9068 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 27 / Thursday, February 11, 2021 / Notices
1 12 CFR part 370.
(3) the location of the device; and (4) the
date of initial operation. Otherwise, the
Commission permits providers to
develop their own registration systems
to facilitate provider control and
interference resolution, providers
should collect only such information
that is reasonably related to achieving
these dual goals. Wireless providers
may determine how to collect such
information and how to keep it up-to-
date. Section 90.219(d)(5)—This rule
requires operators of Part 90 Class B
signal boosters to register these devices
in a searchable on-line database that
will be maintained and operated by the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
via delegated authority from the
Commission. The Commission believes
this will be a valuable tool to resolve
interference should it occur.
Certification Requirements: Sections
20.3, 20.21(e)(2), 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G),
20.21(e)(9)(i)(H), 90.203—These rules,
in conjunction with the R&O, require
that signal booster manufacturers
demonstrate that they meet the new
technical specifications using the
existing and unchanged equipment
authorization application, including
submitting a technical document with
the application for FCC equipment
authorization that shows compliance of
all antennas, cables and/or coupling
devices with the requirements of
§ 20.21(e). The R&O further provides
that manufacturers must make certain
certifications when applying for device
certification. Manufacturers must
provide an explanation of all measures
taken to ensure that the technical
safeguards designed to inhibit harmful
interference and protect wireless
networks cannot be deactivated by the
user. The R&O requires that
manufacturers of Provider-Specific
Consumer Signal Boosters may only be
certificated with the consent of the
licensee so the manufacturer must
certify that it has obtained such consent
as part of the equipment certification
process. The R&O also requires that if a
manufacturer claims that a device will
not affect E911 communications, the
manufacturer must certify this claim
during the equipment certification
process. Note: The ‘‘application for
equipment’’ certification requirements
are met under OMB Control Number
3060–0057, FCC Form 731.
Antenna Kitting Documentation
Requirement: Sections 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G),
20.21(e)(9)(i)(H)—The rules require that
all consumer boosters must be sold with
user manuals specifying all antennas
and cables that meet the requirements of
this section. Part 90 Licensee Consent
Documentation Requirement: Section
90.219(b)(1)(i)—This rule requires that
non-licensees seeking to operate part 90
signal boosters must obtain the express
consent of the licensee(s) of the
frequencies for which the device or
system is intended to amplify. The rules
further require that such consent must
be maintained in a recordable format
that can be presented to a FCC
representative or other relevant licensee
investigating interference.
Cross-reference to Other Rule Parts:
Sections 22.9, 24.9, and 27.9—
Operation of a consumer signal booster
under Parts 22, 24, and 27 of the
Commission’s rules must also comply
with section 20.21 of the Commission’s
rules, including all relevant information
collections.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–02771 Filed 2–10–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Notice of the FDIC’s Response to
Exception Requests Pursuant to
Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Notice of the FDIC’s response to
exception requests pursuant to the
Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination rule.
SUMMARY: In accordance with its rule
regarding recordkeeping for timely
deposit insurance determination, the
FDIC is providing notice that it has
granted time-limited exception relief to
covered institutions from: The
information technology system and
recordkeeping requirements applicable
to certain formal revocable and
irrevocable trust accounts; the
information technology system
requirements, general recordkeeping
requirements, and alternative
recordkeeping requirements applicable
to certain deposit accounts for which
the covered institution must perform
data clean up to assign an appropriate
ownership right and capacity code to
the subject accounts and related system
updates; the information technology
system requirements and general
recordkeeping requirements to certain
internal (work-in-process) deposit
accounts for which the covered
institution’s information technology
system is not yet capable of calculating
deposit insurance within 24 hours after
the appointment of the FDIC as receiver;
and the information technology system
requirements, general recordkeeping
requirements, and alternative
recordkeeping requirements for a
limited number of deposit accounts held
in the covered institution’s trust
department, which acts in an agency or
fiduciary capacity.
DATES: The FDIC’s grants of exception
relief were effective as of February 3,
2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Benjamin Schneider, Section Chief,
Division of Complex Institution
Supervision and Resolution;
beschneider@fdic.gov; 917–320–2534.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC
granted two time-limited exception
requests to multiple covered institutions
and three time-limited exception
requests to a covered institution
pursuant to the FDIC’s rule entitled
‘‘Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination,’’ codified at
12 CFR part 370 (part 370).1 Part 370
generally requires covered institutions
to implement the information
technology system and recordkeeping
capabilities needed to quickly calculate
the amount of deposit insurance
coverage available for each deposit
account in the event of failure. Pursuant
to § 370.8(b)(1), one or more covered
institutions may submit a request in the
form of a letter to the FDIC for an
exception from one or more of the
requirements of part 370 if
circumstances exist that would make it
impracticable or overly burdensome to
meet those requirements. Pursuant to
§ 370.8(b)(3), a covered institution may
rely upon another covered institution’s
exception request which the FDIC has
previously granted by notifying the
FDIC that it will invoke relief from
certain part 370 requirements and
demonstrating that the covered
institution has substantially similar
facts and circumstances to those of the
covered institution that has already
received the FDIC’s approval. The
notification letter must also include the
information required under § 370.8(b)(1)
and cite the applicable notice published
pursuant to § 370.8(b)(2). Unless
informed otherwise by the FDIC within
120 days after the FDIC’s receipt of a
complete notification for exception, the
exception will be deemed granted
subject to the same conditions set forth
in the FDIC’s published notice.
These grants of relief will be subject
to ongoing FDIC review, analysis, and
verification during the FDIC’s routine
part 370 compliance tests. The FDIC
presumes each covered institution is
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:39 Feb 10, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
1 12 CFR part 370.
(3) the location of the device; and (4) the
date of initial operation. Otherwise, the
Commission permits providers to
develop their own registration systems
to facilitate provider control and
interference resolution, providers
should collect only such information
that is reasonably related to achieving
these dual goals. Wireless providers
may determine how to collect such
information and how to keep it up-to-
date. Section 90.219(d)(5)—This rule
requires operators of Part 90 Class B
signal boosters to register these devices
in a searchable on-line database that
will be maintained and operated by the
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
via delegated authority from the
Commission. The Commission believes
this will be a valuable tool to resolve
interference should it occur.
Certification Requirements: Sections
20.3, 20.21(e)(2), 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G),
20.21(e)(9)(i)(H), 90.203—These rules,
in conjunction with the R&O, require
that signal booster manufacturers
demonstrate that they meet the new
technical specifications using the
existing and unchanged equipment
authorization application, including
submitting a technical document with
the application for FCC equipment
authorization that shows compliance of
all antennas, cables and/or coupling
devices with the requirements of
§ 20.21(e). The R&O further provides
that manufacturers must make certain
certifications when applying for device
certification. Manufacturers must
provide an explanation of all measures
taken to ensure that the technical
safeguards designed to inhibit harmful
interference and protect wireless
networks cannot be deactivated by the
user. The R&O requires that
manufacturers of Provider-Specific
Consumer Signal Boosters may only be
certificated with the consent of the
licensee so the manufacturer must
certify that it has obtained such consent
as part of the equipment certification
process. The R&O also requires that if a
manufacturer claims that a device will
not affect E911 communications, the
manufacturer must certify this claim
during the equipment certification
process. Note: The ‘‘application for
equipment’’ certification requirements
are met under OMB Control Number
3060–0057, FCC Form 731.
Antenna Kitting Documentation
Requirement: Sections 20.21(e)(8)(i)(G),
20.21(e)(9)(i)(H)—The rules require that
all consumer boosters must be sold with
user manuals specifying all antennas
and cables that meet the requirements of
this section. Part 90 Licensee Consent
Documentation Requirement: Section
90.219(b)(1)(i)—This rule requires that
non-licensees seeking to operate part 90
signal boosters must obtain the express
consent of the licensee(s) of the
frequencies for which the device or
system is intended to amplify. The rules
further require that such consent must
be maintained in a recordable format
that can be presented to a FCC
representative or other relevant licensee
investigating interference.
Cross-reference to Other Rule Parts:
Sections 22.9, 24.9, and 27.9—
Operation of a consumer signal booster
under Parts 22, 24, and 27 of the
Commission’s rules must also comply
with section 20.21 of the Commission’s
rules, including all relevant information
collections.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–02771 Filed 2–10–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Notice of the FDIC’s Response to
Exception Requests Pursuant to
Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Notice of the FDIC’s response to
exception requests pursuant to the
Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination rule.
SUMMARY: In accordance with its rule
regarding recordkeeping for timely
deposit insurance determination, the
FDIC is providing notice that it has
granted time-limited exception relief to
covered institutions from: The
information technology system and
recordkeeping requirements applicable
to certain formal revocable and
irrevocable trust accounts; the
information technology system
requirements, general recordkeeping
requirements, and alternative
recordkeeping requirements applicable
to certain deposit accounts for which
the covered institution must perform
data clean up to assign an appropriate
ownership right and capacity code to
the subject accounts and related system
updates; the information technology
system requirements and general
recordkeeping requirements to certain
internal (work-in-process) deposit
accounts for which the covered
institution’s information technology
system is not yet capable of calculating
deposit insurance within 24 hours after
the appointment of the FDIC as receiver;
and the information technology system
requirements, general recordkeeping
requirements, and alternative
recordkeeping requirements for a
limited number of deposit accounts held
in the covered institution’s trust
department, which acts in an agency or
fiduciary capacity.
DATES: The FDIC’s grants of exception
relief were effective as of February 3,
2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Benjamin Schneider, Section Chief,
Division of Complex Institution
Supervision and Resolution;
beschneider@fdic.gov; 917–320–2534.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC
granted two time-limited exception
requests to multiple covered institutions
and three time-limited exception
requests to a covered institution
pursuant to the FDIC’s rule entitled
‘‘Recordkeeping for Timely Deposit
Insurance Determination,’’ codified at
12 CFR part 370 (part 370).1 Part 370
generally requires covered institutions
to implement the information
technology system and recordkeeping
capabilities needed to quickly calculate
the amount of deposit insurance
coverage available for each deposit
account in the event of failure. Pursuant
to § 370.8(b)(1), one or more covered
institutions may submit a request in the
form of a letter to the FDIC for an
exception from one or more of the
requirements of part 370 if
circumstances exist that would make it
impracticable or overly burdensome to
meet those requirements. Pursuant to
§ 370.8(b)(3), a covered institution may
rely upon another covered institution’s
exception request which the FDIC has
previously granted by notifying the
FDIC that it will invoke relief from
certain part 370 requirements and
demonstrating that the covered
institution has substantially similar
facts and circumstances to those of the
covered institution that has already
received the FDIC’s approval. The
notification letter must also include the
information required under § 370.8(b)(1)
and cite the applicable notice published
pursuant to § 370.8(b)(2). Unless
informed otherwise by the FDIC within
120 days after the FDIC’s receipt of a
complete notification for exception, the
exception will be deemed granted
subject to the same conditions set forth
in the FDIC’s published notice.
These grants of relief will be subject
to ongoing FDIC review, analysis, and
verification during the FDIC’s routine
part 370 compliance tests. The FDIC
presumes each covered institution is
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:39 Feb 10, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
9069Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 27 / Thursday, February 11, 2021 / Notices
meeting all the requirements set forth in
the Rule unless relief has otherwise
been granted. These grants of relief may
be rescinded or modified upon:
Discovery of misrepresentation; material
change of circumstances or conditions
related to the subject accounts; or failure
to satisfy conditions applicable to each.
The following exceptions were granted
by the FDIC as of February 3, 2021.
I. Certain Formal Revocable and
Irrevocable Trust Accounts With
Transactional Features for Which the
Covered Institution Must Maintain a
Unique Identifier for a Grantor in its
Deposit Account Records
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology system requirements set
forth in § 370.3 and certain
recordkeeping requirements set forth in
§ 370.4(b)(2) of the rule to two covered
institutions for up to 18 months from
their compliance date. These covered
institutions requested exception relief in
order to review records, perform
customer outreach where necessary, and
update recordkeeping and information
technology systems in order to maintain
a unique identifier of a grantor in the
deposit account records for a limited
number of deposit accounts held in
connection with a formal revocable or
irrevocable trust that would be insured
as described in 12 CFR 330.10 or 12 CFR
330.13.
These covered institutions
represented that they had not
maintained a unique identifier (which
may be, but is not required to be, a
government issued identification
number such as a social security
number or tax identification number) for
a grantor of a formal trust with
transactional features in its records for
the subject accounts. The covered
institutions believe that they can obtain
the information needed to maintain a
unique identifier for such a grantor
through a review of trust-related
documents and customer outreach, but
that information technology system
updates are also necessary to ensure a
unique identifier for each grantor can be
maintained in deposit account records.
In connection with the FDIC’s grants
of relief, these covered institutions have
represented that they will maintain the
capability to place holds on the deposit
accounts subject to the exception in the
event of failure until a deposit insurance
determination can be made and place all
such accounts into the pending file of
its part 370 output files during the relief
period. As conditions of relief, these
covered institutions must submit a
status report to part370@fdic.gov at the
midpoint of the exception relief period
and immediately bring to the FDIC’s
attention any change of circumstances
or conditions.
II. Certain Deposit Accounts for Which
the Covered Institution’s Information
Technology System Is Not Capable of
Completing Deposit Insurance
Calculation Process Because Additional
Time Is Required for Data Cleanup To
Assign an Ownership, Right and
Capacity Code and for Related System
Updates
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology system requirements set
forth in § 370.3, general recordkeeping
requirements set forth in § 370.4(a), and
alternative recordkeeping requirements
set forth in § 370.4(b) of the rule to a
covered institution for up to 12 months
from the granted relief date. The
covered institution requested exception
relief to perform data cleanup of
account records, make system updates,
and assign ownership, right and
capacity codes to a limited number of
various deposit accounts. These data
cleanup and system update efforts are
needed so that the covered institution’s
deposit account records and part 370-
compliant information technology
system capabilities can be used to
calculate deposit insurance for the
subject accounts.
The covered institution has identified
data quality issues that led to
inappropriate ownership, right and
capacity codes being assigned to various
deposit accounts. Data quality issues
included inappropriate ownership, right
and capacity codes being assigned to the
subject accounts due to system logic
misidentifying keywords in account
titles. For example, a single account
opened by ‘James Bond’ might be
assigned the public bond account
ownership right and capacity code of
PBA. In other instances, a limited
number of accounts were not assigned
an ownership right and capacity code
due to unclear account titling,
insufficient records, and general data
quality issues.
The covered institution requested
time-limited relief to review records,
assign the appropriate ownership right
and capacity code, and ensure its
systems can calculate deposit insurance
for the subject accounts. In addition, the
covered institution represented that it
will be able to identify the applicable
ownership right and capacity code upon
the completion of remediation efforts for
the majority of accounts.
In connection with the FDIC’s grant of
relief, the covered institution will
investigate the reason accounts were
placed into the pending file of the
covered institution’s part 370 output
files, review account records, write new
system logic to ensure the applicable
ownership right and capacity code is
applied to the subject accounts, and, in
the event of its failure, ensure that holds
can be placed on all deposit accounts
subject to this time-limited exception
relief until sufficient information is
obtained to enable calculation of deposit
insurance coverage. As conditions of
relief, the covered institution must
submit a status report to part370@
fdic.gov at the midpoint of the exception
relief period and immediately bring to
the FDIC’s attention any change of
circumstances or conditions.
III. A Limited Number of Internal
(Work-in-Process) Deposit Accounts for
Which the Covered Institution’s
Information Technology System Is Not
Capable of Completing Deposit
Insurance Calculation Process Within
24 Hours of Failure
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology requirements set forth in
§ 370.3 and general recordkeeping
requirements set forth in § 370.4(a) of
the rule to a covered institution for up
to 18 months from its compliance date
for certain internal (work-in-process)
accounts that the covered institution’s
information technology system cannot
calculate deposit insurance within 24
hours of failure. The covered institution
identified these internal accounts as
accounts utilized for functions such as
clearing, settlement, suspense or work-
in-process. Such accounts do not qualify
for alternative recordkeeping.
In connection with the FDIC’s grant of
relief, the covered institution described
the internal (work-in-process) accounts
in detail, including, account titling, the
number of accounts, account balances,
data and trends regarding transaction
settlement cycles, business-as-usual
processes in place, and zero-balance
accounts. The covered institution has
represented that it will place all such
accounts into the pending file of the
covered institution’s part 370 output
files; document procedures and
processes to upload the data into the
covered institution’s deposit insurance
calculation engine; and certify that the
covered institution can obtain
information from internal business lines
necessary to make a deposit insurance
determination as soon as possible after
appointment of the FDIC as receiver.
As conditions of relief, the covered
institution must submit a status report
to part370@fdic.gov at the midpoint of
the exception relief period setting forth
progress made towards rule compliance
for the subject accounts; provide
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:39 Feb 10, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
meeting all the requirements set forth in
the Rule unless relief has otherwise
been granted. These grants of relief may
be rescinded or modified upon:
Discovery of misrepresentation; material
change of circumstances or conditions
related to the subject accounts; or failure
to satisfy conditions applicable to each.
The following exceptions were granted
by the FDIC as of February 3, 2021.
I. Certain Formal Revocable and
Irrevocable Trust Accounts With
Transactional Features for Which the
Covered Institution Must Maintain a
Unique Identifier for a Grantor in its
Deposit Account Records
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology system requirements set
forth in § 370.3 and certain
recordkeeping requirements set forth in
§ 370.4(b)(2) of the rule to two covered
institutions for up to 18 months from
their compliance date. These covered
institutions requested exception relief in
order to review records, perform
customer outreach where necessary, and
update recordkeeping and information
technology systems in order to maintain
a unique identifier of a grantor in the
deposit account records for a limited
number of deposit accounts held in
connection with a formal revocable or
irrevocable trust that would be insured
as described in 12 CFR 330.10 or 12 CFR
330.13.
These covered institutions
represented that they had not
maintained a unique identifier (which
may be, but is not required to be, a
government issued identification
number such as a social security
number or tax identification number) for
a grantor of a formal trust with
transactional features in its records for
the subject accounts. The covered
institutions believe that they can obtain
the information needed to maintain a
unique identifier for such a grantor
through a review of trust-related
documents and customer outreach, but
that information technology system
updates are also necessary to ensure a
unique identifier for each grantor can be
maintained in deposit account records.
In connection with the FDIC’s grants
of relief, these covered institutions have
represented that they will maintain the
capability to place holds on the deposit
accounts subject to the exception in the
event of failure until a deposit insurance
determination can be made and place all
such accounts into the pending file of
its part 370 output files during the relief
period. As conditions of relief, these
covered institutions must submit a
status report to part370@fdic.gov at the
midpoint of the exception relief period
and immediately bring to the FDIC’s
attention any change of circumstances
or conditions.
II. Certain Deposit Accounts for Which
the Covered Institution’s Information
Technology System Is Not Capable of
Completing Deposit Insurance
Calculation Process Because Additional
Time Is Required for Data Cleanup To
Assign an Ownership, Right and
Capacity Code and for Related System
Updates
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology system requirements set
forth in § 370.3, general recordkeeping
requirements set forth in § 370.4(a), and
alternative recordkeeping requirements
set forth in § 370.4(b) of the rule to a
covered institution for up to 12 months
from the granted relief date. The
covered institution requested exception
relief to perform data cleanup of
account records, make system updates,
and assign ownership, right and
capacity codes to a limited number of
various deposit accounts. These data
cleanup and system update efforts are
needed so that the covered institution’s
deposit account records and part 370-
compliant information technology
system capabilities can be used to
calculate deposit insurance for the
subject accounts.
The covered institution has identified
data quality issues that led to
inappropriate ownership, right and
capacity codes being assigned to various
deposit accounts. Data quality issues
included inappropriate ownership, right
and capacity codes being assigned to the
subject accounts due to system logic
misidentifying keywords in account
titles. For example, a single account
opened by ‘James Bond’ might be
assigned the public bond account
ownership right and capacity code of
PBA. In other instances, a limited
number of accounts were not assigned
an ownership right and capacity code
due to unclear account titling,
insufficient records, and general data
quality issues.
The covered institution requested
time-limited relief to review records,
assign the appropriate ownership right
and capacity code, and ensure its
systems can calculate deposit insurance
for the subject accounts. In addition, the
covered institution represented that it
will be able to identify the applicable
ownership right and capacity code upon
the completion of remediation efforts for
the majority of accounts.
In connection with the FDIC’s grant of
relief, the covered institution will
investigate the reason accounts were
placed into the pending file of the
covered institution’s part 370 output
files, review account records, write new
system logic to ensure the applicable
ownership right and capacity code is
applied to the subject accounts, and, in
the event of its failure, ensure that holds
can be placed on all deposit accounts
subject to this time-limited exception
relief until sufficient information is
obtained to enable calculation of deposit
insurance coverage. As conditions of
relief, the covered institution must
submit a status report to part370@
fdic.gov at the midpoint of the exception
relief period and immediately bring to
the FDIC’s attention any change of
circumstances or conditions.
III. A Limited Number of Internal
(Work-in-Process) Deposit Accounts for
Which the Covered Institution’s
Information Technology System Is Not
Capable of Completing Deposit
Insurance Calculation Process Within
24 Hours of Failure
The FDIC granted time-limited
exception relief from the information
technology requirements set forth in
§ 370.3 and general recordkeeping
requirements set forth in § 370.4(a) of
the rule to a covered institution for up
to 18 months from its compliance date
for certain internal (work-in-process)
accounts that the covered institution’s
information technology system cannot
calculate deposit insurance within 24
hours of failure. The covered institution
identified these internal accounts as
accounts utilized for functions such as
clearing, settlement, suspense or work-
in-process. Such accounts do not qualify
for alternative recordkeeping.
In connection with the FDIC’s grant of
relief, the covered institution described
the internal (work-in-process) accounts
in detail, including, account titling, the
number of accounts, account balances,
data and trends regarding transaction
settlement cycles, business-as-usual
processes in place, and zero-balance
accounts. The covered institution has
represented that it will place all such
accounts into the pending file of the
covered institution’s part 370 output
files; document procedures and
processes to upload the data into the
covered institution’s deposit insurance
calculation engine; and certify that the
covered institution can obtain
information from internal business lines
necessary to make a deposit insurance
determination as soon as possible after
appointment of the FDIC as receiver.
As conditions of relief, the covered
institution must submit a status report
to part370@fdic.gov at the midpoint of
the exception relief period setting forth
progress made towards rule compliance
for the subject accounts; provide
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:39 Feb 10, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES