22771Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, and/or U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
as appropriate in the context in which
the term appears.’’ 76 FR 53764, 53780.
Where a section of the regulations was
determined to pertain to an action that
may have been taken by INS, or a
function that is within the purview of or
shared with another component, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was retained or
inserted. Id.
DHS made one erroneous amendment
in the August 2011 final rule with
regard to the use of ‘‘USCIS’’ in lieu of
‘‘the Service.’’ In 8 CFR part 208, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was revised to read
‘‘USCIS,’’ including in 8 CFR 208.24(f),
which deals with the termination of
asylum or withholding of deportation or
removal by an Immigration Judge or the
Board of Immigration Appeals.
Termination of asylum is an authority
shared between the Department of
Justice and USCIS, but USCIS has no
role in removal proceedings beyond the
issuance of a notice to appear in
accordance with 8 CFR 208.24(e) and
(g). The current, recently-amended
regulatory language incorrectly
provides, however, that USCIS has the
responsibility in removal proceedings to
establish grounds of termination,
whereas that is the responsibility of U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Therefore, this notice corrects that error
by removing one incorrect reference to
‘‘USCIS’’ in 8 CFR 208.24(f) and
replacing it with ‘‘the Service.’’
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 103
Administrative practice and
procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies), Freedom of
information, Immigration, Privacy,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surety bonds.
8 CFR Part 208
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Correction
Accordingly, for the reasons set out in
the preamble, chapter I of title 8 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is corrected
by making the following correcting
amendments:
PART 103—IMMIGRATION BENEFITS;
BIOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS;
AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS
■ 1. The authority citation for part 103
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1103, 1304, 1356, 1365b; 31 U.S.C.
9701; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6
U.S.C. 1 et seq.); E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874,
15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166; 8 CFR part
2.
■ 2. Section 103.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(18) to read as
follows:
Subpart A—Applying for Benefits,
Surety Bonds, Fees
§ 103.2 Submission and adjudication of
benefit requests.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(18) Withholding adjudication. USCIS
may authorize withholding adjudication
of a visa petition or other application if
USCIS determines that an investigation
has been undertaken involving a matter
relating to eligibility or the exercise of
discretion, where applicable, in
connection with the benefit request, and
that the disclosure of information to the
applicant or petitioner in connection
with the adjudication of the benefit
request would prejudice the ongoing
investigation. If an investigation has
been undertaken and has not been
completed within one year of its
inception, USCIS will review the matter
and determine whether adjudication of
the benefit request should be held in
abeyance for six months or until the
investigation is completed, whichever
comes sooner. If, after six months of
USCIS’s determination, the
investigation has not been completed,
the matter will be reviewed again by
USCIS and, if it concludes that more
time is needed to complete the
investigation, adjudication may be held
in abeyance for up to another six
months. If the investigation is not
completed at the end of that time,
USCIS may authorize that adjudication
be held in abeyance for another six
months. Thereafter, if USCIS determines
it is necessary to continue to withhold
adjudication pending completion of the
investigation, it will review that
determination every six months.
* * * * *
PART 208—PROCEDURES FOR
ASLYUM AND WITHHOLDING OF
REMOVAL
■ 3. The authority citation for part 208
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1158, 1226,
1252, 1282; Title VII of Pub. L. 110–229; 8
CFR part 2.
Subpart A—Asylum and Withholding
of Removal
§ 208.24 [Corrected]
■ 4. Section 208.24 is amended in
paragraph (f), the second sentence, by
removing the term ‘‘USCIS’’ and adding
in its place the term, ‘‘the Service’’.
Christina E. McDonald,
Associate General Counsel for Regulatory
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2013–08985 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Chapter III
Statement of Policy on the
Development and Review of
Regulations and Policies
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Revision of statement of policy.
SUMMARY: The FDIC is updating its
Statement of Policy entitled,
‘‘Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies’’ (Policy
Statement). The Policy Statement
articulates the basic principles that
guide the FDIC in its promulgation and
review of regulations and written
statements of policy. The Policy
Statement is being revised to more fully
reflect the FDIC’s current rulemaking
policies and procedures, as well as take
into account various organizational
changes since the Policy Statement was
adopted.
DATES: Effective Date: April 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Fund Analysis
and Pricing Section, Division of
Insurance and Research, (202) 898–
8967, or Michelle Borzillo, Legal
Division, (703) 562–6083, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC
has a longstanding and ongoing
commitment to ensure that its
regulations and policies achieve
legislative and regulatory goals in the
most efficient and effective manner
possible. As part of that commitment,
the FDIC recently undertook a review of
its existing Policy Statement, which was
adopted in 1998, to determine what
updates and clarifications would be
appropriate. As a result of that review,
the FDIC Board of Directors adopted
revisions to the existing Policy
Statement to more fully reflect the
FDIC’s current rulemaking policies and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:11 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM 17APR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, and/or U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
as appropriate in the context in which
the term appears.’’ 76 FR 53764, 53780.
Where a section of the regulations was
determined to pertain to an action that
may have been taken by INS, or a
function that is within the purview of or
shared with another component, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was retained or
inserted. Id.
DHS made one erroneous amendment
in the August 2011 final rule with
regard to the use of ‘‘USCIS’’ in lieu of
‘‘the Service.’’ In 8 CFR part 208, the
term ‘‘the Service’’ was revised to read
‘‘USCIS,’’ including in 8 CFR 208.24(f),
which deals with the termination of
asylum or withholding of deportation or
removal by an Immigration Judge or the
Board of Immigration Appeals.
Termination of asylum is an authority
shared between the Department of
Justice and USCIS, but USCIS has no
role in removal proceedings beyond the
issuance of a notice to appear in
accordance with 8 CFR 208.24(e) and
(g). The current, recently-amended
regulatory language incorrectly
provides, however, that USCIS has the
responsibility in removal proceedings to
establish grounds of termination,
whereas that is the responsibility of U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Therefore, this notice corrects that error
by removing one incorrect reference to
‘‘USCIS’’ in 8 CFR 208.24(f) and
replacing it with ‘‘the Service.’’
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 103
Administrative practice and
procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies), Freedom of
information, Immigration, Privacy,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surety bonds.
8 CFR Part 208
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Correction
Accordingly, for the reasons set out in
the preamble, chapter I of title 8 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is corrected
by making the following correcting
amendments:
PART 103—IMMIGRATION BENEFITS;
BIOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS;
AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS
■ 1. The authority citation for part 103
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1103, 1304, 1356, 1365b; 31 U.S.C.
9701; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6
U.S.C. 1 et seq.); E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874,
15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166; 8 CFR part
2.
■ 2. Section 103.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(18) to read as
follows:
Subpart A—Applying for Benefits,
Surety Bonds, Fees
§ 103.2 Submission and adjudication of
benefit requests.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(18) Withholding adjudication. USCIS
may authorize withholding adjudication
of a visa petition or other application if
USCIS determines that an investigation
has been undertaken involving a matter
relating to eligibility or the exercise of
discretion, where applicable, in
connection with the benefit request, and
that the disclosure of information to the
applicant or petitioner in connection
with the adjudication of the benefit
request would prejudice the ongoing
investigation. If an investigation has
been undertaken and has not been
completed within one year of its
inception, USCIS will review the matter
and determine whether adjudication of
the benefit request should be held in
abeyance for six months or until the
investigation is completed, whichever
comes sooner. If, after six months of
USCIS’s determination, the
investigation has not been completed,
the matter will be reviewed again by
USCIS and, if it concludes that more
time is needed to complete the
investigation, adjudication may be held
in abeyance for up to another six
months. If the investigation is not
completed at the end of that time,
USCIS may authorize that adjudication
be held in abeyance for another six
months. Thereafter, if USCIS determines
it is necessary to continue to withhold
adjudication pending completion of the
investigation, it will review that
determination every six months.
* * * * *
PART 208—PROCEDURES FOR
ASLYUM AND WITHHOLDING OF
REMOVAL
■ 3. The authority citation for part 208
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1158, 1226,
1252, 1282; Title VII of Pub. L. 110–229; 8
CFR part 2.
Subpart A—Asylum and Withholding
of Removal
§ 208.24 [Corrected]
■ 4. Section 208.24 is amended in
paragraph (f), the second sentence, by
removing the term ‘‘USCIS’’ and adding
in its place the term, ‘‘the Service’’.
Christina E. McDonald,
Associate General Counsel for Regulatory
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2013–08985 Filed 4–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Chapter III
Statement of Policy on the
Development and Review of
Regulations and Policies
AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Revision of statement of policy.
SUMMARY: The FDIC is updating its
Statement of Policy entitled,
‘‘Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies’’ (Policy
Statement). The Policy Statement
articulates the basic principles that
guide the FDIC in its promulgation and
review of regulations and written
statements of policy. The Policy
Statement is being revised to more fully
reflect the FDIC’s current rulemaking
policies and procedures, as well as take
into account various organizational
changes since the Policy Statement was
adopted.
DATES: Effective Date: April 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Munsell St. Clair, Chief, Fund Analysis
and Pricing Section, Division of
Insurance and Research, (202) 898–
8967, or Michelle Borzillo, Legal
Division, (703) 562–6083, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC
has a longstanding and ongoing
commitment to ensure that its
regulations and policies achieve
legislative and regulatory goals in the
most efficient and effective manner
possible. As part of that commitment,
the FDIC recently undertook a review of
its existing Policy Statement, which was
adopted in 1998, to determine what
updates and clarifications would be
appropriate. As a result of that review,
the FDIC Board of Directors adopted
revisions to the existing Policy
Statement to more fully reflect the
FDIC’s current rulemaking policies and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:11 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM 17APR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
22772 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
1 In addition to specific statutory provisions
necessitating an implementing rulemaking or
statement of policy, other applicable law includes
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Paperwork
Reduction Act, Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-
Bliley Act, the Plain Writing Act of 2010, Section
302 of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, and
Economic Growth and Regulatory Paper Reduction
Act of 1996.
procedures as well as take into account
various organizational changes. These
revisions highlight important
rulemaking processes and procedures,
such as the FDIC’s open and transparent
rulemaking process, robust interagency
coordination, evaluation of regulatory
costs and benefits (including
consideration of alternatives), and
periodic review of existing regulations.
Text: The text of the revised Policy
Statement is as follows:
Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies
Statement of Policy
I. Purpose and Scope
The Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation is committed to continually
improving the quality of its regulations
and policies, to minimizing regulatory
burdens on the public and the banking
industry, and generally to ensuring that
its regulations and policies achieve
legislative goals effectively and
efficiently. The purpose of this
statement of policy (Policy) is to
establish basic principles which guide
the FDIC’s promulgation and review of
regulations and written statements of
policy. This Policy applies to
regulations and written statements of
policy issued by the Board of Directors
of the FDIC.
II. Principles for the Development and
Review of Regulations and Statements
of Policy
The following principles guide the
FDIC in its development of regulations
and written policies:
• The implications of regulations and
statements of policy should be
evaluated. Before issuing or updating a
regulation or written statement of policy
the FDIC gives careful consideration to
the need for such action. Frequently a
regulation is required by statute.
Alternatively, the FDIC may identify a
need for a supervisory tool to
implement its statutory obligations,
such as maintaining public confidence
in the financial system through safety
and soundness and compliance
supervision, protecting insured
depositors, closing failed institutions,
and preventing or mitigating systemic
risk. The FDIC also may identify a need
to clarify its policy for the benefit of the
banking industry or the public. To bring
different perspectives to the
development of a regulation, the FDIC
typically assigns staff with different
backgrounds or expertise to a regulatory
project; such staff may include
examiners, economists, lawyers or
accountants, depending on the
regulation.
Once the need or requirement for a
regulation or statement of policy is
determined, the FDIC evaluates benefits
and costs, based on available
information, and considers reasonable
and possible alternatives. For many
rulemakings, one or more alternatives
likely will be available, at least with
respect to some aspects of the rule. The
main alternatives, once identified as
available, should be described and
analyzed for their consistency with the
statutory or regulatory objectives,
effectiveness in achieving those
objectives, and burden on the public or
industry. In this context, the FDIC seeks
to minimize to the extent practicable the
burdens which the proposed regulation
or policy imposes on the banking
industry and the public. For example,
new reporting and recordkeeping
requirements imposed by a regulation
are carefully analyzed. The effect of the
regulation or statement of policy on
competition within the industry is
considered. Particular attention is
focused on the impact that a regulation
will have on small institutions and
whether there are comprehensive or
targeted alternatives to accomplish the
FDIC’s goal which would minimize any
burden on small institutions. Typically,
when notice and opportunity for
comment is involved, comment is
sought on these matters. Prior to
issuance of a final rule, the potential
benefits associated with the regulation
are weighed against the potential costs.
Both the proposed and final rule should
discuss key implications that the FDIC
considered in its analysis.
• Regulations and policies should be
clearly, understandably, and concisely
written. The FDIC seeks to make its
regulations and statements of policy as
clear and as understandable as possible
to those persons who are affected by
them. In developing or reviewing
existing regulations and statements of
policy, the FDIC considers the
document’s organizational structure, as
well as the specific language used and
the target audience; all are important
components to achieving a clear and
useful statement.
• The public should have a
meaningful opportunity to participate in
an open and transparent rulemaking
process. The FDIC encourages public
participation in the rulemaking process.
Whether a new regulation is being
promulgated or an existing one revised,
the Board gives careful consideration to
the implications of its actions as public
policy. Public participation in the
rulemaking process is an opportunity
for the Board to hear directly from
affected members of the public with
important experience and insights
related to the pertinent issues. As part
of this, the FDIC recognizes the
importance of providing adequate time
for the public comment process and
thus, generally provides a 60-day
comment period. Under appropriate
circumstances, the FDIC may provide a
longer comment period and,
occasionally, as permitted by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a
shorter comment period if quicker
action is needed. A person or
organization may petition the Board for
the issuance, amendment, or repeal of
any regulation or policy by submitting
a written petition to the Executive
Secretary of the FDIC. The petition
should include a complete and concise
statement of the petitioner’s interest in
the subject matter and the reasons why
the petition should be granted.
All rulemaking is carried out in
accordance with the APA (as well as
other applicable law 1), and the Board
provides the public with notices of
proposed rulemaking and opportunities
to submit comments on the proposals.
The Board also may seek public
comment on proposed statements of
policy as well. All comments and
proposed alternatives received during
the comment period are carefully
considered prior to the issuance of a
final rule or statement of policy. The
Board takes final action on proposed
regulations and policies as promptly as
circumstances allow. If a significant
period of time elapses following the
publication of a proposed rule or
statement of policy without final action,
the Board will consider withdrawing the
proposal or republishing it for comment.
If the Board decides to reconsider a
proposed regulation or statement of
policy that has been withdrawn, it will
begin the rulemaking or policy
development process anew.
The FDIC Board typically considers
proposed and final regulations at
meetings open to the public. The
written recommendations of FDIC staff
are made available on the FDIC’s public
Web site, and the FDIC also broadcasts
public Board meetings live over the
Internet. Comment letters on pending
proposed rules or statements of policy
can be submitted electronically through
the FDIC’s public Web site, and all
letters are posted on the FDIC’s public
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:11 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM 17APR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
1 In addition to specific statutory provisions
necessitating an implementing rulemaking or
statement of policy, other applicable law includes
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Paperwork
Reduction Act, Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-
Bliley Act, the Plain Writing Act of 2010, Section
302 of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, and
Economic Growth and Regulatory Paper Reduction
Act of 1996.
procedures as well as take into account
various organizational changes. These
revisions highlight important
rulemaking processes and procedures,
such as the FDIC’s open and transparent
rulemaking process, robust interagency
coordination, evaluation of regulatory
costs and benefits (including
consideration of alternatives), and
periodic review of existing regulations.
Text: The text of the revised Policy
Statement is as follows:
Development and Review of FDIC
Regulations and Policies
Statement of Policy
I. Purpose and Scope
The Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation is committed to continually
improving the quality of its regulations
and policies, to minimizing regulatory
burdens on the public and the banking
industry, and generally to ensuring that
its regulations and policies achieve
legislative goals effectively and
efficiently. The purpose of this
statement of policy (Policy) is to
establish basic principles which guide
the FDIC’s promulgation and review of
regulations and written statements of
policy. This Policy applies to
regulations and written statements of
policy issued by the Board of Directors
of the FDIC.
II. Principles for the Development and
Review of Regulations and Statements
of Policy
The following principles guide the
FDIC in its development of regulations
and written policies:
• The implications of regulations and
statements of policy should be
evaluated. Before issuing or updating a
regulation or written statement of policy
the FDIC gives careful consideration to
the need for such action. Frequently a
regulation is required by statute.
Alternatively, the FDIC may identify a
need for a supervisory tool to
implement its statutory obligations,
such as maintaining public confidence
in the financial system through safety
and soundness and compliance
supervision, protecting insured
depositors, closing failed institutions,
and preventing or mitigating systemic
risk. The FDIC also may identify a need
to clarify its policy for the benefit of the
banking industry or the public. To bring
different perspectives to the
development of a regulation, the FDIC
typically assigns staff with different
backgrounds or expertise to a regulatory
project; such staff may include
examiners, economists, lawyers or
accountants, depending on the
regulation.
Once the need or requirement for a
regulation or statement of policy is
determined, the FDIC evaluates benefits
and costs, based on available
information, and considers reasonable
and possible alternatives. For many
rulemakings, one or more alternatives
likely will be available, at least with
respect to some aspects of the rule. The
main alternatives, once identified as
available, should be described and
analyzed for their consistency with the
statutory or regulatory objectives,
effectiveness in achieving those
objectives, and burden on the public or
industry. In this context, the FDIC seeks
to minimize to the extent practicable the
burdens which the proposed regulation
or policy imposes on the banking
industry and the public. For example,
new reporting and recordkeeping
requirements imposed by a regulation
are carefully analyzed. The effect of the
regulation or statement of policy on
competition within the industry is
considered. Particular attention is
focused on the impact that a regulation
will have on small institutions and
whether there are comprehensive or
targeted alternatives to accomplish the
FDIC’s goal which would minimize any
burden on small institutions. Typically,
when notice and opportunity for
comment is involved, comment is
sought on these matters. Prior to
issuance of a final rule, the potential
benefits associated with the regulation
are weighed against the potential costs.
Both the proposed and final rule should
discuss key implications that the FDIC
considered in its analysis.
• Regulations and policies should be
clearly, understandably, and concisely
written. The FDIC seeks to make its
regulations and statements of policy as
clear and as understandable as possible
to those persons who are affected by
them. In developing or reviewing
existing regulations and statements of
policy, the FDIC considers the
document’s organizational structure, as
well as the specific language used and
the target audience; all are important
components to achieving a clear and
useful statement.
• The public should have a
meaningful opportunity to participate in
an open and transparent rulemaking
process. The FDIC encourages public
participation in the rulemaking process.
Whether a new regulation is being
promulgated or an existing one revised,
the Board gives careful consideration to
the implications of its actions as public
policy. Public participation in the
rulemaking process is an opportunity
for the Board to hear directly from
affected members of the public with
important experience and insights
related to the pertinent issues. As part
of this, the FDIC recognizes the
importance of providing adequate time
for the public comment process and
thus, generally provides a 60-day
comment period. Under appropriate
circumstances, the FDIC may provide a
longer comment period and,
occasionally, as permitted by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a
shorter comment period if quicker
action is needed. A person or
organization may petition the Board for
the issuance, amendment, or repeal of
any regulation or policy by submitting
a written petition to the Executive
Secretary of the FDIC. The petition
should include a complete and concise
statement of the petitioner’s interest in
the subject matter and the reasons why
the petition should be granted.
All rulemaking is carried out in
accordance with the APA (as well as
other applicable law 1), and the Board
provides the public with notices of
proposed rulemaking and opportunities
to submit comments on the proposals.
The Board also may seek public
comment on proposed statements of
policy as well. All comments and
proposed alternatives received during
the comment period are carefully
considered prior to the issuance of a
final rule or statement of policy. The
Board takes final action on proposed
regulations and policies as promptly as
circumstances allow. If a significant
period of time elapses following the
publication of a proposed rule or
statement of policy without final action,
the Board will consider withdrawing the
proposal or republishing it for comment.
If the Board decides to reconsider a
proposed regulation or statement of
policy that has been withdrawn, it will
begin the rulemaking or policy
development process anew.
The FDIC Board typically considers
proposed and final regulations at
meetings open to the public. The
written recommendations of FDIC staff
are made available on the FDIC’s public
Web site, and the FDIC also broadcasts
public Board meetings live over the
Internet. Comment letters on pending
proposed rules or statements of policy
can be submitted electronically through
the FDIC’s public Web site, and all
letters are posted on the FDIC’s public
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:11 Apr 16, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17APR1.SGM 17APR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES