Limited Exception for a Capped Amount of Reciprocal Deposits From Treatment as Brokered Deposits; Technical Amendment, 15095-15096 [2019-07048]

Download as PDF amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 72 / Monday, April 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations shall lose eligibility for benefits immediately upon receipt by any individual in the household of substantial lottery or gambling winnings, as defined in paragraph (r)(2) of this section. The household shall report the receipt of substantial winnings to the State agency in accordance with the reporting requirements contained in § 273.12(a)(5)(iii)(G)(3) and within the time-frames described in § 273.12(a)(2). The State agency shall also take action to disqualify any household identified as including a member with substantial winnings in accordance with § 272.17. (1) Regaining Eligibility. Such households shall remain ineligible until they meet the allowable resources and income eligibility requirements described in §§ 273.8 and 273.9, respectively. (2) Substantial Winnings—(i) In General. Substantial lottery or gambling winnings are defined as a cash prize equal to or greater than the maximum allowable financial resource limit for elderly or disabled households as defined in § 273.8(b) won in a single game before taxes or other withholdings. For the purposes of this provision, the resource limit defined in § 273.8(b) applies to all households, including non-elderly/disabled households, with substantial lottery and gambling winnings. If multiple individuals shared in the purchase of a ticket, hand, or similar bet, then only the portion of the winnings allocated to the member of the SNAP household would be counted in the eligibility determination. (ii) Adjustment. The value of substantial winnings shall be adjusted annually in accordance with § 273.8(b)(1) and (2). (s) Disqualification for certain convicted felons. An individual shall not be eligible for SNAP benefits if: (1) The individual is convicted as an adult of: (i) Aggravated sexual abuse under section 2241 of title 18, United States Code; (ii) Murder under section 1111 of title 18, United States Code; (iii) An offense under chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code; (iv) A Federal or State offense involving sexual assault, as defined in section 40002(a) of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13925(a)); or (v) An offense under State law determined by the Attorney General to be substantially similar to an offense described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); and (2) The individual is not in compliance with the terms of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Apr 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 sentence of the individual or the restrictions under § 273.11(n). (3) The disqualification contained in this paragraph (s) shall not apply to a conviction if the conviction is for conduct occurring on or before February 7, 2014. ■ 13. In § 273.12, add paragraph (a)(1)(viii) and revise paragraphs (a)(4)(iv), (a)(5)(iii)(G) and (a)(5)(vi)(B). The addition and revisions read as follows: § 273.12 Reporting requirements. (a) * * * (1) * * * (viii) Whenever a member of the household wins substantial lottery or gambling winnings in accordance with § 273.11(r). (4) * * * (iv) Content of the quarterly report form. The State agency may include all of the items subject to reporting under paragraph (a)(1) of this section in the quarterly report, except changes reportable under paragraphs (a)(1)(vii) and (a)(1)(viii) of this section, or may limit the report to specific items while requiring that households report other items through the use of the change report form. (5) * * * (iii) * * * (G) The periodic report form shall be the sole reporting requirement for any information that is required to be reported on the form, except that a household required to report less frequently than quarterly shall report: (1) When the household monthly gross income exceeds the monthly gross income limit for its household size in accordance with paragraph (a)(5)(v) of this section; (2) Whenever able-bodied adults subject to the time limit of § 273.24 have their work hours fall below 20 hours per week, averaged monthly; and (3) Whenever a member of the household wins substantial lottery or gambling winnings in accordance with § 273.11(r). * * * * * (vi) * * * (B) The State agency must not act on changes that would result in a decrease in the household’s benefits unless one of the following occurs: (1) The household has voluntarily requested that its case be closed in accordance with § 273.13(b)(12). (2) The State agency has information about the household’s circumstances considered verified upon receipt. (3) A household member has been identified as a fleeing felon or probation or parole violator in accordance with § 273.11(n). PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 15095 (4) There has been a change in the household’s PA grant, or GA grant in project areas where GA and food stamp cases are jointly processed in accordance with § 273.2(j)(2). (5) The State agency has verified information that a member of a SNAP household has won substantial lottery or gambling winnings in accordance with § 273.11(r). * * * * * Dated: April 8, 2019. Brandon Lipps, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. [FR Doc. 2019–07194 Filed 4–12–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–30–P FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Parts 327 and 337 RIN 3064–AE89 Limited Exception for a Capped Amount of Reciprocal Deposits From Treatment as Brokered Deposits; Technical Amendment Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment to preamble. AGENCY: The FDIC is making technical amendments to the preamble of a final rule published in the Federal Register on February 4, 2019. The final rule relates to a limited exception for a capped amount of reciprocal deposits from treatment as brokered deposits. As published, several industry participants raised concerns about the meaning of a sentence in the preamble of the final rule. To avoid potential confusion, the FDIC is amending the language, as explained below. DATES: The technical amendments are effective April 15, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Legal Division: Vivek V. Khare, Counsel, (202) 898–6847, vkhare@fdic.gov; Thomas Hearn, Counsel, (202) 898– 6967, thohearn@fdic.gov. Division of Risk Management Supervision: Thomas F. Lyons, Chief, Policy and Program Development, (202) 898–6850, tlyons@ fdic.gov. SUMMARY: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Technical Amendments On December 18, 2018, the FDIC adopted a final rule relating to the treatment of reciprocal deposits. The final rule was published in the Federal Register on February 4, 2019 (84 FR 1346). Several industry participants E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM 15APR1 15096 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 72 / Monday, April 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations have raised concerns about whether a sentence in the preamble of the final rule could be read as changing existing interpretations related to accepting or receiving deposits. The sentence is italicized below: 1 The FDIC recognizes that the statute only limits the amount of reciprocal deposits an institution may ‘‘receive’’ in order to be considered an agent institution. Thus, an institution that is less than well capitalized or not well rated will still qualify as an agent institution if it holds a level of reciprocal deposits above the special cap, as long as (1) such deposits were received before the institution became less than well capitalized or not well rated, (2) such deposits are time deposits,28 and (3) the institution satisfies all other qualifications necessary to be an agent institution. For example, an institution that is well capitalized but no longer well rated could continue to be an agent institution if it holds reciprocal time deposits that it received prior to its rating downgrade until those time deposits mature or roll off, but would no longer be an agent institution if it renewed or rolled over such deposits and doing so caused the total amount of reciprocal deposits to exceed the special cap. In this case, once the institution receives reciprocal deposits in excess of its special cap, it is no longer an agent institution. If an institution is not an agent institution, all of its reciprocal deposits should be reported as brokered deposits. * * * * * 28 Transactional reciprocal deposits are viewed as being received daily. amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES The FDIC recognizes that the statute only limits the amount of reciprocal deposits an institution may ‘‘receive’’ in order to be considered an agent institution. To take a simple example, an institution that is well capitalized but no longer well rated could continue to be an agent institution if it holds reciprocal certificate of deposits that it received prior to its rating downgrade until those certificate of deposits mature or roll off, but would no longer be an agent institution if it renewed or rolled over such deposits and doing so caused the total amount of reciprocal deposits to exceed the special cap. In this case, once the institution receives reciprocal deposits in excess of its special cap, it is no longer an agent institution. If an institution is not an agent institution, all of its reciprocal deposits should be reported as brokered deposits. As discussed above, these changes to the preamble text are technical, and do FR 1346, 1349 (February 4, 2019). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Apr 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 Dated at Washington, DC, on March 8, 2019. By Order of the Board of Directors. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Valerie Best, Assistant Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2019–07048 Filed 4–12–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 868 [Docket No. FDA–2019–N–0647] Medical Devices; Anesthesiology Devices; Classification of the Ventilatory Electrical Impedance Tomograph AGENCY: The FDIC does not intend this preamble language to change existing interpretations related to accepting or receiving deposits. Therefore, in an effort to avoid confusion, the FDIC is deleting the sentence in question along with its corresponding footnote and, amending the sentence that immediately follows. The revised paragraph reads as follows: 1 84 not change the rule text. Accordingly, the FDIC finds that notice and comment procedures are unnecessary. Further, because the changes are technical, delaying the effective date would serve no purpose. Therefore, these changes will be effective upon publication. For convenient reference, the FDIC is posting the revised preamble and final rule in their entirety on its website. * * * * * Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final order. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is classifying the ventilatory electrical impedance tomograph into class II (special controls). The special controls that apply to the device type are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language for the ventilatory electrical impedance tomograph’s classification. We are taking this action because we have determined that classifying the device into class II (special controls) will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. We believe this action will also enhance patients’ access to beneficial innovative devices, in part by reducing regulatory burdens. DATES: This order is effective April 15, 2019. The classification was applicable on December 20, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deepika Arora Lakhani, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2560, Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 301– 796–4042, Deepika.Lakhani@ fda.hhs.gov. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Upon request, FDA has classified the ventilatory electrical impedance tomograph as class II (special controls), which we have determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance patients’ access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory burdens by placing the device into a lower device class than the automatic class III assignment. The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as ‘‘postamendments devices’’ because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval. We determine whether a new device is substantially equivalent to a predicate by means of the procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act and part 807 (21 U.S.C. 360(k) and 21 CFR part 807, respectively). FDA may also classify a device through ‘‘De Novo’’ classification, a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105–115) established the first procedure for De Novo classification. Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112–144) modified the De Novo application process by adding a second procedure. A device sponsor may utilize either procedure for De Novo classification. Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM 15APR1

Agencies

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15095-15096]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07048]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

12 CFR Parts 327 and 337

RIN 3064-AE89


Limited Exception for a Capped Amount of Reciprocal Deposits From 
Treatment as Brokered Deposits; Technical Amendment

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment to preamble.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FDIC is making technical amendments to the preamble of a 
final rule published in the Federal Register on February 4, 2019. The 
final rule relates to a limited exception for a capped amount of 
reciprocal deposits from treatment as brokered deposits. As published, 
several industry participants raised concerns about the meaning of a 
sentence in the preamble of the final rule. To avoid potential 
confusion, the FDIC is amending the language, as explained below.

DATES: The technical amendments are effective April 15, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Legal Division: Vivek V. Khare, 
Counsel, (202) 898-6847, [email protected]; Thomas Hearn, Counsel, (202) 
898-6967, [email protected]. Division of Risk Management Supervision: 
Thomas F. Lyons, Chief, Policy and Program Development, (202) 898-6850, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Technical Amendments

    On December 18, 2018, the FDIC adopted a final rule relating to the 
treatment of reciprocal deposits. The final rule was published in the 
Federal Register on February 4, 2019 (84 FR 1346). Several industry 
participants

[[Page 15096]]

have raised concerns about whether a sentence in the preamble of the 
final rule could be read as changing existing interpretations related 
to accepting or receiving deposits. The sentence is italicized below: 
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 84 FR 1346, 1349 (February 4, 2019).

    The FDIC recognizes that the statute only limits the amount of 
reciprocal deposits an institution may ``receive'' in order to be 
considered an agent institution. Thus, an institution that is less 
than well capitalized or not well rated will still qualify as an 
agent institution if it holds a level of reciprocal deposits above 
the special cap, as long as (1) such deposits were received before 
the institution became less than well capitalized or not well rated, 
(2) such deposits are time deposits,\28\ and (3) the institution 
satisfies all other qualifications necessary to be an agent 
institution. For example, an institution that is well capitalized 
but no longer well rated could continue to be an agent institution 
if it holds reciprocal time deposits that it received prior to its 
rating downgrade until those time deposits mature or roll off, but 
would no longer be an agent institution if it renewed or rolled over 
such deposits and doing so caused the total amount of reciprocal 
deposits to exceed the special cap. In this case, once the 
institution receives reciprocal deposits in excess of its special 
cap, it is no longer an agent institution. If an institution is not 
an agent institution, all of its reciprocal deposits should be 
reported as brokered deposits.
* * * * *
    \28\ Transactional reciprocal deposits are viewed as being 
received daily.

    The FDIC does not intend this preamble language to change existing 
interpretations related to accepting or receiving deposits. Therefore, 
in an effort to avoid confusion, the FDIC is deleting the sentence in 
question along with its corresponding footnote and, amending the 
sentence that immediately follows. The revised paragraph reads as 
follows:

    The FDIC recognizes that the statute only limits the amount of 
reciprocal deposits an institution may ``receive'' in order to be 
considered an agent institution. To take a simple example, an 
institution that is well capitalized but no longer well rated could 
continue to be an agent institution if it holds reciprocal 
certificate of deposits that it received prior to its rating 
downgrade until those certificate of deposits mature or roll off, 
but would no longer be an agent institution if it renewed or rolled 
over such deposits and doing so caused the total amount of 
reciprocal deposits to exceed the special cap. In this case, once 
the institution receives reciprocal deposits in excess of its 
special cap, it is no longer an agent institution. If an institution 
is not an agent institution, all of its reciprocal deposits should 
be reported as brokered deposits.

    As discussed above, these changes to the preamble text are 
technical, and do not change the rule text. Accordingly, the FDIC finds 
that notice and comment procedures are unnecessary. Further, because 
the changes are technical, delaying the effective date would serve no 
purpose. Therefore, these changes will be effective upon publication.
    For convenient reference, the FDIC is posting the revised preamble 
and final rule in their entirety on its website.
* * * * *

    Dated at Washington, DC, on March 8, 2019.

    By Order of the Board of Directors.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Valerie Best,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-07048 Filed 4-12-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.