.5090(j) or 40 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21065
721.10228(a) of the proposed rule’s
regulatory text published in the Federal
Register issue of October 21, 2011 (76
FR 65580) (FRL–8876–6). Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Manufacturers (defined by statute to
include importers) of one or more of the
subject chemical substances (NAICS
codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical
manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
• Processors of one or more of the
subject chemical substances (NAICS
codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical
manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
either technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
This action may also affect certain
entities through pre-existing import
certification and export notification
rules under TSCA. See Unit VI. of the
October 21, 2011 proposed rule for
export notification requirements.
B. How can I get copies of this document
and other related information?
EPA has established a docket for this
action under docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2010–0520. All documents
in the docket are listed in the docket
index available at https://
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in
the index, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT
Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm.
3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280. Docket visitors are required
to show photographic identification,
E:\FR\FM\09APP1.SGM
09APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 68 (Monday, April 9, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21057-21065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8467]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
12 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. OCC-2011-0023]
RIN 1557-AD37
Short-Term Investment Funds
AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury (OCC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The OCC is requesting comment on a proposal that would revise
the requirements imposed on banks pursuant to 12 CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B),
the short-term investment fund (STIF) rule (STIF Rule). The proposal
would add safeguards designed to address the risk of loss to a STIF's
principal, including measures governing the nature of a STIF's
investments, ongoing monitoring of its mark-to-market value and
forecasting of potential changes in its mark-to-market value under
adverse market conditions, greater transparency and regulatory
reporting about a STIF's holdings, and procedures to protect fiduciary
accounts from undue dilution of their participating interests in the
event that the STIF loses the ability to maintain a stable net asset
value (NAV).
DATES: Comments should be received on or before June 8, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Because paper mail in the Washington, DC area and at the OCC
is subject to delay, commenters are encouraged to submit comments by
the Federal eRulemaking Portal or email, if possible. Please use the
title ``Short-Term Investment Funds'' to facilitate the organization
and distribution of the comments. You may submit comments by any of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal--``regulations.gov'': Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Click ``Advanced Search''. Select
``Document Type'' of ``Proposed Rule'', and in ``By Keyword or ID''
box, enter Docket ID ``OCC-2011-0023'', and click ``Search''. If
proposed rules for more than one agency are listed, in the ``Agency''
column, locate the notice of proposed rulemaking for the OCC. Comments
can be filtered by Agency using the filtering tools on the left side of
the screen. In the ``Actions'' column, click on ``Submit a Comment'' or
``Open Docket Folder'' to submit or view public comments and to view
supporting and related materials for this rulemaking action.
Click on the ``Help'' tab on the Regulations.gov home page
to get information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for
submitting or viewing public comments, viewing other supporting and
related materials, and viewing the docket after the close of the
comment period.
Email: regs.comments@occ.treas.gov.
Mail: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E
Street SW., Mail Stop 2-3, Washington, DC 20219.
Fax: (202) 874-5274.
Hand Delivery/Courier: 250 E Street SW., Mail Stop 2-3,
Washington, DC 20219.
Instructions: You must include ``OCC'' as the agency name and
``Docket ID OCC-2011-0023'' in your comment. In general, OCC will enter
all comments received into the docket and publish them on the
Regulations.gov Web site without change, including any business or
personal information that you provide such as name and address
information, email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received,
including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the
public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not enclose any
information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider
confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to
this notice of proposed rulemaking by any of the following methods:
Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Click ``Advanced Search''. Select ``Document
Type'' of ``Public Submission'', and in ``By Keyword or ID'' box enter
Docket ID ``OCC-2011-0023'', and click ``Search''. If comments from
more than one agency are listed, the ``Agency'' column will indicate
which comments were received by the OCC. Comments can be filtered by
Agency using the filtering tools on the left side of the screen.
Viewing Comments Personally: You may personally inspect
and photocopy comments at the OCC, 250 E Street SW., Washington, DC.
For security reasons, the OCC requires that visitors make an
appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 874-
4700. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid
government-issued photo identification and to submit to security
screening in order to inspect and photocopy comments.
Docket: You may also view or request available background
documents and project summaries using the methods described above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OCC: Joel Miller, Group Leader, Asset
Management (202) 874-4493, David
[[Page 21058]]
Barfield, NBE, Market Risk (202) 874-1829, Patrick T. Tierney, Counsel,
Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division (202) 874-5090, or Adam
Trost, Senior Attorney, Securities and Corporate Practices Division
(202) 874-5210, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E Street
SW., Washington, DC 20219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Short-Term Investment Funds (STIFs)
A Collective Investment Fund (CIF) is a bank-managed fund that
holds pooled fiduciary assets that meet specific criteria established
by the OCC fiduciary activities regulation at 12 CFR 9.18. Each CIF is
established under a ``Plan'' that details the terms under which the
bank manages and administers the fund's assets. The bank acts as a
fiduciary for the CIF and holds legal title to the fund's assets.
Participants in a CIF are the beneficial owners of the fund's assets.
Each participant owns an undivided interest in the aggregate assets of
a CIF; a participant does not directly own any specific asset held by a
CIF.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 12 CFR 9.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CIFs are designed to enhance investment management capabilities by
combining assets from different accounts into a single fund with a
specific investment strategy. By pooling fiduciary assets, a bank may
lower the operational and administrative expenses associated with
investing fiduciary assets and enhance risk management and investment
performance for the participating accounts.
A fiduciary account's investment in a CIF is called a
``participating interest.'' Participating interests in a CIF are not
FDIC-insured and are not subject to potential claims by a bank's
creditors. In addition, a participating interest in a CIF cannot be
pledged or otherwise encumbered in favor of a third party.
The general rule for valuation of a CIF's assets specifies that a
CIF admitting a fiduciary account (that is, allowing the fiduciary
account, in effect, to purchase its proportionate interest in the
assets of the CIF) or withdrawing the fiduciary account (that is,
allowing the fiduciary account, in effect, to redeem the value of its
proportionate interest in the CIF) may only do so on the basis of a
valuation of the CIF's assets, as of the admission or withdrawal date,
based on the mark-to-market value of the CIF's assets.\2\ This general
valuation rule is designed to protect all fiduciary accounts
participating in the CIF from the risk that other accounts will be
admitted or withdrawn at valuations that dilute the value of existing
participating interests in the CIF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 12 CFR 9.18(b)(5)(i). If the bank cannot readily ascertain
market value as of the valuation date, the bank generally must use a
fair value for the asset, determined in good faith. 12 CFR
9.18(b)(4)(ii)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A STIF is a type of CIF that permits a bank to value the STIF's
assets on an amortized cost basis, rather than at mark-to-market value,
for purposes of admissions and withdrawals. This is an exception to the
general rule of market valuation. In order to qualify for this
exception, a STIF's Plan must require the bank to: (1) Maintain a
dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 90 days or less; (2)
accrue on a straight-line or amortized basis the difference between the
cost and anticipated principal receipt on maturity; and (3) hold the
fund's assets until maturity under usual circumstances.\3\ These
conditions are designed to protect fiduciary accounts from the risk of
dilution of the value of their participating interests. In particular,
by limiting the STIF's investments to shorter-term assets and generally
requiring those assets to be held to maturity, realized differences
between the amortized cost and mark-to-market value of the assets will
be rare, absent atypical market conditions or an impaired asset. As
further discussed in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section, the
amortized cost approach is beneficial for many fiduciary accounts,
because some participants require that a certain percentage of the
assets held in these accounts be in a liquid, low risk investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 12 CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC's STIF Rule governs STIFs managed by national banks. In
addition, regulations adopted by the Office of Thrift Supervision, now
recodified as OCC rules pursuant to Title III of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,\4\ have long required
federal savings associations (FSAs) to comply with the requirements of
the OCC's STIF Rule.\5\ Thus, the proposed revisions to the national
bank STIFs Rule would apply to a federal savings association that
establishes and administers a STIF fund. As of December 31, 2011, there
was approximately $112 billion invested in STIFs administered by
national banks and there were no STIFs administered by FSAs
reported.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 76 FR 48950 (2011).
\5\ 12 CFR 150.260.
\6\ Fifteen national banks collectively reported STIF
investments that they administer. Based on thrift financial report
data, federal savings associations administered no STIFs as of
December 31, 2011. Other types of institutions managing certain
types of CIFs may also observe the requirements of the OCC's STIF
Rule. For example, New York state law provides that all investments
in short-term investment common trust funds may be valued at cost,
if the plan of operation requires that: (i) The type or category of
investments of the fund shall comply with the rules and regulations
of the Comptroller of the Currency pertaining to short-term
investment funds and (ii) in computing income, the difference
between cost of investment and anticipated receipt on maturity of
investment shall be accrued on a straight-line basis. See N.Y. Comp.
Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 3, Sec. 22.23 (2010). Additionally, in order
to retain their tax-exempt status, common trust funds must operate
in compliance with Sec. 9.18 as well as the federal tax laws. See
26 U.S.C. 584. The OCC does not have access to comprehensive data
quantifying investments held by STIF funds administered by other
types of institutions pursuant to legal requirements incorporating
the OCC's STIF Rule. Although the direct scope of the STIF Rule
provisions in section 9.18 of the OCC's regulations is national
banks and Federal branches and agencies of foreign banks acting in a
fiduciary capacity (12 CFR 9.1(c)), the nomenclature of the STIF
Rule refers simply to ``banks.'' For the sake of convenience, the
OCC proposes to continue this approach and also applies the same
convention to the discussion of the STIF Rule in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to revise the requirements of the STIF Rule.
While fiduciary accounts participating in a STIF have an interest in
the fund maintaining a stable net asset value (NAV), ultimately the
participating interests remain subject to the risk of loss to a STIF's
principal. The OCC is proposing additional safeguards designed to
address this risk in several ways. These include measures governing the
nature of a STIF's investments, ongoing monitoring of the STIF's mark-
to-market value and assessment of potential changes in its mark-to-
market value under adverse market conditions, greater transparency and
regulatory reporting about the STIF's holdings, and procedures to
protect fiduciary accounts from undue dilution of their participating
interests in the event that the STIF loses the ability to maintain a
stable NAV.
B. Comparison to Other Products That Seek To Maintain a Stable NAV
There are other types of funds that seek to maintain a stable NAV.
By far, the most significant of these from a financial market presence
standpoint are ``money market mutual funds'' (MMMFs). These funds are
organized as open-ended management investment companies and are
regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'')
pursuant to the Investment Company Act of 1940, particularly pursuant
to the provisions of SEC Rule 2a-7 thereunder (``Rule 2a-7'').\7\
[[Page 21059]]
MMMFs seek to maintain a stable share price, typically $1.00 a share.
In this regard, they are similar to STIFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 80a; 17 CFR 270.2a-7. Because STIFs are a form of
collective investment fund, they are generally exempt from the SEC's
rules under the Investment Company Act. STIFs used exclusively for
(1) the collective investment of money by a bank in its fiduciary
capacity as trustee, executor, administrator, or guardian and (2)
the collective investment of assets of certain employee benefit
plans are exempt from the Investment Company Act under 15 U.S.C.
80a-3(c)(3) and (c)(11), respectively. MMMFs are not subject to
comparable restrictions as to the type of participant who may invest
in the fund or the purpose of such investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, there are a number of important differences between MMMFs
and STIFs; most significantly, MMMFs are open to retail investors,
whereas, STIFs only are available to authorized fiduciary accounts.
MMMFs may be offered to the investing public and have become a popular
product with retail investors, corporate money managers, and
institutional investors seeking returns equivalent to current short-
term interest rates in exchange for high liquidity and the prospect of
protection against the loss of principal. In contrast to the
approximately $112 billion currently held in STIFs administered by
national banks, MMMFs, as of December 2011, held approximately $2.7
trillion dollars of investor assets.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See https://www.ici.org/info/mm_data_2011.xls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the recent period of financial market stress, beginning in
2007 and stretching into 2009, certain types of short-term debt
securities frequently held by MMMFs experienced unusually high
volatility. Concerns by investors that their MMMFs could not maintain a
stable NAV eventually led to investor redemptions out of those funds,
and some funds needed to liquidate sizeable portions of their
securities to meet investor redemption requests. This flood of
redemption requests depressed market prices for short-term debt
instruments, exacerbating the problem for all types of stable NAV
funds.
The President's Working Group on Financial Markets (``PWG''),\9\
after reviewing the market turmoil during the period 2007 through 2009,
recommended that the SEC strengthen the regulation and monitoring of
MMMFs and also recommended that bank regulators consider strengthening
the regulation and monitoring of other types of products that seek to
maintain a stable NAV. The October 2010 report from the PWG states:
``[b]anking and state insurance regulators might consider additional
restrictions to mitigate systemic risk for bank common and collective
funds and other investment pools that seek a stable NAV but that are
exempt from registration under sections 3(c)(3) and 3(c)(11) of the
ICA.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The PWG is comprised of the Secretary of the Treasury, the
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,
the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the
Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
\10\ Report of the President's Working Group on Financial
Markets, Money Market Fund Reform Options, p. 35 (Oct. 2010), see
https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Documents/10.21%20PWG%20Report%20Final.pdf. See also Financial Stability
Oversight Council 2011 Annual Report, p. 13 (July 2011) available at
https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/FSOCAR2011.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the market turmoil from 2007 through 2009 and the work
done by the PWG, among others, the SEC adopted amendments to Rule 2a-7
to strengthen the resilience of MMMFs.\11\ The OCC's proposed changes
to the STIF Rule are informed by the SEC's revisions to Rule 2a-7, but
differ in certain respects in light of the differences between the
money market mutual fund as an investment product and the STIF, e.g., a
bank's fiduciary responsibility to a STIF and requirements limiting
STIF participation to eligible accounts under the OCC's fiduciary
account regulation at 12 CFR part 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Money Market Fund Reform, 75 FR 10060 (Mar. 4, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of Proposed Changes to the STIF Rule
The proposed changes to the STIF Rule would enhance protections
provided to STIF participants and reduce risks to banks that administer
STIFs. The proposed changes add new requirements or amend existing
requirements that a CIF must meet to be considered a STIF and value
assets on an amortized cost basis. The OCC believes many banks that
offer STIFs are already engaged in the risk mitigation efforts set
forth in this proposed rule.
The proposed changes do not affect the obligation that STIFs meet
the CIF requirements described in 12 CFR part 9, which allows national
banks to maintain and invest fiduciary assets, consistent with
applicable law. Applicable law is defined as the law of a state or
other jurisdiction governing a national bank's fiduciary relationships,
any applicable Federal law governing those relationships (e.g., ERISA,
federal tax, and securities laws), the terms of the instrument
governing a fiduciary relationship, or any court order pertaining to
the relationship.\12\ Also, national banks managing CIFs are required
to adopt and follow written policies and procedures that are adequate
to maintain their fiduciary activities in compliance with applicable
law.\13\ Additionally, the STIF Rule requires a STIF's bank manager, at
least once during each calendar year, to conduct a review of all assets
of each fiduciary account for which the bank has investment discretion
to evaluate whether they are appropriate, individually and
collectively, for the account.\14\ These examples of CIF requirements
applicable to STIFs are not exclusive. Other requirements apply, and a
bank must comply will all applicable requirements of 12 CFR part 9 when
acting as a fiduciary for a CIF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 12 CFR 9.2(b).
\13\ 12 CFR 9.5.
\14\ 12 CFR 9.6(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Banks administering a STIF would need to revise the written plan
required by 12 CFR 9.18(b)(1) if this proposal is adopted as a final
rule.
A. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(A)
STIFs typically maintain stable NAVs in order to meet the
expectations of the fund's bank managers and participating fiduciary
accounts.\15\ To the extent a bank fiduciary offers a STIF with a fund
objective of maintaining a stable NAV, participating accounts and the
OCC expect those STIFs to maintain a stable NAV using amortized cost.
The proposal would require a Plan to have as a primary objective that
the STIF operate with a stable NAV of $1.00 per participating
interest.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ For example, many STIF plan participants (e.g., pensions)
have policies, procedures, and operational systems that presume a
stable NAV.
\16\ The OCC would expect banks to normalize and treat stable
NAVs operating at a multiple of a $1.00 (e.g., $10 NAV) or fraction
of $1.00 (e.g., $0.5) as operating with a NAV of $1.00 per
participating interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(B)
The current STIF Rule requires the bank managing the STIF \17\ to
maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 90 days or
less. The current STIF Rule restricts the weighted average maturity of
the STIF's portfolio in order to limit the exposure of participating
fiduciary accounts to certain risks, including interest rate risk. The
proposed rule would change the maturity limits to further reduce such
risks. First, the proposal would reduce the maximum weighted average
portfolio maturity permitted by the rule from 90 days or less to 60
days or less. Second, it would establish a new
[[Page 21060]]
maturity test that would limit the portion of a STIF's portfolio that
could be held in longer term variable- or floating-rate securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The current STIF Rule incorporates this and other measures
through requirements that the Plan include provisions requiring the
bank administering the STIF to effectuate the measures with respect
to the STIF. The revisions proposed herein incorporate additional
measures through requirements that the Plan include provisions
requiring the STIF to observe certain restrictions and adopt certain
procedures. In either case, it is effectively the bank administering
the STIF that generally performs these measures, and for convenience
purposes, the Supplementary Information section herein will describe
it that way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Dollar-Weighted Average Portfolio Maturity
The proposal would amend the ``dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity'' \18\ requirement of the STIF Rule to 60 days or less.
Currently, banks managing STIFs must maintain a dollar-weighted average
portfolio maturity of 90 days or less.\19\ Securities that have shorter
periods remaining until maturity generally exhibit a lower level of
price volatility in response to interest rate and credit spread
fluctuations and, thus, provide a greater assurance that the STIF will
continue to maintain a stable value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Generally, ``dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity''
means the average time it takes for securities in a portfolio to
mature, weighted in proportion to the dollar amount that is invested
in the portfolio. Dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity
measures the price sensitivity of fixed-income portfolios to
interest rate changes.
\19\ 12 CFR 9.18(b)(4)(ii)(B)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having a portfolio weighted towards securities with longer
maturities poses greater risks to participating accounts in a STIF. For
example, a longer dollar-weighted average maturity period increases a
STIF's exposure to interest rate risk. Additionally, longer maturity
periods amplify the effect of widening credit spreads on a STIF.
Finally, a STIF holding securities with longer maturity periods
generally is exposed to greater liquidity risk because: (1) Fewer
securities mature and return principal on a daily or weekly basis to be
available for possible fiduciary account withdrawals, and (2) the fund
may experience greater difficulty in liquidating these securities in a
short period of time at a reasonable price.
STIFs with a shorter portfolio maturity period would be better able
to withstand increases in interest rates and credit spreads without
material deviation from amortized cost. Furthermore, in the event
distress in the short-term instrument market triggers increasing rates
of withdrawals from STIFs, the STIFs would be better positioned to
withstand such withdrawals as a greater portion of their portfolios
mature and return principal on a daily or weekly basis and would have
greater ability to liquidate a portion of their portfolio at a
reasonable price.
Question 1: What are the estimates of the effects, if any, on STIF
portfolios and participating accounts from reducing the maximum dollar-
weighted average portfolio maturity permitted by the rule from 90 to 60
days? The OCC seeks commenters' specific information about the risk
sensitivities associated with current STIF portfolios, including the
current and month-end dollar-weighted average maturity of these funds
since 2008.
2. Weighted Average Portfolio Life Maturity
The proposal would add a new maturity requirement for STIFs, which
would limit the dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity to 120
days or less. The dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity would
be measured without regard to a security's interest rate reset dates
and, thus, would limit the extent to which a STIF could invest in
longer term securities that may expose it to increased liquidity and
credit risk.
To determine compliance with the dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity requirement of the current STIF Rule, banks generally treat
the maturity of a portfolio security as the period remaining until the
date on which the principal must unconditionally be repaid according to
its terms (its final ``legal'' maturity) or, in the case of a security
called for redemption, the date on which the redemption payment must be
made. However, banks treat certain types of securities, such as certain
floating or adjustable-rate securities, as having shorter maturities
equal to the time remaining to the next interest rate reset date.\20\
As a result, STIFs may treat longer term adjustable-rate securities as
short-term securities. While adjustable-rate securities held in these
funds do tend to protect a STIF against changes in interest rates, they
do not fully protect against credit and liquidity risk to the
portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See infra note 22 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The traditional dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity
measurement in the current STIF Rule does not require a STIF to limit
these risks. For this reason, the proposal would impose a new dollar-
weighted average portfolio life maturity limitation on the structure of
a STIF to capture credit and liquidity risk not encompassed by the
dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity restriction. The proposal
would require that STIFs maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio
life maturity of 120 days or less, which would provide a reasonable
balance between strengthening the resilience of STIFs to credit and
liquidity risk while not unduly restricting the bank's ability to
invest the STIF's fiduciary assets in a diversified portfolio of short-
term, high quality debt securities.
The impact of a limit on the dollar-weighted average life of a
portfolio would be on those STIFs that hold certain longer term
floating-rate securities. For example, under the current STIF Rule, a
STIF with a portfolio comprising 50 percent of overnight repurchase
agreements and 50 percent of two-year government agency floating-rate
obligations that reset daily based on the federal funds rate would have
a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of one day. In contrast,
by applying a measurement that does not recognize resets, the portfolio
would have a dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity of 365.5
days (i.e., half of the portfolio has a one day maturity and half has a
two-year maturity), which would be considerably longer than the 120-day
limit of the proposal. Thus, the dollar-weighted average portfolio life
maturity limitation would provide an extra layer of protection for
qualified account participants against credit and liquidity risk,
particularly in volatile markets.
Question 2: What are the effects, if any, on STIF portfolios and
participating accounts of limiting the portion of a fund's portfolio
that may be held in longer term variable- or floating-rate securities?
The OCC seeks commenters' specific information about the risk
sensitivities associated with the current dollar-weighted average life
maturity of these funds.
3. Determination of Maturity Limits
In determining the dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of
STIFs under the current rule, national banks generally apply the same
methodology as required by the SEC for MMMFs pursuant to Rule 2a-7.
Dollar-weighted average maturity under Rule 2a-7 is calculated, as a
general rule, by treating each security's maturity as the period
remaining until the date on which, in accordance with the terms of the
security, the principal amount must be unconditionally paid or, in the
case of a security called for redemption, the date on which the
redemption payment must be made. Rule 2a-7 also provides eight
exceptions to this general rule. For example, for certain types of
variable-rate securities, the date of maturity may be the earlier of
the date of the next interest rate reset or the period remaining until
the principal can be recovered through demand. For repurchase
agreements, the maturity is the date on which the repurchase is
scheduled to occur, unless the repo is subject to demand for
repurchase, in which case the maturity is the notice
[[Page 21061]]
period applicable to demand.\21\ The proposal would include this
approach in the rule text for dollar-weighted average portfolio
maturity and dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity \22\ for
ease of administration and implementation of the proposed rule's
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 17 CFR 270.2a-7(d)(1)-(8).
\22\ The SEC's Rule 2a-7 adopting release describes the new
weighted average life maturity calculation as being based on the
same methodology as the weighted average maturity determination, but
made without reference to the set of maturity exceptions the rule
permits for certain interest rate readjustments for specified types
of assets under the rule. 17 CFR 270.2a-7(c)(2)(iii). The OCC is
proposing the same maturity calculation, referring to it as the
dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity. The calculation
bases a security's maturity on its stated final maturity date or,
when relevant, the date of the next demand feature when the fund may
receive payment of principal and interest (such as a put feature).
See 75 FR 10072 (Mar. 4, 2010) at footnote 154 and accompanying
text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 3: Is this approach for the determination of maturity
limits appropriate, and if not, what alternative approach should be
used?
C. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(E)
To ensure that banks managing STIFs include practices designed to
limit the amount of credit and liquidity risk to which participating
accounts in STIFs are exposed, the proposal would require adoption of
portfolio and issuer qualitative standards and concentration
restrictions. The OCC would expect bank fiduciaries to identify,
monitor, and manage issuer and lower quality investment concentrations
and implement procedures to perform appropriate due diligence on all
concentration exposures as part of the bank's risk management policies
and procedures for each STIF. In addition to standards imposed by
applicable law, the portfolio and issuer qualitative standards and
concentration restrictions should take into consideration market events
and deterioration in an issuer's financial condition.
Question 4: Are defined portfolio concentration limits necessary in
order for STIF managers and STIF participants to ensure that a fund has
reduced its credit exposure to a specific issuer? Commenters who assert
that portfolio concentration limits are necessary should provide
details regarding the percent limits for specific issuers or classes of
issuers.
D. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(F)
Many banks process STIF withdrawal requests within a short time
frame, often on the same day that the withdrawal request is received,
which necessitates sufficient liquidity to meet such requests. By
holding illiquid securities, a STIF exposes itself to the risk that it
will be unable to satisfy withdrawal requests promptly without selling
illiquid securities at a loss that, in turn, could impair its ability
to maintain a stable NAV. Moreover, illiquid securities are generally
subject to greater price volatility, exposing the STIF to greater risk
that its mark-to-market value will deviate from its amortized cost
value. To address this concern, the proposal would require adoption of
standards that include provisions to address contingency funding needs.
E. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(G)
The proposal would require a bank managing a STIF to adopt shadow
pricing procedures.\23\ These procedures require the bank to calculate
the extent of the difference, if any, between the mark-to-market NAV
per participating interest using available market quotations (or an
appropriate substitute that reflects current market conditions) from
the STIF's amortized cost value per participating interest. In the
event the difference exceeds $0.005 per participating interest,\24\ the
bank must take action to reduce dilution of participating interests or
other unfair results to participating accounts in the STIF, such as
ceasing fiduciary account withdrawals. The shadow pricing procedures
must occur at least on a calendar week basis and more frequently as
determined by the bank when market conditions warrant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Shadow pricing is the process of maintaining two sets of
valuation records--one that reflects the value of a fund's assets at
amortized cost and the other that reflects the market value of the
fund's assets.
\24\ The proposal contemplates a stable NAV of $1.00. If a STIF
has a stable NAV that is different than $1.00 it must adjust the
reference value accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 5: Does the proposal differ from banks' current pricing
practices? If so, how? Question 6: Is the proposed weekly shadow
pricing frequency appropriate? Question 7: Would another reporting
frequency be more appropriate and, if so, what frequency and why?
F. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(H)
The proposal would require a bank managing a STIF to adopt
procedures for stress testing the fund's ability to maintain a stable
NAV for participating interests. The proposal would require the stress
tests be conducted at such intervals as an independent risk manager or
a committee responsible for the STIF's oversight determines to be
appropriate and reasonable in light of current market conditions, but
in no case shall the interval be longer than a calendar month-end
basis. The independent risk manager or committee members must be
independent from the STIF's investment management. The stress testing
would be based upon hypothetical events (specified by the bank) that
include, but are not limited to, a change in short-term interest rates;
an increase in participating account withdrawals; a downgrade of or
default on portfolio securities; and the widening or narrowing of
spreads between yields on an appropriate benchmark the fund has
selected for overnight interest rates and commercial paper and other
types of securities held by the fund.
The proposal provides a bank with flexibility to specify the
scenarios or assumptions on which the stress tests are based, as
appropriate to the risk exposures of each STIF. Banks managing STIFs
should, for example, consider procedures that require the fund to test
for the concurrence of multiple hypothetical events, e.g., where there
is a simultaneous increase in interest rates and substantial
withdrawals.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Where stress testing models are relied upon, a bank should
validate the models consistent with the Supervisory Guidance on
Model Risk Management issued by the OCC and the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System. See OCC Bulletin 2011-12 (Apr. 4,
2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal also would require a stress test report be provided to
the independent risk manager or the committee responsible for the
STIF's oversight. The report would include: (1) The date(s) on which
the testing was performed; (2) the magnitude of each hypothetical event
that would cause the difference between the STIF's mark-to-market NAV
calculated using available market quotations (or appropriate
substitutes which reflect current market conditions) and its NAV per
participating interest calculated using amortized cost to exceed
$0.005; and (3) an assessment by the bank of the STIF's ability to
withstand the events (and concurrent occurrences of those events) that
are reasonably likely to occur within the following year.
In addition, the proposal would require that adverse stress testing
results are reported to the bank's senior risk management that is
independent from the STIF's investment management.
The proposed stress testing procedures would provide banks with a
better understanding of the risks to which STIFs are exposed and would
give banks additional information that can be used for managing those
risks.
Question 8: Is the proposed requirement that a STIF adopt
procedures for stress testing the fund's
[[Page 21062]]
ability to maintain a stable NAV for participating interests
appropriate? Why so or why not? Question 9: In particular, is the
proposed monthly stress testing frequency appropriate? Commenters who
assert that another frequency would be more appropriate should identify
the alternative and provide a supporting rationale.
G. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(I)
The proposal would require banks managing STIFs to disclose
information about fund level portfolio holdings to STIF participants
and to the OCC within five business days after each calendar month-end.
Specifically, the bank would be required to disclose the STIF's total
assets under management (securities and other assets including cash,
minus liabilities); the fund's mark-to-market and amortized cost NAVs,
both with and without capital support agreements; the dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity; and dollar-weighted average portfolio life
maturity as of the last business day of the prior calendar month. The
current STIF Rule does not contain a similar disclosure requirement.
Also, for each security held by the STIF, as of the last business
day of the prior calendar month, the bank would be required to disclose
to STIF participants and to the OCC within five business days after
each calendar month-end at a security level: (1) The name of the
issuer; (2) the category of investment; (3) the Committee on Uniform
Securities Identification Procedures (CUSIP) number or other standard
identifier; (4) the principal amount; (5) the maturity date for
purposes of calculating dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity; (6)
the final legal maturity date (taking into account any maturity date
extensions that may be effected at the option of the issuer) if
different from the maturity date for purposes of calculating dollar-
weighted average portfolio maturity; (7) the coupon or yield; and (8)
the amortized cost value.
Question 10: What is the estimate of the burden, if any, associated
with the proposed security level disclosures to STIF participants,
specifically, whether details about every security in the fund should
be disclosed? Question 11: What disclosure formats could accomplish the
disclosure objective efficiently? Question 12: What would be the
impacts on tax-qualified STIF participants of monthly, detailed
security-level disclosures from the STIF, including how STIF
participants might use the disclosed information?
H. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(J)
The proposal would require a bank that manages a STIF to notify the
OCC prior to or within one business day after certain events. Those
events are: (1) Any difference exceeding $0.0025 between the NAV and
the mark-to-market value of a STIF participating interest based on
current market factors; (2) when a STIF has re-priced its NAV below
$0.995 per participating interest; (3) any withdrawal distribution-in-
kind of the STIF's participating interests or segregation of portfolio
participants; (4) any delays or suspensions in honoring STIF
participating interest withdrawal requests; (5) any decision to
formally approve the liquidation, segregation of assets or portfolios,
or some other liquidation of the STIF; and (6) when a national bank,
its affiliate, or any other entity provides a STIF financial support,
including a cash infusion, a credit extension, a purchase of a
defaulted or illiquid asset, or any other form of financial support in
order to maintain a stable NAV per participating interest.\26\ This
proposed requirement to notify the OCC prior to or within one business
day after these limited specific events would permit the OCC to more
effectively supervise STIFs that are experiencing liquidity or
valuation stress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Interagency Policy on Banks/Thrifts Providing Financial
Support to Funds Advised by the Banking Organization or its
Affiliates, OCC Bulletin 2004-2 Attachment (Jan. 5, 2004)
(instructing banks that to avoid engaging in unsafe and unsound
banking practices, banks should adopt appropriate policies and
procedures governing routine or emergency transactions with bank
advised investment funds).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To comply with this proposed requirement, a bank would have to
calculate the mark-to-market value of a STIF participating interest on
a daily basis.
Question 13: Is daily calculation of mark-to-market value of a STIF
participating interest a feasible or appropriate frequency to permit
effective monitoring and risk management by, and supervision of, STIFs
experiencing liquidity or valuation stress?
I. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(K)
The proposal would require banks managing a STIF to adopt
procedures that in the event a STIF has re-priced its NAV below $0.995
per participating interest, the bank managing the STIF shall calculate,
redeem, and sell the STIF's participating interests at a price based on
the mark-to-market NAV. Currently, the rule creates an incentive for
withdrawal of participating interests if the mark-to-market NAV falls
below the stable NAV because the earlier withdrawals are more likely to
receive the full stable NAV payment. The proposal removes this
incentive, as once the NAV is priced below $0.995, all withdrawals of
participating interests will receive the mark-to-market NAV instead of
the stable NAV.
J. Section 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(L)
The proposal would require a bank managing a STIF to adopt
procedures for suspending redemptions and initiating liquidation of a
STIF as a result of redemptions. The intent of the proposal is to
reduce the vulnerability of participating accounts to the harmful
effects of extraordinary levels of withdrawals, which can be
accomplished to some degree by suspending withdrawals. These
suspensions only would be permitted in limited circumstances when, as a
result of redemption, the bank has: (1) Determined that the extent of
the difference between the STIF's amortized cost per participating
interest and its current mark-to-market NAV per participating interest
may result in material dilution of participating interests or other
unfair results to participating accounts; (2) formally approved the
liquidation of the STIF; and (3) facilitated the fair and orderly
liquidation of the STIF to the benefit of all STIF participants.
The OCC understands that suspending withdrawals may impose
hardships on fiduciary accounts for which the ability to redeem
participations is an important consideration. Accordingly, the proposed
requirement is limited to permitting suspension in extraordinary
circumstances when there is significant risk of extraordinary
withdrawal activity to the detriment of other participating accounts.
III. General Request for Comments
In addition to the specific requests for comment outlined in this
Supplementary Information section, the OCC is interested in receiving
comments on all aspects of this proposed rule.
IV. Community Bank Comment Request
The OCC also invites comments on the impact of this proposal on
community banks. The OCC recognizes that community banks operate with
more limited resources than larger institutions and may present a
different risk profile. Question 14: How would the proposal impact
community banks' current resources and available personnel with the
requisite expertise? Question 15: How could the goals of the proposal
be achieved for community banks through an alternative approach?
[[Page 21063]]
V. Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language
Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Pub. L. 106-102, sec.
722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999), requires the OCC to use
plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January
1, 2000. The OCC invites your comments on how to make this proposal
easier to understand. For example:
Question 16: Have we organized the material to suit your
needs? If not, how could this material be better organized?
Question 17: Are the requirements in the proposed
regulation clearly stated? If not, how could the regulation be more
clearly stated?
Question 18: Does the proposed regulation contain language
or jargon that is not clear? If so, which language requires
clarification?
Question 19: Would a different format (grouping and order
of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the regulation easier
to understand? If so, what changes to the format would make the
regulation easier to understand?
Question 20: What else could we do to make the regulation
easier to understand?
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
Request for Comment on Proposed Information Collection
In accordance with section 3512 of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), the OCC may not conduct or
sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, an information
collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) control number. The information collection
requirements contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking have been
submitted to OMB for review and approval under section 3506 of the PRA
and Sec. 1320.11 of OMB's implementing regulations (5 CFR part 1320)
as an amendment to the OCC's existing collection for Fiduciary
Activities (OMB Control No. 1557-0140). The information collection
requirements are found in Sec. Sec. 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(E)-(L).
Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the OCC's functions, including whether the
information has practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the information
collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of information collection on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments should
be addressed to: Communications Division, Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency, Public Information Room, Mailstop 2-3, Attention: 1557-
0140, 250 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20219. In addition, comments may
be sent by fax to 202-874-5274, or by electronic mail to
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov. You may personally inspect and photocopy
comments at the OCC, 250 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20219. For
security reasons, the OCC requires that visitors make an appointment to
inspect comments. You may do so by calling 202-874-4700. Upon arrival,
visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo
identification and submit to security screening in order to inspect and
photocopy comments.
Additionally, please send a copy of your comments by mail to: OCC
Desk Officer, 1557-140, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., 10235, Washington, DC 20503, or by fax to (202)
395-6974.
Proposed Information Collection
Title of Information Collection: Fiduciary Activities.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit.
Respondents: National banks and federal branches and agencies of
foreign banks.
OMB Control No.: 1557-0140.
Abstract: The rule would allow an institution to value a STIF's
assets on a cost basis, rather than mark-to-market value for admissions
and withdrawals if the written plan requires the STIF to adopt certain
procedures and standards. These procedures and standards include:
Portfolio and issuer qualitative standards and restrictions; liquidity
standards; shadow pricing procedures; procedures for stress testing the
ability to maintain a stable NAV and the testing itself; procedures to
make certain disclosures for each security held and issuance of the
disclosures; procedures to require notification to OCC regarding
certain events; procedures regarding re-pricing events; and procedures
for suspending redemptions and initiating liquidation of a STIF.
Estimated Burden for the Amendment to the Collection:
Estimated Number of Respondents: 15 respondents administering 34
funds.
Estimated Burden per Fund: 846 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 28,764 hours.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 605(b) (RFA), the regulatory flexibility analysis otherwise
required under section 603 of the RFA is not required if the agency
certifies that the proposed rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
(defined for purposes of the RFA to include banks and federal branches
and agencies with assets less than or equal to $175 million and trust
companies with assets less than or equal to $ 7 million) and publishes
its certification and a short, explanatory statement in the Federal
Register along with its proposed rule.
The Proposed Rule would have no impact on any small national banks
or federal branches and agencies or trust companies, as defined by the
RFA. No small national banks or federal branches and agencies report
management of STIFs on their required regulatory reports as of December
31, 2011. Therefore, the OCC certifies that the Proposed Rule would
not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
C. OCC Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Determination
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1532) requires the OCC to prepare a budgetary impact statement before
promulgating a rule that includes a federal mandate that may result in
the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one
year (adjusted annually for inflation). The OCC has determined that
this proposed rule will not result in expenditures by State, local, and
tribal governments, or the private sector, of $100 million or more in
any one year. Accordingly, the OCC has not prepared a budgetary impact
statement.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 9
Estates, Investments, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Trusts and trustees.
[[Page 21064]]
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter I of title 12 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 9--FIDUCIARY ACTIVITIES OF NATIONAL BANKS
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh), 92a, and 93a; 12 U.S.C. 78q,
78q-1, and 78w.
2. Section 9.18 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4)(ii) and by
adding paragraph (b)(4)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 9.18 Collective investment funds.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) General Method of Valuation. Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(4)(iii) of this section, a bank shall value each fund asset at
mark-to-market value as of the date set for valuation, unless the bank
cannot readily ascertain mark-to-market value, in which case the bank
shall use a fair value determined in good faith.
(iii) Short-term investment funds (STIFs) Method of Valuation. A
bank may value a STIF's assets on a cost basis, rather than mark-to-
market value as provided in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section, for
purposes of admissions and withdrawals, if the Plan includes
appropriate provisions, consistent with this part, requiring the STIF
to:
(A) Operate with a stable net asset value of $1.00 per
participating interest as a primary fund objective;
(B) Maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 60
days or less and a dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity of
120 days or less as determined in the same manner as is required by the
Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 2a-7 for money
market mutual funds (17 CFR 270.2a-7);
(C) Accrue on a straight-line or amortized basis the difference
between the cost and anticipated principal receipt on maturity;
(D) Hold the STIF's assets until maturity under usual
circumstances;
(E) Adopt portfolio and issuer qualitative standards and
concentration restrictions;
(F) Adopt liquidity standards that include provisions to address
contingency funding needs;
(G) Adopt shadow pricing procedures that:
(1) Require the bank to calculate the extent of difference, if any,
of the mark-to-market net asset value per participating interest using
available market quotations (or an appropriate substitute that reflects
current market conditions) from the STIF's amortized cost price per
participating interest, at least on a calendar week basis and more
frequently as determined by the bank when market conditions warrant;
and
(2) Require the bank, in the event the difference calculated
pursuant to this subparagraph exceeds $0.005 per participating
interest, to take action to reduce dilution of participating interests
or other unfair results to participating accounts in the STIF;
(H) Adopt procedures for stress testing the STIF's ability to
maintain a stable net asset value per participating interest that shall
provide for:
(1) The periodic stress testing, at least on a calendar month basis
and at such intervals as an independent risk manager or a committee
responsible for the STIF's oversight that consists of members
independent from the STIF's investment management determines
appropriate and reasonable in light of current market conditions;
(2) Stress testing based upon hypothetical events that include, but
are not limited to, a change in short-term interest rates, an increase
in participant account withdrawals, a downgrade of or default on
portfolio securities, and the widening or narrowing of spreads between
yields on an appropriate benchmark the STIF has selected for overnight
interest rates and commercial paper and other types of securities held
by the STIF;
(3) A stress testing report on the results of such testing to be
provided to the independent risk manager or the committee responsible
for the STIF's oversight that consists of members independent from the
STIF's investment management that shall include: the date(s) on which
the testing was performed; the magnitude of each hypothetical event
that would cause the difference between the STIF's mark-to-market net
asset value calculated using available market quotations (or
appropriate substitutes which reflect current market conditions) and
its net asset value per participating interest calculated using
amortized cost to exceed $0.005; and an assessment by the bank of the
STIF's ability to withstand the events (and concurrent occurrences of
those events) that are reasonably likely to occur within the following
year; and
(4) Reporting adverse stress testing results to the bank's senior
risk management that is independent from the STIF's investment
management.
(I) Adopt procedures that require a bank to disclose to STIF
participants and to the OCC's Asset Management Group, Credit & Market
Risk Division, Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E St. SW., Washington,
DC 20219-0001, within five business days after each calendar month-end,
the fund's total assets under management (securities and other assets
including cash, minus liabilities); the fund's mark-to-market and
amortized cost net asset values both with and without capital support
agreements; the dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity; the dollar-
weighted average portfolio life maturity of the STIF as of the last
business day of the prior calendar month; and for each security held by
the STIF as of the last business day of the prior calendar month:
(1) The name of the issuer;
(2) The category of investment;
(3) The Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures
(CUSIP) number or other standard identifier;
(4) The principal amount;
(5) The maturity date for purposes of calculating dollar-weighted
average portfolio maturity;
(6) The final legal maturity date (taking into account any maturity
date extensions that may be effected at the option of the issuer) if
different from the maturity date for purposes of calculating dollar-
weighted average portfolio maturity;
(7) The coupon or yield; and
(8) The amortized cost value;
(J) Adopt procedures that require a bank that administers a STIF to
notify the Asset Management Group, Credit & Market Risk Division,
Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E St. SW., Washington, DC 20219-0001
prior to or within one business day thereafter of the following:
(1) Any difference exceeding $0.0025 between the net asset value
and the mark-to-market value of a STIF participating interest as
calculated using the method set forth in paragraph (b)(4)(iii)(G)(1) of
this section;
(2) When a STIF has re-priced its net asset value below $0.995 per
participating interest;
(3) Any withdrawal distribution-in-kind of the STIF's participating
interests or segregation of portfolio participants;
(4) Any delays or suspensions in honoring STIF participating
interest withdrawal requests;
(5) Any decision to formally approve the liquidation, segregation
of assets or portfolios, or some other liquidation of the STIF; or
(6) In those situations when a bank, its affiliate, or any other
entity provides a STIF financial support, including a cash infusion, a
credit extension, a purchase of a defaulted or illiquid asset, or any
other form of financial support in
[[Page 21065]]
order to maintain a stable net asset value per participating interest;
(K) Adopt procedures that in the event a STIF has re-priced its net
asset value below $0.995 per participating interest, the bank
administering the STIF shall calculate, redeem, and sell the STIF's
participating interests at a price based on the mark-to-market net
asset value; and
(L) Adopt procedures that, in the event a bank suspends or limits
withdrawals and initiates liquidation of the STIF as a result of
redemptions, require the bank to:
(1) Determine that the extent of the difference between the STIF's
amortized cost per participating interest and its mark-to-market net
asset value per participating interest may result in material dilution
of participating interests or other unfair results to participating
accounts;
(2) Formally approve the liquidation of the STIF; and
(3) Facilitate the fair and orderly liquidation of the STIF to the
benefit of all STIF participants.
* * * * *
Dated: April 2, 2012.
John Walsh,
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
[FR Doc. 2012-8467 Filed 4-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P