Common use of Non-Substantive Revisions Clause in Contracts

Non-Substantive Revisions. Prior to issuing any non-Substantive Revisions to the FHLB Guide, the MPF Provider will consult with the Active MPF Banks after distributing a draft of the proposed non-Substantive Revisions to the Active MPF Banks for review. The MPF Provider will use commercially reasonable best efforts to balance differences of opinions among the Active MPF Banks, taking into account the direction or purpose of the overall MPF Program as established by the MPF Governance Committee, and abide by any additional obligation of the MPF Provider in determining whether and how to incorporate or address any comments from the Active MPF Banks concerning any non-Substantive Revisions. Upon receipt of any draft non-Substantive Revisions to the FHLB Guide, the Active MPF Bank must respond within fifteen (15) Business Days unless a longer time for review and approval is allowed in the transmittal of the draft revisions, or otherwise approved by the MPF Provider in writing; provided, however, that non-Substantive Revisions which must be made to the FHLB Guide to comply with FHFA rules or regulations, third-party investors requirements, Applicable Law, or external matters beyond the control of the MPF Provider, may have a shorter review period, if needed to achieve compliance, but not less than two (2) Business Days (and, for the avoidance of doubt the MPF Provider shall be permitted to make any such revision notwithstanding whether the consent of the Active MPF Banks is obtained). An Active MPF Bank’s review of draft FHLB Guide non-Substantive Revisions and opportunity to comment will be considered completed if there is no response from the Active MPF Bank within the time period specified herein, in the transmittal or otherwise specified in writing by the MPF Provider. The MPF Provider may elect to publish the non-Substantive Revisions without additional review by the Active MPF Banks or, if the MPF Provider deems it appropriate, to provide the MPF Banks an additional review period. Any comments sent by any MPF Bank after publication of any revisions to the FHLB Guide will be logged in by the MPF Provider and considered for inclusion when future revisions are made to the FHLB Guide. If an Active MPF Bank determines the proposed revision should be classified as a Substantive Revision, that Active MPF Bank must object to the non-Substantive Revision classification within two (2) Business Days from receipt of the proposed revision. The MPF Provider shall then (i) request the Active MPF Banks to review the proposed revision as a Substantive Revision pursuant to Section 2.3(a)(2) or (ii) refer the proposed revision to the MPF Governance Committee for further action. If the MPF Provider elects a Substantive Revision review, two (2) Business Days will be deducted from the review time provided in Section 2.3(a)(2).

Non-Substantive Revisions. Prior to issuing any non-Substantive Revisions to the FHLB Guide, the MPF Provider will consult with the Active MPF Banks after distributing a draft of the proposed non-Substantive Revisions to the Active MPF Banks for review. The MPF Provider will use commercially reasonable best efforts to balance differences of opinions among the Active MPF Banks, taking into account the direction or purpose of the overall MPF Program as established by the MPF Governance Committee, and abide by any additional obligation of the MPF Provider in determining whether and how to incorporate or address any comments from the Active MPF Banks concerning any non-Substantive Revisions. Upon receipt of any draft non-non- Substantive Revisions to the FHLB Guide, the Active MPF Bank must respond within fifteen (15) Business Days unless a longer time for review and approval is allowed in the transmittal of the draft revisions, or otherwise approved by the MPF Provider in writing; provided, however, that non-Substantive Revisions which must be made to the FHLB Guide to comply with FHFA rules or regulations, third-party investors requirements, Applicable Law, or external matters beyond the control of the MPF Provider, may have a shorter review period, if needed to achieve compliance, but not less than two (2) Business Days (and, for the avoidance of doubt the MPF Provider shall be permitted to make any such revision notwithstanding whether the consent of the Active MPF Banks is obtained). An Active MPF Bank’s review of draft FHLB Guide non-non- Substantive Revisions and opportunity to comment will be considered completed if there is no response from the Active MPF Bank within the time period specified herein, in the transmittal or otherwise specified in writing by the MPF Provider. The MPF Provider may elect to publish the non-Substantive Revisions without additional review by the Active MPF Banks or, if the MPF Provider deems it appropriate, to provide the MPF Banks an additional review period. Any comments sent by any MPF Bank after publication of any revisions to the FHLB Guide will be logged in by the MPF Provider and considered for inclusion when future revisions are made to the FHLB Guide. If an Active MPF Bank determines the proposed revision should be classified as a Substantive Revision, that Active MPF Bank must object to the non-Substantive Revision classification within two (2) Business Days from receipt of the proposed revision. The MPF Provider shall then (i) request the Active MPF Banks to review the proposed revision as a Substantive Revision pursuant to Section 2.3(a)(2) or (ii) refer the proposed revision to the MPF Governance Committee for further action. If the MPF Provider elects a Substantive Revision review, two (2) Business Days will be deducted from the review time provided in Section 2.3(a)(2).