20633Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices
Communications Commission, (202)
418–0447.
Federal Communications Commission.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0253.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Part 68 - Connection of
Telephone Equipment to the Telephone
Network (Sections 68.106, 68.108,
68.110).
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 3,270
hours; 0.057 hour (average) per
respondent; 57,540 respondents.
Description: These collections are
designed to prevent harm to the
telephone network when customer-
provided equipment is connected to
telephone company lines and assures
that customers will not overload the
telephone lines with excessive
equipment which would degrade
service to the customers and others.
Telephone companies and persons
connecting certain equipment to the
network are the affected public.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0320.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Section 73.1350 - Transmission
System Operation.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 209 hours;
0.5 hour per respondent; 417
respondents.
Description: Section 73.1350 requires
licensees of broadcast stations to notify
the Commission whenever a
transmission system control point is
established at a location other than the
main studio or transmitter. The data is
used by FCC staff to maintain operating
information regarding licensees in the
event that FCC field staff needs to
contact a station about interference.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0627.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Application for AM Broadcast
Station License.
Form Number: FCC 302–AM.
Estimated Annual Burden: 4,400
hours; 12.57 hours (average) per
response; 350 respondents.
Description: FCC 302–AM is used by
licensees when applying for a new or
modified station license, and/or to
notify the Commission of certain
changes in the licensed facilities of
these stations. The data is used by FCC
staff to confirm that the station has been
built to terms specified in the
outstanding construction permit. Data is
then extracted for inclusion in the
subsequent license to operate the
station.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0634.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Section 73.691 - Visual
Modulation Monitoring.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 70 hours;
1 hour per response; 35 respondents (2
notifications per respondent).
Description: Section 73.691 requires
TV stations to enter into the station log
the date and time of initial technical
problems that make it impossible to
operate TV station in accordance with
timing and carrier level tolerance
requirements. If variance will exceed 10
days, notification must be sent to FCC.
Notification must also be sent to FCC
upon restoration of normal operations.
Data is used by FCC staff to maintain
technical information about station
operation in the event a complaint is
received from the public regarding
station operations.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98–11100 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–F
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[Report No. 2270]
Petitions for Reconsideration and
Clarification of Action in Rulemaking
Proceeding
April 21, 1998.
Petitions for reconsideration and
clarification have been filed in the
Commission’s rulemaking proceedings
listed in this Public Notice and
published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e).
The full text of these documents are
available for viewing and copying in
Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. or may be purchased
from the Commission’s copy contractor,
ITS, Inc., (202) 857–3800. Oppositions
to these petitions must be filed May 12,
1998. See § 1.4(b)(1) of the
Commission’s rule (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).
Replies to an opposition must be filed
within 10 days after the time for filing
oppositions has expired.
Subject: Streamlining Broadcast EEO
Rules and Policies, Vacating the EEO
Forfeiture Policy Statement and
Amending Section 1.80 of the
Commission’s Rules To Include EEO
Forfeiture Guidelines (CC Docket No.
96–16)
Number of Petitions Filed: 1.
Subject: Implementation of Section
703(e) of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996; Amendment of the
Commission’s Rules and Policies
Governing Pole Attachments (CC Docket
97–151).
Number of Petitions Filed: 9.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98–11011 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–M
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Differences in Capital and Accounting
Standards Among the Federal Banking
and Thrift Agencies; Report to
Congressional Committees
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Report to the Committee on
Banking and Financial Services of the
U.S. House of Representatives and to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the United States
Senate Regarding Differences in Capital
and Accounting Standards Among the
Federal Banking and Thrift Agencies.
SUMMARY: This report has been prepared
by the FDIC pursuant to Section 37(c) of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12
U.S.C. 1831n(c)). Section 37(c) requires
each federal banking agency to report to
the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services of the House of
Representatives and to the Committee
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
of the Senate any differences between
any accounting or capital standard used
by such agency and any accounting or
capital standard used by any other such
agency. The report must also contain an
explanation of the reasons for any
discrepancy in such accounting and
capital standards and must be published
in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert F. Storch, Chief, Accounting
Section, Division of Supervision,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
550 17th Street, NW., Washington, D.C.
20429, telephone (202) 898–8906.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of
the report follows:
Report to the Committee on Banking
and Financial Services of the U.S.
House of Representatives and to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the United States
Senate Regarding Differences in Capital
and Accounting Standards Among the
Federal Banking and Thrift Agencies
A. Introduction
This report has been prepared by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(FDIC) pursuant to Section 37(c) of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act, which
requires the agency to submit a report to
specified Congressional Committees
describing any differences in regulatory
Communications Commission, (202)
418–0447.
Federal Communications Commission.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0253.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Part 68 - Connection of
Telephone Equipment to the Telephone
Network (Sections 68.106, 68.108,
68.110).
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 3,270
hours; 0.057 hour (average) per
respondent; 57,540 respondents.
Description: These collections are
designed to prevent harm to the
telephone network when customer-
provided equipment is connected to
telephone company lines and assures
that customers will not overload the
telephone lines with excessive
equipment which would degrade
service to the customers and others.
Telephone companies and persons
connecting certain equipment to the
network are the affected public.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0320.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Section 73.1350 - Transmission
System Operation.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 209 hours;
0.5 hour per respondent; 417
respondents.
Description: Section 73.1350 requires
licensees of broadcast stations to notify
the Commission whenever a
transmission system control point is
established at a location other than the
main studio or transmitter. The data is
used by FCC staff to maintain operating
information regarding licensees in the
event that FCC field staff needs to
contact a station about interference.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0627.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Application for AM Broadcast
Station License.
Form Number: FCC 302–AM.
Estimated Annual Burden: 4,400
hours; 12.57 hours (average) per
response; 350 respondents.
Description: FCC 302–AM is used by
licensees when applying for a new or
modified station license, and/or to
notify the Commission of certain
changes in the licensed facilities of
these stations. The data is used by FCC
staff to confirm that the station has been
built to terms specified in the
outstanding construction permit. Data is
then extracted for inclusion in the
subsequent license to operate the
station.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0634.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2001.
Title: Section 73.691 - Visual
Modulation Monitoring.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Estimated Annual Burden: 70 hours;
1 hour per response; 35 respondents (2
notifications per respondent).
Description: Section 73.691 requires
TV stations to enter into the station log
the date and time of initial technical
problems that make it impossible to
operate TV station in accordance with
timing and carrier level tolerance
requirements. If variance will exceed 10
days, notification must be sent to FCC.
Notification must also be sent to FCC
upon restoration of normal operations.
Data is used by FCC staff to maintain
technical information about station
operation in the event a complaint is
received from the public regarding
station operations.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98–11100 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–F
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[Report No. 2270]
Petitions for Reconsideration and
Clarification of Action in Rulemaking
Proceeding
April 21, 1998.
Petitions for reconsideration and
clarification have been filed in the
Commission’s rulemaking proceedings
listed in this Public Notice and
published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e).
The full text of these documents are
available for viewing and copying in
Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. or may be purchased
from the Commission’s copy contractor,
ITS, Inc., (202) 857–3800. Oppositions
to these petitions must be filed May 12,
1998. See § 1.4(b)(1) of the
Commission’s rule (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).
Replies to an opposition must be filed
within 10 days after the time for filing
oppositions has expired.
Subject: Streamlining Broadcast EEO
Rules and Policies, Vacating the EEO
Forfeiture Policy Statement and
Amending Section 1.80 of the
Commission’s Rules To Include EEO
Forfeiture Guidelines (CC Docket No.
96–16)
Number of Petitions Filed: 1.
Subject: Implementation of Section
703(e) of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996; Amendment of the
Commission’s Rules and Policies
Governing Pole Attachments (CC Docket
97–151).
Number of Petitions Filed: 9.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98–11011 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–M
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Differences in Capital and Accounting
Standards Among the Federal Banking
and Thrift Agencies; Report to
Congressional Committees
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Report to the Committee on
Banking and Financial Services of the
U.S. House of Representatives and to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the United States
Senate Regarding Differences in Capital
and Accounting Standards Among the
Federal Banking and Thrift Agencies.
SUMMARY: This report has been prepared
by the FDIC pursuant to Section 37(c) of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12
U.S.C. 1831n(c)). Section 37(c) requires
each federal banking agency to report to
the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services of the House of
Representatives and to the Committee
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
of the Senate any differences between
any accounting or capital standard used
by such agency and any accounting or
capital standard used by any other such
agency. The report must also contain an
explanation of the reasons for any
discrepancy in such accounting and
capital standards and must be published
in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert F. Storch, Chief, Accounting
Section, Division of Supervision,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
550 17th Street, NW., Washington, D.C.
20429, telephone (202) 898–8906.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of
the report follows:
Report to the Committee on Banking
and Financial Services of the U.S.
House of Representatives and to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the United States
Senate Regarding Differences in Capital
and Accounting Standards Among the
Federal Banking and Thrift Agencies
A. Introduction
This report has been prepared by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(FDIC) pursuant to Section 37(c) of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act, which
requires the agency to submit a report to
specified Congressional Committees
describing any differences in regulatory
20634 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices
1 In the following areas, differences in reporting
standards between the banking agencies and the
OTS were eliminated in 1997: sales of assets with
recourse, futures and forward contracts, excess
servicing fees, offsetting of assets and liabilities,
and in-substance defeasance of debt.
capital and accounting standards among
the federal banking and thrift agencies,
including an explanation of the reasons
for these differences. Section 37(c) also
requires the FDIC to publish this report
in the Federal Register. This report
covers differences existing during 1997
and developments affecting these
differences.
The FDIC, the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System (FRB), and
the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC) (hereafter, the banking
agencies) have substantially similar
leverage and risk-based capital
standards. While the Office of Thrift
Supervision (OTS) employs a regulatory
capital framework that also includes
leverage and risk-based capital
requirements, it differs in several
respects from that of the banking
agencies. Nevertheless, the agencies
view the leverage and risk-based capital
requirements as minimum standards
and most institutions are expected to
operate with capital levels well above
the minimums, particularly those
institutions that are expanding or
experiencing unusual or high levels of
risk.
The banking agencies, under the
auspices of the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council
(FFIEC), have developed uniform
Reports of Condition and Income (Call
Reports) for all commercial banks and
FDIC-supervised savings banks.
Effective with the March 31, 1997,
report date, the FFIEC and the banking
agencies adopted generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP) as the
reporting basis for the balance sheet,
income statement, and related schedules
in the Call Report. Prior to 1997, the
reporting standards for the bank Call
Report were substantially consistent
with GAAP. In the limited number of
cases where the bank Call Report
standards differed from GAAP, the
regulatory reporting requirements were
intended to be more conservative than
GAAP. Adopting GAAP as the reporting
basis for recognition and measurement
purposes in the basic schedules of the
Call Report was designed to eliminate
these differences, thereby producing
greater consistency in the information
collected in bank Call Reports and
general purpose financial statements
and reducing regulatory burden.
The OTS requires each savings
association to file the Thrift Financial
Report (TFR), the reporting standards
for which are consistent with GAAP.
Thus, through year-end 1996, the
reporting standards applicable to the
bank Call Report differed in some
respects from the reporting standards
applicable to the TFR. However, with
the banking agencies’ move to GAAP for
Call Report purposes in 1997, the most
significant differences in reporting
standards among the agencies that were
cited in previous reports have been
eliminated.1
Section 303 of the Riegle Community
Development and Regulatory
Improvement Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C.
4803) requires the banking agencies and
the OTS to conduct a systematic review
of their regulations and written policies
in order to improve efficiency, reduce
unnecessary costs, and eliminate
inconsistencies. It also directs the four
agencies to work jointly to make
uniform all regulations and guidelines
implementing common statutory or
supervisory policies. The results of
these efforts must be ‘‘consistent with
the principles of safety and soundness,
statutory law and policy, and the public
interest.’’ The four agencies’ efforts to
eliminate existing differences among
their regulatory capital standards as part
of the Section 303 review are discussed
in the following section.
B. Differences in Capital Standards
Among the Federal Banking and Thrift
Agencies
B.1. Minimum Leverage Capital
The banking agencies have
established leverage capital standards
based upon the definition of Tier 1 (or
core) capital contained in their risk-
based capital standards. These
standards require the most highly-rated
banks (i.e., those with a composite
rating of ‘‘1’’ under the Uniform
Financial Institutions Rating System
(UFIRS)) to maintain a minimum
leverage capital ratio of at least 3
percent if they are not anticipating or
experiencing any significant growth and
meet certain other conditions. All other
banks must maintain a minimum
leverage capital ratio that is at least 100
to 200 basis points above this minimum
(i.e., an absolute minimum leverage
ratio of not less than 4 percent).
The OTS has a 3 percent core capital
and a 1.5 percent tangible capital
leverage requirement for savings
associations. However, the OTS’ Prompt
Corrective Action rule requires a savings
association to have a 4 percent leverage
capital ratio (or a 3 percent leverage
capital ratio if it is rated a composite
‘‘1’’ under the UFIRS) in order for the
association to be considered
‘‘adequately capitalized.’’ Consequently,
the 4 percent leverage capital ratio is, in
effect, the controlling leverage capital
standard for savings associations other
than those rated a composite ‘‘1.’’
As a result of the agencies’ Section
303 review of their regulatory capital
standards, the agencies issued a
proposal for public comment on October
27, 1997, that, among other provisions,
would establish a uniform leverage
requirement. As proposed, institutions
rated a composite 1 under the Uniform
Financial Institutions Rating System
would be subject to a minimum 3
percent leverage ratio and all other
institutions would be subject to a
minimum 4 percent leverage ratio. This
change would simplify and streamline
the agencies’ leverage rules and make
them uniform. The comment period for
the proposal ended on December 26,
1997.
B.2. Interest Rate Risk
Section 305 of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation Improvement Act
of 1991 mandates that the agencies’ risk-
based capital standards take adequate
account of interest rate risk. In August
1995, each of the banking agencies
amended its capital standards to
specifically include an assessment of a
bank’s interest rate risk, as measured by
its exposure to declines in the economic
value of its capital due to changes in
interest rates, in the evaluation of bank
capital adequacy. In June 1996, the
banking agencies issued a Joint Agency
Policy Statement on Interest Rate Risk
which provides guidance on sound
practices for managing interest rate risk.
This policy statement does not establish
a standardized measure of interest rate
risk nor does it create an explicit capital
charge for interest rate risk. Instead, the
policy statement identifies the standards
that the banking agencies will use to
evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness
of a bank’s interest rate risk
management.
In 1993, the OTS adopted a final rule
which adds an interest rate risk
component to its risk-based capital
standards. Under this rule, savings
associations with a greater than normal
interest rate exposure must take a
deduction from the total capital
available to meet their risk-based capital
requirement. The deduction is equal to
one half of the difference between the
institution’s actual measured exposure
and the normal level of exposure. The
OTS has partially implemented this rule
by formalizing the review of interest rate
risk; however, no deductions from
capital are being made. As described
above, the approach adopted by the
banking agencies differs from that of the
OTS.
1 In the following areas, differences in reporting
standards between the banking agencies and the
OTS were eliminated in 1997: sales of assets with
recourse, futures and forward contracts, excess
servicing fees, offsetting of assets and liabilities,
and in-substance defeasance of debt.
capital and accounting standards among
the federal banking and thrift agencies,
including an explanation of the reasons
for these differences. Section 37(c) also
requires the FDIC to publish this report
in the Federal Register. This report
covers differences existing during 1997
and developments affecting these
differences.
The FDIC, the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System (FRB), and
the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC) (hereafter, the banking
agencies) have substantially similar
leverage and risk-based capital
standards. While the Office of Thrift
Supervision (OTS) employs a regulatory
capital framework that also includes
leverage and risk-based capital
requirements, it differs in several
respects from that of the banking
agencies. Nevertheless, the agencies
view the leverage and risk-based capital
requirements as minimum standards
and most institutions are expected to
operate with capital levels well above
the minimums, particularly those
institutions that are expanding or
experiencing unusual or high levels of
risk.
The banking agencies, under the
auspices of the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council
(FFIEC), have developed uniform
Reports of Condition and Income (Call
Reports) for all commercial banks and
FDIC-supervised savings banks.
Effective with the March 31, 1997,
report date, the FFIEC and the banking
agencies adopted generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP) as the
reporting basis for the balance sheet,
income statement, and related schedules
in the Call Report. Prior to 1997, the
reporting standards for the bank Call
Report were substantially consistent
with GAAP. In the limited number of
cases where the bank Call Report
standards differed from GAAP, the
regulatory reporting requirements were
intended to be more conservative than
GAAP. Adopting GAAP as the reporting
basis for recognition and measurement
purposes in the basic schedules of the
Call Report was designed to eliminate
these differences, thereby producing
greater consistency in the information
collected in bank Call Reports and
general purpose financial statements
and reducing regulatory burden.
The OTS requires each savings
association to file the Thrift Financial
Report (TFR), the reporting standards
for which are consistent with GAAP.
Thus, through year-end 1996, the
reporting standards applicable to the
bank Call Report differed in some
respects from the reporting standards
applicable to the TFR. However, with
the banking agencies’ move to GAAP for
Call Report purposes in 1997, the most
significant differences in reporting
standards among the agencies that were
cited in previous reports have been
eliminated.1
Section 303 of the Riegle Community
Development and Regulatory
Improvement Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C.
4803) requires the banking agencies and
the OTS to conduct a systematic review
of their regulations and written policies
in order to improve efficiency, reduce
unnecessary costs, and eliminate
inconsistencies. It also directs the four
agencies to work jointly to make
uniform all regulations and guidelines
implementing common statutory or
supervisory policies. The results of
these efforts must be ‘‘consistent with
the principles of safety and soundness,
statutory law and policy, and the public
interest.’’ The four agencies’ efforts to
eliminate existing differences among
their regulatory capital standards as part
of the Section 303 review are discussed
in the following section.
B. Differences in Capital Standards
Among the Federal Banking and Thrift
Agencies
B.1. Minimum Leverage Capital
The banking agencies have
established leverage capital standards
based upon the definition of Tier 1 (or
core) capital contained in their risk-
based capital standards. These
standards require the most highly-rated
banks (i.e., those with a composite
rating of ‘‘1’’ under the Uniform
Financial Institutions Rating System
(UFIRS)) to maintain a minimum
leverage capital ratio of at least 3
percent if they are not anticipating or
experiencing any significant growth and
meet certain other conditions. All other
banks must maintain a minimum
leverage capital ratio that is at least 100
to 200 basis points above this minimum
(i.e., an absolute minimum leverage
ratio of not less than 4 percent).
The OTS has a 3 percent core capital
and a 1.5 percent tangible capital
leverage requirement for savings
associations. However, the OTS’ Prompt
Corrective Action rule requires a savings
association to have a 4 percent leverage
capital ratio (or a 3 percent leverage
capital ratio if it is rated a composite
‘‘1’’ under the UFIRS) in order for the
association to be considered
‘‘adequately capitalized.’’ Consequently,
the 4 percent leverage capital ratio is, in
effect, the controlling leverage capital
standard for savings associations other
than those rated a composite ‘‘1.’’
As a result of the agencies’ Section
303 review of their regulatory capital
standards, the agencies issued a
proposal for public comment on October
27, 1997, that, among other provisions,
would establish a uniform leverage
requirement. As proposed, institutions
rated a composite 1 under the Uniform
Financial Institutions Rating System
would be subject to a minimum 3
percent leverage ratio and all other
institutions would be subject to a
minimum 4 percent leverage ratio. This
change would simplify and streamline
the agencies’ leverage rules and make
them uniform. The comment period for
the proposal ended on December 26,
1997.
B.2. Interest Rate Risk
Section 305 of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation Improvement Act
of 1991 mandates that the agencies’ risk-
based capital standards take adequate
account of interest rate risk. In August
1995, each of the banking agencies
amended its capital standards to
specifically include an assessment of a
bank’s interest rate risk, as measured by
its exposure to declines in the economic
value of its capital due to changes in
interest rates, in the evaluation of bank
capital adequacy. In June 1996, the
banking agencies issued a Joint Agency
Policy Statement on Interest Rate Risk
which provides guidance on sound
practices for managing interest rate risk.
This policy statement does not establish
a standardized measure of interest rate
risk nor does it create an explicit capital
charge for interest rate risk. Instead, the
policy statement identifies the standards
that the banking agencies will use to
evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness
of a bank’s interest rate risk
management.
In 1993, the OTS adopted a final rule
which adds an interest rate risk
component to its risk-based capital
standards. Under this rule, savings
associations with a greater than normal
interest rate exposure must take a
deduction from the total capital
available to meet their risk-based capital
requirement. The deduction is equal to
one half of the difference between the
institution’s actual measured exposure
and the normal level of exposure. The
OTS has partially implemented this rule
by formalizing the review of interest rate
risk; however, no deductions from
capital are being made. As described
above, the approach adopted by the
banking agencies differs from that of the
OTS.