Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

23586

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

changes to Enterprise operations, corporate structures, capabilities, etc.
that result or will result from their resolution planning. In contrast, another commenter remarked that the scope of the public section should be relatively limited in order to allow more candid disclosure and discussion in the comprehensive confidential section of a resolution plan. That commenter also requested FHFA clarify that information on specific service providers or counterparties would not be shared in the public section, as public disclosure of key third-party relationships could impact Enterprise commercial relationships.
FHFA does not plan to change the scope of the public section of an Enterprise resolution plan at this time, and is not requiring additional public notice of material changes to Enterprise operations, organization, or capability that result or could result from resolution planning. FHFA expects to work with the Enterprises when developing their initial public sections, to ensure appropriate information, with an appropriate level of detail, is made available to the public, while balancing the need for candor and to preserve confidentiality of some information.
Regarding public identification of key third-party relationships specifically, FHFA notes that the rule does not require these to be disclosed.
E. Timing of Plan Submission; Interim Updates FHFA proposed to require the Enterprises to submit their initial resolution plans roughly two years after the effective date of the final rule, and to require resolution plans to be submitted every two years thereafter.44
FHFA also retained authority to require submission on a date different from that established though the rule, in part to avoid requiring resolution plans to be submitted in the fourth quarter, due to other end-of-year reporting obligations, if, based on the date of finalizing the rule, resolutions plans would otherwise be due then.45
Commenters generally supported the flexibility provided by FHFAs reservation of authority to adjust submission dates. One commenter noted that the DFA section 165d rule provides similar flexibility but requires the FRB and FDIC to provide notice of an adjusted submission date at least 12
months in advance of the new due date.46 That commenter suggested FHFA add a similar timing-of-notice 12 CFR 1242.4a1, 86 FR at 1344.
CFR 1242.4a2, 86 FR at 1344.
46 Cf. 12 CFR 243.4d2.

provision to its rule. FHFA agrees that notice of an adjusted submission date should be provided reasonably in advance of the adjusted date, and adding such a notice requirement to the rule would make it more transparent.
Thus, FHFA has added a rule requirement that it provide the Enterprises with 12 months notice in advance of the new submission date.
FHFA also proposed to require the Enterprises to submit interim updates to resolution plans within a reasonable time, as determined by FHFA. 47 One commenter suggested FHFA provide a specific time period, such as six months, for an Enterprise to respond to any request for an interim update.
Although FHFA agrees that the Enterprises should be provided a reasonable period to prepare interim updates, FHFA does not believe the rule should state a period because what is a reasonable timeframe for preparation will necessarily depend upon the scope of the update requested. FHFA expects to engage with an Enterprise subject to an interim update request on a reasonable period for preparing the update, prior to establishing a submission date.
F. FHFA Identification of Deficiencies and Shortcomings FHFA proposed to identify and provide notice to an Enterprise of any deficiencies in its resolution plan, which the Enterprise would then be required to address in a revised resolution plan.48 FHFA noted that the DFA section 165 rule also includes shortcomings as a second, lesser, category for identified supervisory concerns, and asked if that category should be included in FHFAs rule.49 In the DFA section 165 rule, identification of a shortcoming does not trigger the need to submit a revised plan, but companies are expected to address shortcomings in their next resolution plans, and a shortcoming that is not addressed may be identified as a deficiency in a later plan.
One commenter responded that a rule category for shortcomings could reduce potential ambiguity regarding the level of Enterprise action necessary to respond. If shortcomings are addressed in the rule, then a concern categorized as a shortcoming may receive more Enterprise resources funding and staff time to remediate, which could be helpful to Enterprise efforts to prioritize and focus appropriate attention.

44 See
47 12

45 12

48 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:02 May 03, 2021

Jkt 253001

CFR 1242.4a3, 86 FR at 1344.
12 CFR 1242.7b, 86 FR at 1347.
49 See 86 FR at 1338.

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

FHFA found the response related to the potential value of a shortcomings category persuasive and so has added it to the final rule, along with a definition of shortcoming that is modeled on the definition of shortcoming in the DFA
section 165 rule. Also in line with that rule, FHFA has included provisions to the effect that an unaddressed shortcoming may become a deficiency, and that it is not necessary for FHFA to identify an aspect of a plan as a shortcoming in order to identify it as a deficiency in a later plan.
G. Timing of FHFA Feedback; Provision of Formal Guidance FHFA proposed to provide feedback to the Enterprises within one year after receiving complete resolution plans.50
One commenter requested that FHFA
commit to providing feedback not less than 12 months before the filing date of the next plan and to providing the Enterprises with more than half of the total plan cycle time to respond.
FHFA intends to provide timely feedback to the Enterprises on their resolution plans and established a benchmark of not later than one year after plans have been submitted in the proposed rule. FHFA proposed to require the Enterprises to provide revised resolution plans addressing any deficiency identified by FHFA within 90 days of receiving notice of deficiency from FHFA. Other matters of concern, including identified shortcomings, may not require half of the total plan cycle for response, and committing to that timing in the final rule would likely result in the submission and review cycle longer than the biennial cycle FHFA desires. For these reasons, FHFA
has not amended the rule text on timing of FHFA feedback or Enterprise responses.
Apart from feedback provided directly to an Enterprise on a specific resolution plan, commenters also addressed more general FHFA guidance on resolution planning. Commenters approved FHFAs view, stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, that resolution planning was an iterative process that would include guidance to the Enterprises.51 One commenter encouraged FHFA to consider providing public notice of and soliciting comment on formal guidance, similar to the process the FDIC and FRB have undertaken with guidance on the DFA
section 165 rule, to engage the public and obtain input from interested stakeholders and to promote transparency in the resolution planning 50 See 51 See
E:FRFM04MYR1.SGM

12 CFR 1242.7b1iii, 86 FR at 1347.
86 FR at 1330, 1331, and 1339.

04MYR1