Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation and National Securities Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Changes To Institute a Clearing Fund Premium Based Upon a Member's Clearing Fund Requirement To Excess Regulatory Capital Ratio, 21060-21062 [E6-6066]
Download as PDF
21060
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Notices
public notice of such determination.
The Commission believes that the
proposal will better inform issuers of
the requirements for voluntary delisting
of their securities under CBOE rules and
federal securities laws.
The proposal also sets forth a new
requirement not in amended SEC Rule
12d2–2 that would require the issuer to
notify the Exchange that it has filed
Form 25 with the Commission
contemporaneously with such filing.
The Commission believes that this
requirement will allow the Exchange to
be fully informed of the filing of a Form
25 and prepared to take timely action in
accordance with the filing of the Form.
In addition, CBOE proposes to amend
CBOE Rule 31.94(G)(h) to state that in
appropriate circumstances, when the
Exchange is considering delisting
because a company no longer meets the
requirements for continued listing, a
company may, with the consent of the
Exchange, file a Form 25 with the SEC,
provided that it follows the
requirements set forth in SEC Rule
12d2–2(c) and discloses that it is no
longer eligible for continued listing on
the Exchange in its written notice to the
Exchange and public press release, and
if it has a publicly accessible Web site,
posts such notice on that Web site.17
The Commission believes that this
requirement will allow shareholders to
be informed and aware that the issuer
has failed to meet Exchange listing
standards and is voluntarily delisting
with the consent of the Exchange.
Issuers will therefore not be permitted
to delist voluntarily without public
disclosure of their noncompliance with
Exchange listing standards.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–
CBOE–2005–87), as amended, is
approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.19
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–6074 Filed 4–21–06; 8:45 am]
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–53664; File No. SR–CHX–
2006–03]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval to Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Prohibition of
Trade Shredding
April 17, 2006.
I. Introduction
On January 24, 2006, the Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change
relating to trade shredding. The
proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on
March 16, 2006.3 The Commission
received no comments on the proposal.
This order approves the proposed rule
change.
II. Description of the Proposal
The Exchange proposed to amend its
rules to prohibit its participants from
breaking customer orders into smaller
multiple orders for the primary purpose
of maximizing rebates or other
payments to the participant without
regard for the customer’s interest.
III. Discussion and Commission
Findings
The Commission has reviewed
carefully the proposed rule change and
finds that it is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to
a national securities exchange,4
particularly Section 6(b)(5) of the Act
which, among other things, requires that
the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating
securities transactions, to remove
impediments to and to perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest.5 The Commission
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
1 15
17 See
Amendment No. 2, supra note 4.
18 Id.
19 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:56 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
U.S.C. 78s(b)(l).
2 17 CFR 240. 19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53441
(March 8, 2006), 71 FR 13642.
4 In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
believes that the proposed rule change
should help eliminate the distortive
practice of trade shredding, and,
therefore, promote just and equitable
principles of trade.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,6 that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–
CHX–2006–03), be and hereby is,
approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.7
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–6070 Filed 4–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–53671; File Nos. SR–FICC–
2006–03 and SR–NSCC–2006–03]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation and
National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Changes To Institute a
Clearing Fund Premium Based Upon a
Member’s Clearing Fund Requirement
To Excess Regulatory Capital Ratio
April 18, 2006.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on
February 22, 2006, the Fixed Income
Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) and the
National Securities Clearing Corporation
(‘‘NSCC’’) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’)
the proposed rule changes described in
Items I, II, and III below, which items
have been primarily prepared by FICC
and NSCC. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule changes
from interested parties.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Changes
FICC and NSCC are seeking to
institute a clearing fund premium on
their members based on a member’s
clearing fund requirement to excess
regulatory capital ratio.
6 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
7 17
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Notices
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Changes
In its filing with the Commission,
FICC and NSCC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule changes and
discussed any comments they received
on the proposed rule changes. The text
of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
FICC and NSCC have prepared
summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B),
and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of these statements.2
(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Changes
1. FICC Clearing Fund Premium
The degree to which the collateral
requirement of a clearing agency
member compares to the member’s
excess regulatory capital is an important
indicator of the potential risk that the
member presents to the clearing agency.
In 2002, the Government Securities
Clearing Corporation (‘‘GSCC’’), the
predecessor to the Government
Securities Division (‘‘GSD’’) of FICC,
received Commission approval to
impose a collateral premium on netting
members whose clearing fund
requirement exceeds their excess
regulatory capital.3 Specifically, the
GSD currently imposes a 25 percent
collateral premium when a member’s
ratio of clearing fund requirement to
excess net capital, excess liquid capital,
excess regulatory capital, or excess
adjusted capital is greater than 1.0. The
25 percent premium is applied to the
amount by which the member’s clearing
fund requirement exceeds the member’s
excess regulatory capital.
In order to more effectively manage
the risk posed by a GSD member whose
activity causes it to have a clearing fund
requirement that is greater than its
excess regulatory capital, FICC now
proposes to strengthen the abovementioned risk management tool by
applying a clearing fund premium that
is equal to the member’s ratio of clearing
fund requirement to excess regulatory
capital in place of the current flat
premium of 25 percent.4 The premium
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
2 The
Commission has modified the text of the
summaries prepared by FICC and NSCC.
3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45647
(March 26, 2002), 67 FR 15438 (April 1, 2002) [File
No. SR–GSCC–2001–15]. ‘‘Excess regulatory
capital’’ for purposes of GSD’s collateral premium
included excess net capital, excess liquid capital, or
excess adjusted capital.
4 If FICC imposes this premium on a Netting
Member, then it shall be considered included as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:56 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
21061
would be determined by multiplying: (a)
The amount by which a member’s
clearing fund requirement exceeds its
capital by (b) the member’s ratio of
clearing fund to excess regulatory
capital expressed as a percent. This
formula would allow the premium to
increase or decrease in proportion to
changes in the ratio and should allow
for risk management that is measured in
proportion to the risk presented. For
example, if a member has a clearing
fund requirement of $11.4 million and
excess net capital of $10 million, its
ratio is 1.14 (or 114 percent), and the
applicable collateral premium would be
114 percent of $1.4 million (i.e., the
amount by which the member’s clearing
fund requirement exceeds its excess net
capital) or $1,596,000. If the same
member had a clearing fund
requirement of $20 million, its ratio
would be 2.0 (or 200 percent), and the
applicable collateral premium would be
200 percent of $10 million or $20
million.
Currently, the collateral premium
applies to members whose excess
regulatory capital is measured as excess
net capital, excess liquid capital, or
excess adjusted net capital. The
proposed rule change seeks to also
include excess equity capital as
regulatory excess capital so that the
premium can be applied to bank and
trust company netting members whose
capital is measured as equity capital.
The proposed rule change also seeks
an additional change to Rule 4 (Clearing
Fund, Watch List and Loss Allocation),
Section 3 (Watch List) to remove a
provision which states that FICC may
require a netting member to adjust its
trading activity so that its excess
regulatory capital ratio decreases to a
satisfactory level. This provision was
appropriate under the fixed 25 percent
premium but no longer would be
appropriate because the proposed rule
change would impose a variable
premium based on activity which would
require members to adjust their trading
activity or be subject to the higher
premium.
regulatory capital premium would be
triggered when a member’s ratio of
clearing fund requirement to excess
regulatory capital is greater than 1.0 and
would be determined using the same
formula as that proposed by FICC. The
new premium would be added to
NSCC’s clearing fund formula in
Procedure XV (Clearing Fund Formula
and Other Matters).5
As a matter of practice, when a FICC
or NSCC member’s clearing fund
requirement to excess regulatory capital
ratio is between .50 and 1.0, a warning
notification will be issued which will
put the member on notice that a
collateral premium will be required if
the ratio reaches an amount greater than
1.0. When a member’s ratio exceeds 1.0,
it will be notified on that business day
that a collateral premium has been
calculated and will be collected.
FICC and NSCC will reserve the right
to: (i) Apply a lesser collateral premium
(including no premium) based on
specific circumstances (such as a
member being subject to an unexpected
haircut or capital charge that does not
fundamentally change its risk profile)
and (ii) return all or a portion of the
premium amount if it believes that the
member’s risk profile does not require
the maintenance of that amount.
FICC and NSCC believe that the
proposed rule changes are consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of
the Act 6 and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to FICC and
NSCC because they should help FICC
and NSCC assure the safeguarding of
securities and funds which are in their
custody or control or for which they are
responsible by allowing FICC and NSCC
to more effectively manage risk
presented by certain members.
2. NSCC Clearing Fund Premium
NSCC is proposing to impose a
clearing fund premium on Rule 2
(Members) broker/dealer and bank
members whose clearing fund
requirement exceeds their regulatory
excess capital. NSCC’s proposed excess
regulatory capital premium would apply
to members whose regulatory excess
capital is measured as excess net capital
or excess equity capital. The excess
(C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Changes Received From
Members, Participants or Others
part of the netting member’s ‘‘required fund
deposit’’ as defined in the GSD’s rules.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
FICC and NSCC do not believe that
the proposed rule changes would
impose any burden on competition.
Written comments were not and are
not intended to be solicited with respect
to the proposed rule changes, and none
have been received.
5 This premium would not apply to the Canadian
Depository for Securities Limited (‘‘CDS’’) clearing
fund requirement that is computed pursuant to
Appendix 1 of NSCC’s rules.
6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
21062
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Notices
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Changes and Timing for
Commission Action
Within thirty-five days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period (i)
as the Commission may designate up to
ninety days of such date if it finds such
longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii) as to which the self-regulatory
organization consents, the Commission
will:
(A) By order approve such proposed
rule changes or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule changes
should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
changes are consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Numbers SR–FICC–2006–03 and SR–
NSCC–2006–03 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Numbers SR–FICC–2006–03 and SR–
NSCC–2006–03. These file numbers
should be included on the subject line
if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
changes that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule changes between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549. Copies of such filings also
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:56 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal offices of FICC
and NSCC and on FICC’s Web site at
https://www.ficc.com/gov/
gov.docs.jsp?NS-query and on NSCC’s
Web site at https://www.nscc.com/legal/
All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Numbers SR–FICC–2006–03 and SR–
NSCC–2006–03 and should be
submitted on or before May 15, 2006.
For the Commission by the Division
of Market Regulation, pursuant to
delegated authority.7
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–6066 Filed 4–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–53669; File No. SR–NASD–
2006–046]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Technical
Amendments to Rule 3080 (Disclosure
to Associated Persons When Signing
Form U–4)
April 18, 2006.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on April 13,
2006, the National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have
been prepared by NASD. NASD filed the
proposed rule change as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ rule change under Rule
19b–4(f)(6) under the Act,3 which
rendered the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
7 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
NASD proposes to amend NASD Rule
3080 (Disclosure to Associated Persons
When Signing Form U–4) to correct the
reference to the name of the Form U4
(Uniform Application for Securities
Industry Registration or Transfer) and
the location of the predispute arbitration
clause in the Form U4. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on
NASD’s Web site, https://www.nasd.com,
at NASD’s Office of the Secretary, and
at the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
NASD included statements concerning
the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. NASD has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
NASD Rule 3080 requires that
members disclose to associated persons
certain information regarding the nature
and process of arbitration proceedings
that the associated person agrees to be
bound by upon signing a Form U4. The
references to the name of the Form and
the location of the predispute arbitration
clause in the Form are not correct due
to prior amendments to the Form.4
Accordingly, the proposed rule change
will amend NASD Rule 3080 to
eliminate the hyphen in the name of the
Form U4 and to indicate that the
predispute arbitration clause is in Item
5 of section 15A of the Form U4. The
effective date and the implementation
date of the proposed rule change will be
the date of filing.
2. Statutory Basis
NASD believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with section 15A of
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 48161
(July 10, 2003), 68 FR 42444 (July 17, 2003) (SR–
NASD–2003–57) (which, among other things,
changed the name of the Form from ‘‘U–4’’ to ‘‘U4’’)
and 45531 (March 11, 2002), 67 FR 11735 (March
15, 2002) (SR–NASD–2002–05) (which, among
other things, relocated the predispute arbitration
clause to a new Section 15A of the Form U4).
E:\FR\FM\24APN1.SGM
24APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21060-21062]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6066]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-53671; File Nos. SR-FICC-2006-03 and SR-NSCC-2006-03]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
and National Securities Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Changes To Institute a Clearing Fund Premium Based Upon a
Member's Clearing Fund Requirement To Excess Regulatory Capital Ratio
April 18, 2006.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on February 22, 2006, the
Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') and the National
Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes
described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been
primarily prepared by FICC and NSCC. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule changes from interested
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Changes
FICC and NSCC are seeking to institute a clearing fund premium on
their members based on a member's clearing fund requirement to excess
regulatory capital ratio.
[[Page 21061]]
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes
In its filing with the Commission, FICC and NSCC included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
changes and discussed any comments they received on the proposed rule
changes. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. FICC and NSCC have prepared summaries, set
forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of these statements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by FICC and NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes
1. FICC Clearing Fund Premium
The degree to which the collateral requirement of a clearing agency
member compares to the member's excess regulatory capital is an
important indicator of the potential risk that the member presents to
the clearing agency. In 2002, the Government Securities Clearing
Corporation (``GSCC''), the predecessor to the Government Securities
Division (``GSD'') of FICC, received Commission approval to impose a
collateral premium on netting members whose clearing fund requirement
exceeds their excess regulatory capital.\3\ Specifically, the GSD
currently imposes a 25 percent collateral premium when a member's ratio
of clearing fund requirement to excess net capital, excess liquid
capital, excess regulatory capital, or excess adjusted capital is
greater than 1.0. The 25 percent premium is applied to the amount by
which the member's clearing fund requirement exceeds the member's
excess regulatory capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45647 (March 26, 2002),
67 FR 15438 (April 1, 2002) [File No. SR-GSCC-2001-15]. ``Excess
regulatory capital'' for purposes of GSD's collateral premium
included excess net capital, excess liquid capital, or excess
adjusted capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to more effectively manage the risk posed by a GSD member
whose activity causes it to have a clearing fund requirement that is
greater than its excess regulatory capital, FICC now proposes to
strengthen the above-mentioned risk management tool by applying a
clearing fund premium that is equal to the member's ratio of clearing
fund requirement to excess regulatory capital in place of the current
flat premium of 25 percent.\4\ The premium would be determined by
multiplying: (a) The amount by which a member's clearing fund
requirement exceeds its capital by (b) the member's ratio of clearing
fund to excess regulatory capital expressed as a percent. This formula
would allow the premium to increase or decrease in proportion to
changes in the ratio and should allow for risk management that is
measured in proportion to the risk presented. For example, if a member
has a clearing fund requirement of $11.4 million and excess net capital
of $10 million, its ratio is 1.14 (or 114 percent), and the applicable
collateral premium would be 114 percent of $1.4 million (i.e., the
amount by which the member's clearing fund requirement exceeds its
excess net capital) or $1,596,000. If the same member had a clearing
fund requirement of $20 million, its ratio would be 2.0 (or 200
percent), and the applicable collateral premium would be 200 percent of
$10 million or $20 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ If FICC imposes this premium on a Netting Member, then it
shall be considered included as part of the netting member's
``required fund deposit'' as defined in the GSD's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the collateral premium applies to members whose excess
regulatory capital is measured as excess net capital, excess liquid
capital, or excess adjusted net capital. The proposed rule change seeks
to also include excess equity capital as regulatory excess capital so
that the premium can be applied to bank and trust company netting
members whose capital is measured as equity capital.
The proposed rule change also seeks an additional change to Rule 4
(Clearing Fund, Watch List and Loss Allocation), Section 3 (Watch List)
to remove a provision which states that FICC may require a netting
member to adjust its trading activity so that its excess regulatory
capital ratio decreases to a satisfactory level. This provision was
appropriate under the fixed 25 percent premium but no longer would be
appropriate because the proposed rule change would impose a variable
premium based on activity which would require members to adjust their
trading activity or be subject to the higher premium.
2. NSCC Clearing Fund Premium
NSCC is proposing to impose a clearing fund premium on Rule 2
(Members) broker/dealer and bank members whose clearing fund
requirement exceeds their regulatory excess capital. NSCC's proposed
excess regulatory capital premium would apply to members whose
regulatory excess capital is measured as excess net capital or excess
equity capital. The excess regulatory capital premium would be
triggered when a member's ratio of clearing fund requirement to excess
regulatory capital is greater than 1.0 and would be determined using
the same formula as that proposed by FICC. The new premium would be
added to NSCC's clearing fund formula in Procedure XV (Clearing Fund
Formula and Other Matters).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ This premium would not apply to the Canadian Depository for
Securities Limited (``CDS'') clearing fund requirement that is
computed pursuant to Appendix 1 of NSCC's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a matter of practice, when a FICC or NSCC member's clearing fund
requirement to excess regulatory capital ratio is between .50 and 1.0,
a warning notification will be issued which will put the member on
notice that a collateral premium will be required if the ratio reaches
an amount greater than 1.0. When a member's ratio exceeds 1.0, it will
be notified on that business day that a collateral premium has been
calculated and will be collected.
FICC and NSCC will reserve the right to: (i) Apply a lesser
collateral premium (including no premium) based on specific
circumstances (such as a member being subject to an unexpected haircut
or capital charge that does not fundamentally change its risk profile)
and (ii) return all or a portion of the premium amount if it believes
that the member's risk profile does not require the maintenance of that
amount.
FICC and NSCC believe that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \6\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to FICC and NSCC because they should
help FICC and NSCC assure the safeguarding of securities and funds
which are in their custody or control or for which they are responsible
by allowing FICC and NSCC to more effectively manage risk presented by
certain members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
FICC and NSCC do not believe that the proposed rule changes would
impose any burden on competition.
(C) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Changes Received From Members, Participants or Others
Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule changes, and none have been received.
[[Page 21062]]
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Changes and Timing for
Commission Action
Within thirty-five days of the date of publication of this notice
in the Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the
Commission may designate up to ninety days of such date if it finds
such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so
finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents,
the Commission will:
(A) By order approve such proposed rule changes or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
changes should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
changes are consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any
of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Numbers SR-FICC-2006-03 and SR-NSCC-2006-03 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Numbers SR-FICC-2006-03 and
SR-NSCC-2006-03. These file numbers should be included on the subject
line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission
will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (https://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
changes that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule changes between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of
such filings also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of FICC and NSCC and on FICC's Web site at https://
www.ficc.com/gov/gov.docs.jsp?NS-query and on NSCC's Web site at http:/
/www.nscc.com/legal/ All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Numbers
SR-FICC-2006-03 and SR-NSCC-2006-03 and should be submitted on or
before May 15, 2006.
For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant
to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6066 Filed 4-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P