[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 139 (Monday, July 21, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42231-42235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16975]


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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 390

RIN 3064-AE19


Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Electronic Operations

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice of proposed rulemaking, the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation (``FDIC'') proposes to rescind and remove 
regarding electronic operations which were transferred to the FDIC from 
the Office of Thrift Supervision (``OTS'') on July 21, 2011, in 
connection with the implementation of applicable provisions of Title 
III of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
(``Dodd-Frank Act''). There is no corresponding FDIC Electronic 
Operations rule and the rule is deemed obsolete and unnecessary. 
Therefore, the FDIC proposes to rescind and remove the regulations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 19, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     FDIC Web site: http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal/. Follow instructions for submitting comments on the agency Web 
site.
     FDIC Email: [email protected]. Include RIN 3064-AE19 on 
the subject line of the message.
     FDIC Mail: Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, 
Attention: Comments, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th 
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
     Hand Delivery to FDIC: Comments may be hand-delivered to 
the guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street building (located 
on F Street) on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
    Please include your name, affiliation, address, email address, and 
telephone number(s) in your comment. Where appropriate, comments should 
include a short Executive Summary consisting of no more than five 
single-spaced pages. All statements received, including attachments and 
other supporting materials, are part of the public record and are 
subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that 
you wish to make publicly available.

    Please note:  All comments received will be posted generally 
without change to http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal/, 
including any personal information provided. Paper copies of public 
comments may be requested from the Public Information Center by 
telephone at 1-877-275-3342 or 1-703-562-2200.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Coleman, Division of Risk 
Management Supervision, (703) 254-0452; Martha L. Ellett, Legal 
Division, (202) 898-6765; Jennifer Maree, Legal Division, (202) 898-
6543.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

The Dodd-Frank Act

    Title III of the Dodd-Frank Act \1\ provided for a substantial 
reorganization of the regulation of State and Federal savings 
associations and their holding companies. Beginning July 21, 2011, the 
transfer date established by section 311 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 
codified at 12 U.S.C. 5411, the powers, duties, and functions formerly 
performed by the OTS were divided among the FDIC, as to State savings 
associations, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (``OCC''), 
as to Federal savings associations, and the Board of Governors of the 
Federal Reserve System (``FRB''), as to savings and loan holding 
companies. Section 316(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act, codified at 12 U.S.C. 
5414(b), provides the manner of treatment for all orders, resolutions, 
determinations, regulations, and advisory materials that had been 
issued, made, prescribed, or allowed to become effective by the OTS. 
The section provides that if such materials were in effect on the day 
before the transfer

[[Page 42232]]

date, they continue to be in effect and are enforceable by or against 
the appropriate successor agency until they are modified, terminated, 
set aside, or superseded in accordance with applicable law by such 
successor agency, by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by 
operation of law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 
Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 316(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act, codified at 12 U.S.C. 
5414(c), further directed the FDIC and the OCC to consult with one 
another and to publish a list of the continued OTS regulations which 
would be enforced by the FDIC and the OCC, respectively. On June 14, 
2011, the FDIC's Board of Directors approved a ``List of OTS 
Regulations to be Enforced by the OCC and the FDIC Pursuant to the 
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.'' This list 
was published by the FDIC and the OCC as a Joint Notice in the Federal 
Register on July 6, 2011.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 76 FR 39247 (July 6, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although section 312(b)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 
codified at 12 U.S.C. 5412(b)(2)(B)(i)(II), granted the OCC rulemaking 
authority relating to both State and Federal savings associations, 
nothing in the Dodd-Frank Act affected the FDIC's existing authority to 
issue regulations under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (``FDI Act'') 
and other laws as the ``appropriate Federal banking agency'' or under 
similar statutory terminology. Section 312(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act 
amended the definition of ``appropriate Federal banking agency'' 
contained in section 3(q) of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1813(q), to add 
State savings associations to the list of entities for which the FDIC 
is designated as the ``appropriate Federal banking agency.'' As a 
result, when the FDIC acts as the designated ``appropriate Federal 
banking agency'' (or under similar terminology) for State savings 
associations, as it does here, the FDIC is authorized to issue, modify 
and rescind regulations involving such associations, as well as for 
State nonmember banks and insured branches of foreign banks.
    As noted, on June 14, 2011, operating pursuant to this authority, 
the FDIC's Board of Directors reissued and redesignated certain 
transferring OTS regulations. These transferred OTS regulations were 
published as new FDIC regulations in the Federal Register on August 5, 
2011.\3\ When it republished the transferred OTS regulations as new 
FDIC regulations, the FDIC specifically noted that its staff would 
evaluate the transferred OTS rules and might later recommend 
incorporating the transferred OTS regulations into other FDIC rules, 
amending them, or rescinding them, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 76 FR 47652 (Aug. 5, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One of the OTS rules transferred to the FDIC requires State savings 
associations to notify the FDIC at least 30 days before establishing a 
transactional Web site. The OTS rule, formerly found at 12 CFR part 
555, subpart B (``part 555, subpart B''), was transferred to the FDIC 
with only technical changes and is now found in the FDIC's rules at 
part 390, subpart L, entitled ``Electronic Operations.'' The FDIC has 
no such corresponding rule. After careful review of part 390, subpart 
L, the FDIC proposes to rescind part 390, subpart L, because, as 
discussed below, it is obsolete, unnecessary, and burdensome.

Former OTS Part 555, Subpart B (Transferred to FDIC Part 390, Subpart 
L)

    On January 1, 1999, part 555, subpart B became effective and was 
among the regulations that were transferred to the FDIC from the OTS on 
July 21, 2011, pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act. This rule required 
savings associations to file a written notice with the OTS at least 30 
days before establishing a transactional Web site. The OTS enacted the 
Electronic Operations rule unilaterally. Neither the FDIC, nor the 
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (``OCC''),\4\ nor the Board 
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (``FRB'') has a regulatory 
notice requirement similar to the Electronic Operations rule that 
requires insured depository institutions (``IDIs'') to notify the FDIC 
if they intend to establish transactional Web sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The OCC has an Electronic Activities rule that ``identifies 
the criteria that the OCC uses to determine whether an electronic 
activity is authorized as part of, or incidental to, the business of 
banking under 12 U.S.C. 24 (Seventh) or other statutory authority.'' 
12 CFR 7.5000. However, this rule does not contain a prior notice 
requirement before establishing a transactional Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In issuing its Electronic Operations rule, the OTS sought to 
``monitor adequately savings associations' technological innovations 
and to assess security, compliance, and privacy risks.'' \5\ The OTS 
reasoned that the notice requirement would aid the agency in assisting 
savings associations ``that are contemplating or already conducting 
Internet operations to identify and address the risks that accompany 
such activities'' and would ``help institutions avoid problems and 
protect consumers.'' \6\ At the time, the OTS concluded that a 
requirement that each savings association must provide advance notice 
to the OTS of the association's intent to establish a transactional Web 
site would assist the OTS in evaluating safety and soundness, 
compliance, and other risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 63 FR 65673, 65678 (Nov. 30, 1998).
    \6\ 63 FR 43327, 43328 (Aug. 13, 1998). The OTS articulated 
concerns about ``protecting the privacy of individuals'' and ``other 
operational and compliance risks presented by Internet banking'' and 
noted its intent to ``increase its monitoring of Web sites for 
compliance with disclosure laws and regulations.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Significantly, the OTS noted that ``[a]s technologies mature and 
the industry and OTS gain additional experience, the OTS may revise the 
rule to no longer require notice before establishing a transactional 
Web site.'' \7\ In a 2001 review of its regulations regarding 
electronic delivery of financial products and services, the OTS 
suggested that a goal of the Electronic Operations rule was to impose a 
notice requirement in lieu of specific operational standards as the 
least burdensome way to regulate savings associations. The OTS also 
stated that it ``designed its regulations to help ensure that it would 
have sufficient information to understand developing technologies, to 
provide appropriate guidance on these technologies, and to supervise 
electronic operations effectively.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 63 FR 43327, 43329 (Aug. 13, 1998).
    \8\ 66 FR 31186, 31187 (June 11, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After careful consideration of the former OTS's general prior 
notice requirement, the FDIC has reached the same conclusion it has in 
the past, particularly in light of continuing advancements in 
electronic banking and related technology. Specifically, the FDIC 
concludes there is no supervisory value in a requirement that an IDI 
give prior notification to the FDIC about its establishment of a 
transactional Web site. Given the rapid evolution, innovation and 
current state of technological products and interfaces with customers, 
the FDIC relies on dynamic, in-depth supervisory means to evaluate an 
IDI's information technology (``IT'') systems. Instead of a general 
notice requirement for the establishment of a transactional Web site, 
the FDIC has developed and relies upon more useful and ongoing sources 
of information to evaluate the financial condition, risks and 
regulatory compliance by FDIC-supervised institutions. Prior 
notification that an institution is establishing a transactional Web 
site is an outdated and unnecessary requirement.
    Currently, the FDIC receives information about an IDI's IT systems, 
including its transactional Web sites, from various examinations and 
other sources of information that render a general prior notice 
requirement such as the former OTS rule for savings

[[Page 42233]]

associations, outdated and unnecessary for the FDIC's supervisory 
purposes of risk management and compliance. For example, the FDIC's IT 
pre-examination questionnaire to IDIs requires information about the 
IDI's technological developments, including whether there were any 
changes in technology that were implemented since the previous FDIC 
examination.
    Changes in technology include, for example, any ``new service 
provider relationships, new software applications and/or service 
offerings.'' \9\ The IT pre-examination questionnaire also asks whether 
the IDI plans to ``deploy new technology within the next 12 months,'' 
which would include the implementation of a transactional Web site. If 
the answer is ``yes,'' the questionnaire asks whether the risks 
associated with the new technology were reviewed by the IDI during the 
institution's most recent risk assessment.\10\ The FDIC then reviews 
the IDI's risk assessment at each examination. The questionnaire also 
asks whether the IDI has ``identified and reported its service provider 
relationships (both domestic and foreign-based) to the FDIC,'' \11\ 
which would include those with Technology Service Providers (``TSPs''). 
This information is also required to be reported by the IDI to the FDIC 
pursuant to the Bank Service Company Act (``BSCA'').\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Information Technology Officer's Questionnaire, Part 1(h) 
(Dec. 2007).
    \10\ Information Technology Officer's Questionnaire, Part 1(k) 
(Dec. 2007).
    \11\ Information Technology Officer's Questionnaire, Part 5(b) 
(Dec. 2007).
    \12\ 12 U.S.C. 1861 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of its examination process, the FDIC also monitors 
technology developments and TSPs. In periodic on-site IT examinations, 
FDIC examiners obtain information regarding the establishment of 
transactional Web sites and any other technological developments the 
institution has implemented. Through the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council (``FFIEC''), the FDIC, jointly with other Federal 
banking agencies, also participates in examinations of all of the major 
TSPs. In these examinations, the FDIC obtains customer lists of all 
financial institutions that have contracted for services from the 
particular service provider, including TSPs. These lists are more up to 
date than a point-in-time notice that the Electronic Operations rule 
offers and they also provide the FDIC with notice of any changes in 
TSPs.
    During the FDIC's compliance examinations, IDIs are also routinely 
examined for compliance with applicable consumer protection laws and 
regulations, such as the Truth in Lending Act, Regulation Z; the 
Electronic Funds Transfer Act, Regulation E; the Equal Credit 
Opportunity Act, Regulation B; the Truth in Savings Act, Regulation DD; 
and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act that prohibits unfair 
or deceptive acts or practices. These examinations address any problems 
IDIs may have with the adequacy of consumer disclosures, among other 
things.
    In addition, the BSCA requires IDIs to provide written notice to 
the FDIC (or other appropriate Federal banking agency) of the existence 
of third-party service relationships ``within thirty days after the 
making of such service contract or the performance of the service, 
whichever occurs first.'' \13\ The BSCA covers services performed by 
third parties, including TSPs and the FDIC has long interpreted the 
BSCA to include within its scope Internet banking service 
providers.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 1867(c)(2). Although the BSCA notice does not 
require a prior notification like the Electronic Operations notice 
requirement, it is supplemented by other, ongoing and detailed 
sources of supervisory information.
    \14\ See Bank Service Company Act, FDIC, FIL-49-99 (June 3, 
1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specific and ongoing information obtained and evaluated by the FDIC 
through the IT pre-examination questionnaire, on-site IT examinations, 
TSP examinations and compliance examinations as well as the BSCA notice 
better enables the FDIC to evaluate existing or potential safety and 
soundness and compliance concerns. The FDIC's IT examination process 
renders a general, point-in-time notice such as that required by the 
OTS's Electronic Operations rule, to be unnecessary. The rule is 
inefficient and unnecessarily burdensome, and it should be eliminated.
    In its supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, the OTS 
expressed concerns regarding the safety of Internet banking and 
protecting customers' privacy in support of its rule.\15\ However, 
these supervisory concerns have been addressed elsewhere, rendering the 
Electronic Operations rule superfluous. For example, in 2005 and most 
recently updated in 2011, the FDIC, with the other FFIEC agencies, 
issued guidance that describes supervisory expectations regarding 
customer authentication for high-risk transactions, layered security 
programs, and other controls related to Internet banking.\16\ The 
guidance includes regulatory expectations about enhanced authentication 
methods banks must use when authenticating the identity of customers 
using on-line products and services, the need for layered security, and 
minimum control expectations for certain online banking activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 63 FR 43327 (Aug. 13, 1998).
    \16\ The guidance was first issued in 2005, see Authentication 
in an Internet Banking Environment, FDIC, FIL-103-2005 (Oct. 12, 
2005), and was updated in 2011, see FFIEC Supplement to 
Authentication in an Internet Banking Environment, FDIC, FIL-50-2011 
(June 29, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, 12 CFR part 364, appendix B (``part 364, appendix B'') 
to the FDIC regulations, which implements the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act, 
addresses the bank's requirements for safeguarding customer 
information, which includes transactional Web sites.\17\ An 
institution's compliance with part 364, appendix B is assessed at every 
FDIC IT examination and specifically addressed in each Report of 
Examination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Interagency Guidelines Establishing Information Security 
Standards, 12 CFR Part 364, Appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After careful review of the OTS's transferred rule in part 390, 
subpart L, and the former OTS's stated rationale for the rule, the 
FDIC, as the appropriate Federal banking agency for State savings 
associations, proposes to rescind and remove the former OTS rule in its 
entirety. Rescinding part 390, subpart L also will serve to streamline 
the FDIC's rules and eliminate obsolete and superfluous regulations. If 
the proposal is adopted in final form, all IDIs regulated by the FDIC--
including State savings associations--will be regulated in a uniform 
manner.

II. The Proposal

    Regarding the functions of the former OTS that were transferred to 
the FDIC, section 316(b)(3) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 
5414(b)(3), in pertinent part, provides that the former OTS regulations 
will be enforceable by the FDIC until they are modified, terminated, 
set aside, or superseded in accordance with applicable law. After 
reviewing the Electronic Operations rule currently found in part 390, 
subpart L, the FDIC, as the appropriate Federal banking agency for 
State savings associations, proposes to rescind part 390, subpart L in 
its entirety. Rescinding part 390, subpart L will serve to streamline 
the FDIC's rules and eliminate obsolete and unnecessary regulations. It 
will also facilitate uniform supervision regarding notification 
requirements for electronic operation for all FDIC-supervised IDIs.

[[Page 42234]]

III. Request for Comments

    The FDIC invites comments on all aspects of this proposed 
rulemaking, and specifically requests comments on the following:
    (1) What impacts, positive or negative, can you foresee in the 
FDIC's proposal to rescind part 390, subpart L?
    Written comments must be received by the FDIC no later than 
September 19, 2014.

IV. Regulatory Analysis and Procedure

A. The Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(``PRA'') of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, the FDIC may not conduct or 
sponsor, and the 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 Proposed Rule would rescind and remove from FDIC regulations 
part 390, subpart L because it is obsolete and unnecessary. In 
republishing this rule, the FDIC made only technical changes to 
existing OTS regulations, such as nomenclature changes. The FDIC does 
not have a regulatory notice requirement similar to the Electronic 
Operations rule that requires IDIs to notify the FDIC if they intend to 
set up transactional Web sites and, therefore, never established an 
information collection to account for the paperwork burden imposed on 
the public.
    This Proposed Rule will neither create any paperwork information 
collection nor modify any of the FDIC's existing paperwork information 
collections. Accordingly, the FDIC need not submit any Information 
Collection Request to OMB.

B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''),\18\ requires that, in 
connection with a notice of proposed rulemaking, an agency prepare and 
make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small 
entities (defined in regulations promulgated by the Small Business 
Administration to include banking organizations with total assets of 
less than or equal to $500 million).\19\ However, a regulatory 
flexibility analysis is not required if the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, and publishes its certification and a short 
explanatory statement in the Federal Register together with the rule. 
For the reasons provided below, the FDIC certifies that the Proposed 
Rule, if adopted in final form, would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, a 
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The Proposed Rule does 
not impose any additional burdens or requirements on small entities. 
Rather, because the Electronic Operations rule is being rescinded, the 
Proposed Rule reduces the paperwork and other regulatory burdens on 
State savings associations by eliminating the requirement to provide 
the FDIC with notice before establishing a transactional Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    \19\ 78 FR 37409, 37411 (June 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in this notice of proposed rulemaking, part 390, 
subpart L was transferred from part 555, subpart B, which governed 
notification provisions for savings associations that intended to 
establish transactional Web sites. Part 555, subpart B became effective 
on January 1, 1999, and all savings associations were required to 
comply with it. Because it is obsolete and unnecessary, the FDIC 
proposes rescinding and removing part 390, subpart L. Therefore, 
today's Proposed Rule would have no significant economic impact on any 
State savings association.

C. Plain Language

    Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, codified at 12 U.S.C. 
4809, requires each Federal banking agency to use plain language in all 
of its proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. The 
FDIC invites comments on whether the Proposed Rule is clearly stated 
and effectively organized, and how the FDIC might make it easier to 
understand. For example:
     Has the FDIC organized the material to suit your needs? If 
not, how could it present the rule more clearly?
     Have we clearly stated the requirements of the rule? If 
not, how could the rule be more clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical jargon that is not clear? 
If so, which language requires clarification?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the regulation easier to 
understand? If so, what changes would make the regulation easier to 
understand?
     What else could we do to make the regulation easier to 
understand?

D. The Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under section 2222 of the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1996 (``EGRPRA''), the FDIC is required to review all 
of its regulations, at least once every 10 years, in order to identify 
any outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulations imposed on insured 
institutions.\20\ The FDIC completed the last comprehensive review of 
its regulations under EGRPRA in 2006 and is commencing the next 
decennial review. The action taken on this rule will be included as 
part of the EGRPRA review that is currently in progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Public Law 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 390

    Banks and banking, Electronic operations, Savings associations.

Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Board of Directors of 
the FDIC proposes to amend 12 CFR part 390 as follows:

PART 390--REGULATIONS TRANSFERRED FROM THE OFFICE OF THRIFT 
SUPERVISION

0
1. The authority citation for part 390 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1819.

    Subpart A also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1820.
    Subpart B also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1818.
    Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 504; 554-557; 12 U.S.C. 
1464; 1467; 1468; 1817; 1818; 1820; 1829; 3349, 4717; 15 U.S.C. 78l; 
78o-5; 78u-2; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 31 U.S.C. 5321; 42 U.S.C. 4012a.
    Subpart D also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1817; 1818; 1820; 15 
U.S.C. 78l.
    Subpart E also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1813; 1831m; 15 U.S.C. 78.
    Subpart F also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552; 559; 12 U.S.C. 2901 et 
seq.
    Subpart G also issued under 12 U.S.C. 2810 et seq., 2901 et 
seq.; 15 U.S.C. 1691; 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982, 3601-3619.
    Subpart H also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1464; 1831y.
    Subpart I also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1831x.
    Subpart J also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1831p-1.
    Subpart M also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1818.
    Subpart N also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1821.
    Subpart O also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1828.
    Subpart P also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1470; 1831e; 1831n; 1831p-
1; 3339.
    Subpart Q also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462; 1462a; 1463; 1464.
    Subpart R also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1463; 1464; 1831m; 1831n; 
1831p-1.
    Subpart S also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462; 1462a; 1463; 1464; 
1468a; 1817; 1820; 1828; 1831e; 1831o; 1831p-1; 1881-1884; 3207; 
3339; 15 U.S.C. 78b; 78l; 78m; 78n;

[[Page 42235]]

78p; 78q; 78w; 31 U.S.C. 5318; 42 U.S.C. 4106.
    Subpart T also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462a; 1463; 1464; 15 
U.S.C. 78c; 78l; 78m; 78n; 78w.
    Subpart U also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462a; 1463; 1464; 15 
U.S.C. 78c; 78l; 78m; 78n; 78p; 78w; 78d-1; 7241; 7242; 7243; 7244; 
7261; 7264; 7265.
    Subpart V also issued under 12 U.S.C. 3201-3208.
    Subpart W also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462a; 1463; 1464; 15 
U.S.C. 78c; 78l; 78m; 78n; 78p; 78w.
    Subpart X also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462; 1462a; 1463; 1464; 
1828; 3331 et seq.
    Subpart Y also issued under 12 U.S.C.1831o.
    Subpart Z also issued under 12 U.S.C. 1462; 1462a; 1463; 1464; 
1828 (note).

Subpart L--[Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve subpart L, consisting of Sec. Sec.  390.220 
through 390.222.

    Dated at Washington, DC, this 15th day of July, 2014.

    By order of the Board of Directors, Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16975 Filed 7-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P