Statement of Policy on the Development and Review of Regulations and Policies, 22771-22773 [2013-08986]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, and/or U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
as appropriate in the context in which
the term appears.’’ 76 FR 53764, 53780.
Where a section of the regulations was
determined to pertain to an action that
may have been taken by INS, or a
function that is within the purview of or
shared with another component, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was retained or
inserted. Id.
DHS made one erroneous amendment
in the August 2011 final rule with
regard to the use of ‘‘USCIS’’ in lieu of
‘‘the Service.’’ In 8 CFR part 208, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was revised to read
‘‘USCIS,’’ including in 8 CFR 208.24(f),
which deals with the termination of
asylum or withholding of deportation or
removal by an Immigration Judge or the
Board of Immigration Appeals.
Termination of asylum is an authority
shared between the Department of
Justice and USCIS, but USCIS has no
role in removal proceedings beyond the
issuance of a notice to appear in
accordance with 8 CFR 208.24(e) and
(g). The current, recently-amended
regulatory language incorrectly
provides, however, that USCIS has the
responsibility in removal proceedings to
establish grounds of termination,
whereas that is the responsibility of U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Therefore, this notice corrects that error
by removing one incorrect reference to
‘‘USCIS’’ in 8 CFR 208.24(f) and
replacing it with ‘‘the Service.’’
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 103
Administrative practice and
procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies), Freedom of
information, Immigration, Privacy,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surety bonds.
8 CFR Part 208
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Correction
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Accordingly, for the reasons set out in
the preamble, chapter I of title 8 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is corrected
by making the following correcting
amendments:
PART 103—IMMIGRATION BENEFITS;
BIOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS;
AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS
1. The authority citation for part 103
continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:11 Apr 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1103, 1304, 1356, 1365b; 31 U.S.C.
9701; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6
U.S.C. 1 et seq.); E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874,
15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166; 8 CFR part
2.
2. Section 103.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(18) to read as
follows:
■
Subpart A—Applying for Benefits,
Surety Bonds, Fees
§ 103.2 Submission and adjudication of
benefit requests.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(18) Withholding adjudication. USCIS
may authorize withholding adjudication
of a visa petition or other application if
USCIS determines that an investigation
has been undertaken involving a matter
relating to eligibility or the exercise of
discretion, where applicable, in
connection with the benefit request, and
that the disclosure of information to the
applicant or petitioner in connection
with the adjudication of the benefit
request would prejudice the ongoing
investigation. If an investigation has
been undertaken and has not been
completed within one year of its
inception, USCIS will review the matter
and determine whether adjudication of
the benefit request should be held in
abeyance for six months or until the
investigation is completed, whichever
comes sooner. If, after six months of
USCIS’s determination, the
investigation has not been completed,
the matter will be reviewed again by
USCIS and, if it concludes that more
time is needed to complete the
investigation, adjudication may be held
in abeyance for up to another six
months. If the investigation is not
completed at the end of that time,
USCIS may authorize that adjudication
be held in abeyance for another six
months. Thereafter, if USCIS determines
it is necessary to continue to withhold
adjudication pending completion of the
investigation, it will review that
determination every six months.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 208—PROCEDURES FOR
ASLYUM AND WITHHOLDING OF
REMOVAL
3. The authority citation for part 208
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1158, 1226,
1252, 1282; Title VII of Pub. L. 110–229; 8
CFR part 2.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22771
Subpart A—Asylum and Withholding
of Removal
§ 208.24
[Corrected]
4. Section 208.24 is amended in
paragraph (f), the second sentence, by
removing the term ‘‘USCIS’’ and adding
in its place the term, ‘‘the Service’’.
■
Christina E. McDonald,
Associate General Counsel for Regulatory
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2013–08985 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Chapter III
Statement of Policy on the
Development and Review of
Regulations and Policies
Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Revision of statement of policy.
AGENCY:
The FDIC is updating its
Statement of Policy entitled,
‘‘Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies’’ (Policy
Statement). The Policy Statement
articulates the basic principles that
guide the FDIC in its promulgation and
review of regulations and written
statements of policy. The Policy
Statement is being revised to more fully
reflect the FDIC’s current rulemaking
policies and procedures, as well as take
into account various organizational
changes since the Policy Statement was
adopted.
DATES: Effective Date: April 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Fund Analysis
and Pricing Section, Division of
Insurance and Research, (202) 898–
8967, or Michelle Borzillo, Legal
Division, (703) 562–6083, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC
has a longstanding and ongoing
commitment to ensure that its
regulations and policies achieve
legislative and regulatory goals in the
most efficient and effective manner
possible. As part of that commitment,
the FDIC recently undertook a review of
its existing Policy Statement, which was
adopted in 1998, to determine what
updates and clarifications would be
appropriate. As a result of that review,
the FDIC Board of Directors adopted
revisions to the existing Policy
Statement to more fully reflect the
FDIC’s current rulemaking policies and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM
17APR1
22772
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
procedures as well as take into account
various organizational changes. These
revisions highlight important
rulemaking processes and procedures,
such as the FDIC’s open and transparent
rulemaking process, robust interagency
coordination, evaluation of regulatory
costs and benefits (including
consideration of alternatives), and
periodic review of existing regulations.
Text: The text of the revised Policy
Statement is as follows:
Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies
Statement of Policy
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Purpose and Scope
The Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation is committed to continually
improving the quality of its regulations
and policies, to minimizing regulatory
burdens on the public and the banking
industry, and generally to ensuring that
its regulations and policies achieve
legislative goals effectively and
efficiently. The purpose of this
statement of policy (Policy) is to
establish basic principles which guide
the FDIC’s promulgation and review of
regulations and written statements of
policy. This Policy applies to
regulations and written statements of
policy issued by the Board of Directors
of the FDIC.
II. Principles for the Development and
Review of Regulations and Statements
of Policy
The following principles guide the
FDIC in its development of regulations
and written policies:
• The implications of regulations and
statements of policy should be
evaluated. Before issuing or updating a
regulation or written statement of policy
the FDIC gives careful consideration to
the need for such action. Frequently a
regulation is required by statute.
Alternatively, the FDIC may identify a
need for a supervisory tool to
implement its statutory obligations,
such as maintaining public confidence
in the financial system through safety
and soundness and compliance
supervision, protecting insured
depositors, closing failed institutions,
and preventing or mitigating systemic
risk. The FDIC also may identify a need
to clarify its policy for the benefit of the
banking industry or the public. To bring
different perspectives to the
development of a regulation, the FDIC
typically assigns staff with different
backgrounds or expertise to a regulatory
project; such staff may include
examiners, economists, lawyers or
accountants, depending on the
regulation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:11 Apr 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
Once the need or requirement for a
regulation or statement of policy is
determined, the FDIC evaluates benefits
and costs, based on available
information, and considers reasonable
and possible alternatives. For many
rulemakings, one or more alternatives
likely will be available, at least with
respect to some aspects of the rule. The
main alternatives, once identified as
available, should be described and
analyzed for their consistency with the
statutory or regulatory objectives,
effectiveness in achieving those
objectives, and burden on the public or
industry. In this context, the FDIC seeks
to minimize to the extent practicable the
burdens which the proposed regulation
or policy imposes on the banking
industry and the public. For example,
new reporting and recordkeeping
requirements imposed by a regulation
are carefully analyzed. The effect of the
regulation or statement of policy on
competition within the industry is
considered. Particular attention is
focused on the impact that a regulation
will have on small institutions and
whether there are comprehensive or
targeted alternatives to accomplish the
FDIC’s goal which would minimize any
burden on small institutions. Typically,
when notice and opportunity for
comment is involved, comment is
sought on these matters. Prior to
issuance of a final rule, the potential
benefits associated with the regulation
are weighed against the potential costs.
Both the proposed and final rule should
discuss key implications that the FDIC
considered in its analysis.
• Regulations and policies should be
clearly, understandably, and concisely
written. The FDIC seeks to make its
regulations and statements of policy as
clear and as understandable as possible
to those persons who are affected by
them. In developing or reviewing
existing regulations and statements of
policy, the FDIC considers the
document’s organizational structure, as
well as the specific language used and
the target audience; all are important
components to achieving a clear and
useful statement.
• The public should have a
meaningful opportunity to participate in
an open and transparent rulemaking
process. The FDIC encourages public
participation in the rulemaking process.
Whether a new regulation is being
promulgated or an existing one revised,
the Board gives careful consideration to
the implications of its actions as public
policy. Public participation in the
rulemaking process is an opportunity
for the Board to hear directly from
affected members of the public with
important experience and insights
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
related to the pertinent issues. As part
of this, the FDIC recognizes the
importance of providing adequate time
for the public comment process and
thus, generally provides a 60-day
comment period. Under appropriate
circumstances, the FDIC may provide a
longer comment period and,
occasionally, as permitted by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a
shorter comment period if quicker
action is needed. A person or
organization may petition the Board for
the issuance, amendment, or repeal of
any regulation or policy by submitting
a written petition to the Executive
Secretary of the FDIC. The petition
should include a complete and concise
statement of the petitioner’s interest in
the subject matter and the reasons why
the petition should be granted.
All rulemaking is carried out in
accordance with the APA (as well as
other applicable law 1), and the Board
provides the public with notices of
proposed rulemaking and opportunities
to submit comments on the proposals.
The Board also may seek public
comment on proposed statements of
policy as well. All comments and
proposed alternatives received during
the comment period are carefully
considered prior to the issuance of a
final rule or statement of policy. The
Board takes final action on proposed
regulations and policies as promptly as
circumstances allow. If a significant
period of time elapses following the
publication of a proposed rule or
statement of policy without final action,
the Board will consider withdrawing the
proposal or republishing it for comment.
If the Board decides to reconsider a
proposed regulation or statement of
policy that has been withdrawn, it will
begin the rulemaking or policy
development process anew.
The FDIC Board typically considers
proposed and final regulations at
meetings open to the public. The
written recommendations of FDIC staff
are made available on the FDIC’s public
Web site, and the FDIC also broadcasts
public Board meetings live over the
Internet. Comment letters on pending
proposed rules or statements of policy
can be submitted electronically through
the FDIC’s public Web site, and all
letters are posted on the FDIC’s public
1 In addition to specific statutory provisions
necessitating an implementing rulemaking or
statement of policy, other applicable law includes
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Paperwork
Reduction Act, Section 722 of the Gramm-LeachBliley Act, the Plain Writing Act of 2010, Section
302 of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, and
Economic Growth and Regulatory Paper Reduction
Act of 1996.
E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM
17APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Web site for easy access by all interested
parties. In addition, the FDIC posts
notices of meetings held with outside
parties commenting on pending
rulemakings during the comment period
and may, in appropriate circumstances,
hold roundtable discussions on issues of
particular importance.
• Common or overlapping statutory
and supervisory requirements should be
implemented by the Federal financial
institutions regulators in a coordinated
way. The FDIC has many statutory and
supervisory requirements that are
common to the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System and the
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, and some are common to the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,
and/or the National Credit Union
Administration. The more uniform the
Federal financial institutions regulators
can be in their regulations, policies and
approaches to supervision, the easier it
will be for the industry and the public
to comply with the regulators’
requirements. The FDIC is a member of
the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (FFIEC) and works
with the other federal financial
institutions regulators through the
FFIEC to make uniform those
regulations and policies that implement
common statutory or supervisory
policies.
Moreover, other statutory and
supervisory requirements may overlap
either in substance or in effect on other
participants in the financial sector. As a
result, coordination with other
regulators (such as the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, and
Federal Housing Finance Agency) has
become more common. Some
rulemakings also require consultation
with the Financial Stability Oversight
Council. Where required by law or
otherwise appropriate, interagency
working groups consult or collaborate to
develop rules and policy statements to
identify interactions and promote
consistency.
III. Periodic Review of Existing
Regulations and Statements of Policy
To ensure that the FDIC’s regulations
and written statements of policy are
current, effective, and efficient, and
continue to meet the principles set forth
in this Policy, the FDIC periodically
undertakes a review of each regulation
and statement of policy. Sometimes, this
review is done in conjunction with a
change to a regulation or policy
statement triggered by a change in the
law. In addition, under the Economic
Growth and Regulatory Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1996 and in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:11 Apr 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
conjunction with other FFIEC agencies,
the FDIC conducts a comprehensive
review of its regulations, at least once
every ten years, to identify any
outdated, unnecessary, or unduly
burdensome regulatory requirements
imposed on financial institutions. The
FDIC also may initiate a targeted review
in a specific area based on changes in
the markets or observations at bank
examinations, for example.
Factors to be considered in
determining whether a regulation or
written policy should be revised or
eliminated include: the continued need
for the regulation or policy;
opportunities to simplify or clarify the
regulation or policy; the need to
eliminate duplicative and inconsistent
regulations and policies; and the extent
to which technology, economic
conditions, and other factors have
changed in the area affected by the
regulation or policy. The result of this
review will be a specific decision for
each regulation and statement of policy
to retain, revise, or rescind it. The
principles of regulation and statement of
policy development, as articulated in
this Policy, will apply to the periodic
reviews as well.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 11th day of
April 2013.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–08986 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714–01–P
DATES:
22773
Effective on May 28, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Julie
Greenisen, (202) 502–6362.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Errata Notice
On March 21, 2013, the Commission
issued ‘‘Order No. 777; Final Rule, in
the above referenced proceeding.
Revisions to Reliability Standard for
Transmission Vegetation Management,
142 FERC ¶ 61,208 (2013).
Paragraphs 73 and 77 of the Final
Rule indicate that NERC will be
required to file modifications to the
Violation Risk Factor for Requirement
R2 of Reliability Standard FAC–003–2
within 45 days of the effective date of
the Final Rule, while Paragraph 5 of the
Final Rule indicates that NERC will
have 60 days to make that filing. This
errata notice serves to correct
paragraphs 73 and 77 of the Final Rule,
to delete the reference to 45 days and to
replace it with the same 60 day deadline
as set out in Paragraph 5 of the Final
Rule.
In FR Doc. 2013–07113 appearing on
page 18817 in the Federal Register of
Thursday, March 28, 2013, the
following corrections are made:
1. On page 18826, in the third
column, in paragraph 73, correct ‘‘45
days’’ to read ‘‘60 days’’.
2. On page 18827, in the first column,
in paragraph 77, correct ‘‘45 days’’ to
read ‘‘60 days’’.
Dated: April 9, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–08640 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
18 CFR Part 40
International Trade Administration
[Docket No. RM12–4–000; Order No. 777]
19 CFR Part 351
Revisions to Reliability Standard for
Transmission Vegetation Management;
Correction
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
This document contains
corrections to the final rule (RM12–4–
000) which was published in the
Federal Register of Thursday, March 28,
2013 (78 FR 18817). The regulations
established procedures with regard to
filing and other requirements the North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) needs to submit
when modifying certain Reliability
Standards.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
RIN 0625–AA92
[Docket No.: 120613168–2175–02]
Regulation Strengthening
Accountability of Attorneys and NonAttorney Representatives Appearing
Before the Department
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is amending its
regulations to add a subsection that
strengthens the accountability of
attorneys and non-attorney
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM
17APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 74 (Wednesday, April 17, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22771-22773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
12 CFR Chapter III
Statement of Policy on the Development and Review of Regulations
and Policies
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Revision of statement of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FDIC is updating its Statement of Policy entitled,
``Development and Review of FDIC Regulations and Policies'' (Policy
Statement). The Policy Statement articulates the basic principles that
guide the FDIC in its promulgation and review of regulations and
written statements of policy. The Policy Statement is being revised to
more fully reflect the FDIC's current rulemaking policies and
procedures, as well as take into account various organizational changes
since the Policy Statement was adopted.
DATES: Effective Date: April 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Fund
Analysis and Pricing Section, Division of Insurance and Research, (202)
898-8967, or Michelle Borzillo, Legal Division, (703) 562-6083, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC has a longstanding and ongoing
commitment to ensure that its regulations and policies achieve
legislative and regulatory goals in the most efficient and effective
manner possible. As part of that commitment, the FDIC recently
undertook a review of its existing Policy Statement, which was adopted
in 1998, to determine what updates and clarifications would be
appropriate. As a result of that review, the FDIC Board of Directors
adopted revisions to the existing Policy Statement to more fully
reflect the FDIC's current rulemaking policies and
[[Page 22772]]
procedures as well as take into account various organizational changes.
These revisions highlight important rulemaking processes and
procedures, such as the FDIC's open and transparent rulemaking process,
robust interagency coordination, evaluation of regulatory costs and
benefits (including consideration of alternatives), and periodic review
of existing regulations.
Text: The text of the revised Policy Statement is as follows:
Development and Review of FDIC Regulations and Policies
Statement of Policy
I. Purpose and Scope
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is committed to
continually improving the quality of its regulations and policies, to
minimizing regulatory burdens on the public and the banking industry,
and generally to ensuring that its regulations and policies achieve
legislative goals effectively and efficiently. The purpose of this
statement of policy (Policy) is to establish basic principles which
guide the FDIC's promulgation and review of regulations and written
statements of policy. This Policy applies to regulations and written
statements of policy issued by the Board of Directors of the FDIC.
II. Principles for the Development and Review of Regulations and
Statements of Policy
The following principles guide the FDIC in its development of
regulations and written policies:
The implications of regulations and statements of policy
should be evaluated. Before issuing or updating a regulation or written
statement of policy the FDIC gives careful consideration to the need
for such action. Frequently a regulation is required by statute.
Alternatively, the FDIC may identify a need for a supervisory tool to
implement its statutory obligations, such as maintaining public
confidence in the financial system through safety and soundness and
compliance supervision, protecting insured depositors, closing failed
institutions, and preventing or mitigating systemic risk. The FDIC also
may identify a need to clarify its policy for the benefit of the
banking industry or the public. To bring different perspectives to the
development of a regulation, the FDIC typically assigns staff with
different backgrounds or expertise to a regulatory project; such staff
may include examiners, economists, lawyers or accountants, depending on
the regulation.
Once the need or requirement for a regulation or statement of
policy is determined, the FDIC evaluates benefits and costs, based on
available information, and considers reasonable and possible
alternatives. For many rulemakings, one or more alternatives likely
will be available, at least with respect to some aspects of the rule.
The main alternatives, once identified as available, should be
described and analyzed for their consistency with the statutory or
regulatory objectives, effectiveness in achieving those objectives, and
burden on the public or industry. In this context, the FDIC seeks to
minimize to the extent practicable the burdens which the proposed
regulation or policy imposes on the banking industry and the public.
For example, new reporting and recordkeeping requirements imposed by a
regulation are carefully analyzed. The effect of the regulation or
statement of policy on competition within the industry is considered.
Particular attention is focused on the impact that a regulation will
have on small institutions and whether there are comprehensive or
targeted alternatives to accomplish the FDIC's goal which would
minimize any burden on small institutions. Typically, when notice and
opportunity for comment is involved, comment is sought on these
matters. Prior to issuance of a final rule, the potential benefits
associated with the regulation are weighed against the potential costs.
Both the proposed and final rule should discuss key implications that
the FDIC considered in its analysis.
Regulations and policies should be clearly,
understandably, and concisely written. The FDIC seeks to make its
regulations and statements of policy as clear and as understandable as
possible to those persons who are affected by them. In developing or
reviewing existing regulations and statements of policy, the FDIC
considers the document's organizational structure, as well as the
specific language used and the target audience; all are important
components to achieving a clear and useful statement.
The public should have a meaningful opportunity to
participate in an open and transparent rulemaking process. The FDIC
encourages public participation in the rulemaking process. Whether a
new regulation is being promulgated or an existing one revised, the
Board gives careful consideration to the implications of its actions as
public policy. Public participation in the rulemaking process is an
opportunity for the Board to hear directly from affected members of the
public with important experience and insights related to the pertinent
issues. As part of this, the FDIC recognizes the importance of
providing adequate time for the public comment process and thus,
generally provides a 60-day comment period. Under appropriate
circumstances, the FDIC may provide a longer comment period and,
occasionally, as permitted by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a
shorter comment period if quicker action is needed. A person or
organization may petition the Board for the issuance, amendment, or
repeal of any regulation or policy by submitting a written petition to
the Executive Secretary of the FDIC. The petition should include a
complete and concise statement of the petitioner's interest in the
subject matter and the reasons why the petition should be granted.
All rulemaking is carried out in accordance with the APA (as well
as other applicable law \1\), and the Board provides the public with
notices of proposed rulemaking and opportunities to submit comments on
the proposals. The Board also may seek public comment on proposed
statements of policy as well. All comments and proposed alternatives
received during the comment period are carefully considered prior to
the issuance of a final rule or statement of policy. The Board takes
final action on proposed regulations and policies as promptly as
circumstances allow. If a significant period of time elapses following
the publication of a proposed rule or statement of policy without final
action, the Board will consider withdrawing the proposal or
republishing it for comment. If the Board decides to reconsider a
proposed regulation or statement of policy that has been withdrawn, it
will begin the rulemaking or policy development process anew.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to specific statutory provisions necessitating
an implementing rulemaking or statement of policy, other applicable
law includes the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Paperwork Reduction
Act, Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Plain Writing
Act of 2010, Section 302 of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, and Economic Growth and Regulatory Paper
Reduction Act of 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FDIC Board typically considers proposed and final regulations
at meetings open to the public. The written recommendations of FDIC
staff are made available on the FDIC's public Web site, and the FDIC
also broadcasts public Board meetings live over the Internet. Comment
letters on pending proposed rules or statements of policy can be
submitted electronically through the FDIC's public Web site, and all
letters are posted on the FDIC's public
[[Page 22773]]
Web site for easy access by all interested parties. In addition, the
FDIC posts notices of meetings held with outside parties commenting on
pending rulemakings during the comment period and may, in appropriate
circumstances, hold roundtable discussions on issues of particular
importance.
Common or overlapping statutory and supervisory
requirements should be implemented by the Federal financial
institutions regulators in a coordinated way. The FDIC has many
statutory and supervisory requirements that are common to the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, and some are common to the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, and/or the National Credit Union
Administration. The more uniform the Federal financial institutions
regulators can be in their regulations, policies and approaches to
supervision, the easier it will be for the industry and the public to
comply with the regulators' requirements. The FDIC is a member of the
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) and works
with the other federal financial institutions regulators through the
FFIEC to make uniform those regulations and policies that implement
common statutory or supervisory policies.
Moreover, other statutory and supervisory requirements may overlap
either in substance or in effect on other participants in the financial
sector. As a result, coordination with other regulators (such as the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, and Federal Housing Finance Agency) has become more common.
Some rulemakings also require consultation with the Financial Stability
Oversight Council. Where required by law or otherwise appropriate,
interagency working groups consult or collaborate to develop rules and
policy statements to identify interactions and promote consistency.
III. Periodic Review of Existing Regulations and Statements of Policy
To ensure that the FDIC's regulations and written statements of
policy are current, effective, and efficient, and continue to meet the
principles set forth in this Policy, the FDIC periodically undertakes a
review of each regulation and statement of policy. Sometimes, this
review is done in conjunction with a change to a regulation or policy
statement triggered by a change in the law. In addition, under the
Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 and in
conjunction with other FFIEC agencies, the FDIC conducts a
comprehensive review of its regulations, at least once every ten years,
to identify any outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulatory
requirements imposed on financial institutions. The FDIC also may
initiate a targeted review in a specific area based on changes in the
markets or observations at bank examinations, for example.
Factors to be considered in determining whether a regulation or
written policy should be revised or eliminated include: the continued
need for the regulation or policy; opportunities to simplify or clarify
the regulation or policy; the need to eliminate duplicative and
inconsistent regulations and policies; and the extent to which
technology, economic conditions, and other factors have changed in the
area affected by the regulation or policy. The result of this review
will be a specific decision for each regulation and statement of policy
to retain, revise, or rescind it. The principles of regulation and
statement of policy development, as articulated in this Policy, will
apply to the periodic reviews as well.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 11th day of April 2013.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-08986 Filed 4-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
