Policy on Payments System Risk, 36800-36811 [06-5843]
Download as PDF
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
36800
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
Intermediaries, Federal Maritime
Commission, Washington, DC 20573.
Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier
Ocean Transportation Intermediary
Applicants:
Lorimer Cargo Express, Inc., 1924
S.W. 100th Ave., Miramar, FL
33025, Officer: Rafael G. Polanco,
President (Qualifying Individual).
La Ocean Freight Inc., 3428 Vantage
Point Drive, Rowland Heights, CA
91748, Officers: Catherine Tsai,
Vice President (Qualifying
Individual), Christin Liu, President.
Comis International, 690 Knox Street,
#220, Torrance, CA 90502, Frank
Noah, Sole Proprietor.
Advanced Marketing Services, Inc.,
5880 Oberlin Drive, Suite 400, San
Diego, CA 92121, Officers: Keli
Parker, Vice President (Qualifying
Individual), Bruce C. Myers,
President.
Non-Vessel-Operating Common
Carrier and Ocean Freight
Forwarder Transportation
Intermediary Applicants:
United Global Logistics Inc., 227
Bryant Avenue, Floral Park, NY
11001, Officers: Mohamed Yeheya
Khan, President (Qualifying
Individual), Sharmaine Enoka
Khan, Vice President.
Marine Services International, Inc.,
14502 South Industrial Avenue,
Cleveland, OH 44137, Officers:
Michelle Lynn Frank, President
(Qualifying Individual), David
Michael Magden, Vice President.
Panda Logistics USA, Inc., 19600 S.
Alameda Street, Suite #1, E. Rancho
Dominguez, CA 90221, Officer:
Cooper Chao, CEO (Qualifying
Individual).
Royal Pacific Shipping Co., 58 Leslie
Street, Newark, NJ 07108, Officers:
Atta Boamah, President (Qualifying
Individual), Alice Boamah, Vice
President.
Santo Domingo Shipping Inc., 4707
NW. 72nd Avenue, Miami, FL
33166, Officers: Mercedes D.
Rodriguez, Vice President
(Qualifying Individual), Carlos J.
Rodriguez, President.
DFYoung-Del Med, Inc., 1235
Westlakes Drive, Suite 255, Berwyn,
PA 19312–2401, Officers: Aaron
Wesley Wyatt, IV, Vice President
(Qualifying Individual), John
Hardy, Vice President.
Yavid Corporation, 5579 NW., 72
Avenue, Miami, FL 33166, Officers:
Luis Vidal, President (Qualifying
Individual), Ramona de Lourdes
Gonzalez, Director.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
ACE Logistics, LLC, 11188 Salentino
Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89138,
Officer: Mamerto, S. Mercado,
Operating Manager (Qualifying
Individual).
Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean
Transportation Intermediary
Applicants:
Login Logistics, LLC, 5230 Pacific
Concourse Drive, #105, Los
Angeles, CA 90045, Officers: Steen
Marcuslund, Manager (Qualifying
Individual), John Fitzpatrick,
Manager.
Upak WeShip, Inc., 10610 Iron Bridge
Road, Unit 6, Jessup, MD 20794,
Officers: Allison Elizabeth Kane,
President (Qualifying Individual),
Mark Nash, Vice President.
Dated: June 23, 2006.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–5856 Filed 6–27–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730–01–P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
[Docket No. OP–1259]
Policy on Payments System Risk
Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Policy statement; request for
comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Board requests comments
on proposed changes to Part I of its
Policy on Payments System Risk (PSR
policy) addressing risk management in
payments and settlement systems. The
proposed policy changes include (1)
incorporating into the PSR policy the
Recommendations for Central
Counterparties (Recommendations for
CCP) as the Board’s minimum standards
for central counterparties, (2) clarifying
the purpose of Part I of the policy and
revising its scope with regard to central
counterparties, and (3) establishing an
expectation that systemically important
systems disclose publicly selfassessments against the Core Principles
for Systemically Important Payment
Systems (Core Principles),
Recommendations for Securities
Settlement Systems (Recommendations
for SSS), or Recommendations for CCP,
as appropriate, demonstrating the extent
to which these systems meet the
principles or minimum standards. The
Board is also making other technical
changes.
DATES: Comments must be received by
September 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. OP–1259, by
any of the following methods:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Agency Web Site: https://
www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/
generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail:
regs.comments@federalreserve.gov.
Include the docket number in the
subject line of the message.
• Fax: (202) 452–3819 or (202) 452–
3102.
• Mail: Address to Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary, Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20551.
All public comments will be made
available on the Board’s Web site at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/
generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as
submitted, unless modified for technical
reasons. Accordingly, comments will
not be edited to remove any identifying
or contact information. Public
comments may also be viewed
electronically or in paper in Room MP–
500 of the Board’s Martin Building (20th
and C Streets, NW.) between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m. on weekdays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Stehm, Assistant Director (202/452–
2217), Division of Reserve Bank
Operations and Payment Systems, or
Jennifer Lucier, Senior Financial
Services Analyst (202/872–7581),
Division of Reserve Bank Operations
and Payment Systems; for the hearing
impaired only: Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf, 202/263–4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Since the early 1980s, the Board has
published and periodically revised a
series of policies encouraging the
reduction and management of risks in
payments and securities settlement
systems.1 In 1992, the Board issued its
‘‘Policy Statement on Payments System
Risk,’’ which provided a comprehensive
statement of its previously adopted
policies regarding payments system risk
reduction, including risk management
in private large-dollar funds transfer
networks, private delivery-againstpayment securities systems, offshore
dollar clearing and netting systems, and
private small-dollar clearing and
settlement systems.2
During this same period, the Federal
Reserve also worked with other central
1 See 50 FR 21120, May 22, 1985; 52 FR 29255,
August 6, 1987; and 54 FR 26104 and 26092, June
21, 1989.
2 57 FR 40455, September 3, 1992.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
banks and securities regulators to
develop standards to strengthen
payments and securities settlement
infrastructures and to promote financial
stability. These efforts initially
produced the Lamfalussy Minimum
Standards, which were incorporated
into the Board’s PSR policy in 1994.3
More recently, this work resulted in the
publication of the Core Principles and
the Recommendations for SSS in 2001,
which were incorporated into the
Board’s PSR policy in 2004.4 5 The Core
Principles extended and replaced the
Lamfalussy Minimum Standards, while
the Recommendations for SSS provided,
for the first time, explicit standards for
securities settlement systems.
In addition to establishing specific
principles and standards, the Core
Principles and Recommendations for
SSS call for central banks to state clearly
their roles and policies regarding
payments and securities settlement
systems, assess compliance with the
Core Principles and the
Recommendations for SSS when
overseeing relevant systems, and
coordinate with other authorities in
overseeing systems. Moreover, the Core
Principles and Recommendations for
SSS are intended to apply to systems
operated by both central banks and the
private sector.
Concurrent with the drafting and
adoption of the 2004 policy revisions,
the Federal Reserve was working with
the CPSS and IOSCO to finalize the
Recommendations for CCP.6 These
3 59 FR 67534, December 29, 1994. The
Lamfalussy Minimum Standards were set out in the
‘‘Report of the Committee on Interbank Netting
Schemes of the Central Banks of the Group of Ten
Countries,’’ published by the Bank for International
Settlements in November 1990. See the full report
at https://www.bis.org/publ/cpss04.pdf.
4 The Core Principles were developed by the
Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems
(CPSS) of the Central banks of the Group of Ten
countries, and the Recommendations were
developed by the CPSS in conjunction with the
Technical Committee of the International
Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). In
addition to the Federal Reserve, the Securities and
Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission participated in the
development of the Recommendations for SSS.
Both the Core Principles and the Recommendations
for SSS were published by the CPSS and IOSCO for
public comment before being adopted in their final
form, and in their final form have been adopted as
part of the Financial Stability Forum’s
Compendium of Standards that are widely
recognized and endorsed by U.S. authorities as
integral to strengthening global financial stability.
The full reports on the Core Principles and the
Recommendations for SSS are available at https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss43.htm and https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss46.htm, respectively.
5 69 FR 69926, December 1, 2004.
6 Final recommendations were issued in
November 2004. In addition to the Federal Reserve,
the Securities and Exchange Commission and the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission also
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
recommendations establish minimum
standards for central counterparty risk
management, operational reliability,
efficiency, governance, transparency,
and regulation and oversight. The
Recommendations for CCP build upon
the Recommendations for SSS and
supersede those recommendations
where central counterparties are
concerned (these two sets of
recommendations are collectively
referred to as the ‘‘CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations’’). At the time it
incorporated the Core Principles and
Recommendations for SSS into the PSR
policy, the Board noted that the CPSS
and IOSCO were developing the
Recommendations for CCP and that it
would review the Recommendations for
CCP at a later time and determine
whether it would be appropriate to
incorporate them into its PSR policy.
II. Discussion of Proposed Policy
Changes
The policy changes proposed by the
Board include (1) incorporating into the
PSR policy the Recommendations for
CCP as the Board’s minimum standards
for central counterparties, (2) clarifying
the purpose of Part I of the policy and
revising its scope with regard to central
counterparties, and (3) establishing an
expectation that systemically important
systems disclose publicly selfassessments against the Core Principles,
Recommendations for SSS, or
Recommendations for CCP
demonstrating the extent to which these
systems meet the principles or
minimum standards. The Board is also
making other technical changes.
A. Incorporation of the
Recommendations for CCP
The Board is proposing to incorporate
the Recommendations for CCP with no
modifications as the Board’s minimum
standards for central counterparties.
Central counterparties occupy an
important place in the financial system,
interposing themselves between
counterparties to financial transactions.
Given a central counterparty’s position
in a market, its risk management
practices can have implications for the
stability of the financial system and
pose risks to the Federal Reserve. The
Board believes the Recommendations
for CCP are an important framework for
promoting sound risk management in
central counterparties and believes that
adherence to these recommendations
can promote financial stability. The
participated in the development of the
Recommendations for CCP. The full report on the
Recommendations for CCP is available at https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss64.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36801
Federal Reserve, along with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
and the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, were actively involved in
developing these recommendations,
which reflect broad input and a
balanced view of acceptable risk
management practices.
The incorporation of the
Recommendations for CCP into the PSR
policy continues the Board’s longstanding interest in the safety and
soundness of the nation’s payments and
settlement systems. The Board believes
that its incorporation of the
Recommendations for CCP continues its
past efforts to adopt appropriate
international standards for key
payments and settlement systems and to
enhance the understanding and
management of risks by users and other
stakeholders in these systems. The
Board also believes that this change is
consistent with the spirit and intention
of the 2004 PSR policy revisions,
clarifying the Board’s policy objectives
and expectations for payments and
settlement systems subject to its
authority, and providing further
guidance on how it expects systems to
manage and disclose their risks.
Accordingly, the Board is proposing to
incorporate the Recommendations for
CCP into the policy to highlight the
importance of central counterparties to
the financial markets and to
demonstrate the Board’s desire to
encourage the use of Recommendations
for CCP globally in cooperation with
other domestic and foreign financial
system authorities.
B. Purpose and Scope of Part I of the
PSR Policy
In support of incorporating the
Recommendations for CCP, the Board is
proposing to clarify the purpose of Part
I of the policy and revise its scope with
regard to central counterparties. First,
the Board is proposing to revise the
purpose of Part I of the PSR policy to
set forth the Board’s views and related
principles and minimum standards
regarding the management of risks in
payments and settlement systems
generally. A range of payments and
settlement systems operate in the
financial markets and a failure in one or
more of them could affect financial
stability and expose the Federal Reserve
to certain risks. While the Federal
Reserve does not directly oversee all of
these systems, it does have a
fundamental interest in financial
stability for the financial system as
whole. Robust risk management by
these systems plays an important role in
maintaining financial stability.
Therefore, the Board is proposing to
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
36802
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
revise its policy to broadly state its
views on risk management for all
systems that could affect financial
stability.
In this context, the Board encourages
key payments and settlement systems
and their primary regulators to take the
principles and minimum standards in
the PSR policy into consideration in the
design, operation, monitoring, and
assessment of these systems. Privateand public-sector systems subject to the
Board’s authority, however, are
expected to meet the Board’s
expectations as described in the PSR
policy. The Board’s proposed revisions
also clarify this latter point.
Second, the Board is also proposing to
revise the scope to include central
counterparties as key systems that could
affect financial stability. The Board’s
current PSR policy applies to publicand private-sector ‘‘payments and
securities settlement systems,’’ that
meet certain volume thresholds. The
term ‘‘securities settlement system’’
currently includes foreign-exchange
settlement systems and central
counterparties in the securities
markets.7 The Board is proposing to
revise the scope to refer to ‘‘settlement
systems,’’ which can include a range of
systems, including a settlement system
for foreign exchange transactions, a
securities settlement system, or a central
counterparty. To affect this change, the
Board has deleted the exemption for
clearance and settlement systems for
exchange-traded futures and options.
The Board recognizes that several of
the systems within the revised scope of
Part I of the policy are supervised,
regulated, or overseen by other financial
system authorities. Where the Board
does not have authority or does not have
exclusive authority over systems
covered by the policy, it will work with
other domestic and foreign financial
system authorities to promote the Core
Principles and CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations and the objectives of
this policy.8 The Board believes
7 The Board’s current PSR policy explicitly does
not cover central counterparties for exchange-traded
futures and options, and is silent on the coverage
of central counterparties for foreign exchange
contracts and over-the-counter derivative contracts.
8 The revised scope will include central
counterparties to contracts in financial markets,
including derivatives and foreign exchange markets.
The Board acknowledges that the policy’s current
$5 billion threshold and factors for considering a
system’s systemic importance may not be useful
benchmarks for central counterparties operating in
these markets. Therefore, the Board encourages the
appropriate financial system authorities to apply
appropriate benchmarks or standards for
determining whether central counterparties should
meet specific risk management expectations, such
as those included in the policy, or whether they
should meet the Recommendations for CCP.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
clarifying the purpose of Part I and
revising its scope to include the full
range of current and future central
counterparties for contracts in financial
markets are warranted for several
reasons.
First, the Board’s policy rests on a
fundamental interest of the Federal
Reserve as the central bank in financial
stability and the role that payments and
settlement systems play in promoting
and maintaining resilience in the
financial system. Therefore, the Board
believes that its policy should reflect the
Board’s views on risk management for
the full range of systems that clear and
settle payments and other financial
instruments that could affect financial
stability, including central
counterparties.
Second, revising the scope will enable
the policy to conform to changes in the
payments and settlement landscape as it
continues to evolve. The benefits of
central counterparty clearing have been
considered and implemented in
multiple markets, including the
securities, options, and futures markets.
In addition, the financial services
industry has proposed or implemented
central counterparties for foreign
exchange transactions in the past, such
as Multinet and ECHO,9 and continues
to debate the efficacy of central
counterparties for over-the-counter
derivatives products. Should the
industry pursue the implementation of
central counterparty clearing models in
these markets, introduce new systems,
or redesign existing ones, the designers
and owners of these systems will have
clear ex ante knowledge of the Board’s
views and expectations regarding risk
management for central counterparties
as they design and develop their
systems.
Finally, in their role as providers of
payments and settlement services, the
Reserve Banks provide settlement
services to a variety of private-sector
payments and settlement arrangements.
In providing such services, the Reserve
Banks need to consider the risks that
they might incur should a system fail to
settle. One reason the Board developed
its PSR policy was to address the risks
that systems present not only to the
9 In 1996, Multinet was authorized as a limitedpurpose bank under New York Law to provide
multilateral netting services; Multinet, however,
never became operational. ECHO, Exchange
Clearing House Limited, was a London-based
clearing house that, from 1995 to 1997, provided
multilateral netting and settlement of spot and
forward foreign exchange obligations for its users.
In 1997, Multinet and ECHO merged forming the
basis for the Continuous Linked Settlement (CLS)
Bank which currently provides payment-versuspayment services to its users trading in the 15
currencies eligible for settlement at CLS.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
financial system, but also to the Federal
Reserve Banks. Revising the scope to
cover the full range of potential
payments and settlement systems,
therefore, would provide a defined set
of principles and standards that the
Reserve Banks could look to for
assessing the risks of systems seeking
settlement services, if needed.
C. Self-Assessments by Systemically
Important Systems
The Board believes that the effective
implementation of the risk management
concepts embodied in the Core
Principles and CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations will further
strengthen the financial system. The
Core Principles and CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations establish an
expectation that a system will disclose
sufficient information to allow users
and other stakeholders to identify,
understand, and evaluate accurately the
risks and costs of using the system’s
services. Central banks as well as
systems have pursued a variety of
disclosure practices, resulting in varying
levels of information being
disseminated to users and the public
generally. Given these varying practices,
users and others may find it difficult to
obtain access to sufficient information
in order to assess a particular system
against internationally accepted
principles or minimum standards. The
Board believes that broadening the
availability of information concerning a
system’s risk management controls,
governance, and legal framework, for
example, can assist users and other
interested persons in evaluating and
managing their risk exposures while
furthering global financial stability.
The Board acknowledges that
disclosure can be achieved in several
ways, including through public
disclosure of assessments by the central
bank. Certain central banks in other
countries functioning as overseers
publish oversight reports that have
included summarized and, in some
cases, detailed assessments of
systemically important systems against
the same principles and minimum
standards in the Board’s policy. The
Board, however, supervises as well as
oversees certain systemically important
systems. In order to produce robust
assessments, it is important for the
Board to draw upon all relevant and
available information, including
supervisory information that
traditionally has been treated
confidentially. This constrains the
ability of the Board to issue a public
assessment that relies, at least in part,
on confidential information. In this
context, and in order to promote
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
appropriate disclosure, the Board
believes the individual system operators
are well positioned to make informed,
accurate disclosures to meet both the
information needs of users and other
persons and the stated policy objectives.
Therefore, in furtherance of its
objectives, the Board is proposing to
revise its policy to establish an
expectation that systemically important
systems subject to the Board’s authority
will complete self-assessments against
the principles or minimum standards, as
applicable, in the policy and publicly
disclose those assessments. The Board is
proposing several guidelines to assist
the system operator in developing a selfassessment consistent with the Board’s
expectations.
The Board expects the content of a
self-assessment to be comprehensive
and objective. The Board is proposing
that a system determine its level of
implementation and state whether each
principle or minimum standard is
observed, broadly observed, partly
observed, or non-observed; all
conclusions should be fully supported
in the self-assessment. In documenting
the basis for the self-assessment,
however, the Board does not expect the
system to disclose sensitive information
that may expose system vulnerabilities,
such as specific business continuity
plans. For further guidance in
developing a self-assessment and
understanding the relevant principles or
minimum standards, the Board would
encourage a system operator to consult
the interpretation discussion in the Core
Principles or the assessment
methodology for the relevant CPSS–
IOSCO Recommendations as further
guidance. A system may also consult the
Board for assistance with respect to the
individual principles and minimum
standards and the completion of its selfassessment.
The Board believes that in order for a
self-assessment to be useful to users and
others in understanding and managing
their risks the content must be accurate
and readily available. Therefore, the
Board is proposing that the system’s
senior management and board of
directors review and approve a selfassessment prior to publication to
ensure system accountability for
accuracy and completeness. To achieve
broad disclosure, the Board is proposing
that the system publish its selfassessment on its public Web site. The
Board is also proposing that a system
complete and publish its first selfassessment within twelve months of the
effective date of the final policy
changes. Lastly, to ensure continued
accuracy, the Board is proposing that
the system update statements in its
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
assessment following material changes
to the system or its environment, and,
at a minimum, review annually its selfassessment.
As part of its ongoing oversight of
systemically important payments and
settlement systems over which it
exercises authority, the Federal Reserve
will review published self-assessments
and, if the Federal Reserve materially
disagrees with the content of a selfassessment of a system, it will
communicate its concerns to the
system’s senior management or the
board of directors, as appropriate. The
Federal Reserve may also discuss its
concerns with other relevant financial
system authorities, as appropriate. The
Board would evaluate the effectiveness
of this self-assessment framework after a
few years to determine if the selfassessment process is meeting its policy
objectives.
III. Request for Comment
The Board requests comment on the
proposed revisions to its PSR policy. In
particular, the Board requests comment
on whether the revisions to the scope
and application of the policy are
sufficiently clear and provide the
appropriate coverage to achieve the
policy’s intended objectives. The Board
will carefully consider comments
submitted to ensure the final selfassessment framework is appropriate for
all systems subject to this policy and
subject to the Board’s authority. The
Board also requests comment on the
following specific questions:
1. Are the proposed policy objectives
clear?
2. Is the incorporation of the
Recommendations for CCP reasonable
and appropriate?
3. Are the clarifications to the purpose
and revisions to the scope with regard
to central counterparties reasonable and
appropriate?
4. Do you believe that selfassessments are an effective method to
facilitate the availability of information
for users and other interested parties to
identify, understand, and evaluate the
risks of a systemically important
system?
5. Are the proposed guidelines
regarding self-assessments clear and do
they provide sufficient guidance to
system operators?
6. Do the implementation measures
included in the Core Principles and the
assessment methodologies for the
CPSS–IOSCO Recommendations
provide sufficiently clear and useful
frameworks to complete comprehensive
and objective self-assessments? If not,
please explain. Are there alternatives to
these frameworks that can provide
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36803
equally robust and objective selfassessments?
7. Will the inclusion of ratings
(observed, broadly observed, partly
observed, and non-observed) be helpful
to persons evaluating a particular
systemically important system against
the principles and minimum standards?
What are the pros and cons of including
self-ratings as part of self-assessments?
8. Are there any drawbacks to the
public disclosure of self-assessments? If
so, what are they? Given the stated
policy objectives, are there valid reasons
to consider a more limited distribution
of self-assessments and/or self-ratings
(e.g., only to a system’s users)?
9. Is the proposed twelve month time
frame for a system to complete and
publish its first self-assessment
appropriate?
10. Are the proposed triggers for
reviewing and updating a selfassessment appropriate? If not, what
other triggers would ensure published
self-assessments remain accurate?
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Board has determined that this
proposed policy statement would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The proposal would require payments
and securities settlement systems to
address material risks in their systems.
The proposal is designed to minimize
regulatory burden on smaller systems
that do not raise material risks.
V. Competitive Impact Analysis
The Board has established procedures
for assessing the competitive impact of
rule or policy changes that have a
substantial impact on payments system
participants.10 Under these procedures,
the Board will assess whether a change
would have a direct and material
adverse effect on the ability of other
service providers to compete effectively
with the Federal Reserve in providing
similar services due to differing legal
powers or constraints, or due to a
dominant market position of the Federal
Reserve deriving from such differences.
If no reasonable modifications would
mitigate the adverse competitive effects,
the Board will determine whether the
anticipated benefits are significant
enough to proceed with the change
despite the adverse effects. The
proposed policy revisions provide that
Reserve Bank systems will be treated
similarly to private-sector systems and
thus will have no material adverse effect
on the ability of other service providers
10 These procedures are described in the Board’s
policy statement ‘‘The Federal Reserve in the
Payments System,’’ as revised in March 1990 (55 FR
11648, March 29, 1990).
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
36804
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
to compete effectively with the Federal
Reserve Banks in providing payments
and securities settlement services.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Ch.
3506; 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1), the
Board reviewed the policy statement
under the authority delegated to the
Board by the Office of Management and
Budget. The Federal Reserve may not
conduct or sponsor, and an organization
is not required to respond to, this
information collection unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number.
An OMB control number will be
assigned upon approval of the new
information collection.
The collection of information that is
proposed to be implemented by this
notice is found in Part I of the Board’s
Policy on Payments System Risk (PSR
policy). This information is required to
evidence compliance with the
requirements of the PSR policy. The
respondents are systemically important
systems, as defined in the PSR policy.
The Board proposes that systemically
important systems, subject to the
Board’s authority, complete initial
comprehensive self-assessments and
thereafter, review and update selfassessments annually or as otherwise
provided in the PSR policy. The Board
also proposes that these selfassessments be reviewed and approved
by the system’s senior management and
board of directors. Upon approval and
in order to achieve broad disclosure, the
systems should publish self-assessments
on their public Websites. In order to
help minimize burden the Board is
proposing guidelines to assist system
operators in developing self-assessments
consistent with the Board’s
expectations.
The proposed burden for the initial
reporting and disclosure requirements
associated with this policy statement is
estimated to be on average 310 hours
per system (ranging from 200 to 400
hours). The burden includes: 215 hours
for staff to review the requirements and
complete the self-assessment; 30 hours
for senior management to review that
each principle was fully assessed; 50
hours for the board of directors to
review and approve the self-assessment;
and 15 hours for type-setting and
technical editing of the document and
preparing the website. The Board
estimates that currently about three
private-sector systems are systemically
important and subject to the Board’s
authority; therefore, the total burden for
systems under the Board’s authority is
estimated to 930 hours to complete the
initial self-assessments.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
Following the initial assessment, the
Board estimates that the burden will
decrease for a system to conduct an
annual review and report and disclose
updates to its self-assessment. The
proposed burden for annual reviews and
updates associated with this policy is
estimated to be on average 70 hours per
system (ranging from 50–100 hours).
The burden includes: 25 hours for staff
to review the self-assessment and
update relevant sections; 15 hours for
senior management to review the selfassessment; 25 hours for the board of
directors to review and approve the selfassessment; and 5 hours for technical
editing and Website activities. The total
burden for the approximately three
private-sector systems under the Board’s
authority would be an estimated 210
hours. These initial estimates will be
adjusted in the future, as appropriate.
Comments are invited on a. Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the Federal Reserve’s functions,
including whether the information has
practical utility; b. The accuracy of the
Federal Reserve’s estimate of the burden
of the proposed information collection,
including the cost of compliance; c.
Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and d. Ways to minimize the
burden of information collection on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments on the collections of
information should be sent to Secretary,
Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551,
with copies of such comments to be sent
to the Office of Management and
Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project
(7100–PSR Policy), Washington, DC
20503.
VII. Federal Reserve Policy on
Payments System Risk
Introduction [Revised]
Risks in Payments and Settlement Systems
[Revised]
I. Risk Management in Payments and
Settlement Systems [Revised]
A. Scope
B. General Policy Expectations
C. Systemically Important Systems
1. Principles for Systemically Important
Payments Systems
2. Minimum Standards for Systemically
Important Securities Settlement Systems
and Central Counterparties
II. Federal Reserve Daylight Credit Policies
[No Change]
A. Daylight Overdraft Definition and
Measurement
B. Pricing
C. Net Debit Caps
D. Collateral
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E. Special Situations
F. Monitoring
G. Transfer-size Limit on Book-Entry
Securities
III. Other Policies [No Change]
A. Rollovers and Continuing Contracts
Introduction
Payments and settlement systems are
critical components of the nation’s
financial system. The smooth
functioning of these systems is vital to
the financial stability of the U.S.
economy. Given the importance of these
systems, the Board has developed this
policy to address the risks that
payments and settlement activity
present to the financial system and to
the Federal Reserve Banks (Reserve
Banks).
In adopting this policy, the Board’s
objectives are to foster the safety and
efficiency of payments and settlement
systems. These policy objectives are
consistent with (1) the Board’s longstanding objectives to promote the
integrity, efficiency, and accessibility of
the payments mechanism; (2) industry
and supervisory methods for risk
management; and (3) internationally
accepted risk management principles
and minimum standards for
systemically important payments and
settlement systems.1
Part I of this policy sets out the
Board’s views, and related principles
and minimum standards, regarding the
management of risks in payments and
settlement systems, including those
operated by the Reserve Banks. In
setting out its views, the Board seeks to
encourage payments and settlement
systems, and their primary regulators, to
take the principles and minimum
standards in this policy into
consideration in the design, operation,
monitoring, and assessing of these
systems. The Board also will be guided
by this part, in conjunction with
relevant laws and other Federal Reserve
policies, when exercising its authority
over certain systems or their
participants, when providing payment
and settlement services to systems, or
when providing intraday credit to
Federal Reserve account holders.
Part II of this policy governs the
provision of intraday or ‘‘daylight’’
overdrafts in accounts at the Reserve
Banks and sets out the general methods
used by the Reserve Banks to control
their intraday credit exposures.2 Under
1 For the Board’s long-standing objectives in the
payments system, see ‘‘The Federal Reserve in the
Payments System,’’ September 2001, FRRS 9–1550,
available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/
paymentssystems/pricing/frpaysys.htm.
2 To assist depository institutions in
implementing this part of the Board’s payments
system risk policy, the Federal Reserve has
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
this part, the Board expects depository
institutions to manage their Federal
Reserve accounts effectively and
minimize their use of Federal Reserve
daylight credit.3 Although some
intraday credit may be necessary, the
Board expects that, as a result of this
policy, relatively few institutions will
consistently rely on intraday credit
supplied by the Federal Reserve to
conduct their business.
Through this policy, the Board
expects financial system participants,
including the Reserve Banks, to reduce
and control settlement and systemic
risks arising in payments and settlement
systems, consistent with the smooth
operation of the financial system. This
policy is designed to fulfill that aim by
(1) making financial system participants
and system operators aware of the types
of basic risks that arise in the settlement
process and the Board’s expectations
with regard to risk management, (2)
setting explicit risk management
expectations for systemically important
systems, and (3) establishing the policy
conditions governing the provision of
Federal Reserve intraday credit to
account holders. The Board’s adoption
of this policy in no way diminishes the
primary responsibilities of financial
system participants generally and
settlement system operators,
participants, and Federal Reserve
account holders more specifically, to
address the risks that may arise through
their operation of, or participation in,
payments and settlement systems.
Risks in Payments and Settlement
Systems
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
The basic risks in payments and
settlement systems are credit risk,
liquidity risk, operational risk, and legal
prepared two documents, the ‘‘Overview of the
Federal Reserve’s Payments System Risk Policy’’
and the ‘‘Guide to the Federal Reserve’s Payments
System Risk Policy,’’ which are available online at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentssystems/
PSR or from any Reserve Bank. The ‘‘Overview of
the Federal Reserve’s Payments System Risk
Policy’’ summarizes the Board’s policy on the
provision of daylight credit, including net debit
caps and daylight overdraft fees. The overview is
intended for use by institutions that incur only
small and infrequent daylight overdrafts. The
‘‘Guide to the Federal Reserve’s Payments System
Risk Policy’’ explains in detail how these policies
apply to different institutions and includes
procedures for completing a self-assessment and
filing a cap resolution as well as information on
other aspects of the policy.
3 The term ‘‘depository institution,’’ as used in
this policy, refers not only to institutions defined
as depository institutions’’ in 12 U.S.C.
461(b)(1)(A), but also to U.S. branches and agencies
of foreign banking organizations, Edge and
agreement corporations, trust companies, and
bankers’ banks, unless the context indicates a
different reading.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
risk. In the context of this policy, these
risks are defined as follows.4
Credit Risk. The risk that a
counterparty will not settle an
obligation for full value either when
due, or anytime thereafter.
Liquidity Risk. The risk that a
counterparty will not settle an
obligation for full value when due.
Operational Risk. The risk of loss
resulting from inadequate or failed
internal processes, people, and systems,
or from external events. This type of risk
includes various physical and
information security risks.
Legal Risk. The risk of loss because of
the unexpected application of a law or
regulation or because a contract cannot
be enforced.
These risks arise between financial
institutions as they settle payments and
other financial transactions and must be
managed by institutions, both
individually and collectively.5 6
Multilateral payments and settlement
systems, in particular, may increase,
shift, concentrate, or otherwise
transform risks in unanticipated ways.
These systems also may pose systemic
risk to the financial system where the
inability of a system participant to meet
its obligations when due may cause
other participants to be unable to meet
their obligations when due. The failure
of one or more participants to settle
their payments or other financial
transactions, in turn, could create credit
or liquidity problems for other
participants, the system operator, or
depository institutions. Systemic risk
might lead ultimately to a disruption in
the financial system more broadly or
undermine public confidence in the
nation’s financial infrastructure.
These risks stem, in part, from the
multilateral and time-sensitive credit
and liquidity interdependencies among
financial institutions. These
interdependencies often create complex
transaction flows that, in combination
with a system’s design, can lead to
significant demands for intraday credit,
4 These definitions of credit risk, liquidity risk,
and legal risk are based upon those presented in the
Core Principles for Systemically Important Payment
Systems (Core Principles) and the
Recommendations for Securities Settlement
Systems (Recommendations for SSS). The
definition of operational risk is based on the Basel
Committee on Banking Supervision’s ‘‘Sound
Practices for the Management and Supervision of
Operational Risk,’’ available at https://www.bis.org/
pub/bcbs96.htm. Each of these definitions is largely
consistent with those included in the
Recommendations for Central Counterparties
(Recommendations for CCP).
5 The term ‘‘financial institution,’’ as used in this
policy, includes a broad array of types of
organizations that engage in financial activity,
including depository institutions and securities
dealers.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36805
either on a regular or extraordinary
basis. Some level of intraday credit is
appropriate to ensure the smooth
functioning of payments and settlement
systems. To the extent that financial
institutions or the Reserve Banks are the
direct or indirect source of such
intraday credit, they may face a direct
risk of loss if daylight credit is not
extinguished as planned. In addition,
measures taken by Reserve Banks to
limit their intraday credit exposures
may shift some or all of the associated
risks to private-sector systems.
The smooth functioning of payments
and settlement systems is also critical to
certain public policy objectives in the
areas of monetary policy and banking
supervision. The effective
implementation of monetary policy, for
example, depends on both the orderly
settlement of open market operations
and the efficient distribution of reserve
balances throughout the banking system
via the money market and payments
system. Likewise, supervisory objectives
regarding the safety and soundness of
depository institutions must take into
account the risks payments and
settlement systems pose to depository
institutions that participate directly or
indirectly in, or provide settlement,
custody, or credit services to, such
systems.
Part I: Risk Management in Payments
and Settlement Systems
This part sets out the Board’s views
regarding the management of risk in
payments and settlement systems,
including those operated by the Reserve
Banks. The Board will be guided by this
part, in conjunction with relevant laws
and other Federal Reserve policies,
when exercising its authority in (1)
supervising state member banks, Edge
and agreement corporations, bank
holding companies, and clearinghouse
arrangements, including the exercise of
authority under the Bank Service
Company Act, where applicable,7 (2)
setting or reviewing the terms and
conditions for the use of Federal
Reserve payments and settlement
services by system operators and
participants, (3) developing and
applying policies for the provision of
intraday liquidity to Reserve Bank
account holders, and (4) interacting
with other domestic and foreign
6 Several existing regulatory and bank supervision
guidelines and polices also are directed at
institutions’ management of the risks posed by
interbank payments and settlement activity. For
example, Federal Reserve Regulation F (12 CFR
206) directs insured depository institutions to
establish policies and procedures to avoid excessive
exposures to any other depository institutions,
including exposures that may be generated through
the clearing and settlement of payments.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
36806
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
financial system authorities on
payments and settlement risk
management issues. The Board’s
adoption of this policy is not intended
to exert or create new supervisory or
regulatory authority over any particular
class of institutions or arrangements
where the Board does not currently have
such authority.
Where the Board does not have
exclusive authority over systems
covered by this policy, it will work with
other domestic and foreign financial
system authorities to promote effective
risk management in payments and
settlement systems, as appropriate. The
Board encourages other relevant
authorities to consider the principles
and minimum standards embodied in
this policy when evaluating the risks
posed by and to payments and
settlement systems and individual
system participants that they oversee,
supervise, or regulate. In working with
other financial system authorities, the
Board will be guided, as appropriate, by
Responsibility D of the Core Principles,
Recommendation 18 of the
Recommendations for SSS,
Recommendation 15 of the
Recommendations for CCP, the
‘‘Principles for Cooperative Central
Bank Oversight of Cross-border and
Multi-currency Netting and Settlement
Schemes,’’ and the Principles for
International Cooperative Oversight
(Part B) of the Committee on Payment
and Settlement Systems (CPSS) report,
‘‘Central Bank Oversight of Payment and
Settlement Systems.’’ 8 The Board
believes these international principles
provide an appropriate framework for
cooperating and coordinating with other
authorities to address risks in domestic,
8 Payments and settlement systems within the
scope of this policy may be subject to oversight or
supervision by multiple public authorities, as a
result of the legal framework or the system’s
operating structure (e.g., multi-currency or crossborder systems). As such, the Federal Reserve, other
central banks, securities regulators, or other
financial system authorities may need to find
practical ways to cooperate in order to discharge
fully their own responsibilities. In some cases,
multiple authorities may have responsibility for a
multi-currency, cross-border, or other arrangement.
In these situations, financial authorities need to be
sensitive to the potential for duplicative or
conflicting requirements, oversight gaps, or
unnecessary costs and burdens imposed on the
system. The ‘‘Principles for Cooperative Central
Bank Oversight and Multi-currency Netting and
Settlement Schemes’’ are set out in the ‘‘Report of
the Committee on Interbank Netting Schemes of the
Central Banks of the Group of Ten Countries’’
(Lamafalussy Minimum Standards). The CPSS
report, ‘‘Central Bank Oversight of Payment and
Settlement Systems’’ (Oversight Report), Part B,
‘‘Principles for international cooperative oversight,’’
provides further information on the practical
application of the Lamfalussy Cooperative
Oversight Principles. The Lamfalussy Minimum
Standards and the Oversight Report are available at
https://www.bis.org/cpss/cpsspub.htm.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
cross-border, multi-currency, and,
where appropriate, offshore payments
and settlement systems.
A. Scope
This policy applies to public- and
private-sector payments and settlement
systems that expect to settle a daily
aggregate gross value of U.S. dollardenominated transactions exceeding $5
billion on any day during the next 12
months.9 10 For purposes of this policy,
a payments or settlement system is
considered to be a multilateral
arrangement (three or more participants)
among financial institutions for the
purposes of clearing, netting, and/or
settling payments, securities, or other
9 The $5 billion threshold was designed to apply
to cash markets and may not be a useful benchmark
for central counterparties operating in derivatives
markets. The appropriate financial system
authorities in derivatives markets may therefore
have different benchmarks and standards relevant
to such central counterparties.
10 The ‘next’ twelve-month period is determined
by reference to the date a determination is being
made as to whether the policy applies to a
particular system. Aggregate gross value of U.S.
dollar-denominated transactions refers to the total
dollar value of individual U.S. dollar transactions
settled in the system which also represents the sum
of total U.S. dollar debits (or credits) to all
participants prior to or in absence of any netting of
transactions.
11 A system includes all of the governance,
management, legal, and operational arrangements
used to effect settlement as well as the relevant
parties to such arrangements, such as the system
operator, system participants, and system owners.
12 The types of systems that may fall within the
scope of this policy include, but are not limited to,
large-value funds transfer systems, automated
clearinghouse (ACH) systems, check
clearinghouses, and credit and debit card settlement
systems, as well as central counterparties, clearing
corporations, and central securities depositories.
For purposes of this policy, the system operator is
the entity that manages and oversees the operations
of the system.
13 For the purposes of this policy, a ‘‘settlement
system’’ includes a payment-versus-payment
settlement system for foreign exchange transactions,
a securities settlement system, and a system
operating as central counterparty. The CPSS defines
‘‘payment-versus-payment’’ as ‘‘* * * a foreign
exchange settlement system which ensures that a
final transfer of one currency occurs if and only if
a final transfer of the other currency or currencies
takes place.’’ The CPSS and the Technical
Committee of the International Organization of
Securities Commission (IOSCO) define a ‘‘securities
settlement system’’ as the full set of institutional
arrangements for confirmation, clearance, and
settlement of securities trades and safekeeping of
securities and a ‘‘central counterparty’’ is an entity
that interposes itself between counterparties to
contracts traded in one or more financial markets,
becoming the buyer to every seller and the seller to
every buyer. A central counterparty can include a
derivatives clearing organization, such as a
clearinghouse, clearing association, clearing
corporation, or similar entity, facility, system, or
organization that, with respect to an agreement,
contract, or transaction, acts as a central
counterparty to each party to an agreement,
contract, or transaction; arranges or provides for
multilateral netting; or provide clearing services or
arrangements that mutualize or transfer credit risk
among participants in the organization.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
financial transactions among themselves
or between each of them and a central
party, such as a system operator or
central counterparty.11 12 13 A system
generally embodies one or more of the
following characteristics: (1) A set of
rules and procedures, common to all
participants, that govern the clearing
(comparison and/or netting) and
settlement of payments, securities, or
other financial transactions, (2) a
common technical infrastructure for
conducting the clearing or settlement
process, and (3) a risk management or
capital structure where any credit losses
are ultimately borne by system
participants rather than the system
operator, a central counterparty or
guarantor, or the system’s shareholders.
These systems may be organized,
located, or operated within the United
States (domestic systems), outside the
United States (offshore systems), or both
(cross-border systems) and may involve
other currencies in addition to the U.S.
dollar (multi-currency systems). The
policy also applies to any system based
or operated in the United States that
engages in the settlement of non-U.S.
dollar transactions if that system would
be otherwise subject to the policy.14
This policy does not apply to bilateral
relationships between financial
institutions and their customers, such as
traditional correspondent banking,
including traditional government
securities clearing services. The Board
believes that these relationships do not
constitute ‘‘a system’’ for purposes of
this policy and that relevant safety and
soundness issues associated with these
relationships are more appropriately
addressed through the bank supervisory
process.
B. General Policy Expectations
The Board encourages payments and
settlement systems within the scope of
this policy and expects systems subject
to its authority to implement a risk
management framework appropriate for
the risks the system poses to the system
operator, system participants, and other
relevant parties as well as the financial
9 The $5 billion threshold was designed to apply
to cash markets and may not be a useful benchmark
for central counterparties operating in derivatives
markets. The appropriate financial system
authorities in derivatives markets may therefore
have different benchmarks and standards relevant
to such central counterparties.
10 The ‘next’ twelve-month period is determined
by reference to the date a determination is being
made as to whether the policy applies to a
particular system. Aggregate gross value of U.S.
dollar-denominated transactions refers to the total
dollar value of individual U.S. dollar transactions
settled in the system which also represents the sum
of total U.S. dollar debits (or credits) to all
participants prior to or in absence of any netting of
transactions.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
system more broadly. A risk
management framework is the set of
objectives, policies, arrangements,
procedures, and resources that a system
employs to limit and manage risk. While
there are a number of ways to structure
a sound risk management framework, all
frameworks should
• Clearly identify risks and set sound
risk management objectives;
• Establish sound governance
arrangements;
• Establish clear and appropriate
rules and procedures; and,
• Employ the resources necessary to
achieve the system’s risk management
objectives and implement effectively its
rules and procedures.
In addition to establishing a risk
management framework that includes
these key elements, the Board expects
systems subject to its authority that it
determines are systemically important
to meet the policy expectations set out
in Section C (Core Principles,
Recommendations for SSS, or
Recommendations for CCP, as
applicable).
Identify Risks and Set Sound Risk
Management Objectives. The first
element of a sound risk management
framework is the clear identification of
all risks that have the potential to arise
in or result from the system’s settlement
process and the development of clear
and transparent objectives regarding the
system’s tolerance for and management
of such risks.
System operators should identify the
forms of risk present in their system’s
settlement process as well as the parties
posing and bearing each risk. In
particular, system operators should
identify the risks posed to and borne by
themselves, the system participants, and
other key parties such as a system’s
settlement banks, custody banks, and
third-party service providers. System
operators should also analyze whether
risks might be imposed on other
external parties and the financial system
more broadly.
In addition, system operators should
analyze how risk is transformed or
concentrated by the settlement process.
System operators should also consider
the possibility that attempts to limit one
type of risk could lead to an increase in
another type of risk. Moreover, system
operators should be aware of risks that
might be unique to certain instruments,
participants, or market practices.
System operators should also analyze
how risks are correlated among
instruments or participants.15
11 A system includes all of the governance,
management, legal, and operational arrangements
used to effect settlement as well as the relevant
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
Based upon its clear identification of
risks, a system should establish its risk
tolerance, including the levels of risk
exposure that are acceptable to the
system operator, system participants,
and other relevant parties. The system
operator should then set risk
management objectives that clearly
allocate acceptable risks among the
relevant parties and set out strategies to
manage this risk. Risk management
objectives should be consistent with the
objectives of this policy, the system’s
business purposes, and the type of
instruments and markets for which the
system clears and settles. Risk
management objectives should also be
communicated to and understood by
both the system operator’s staff and
system participants.
System operators should reevaluate
their risks in conjunction with any
major changes in the settlement process
or operations, the instruments or
transactions settled, a system’s rules or
procedures, or the relevant legal and
market environments. Systems should
revisit their risk management objectives
regularly to ensure that they are
appropriate for the risks posed by the
system, continue to be aligned with the
system’s purposes, remain consistent
with this policy, and are being
parties to such arrangements, such as the system
operator, system participants, and system owners.
12 The types of systems that may fall within the
scope of this policy include, but are not limited to,
large-value funds transfer systems, automated
clearinghouse (ACH) systems, check
clearinghouses, and credit and debit card settlement
systems, as well as central counterparties, clearing
corporations, and central securities depositories.
For purposes of this policy, the system operator is
the entity that manages and oversees the operations
of the system.
13 For the purposes of this policy, a ‘‘settlement
system’’ includes a payment-versus-payment
settlement system for foreign exchange transactions,
a securities settlement system, and a system
operating as central counterparty. The CPSS defines
‘‘payment-versus-payment’’ as ‘‘* * * a foreign
exchange settlement system which ensures that a
final transfer of one currency occurs if and only if
a final transfer of the other currency or currencies
takes place.’’ The CPSS and the Technical
Committee of the International Organization of
Securities Commission (IOSCO) define a ‘‘securities
settlement system’’ as the full set of institutional
arrangements for confirmation, clearance, and
settlement of securities trades and safekeeping of
securities and a ‘‘central counterparty’’ is an entity
that interposes itself between counterparties to
contracts traded in one or more financial markets,
becoming the buyer to every seller and the seller to
every buyer. A central counterparty can include a
derivatives clearing organization, such as a
clearinghouse, clearing association, clearing
corporation, or similar entity, facility, system, or
organization that, with respect to an agreement,
contract, or transaction, acts as a central
counterparty to each party to an agreement,
contract, or transaction; arranges or provides for
multilateral netting; or provide clearing services or
arrangements that mutualize or transfer credit risk
among participants in the organization.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36807
effectively adhered to by the system
operator and participants.
Sound Governance Arrangements.
Systems should have sound governance
arrangements to implement and oversee
their risk management frameworks. The
responsibility for sound governance
rests with a system operator’s board of
directors or similar body and with the
system operator’s senior management.
Governance structures and processes
should be transparent; enable the
establishment of clear risk management
objectives; set and enforce clear lines of
responsibility and accountability for
achieving these objectives; ensure that
there is appropriate oversight of the risk
management process; and enable the
effective use of information reported by
the system operator’s management,
internal auditors, and external auditors
to monitor the performance of the risk
management process.16 Individuals
responsible for governance should be
qualified for their positions, understand
their responsibilities, and understand
their system’s risk management
framework. Governance arrangements
should also ensure that risk
management information is shared in
forms, and at times, that allow
individuals responsible for governance
to fulfill their duties effectively.
Clear and Appropriate Rules and
Procedures. Systems should implement
rules and procedures that are
appropriate and sufficient to carry out
the system’s risk management objectives
and that have a well-founded legal
basis. Such rules and procedures should
specify the respective responsibilities of
the system operator, system
participants, and other relevant parties.
Rules and procedures should establish
the key features of a system’s settlement
and risk management design and specify
clear and transparent crisis management
procedures and settlement failure
procedures, if applicable.17
Employ Necessary Resources. Systems
should ensure that the appropriate
resources and processes are in place to
allow them to achieve their risk
management objectives and effectively
implement their rules and procedures.
In particular, the system operator’s staff
should have the appropriate skills,
16 The risk management and internal audit
functions should also be independent of those
responsible for day-do-day functions.
17 Examples of key features that might be
specified in a system’s rules and procedures are
controls to limit participant-based risks, such as
membership criteria based on participant’s financial
and operational health, limits on settlement
exposures, and the procedures and resources to
hedge, margin, or collateralize settlement
exposures. Other examples of key features might be
business continuity requirements and loss
allocation procedures.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
36808
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
information, and tools to apply the
system’s rules and procedures and
achieve the system’s risk management
objectives. System operators should also
ensure that their facilities and
contingency arrangements, including
any information system resources, are
sufficient to meet their risk management
objectives.
The Board recognizes that payments
and settlement systems differ widely in
terms of form, function, scale, and scope
of activities and that these
characteristics result in differing
combinations and levels of risks. Thus,
the exact features of a system’s risk
management framework should be
tailored to the risks of that system. The
Board also recognizes that the specific
features of a risk management
framework may entail trade-offs
between efficiency and risk reduction
and that payments and settlement
systems will need to consider these
trade-offs when designing appropriate
rules and procedures. In considering
such trade-offs, however, it is critically
important that systems take into account
the costs and risks that may be imposed
on all relevant parties, including parties
with no direct role in the system.
Furthermore, in light of rapidly evolving
technologies and risk management
practices, the Board encourages all
systems to consider periodically making
cost-effective risk-management
improvements.
To determine whether a system’s
current or proposed risk management
framework is consistent with this
policy, the Board will seek to
understand how a system achieves the
four elements of a sound risk
management framework set out above.
In this context, it may be necessary for
the Board to obtain information from
system operators regarding their risk
management framework, risk
management objectives, rules and
procedures, significant legal analyses,
general risk analyses, analyses of the
credit and liquidity effects of settlement
disruptions, business continuity plans,
crisis management procedures, and
other relevant documentation.18 It may
also be necessary for the Board to obtain
data or statistics on system activity on
an ad-hoc or ongoing basis. All
information provided to the Federal
Reserve for the purposes of this policy
will be handled in accordance with all
18 To facilitate analysis of settlement disruptions,
systems may need to develop the capability to
simulate credit and liquidity effects on participants
and on the system resulting from one or more
participant defaults, or other possible sources of
settlement disruptions. Such simulations may need
to include, if appropriate, the effects of changes in
market prices, volatilities, or other factors.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
applicable Federal Reserve policies on
information security, confidentiality,
and conflicts of interest.
C. Systemically Important Systems
Financial stability depends, in part,
on a robust and well-managed financial
infrastructure. If risks are not effectively
managed by systemically important
systems, these systems have the
potential to be a major channel for the
transmission of financial shocks across
systems and markets. Financial system
authorities, including central banks,
have promoted sound risk management
practices by developing internationally
accepted guidelines to encourage the
safe design and operation of payments
and settlement systems, especially those
considered systemically important.
In particular, the Core Principles,
Recommendations for SSS, and
Recommendations for CCP (the latter
two collectively referred to as the CPSS–
IOSCO Recommendations) set forth risk
management practices for payments
systems, securities settlement systems,
and central counterparties,
respectively.19 thnsp;20 The Federal
Reserve collaborated with participating
financial system authorities in
developing these principles and
minimum standards. In addition, the
Securities and Exchange Commission
and Commodity Futures Trading
Commission participated in the
development of the CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations. The principles and
minimum standards reflect broad input
and provide a balanced view of
acceptable risk management practices.
The Core Principles and
Recommendations for SSS are also part
of the Financial Stability Forum’s
Compendium of Standards that have
been widely recognized, supported, and
endorsed by U.S. authorities as integral
to strengthening the stability of the
financial system. The Board believes
that the implementation of the
19 The Core Principles were developed by the
CPSS; reference to ‘‘principles’’ in this policy are
to the Core Principles. The Core Principles draw
exclusively on the previous work of the CPSS, most
importantly the Lamfalussy Minimum Standards.
The Core Principles extend the Lamfalussy
Minimum Standards by adding several principles
and broadening the coverage to include
systematically important payments systems for all
types, including gross settlement systems, net
settlement systems, and hybrid systems, operated
by either the public or private sector. The Core
Principles also address the responsibilities of
central banks in applying the Core Principles.
20 The CPSS and IOSCO developed the CPSS–
IOSCO Recommendations as ‘‘minimum standards’’
and are referred to as such in this policy. The full
reports on the Core Principles and the CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations are available at https://
www.bis.org/pucl/cpss43.htm, https://www.bis.org/
pucl/cpss46.htm, and https://www.bis.org/publ/
cpss64.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
individual principles and minimum
standards by systemically important
systems can help promote safety and
efficiency in the financial system and
foster greater financial stability in
domestic and global economies.
Systemically important systems that
are subject to the Board’s authority are
expected to meet the specific risk
management principles and minimum
standards in this section, as appropriate,
and the general expectations of Section
B because of their potential to cause
major disruptions in the financial
system.21 To determine whether a
system is systemically important for
purposes of this policy, the Board may
consider, but will not be limited to, one
or more of the following factors: 22
• Whether the system has the
potential to create significant liquidity
disruptions or dislocations should it fail
to perform or settle as expected;
• Whether the system has the
potential to create large credit or
liquidity exposures relative to
participants’ financial capacity;
• Whether the system settles a high
proportion of large-value or interbank
transactions;
• Whether the system settles
transactions for important financial
markets; 23
• Whether the system provides
settlement for other systems; and,
• Whether the system is the only
system or one of a very few systems for
settlement of a given financial
instrument.
Some systemically important systems,
however, may present an especially
high degree of systemic risk, by virtue
21 Systematically important payments systems are
expected to meet the principles listed in Section
C.1. Securities settlement systems of systemic
importance are expected to meet the minimum
standards listed in Section C.2.a., and
systematically important central counterparties are
expected to meet the minimum standards listed in
C.2.b. For a system not subject to its authority, the
Board encourages the system and its appropriate
financial system authority to consider these
principles and minimum standards when
designing, operating, monitoring, and assessing the
system, as appropriate and applicable.
22 The Board will inform a system subject to its
authority if it considers it systemically important
and therefore expected to meet the principles or
minimum standards in this policy. The Board will
also inform such system if they are expected to
exceed any of the principles or minimum standards.
The appropriate financial system authorities
responsible for supervising or regulating central
counterparties are encouraged to inform the central
counterparties as to whether they are expected to
meet the Recommendations for CCP.
23 Important financial markets include, but are
not limited to, critical markets as defined in the
‘‘Interagency Paper on Sound Practices to
Strengthen the Resilience of the U.S. Financial
System’’ as the markets for federal funds, foreign
exchange, and commercial paper; U.S. government
and agency securities; and corporate debt and
security securities. See 68 FR 17809, April 11, 2003.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
of their high volume of large-value
transactions or central role in the
financial markets. Because all systems
are expected to employ a risk
management framework that is
appropriate for their risks, the Board
may expect these systems to exceed the
principles and minimum standards set
out below. Finally, the Board expects
systemically important systems to
demonstrate the extent to which they
meet the applicable principles or
minimum standards by completing selfassessments and disclosing publicly the
results of their analyses in a manner
consistent with the guidelines set forth
in Section C.3.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
1. Principles for Systemically Important
Payments Systems
1. The system should have a wellfounded legal basis under all relevant
jurisdictions.
2. The system’s rules and procedures
should enable participants to have a
clear understanding of the system’s
impact on each of the financial risks
they incur through participation in it.
3. The system should have clearly
defined procedures for the management
of credit risks and liquidity risks, which
specify the respective responsibilities of
the system operator and the participants
and which provide appropriate
incentives to manage and contain those
risks.
4. The system should provide prompt
final settlement on the day of value,
preferably during the day and at a
minimum at the end of the day.
5. A system in which multilateral
netting takes place should, at a
minimum, be capable of ensuring the
timely completion of daily settlements
in the event of an inability to settle by
the participant with the largest single
settlement obligation.
6. Assets used for settlement should
preferably be a claim on the central
bank; where other assets are used, they
should carry little or no credit risk and
little or no liquidity risk.
7. The system should ensure a high
degree of security and operational
reliability and should have contingency
arrangements for timely completion of
daily processing.
8. The system should provide a means
of making payments which is practical
for its users and efficient for the
economy.
9. The system should have objective
and publicly disclosed criteria for
participation, which permit fair and
open access.
10. The system’s governance
arrangements should be effective,
accountable and transparent.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
2. Minimum Standards for Systemically
Important Securities Settlement Systems
and Central Counterparties
The CPSS–IOSCO Recommendations
apply to the full set of institutional
arrangements for confirmation,
clearance, and settlement of securities
transactions, including those related to
market convention and pre-settlement
activities. As such, not all of these
standards apply to all systems.
Moreover, the standards applicable to a
particular system also will vary based
on the structure of the market and the
system’s design.
While the Board endorses the CPSS–
IOSCO Recommendations in their
entirety, its primary interest for
purposes of this policy is in those
recommendations related to the
settlement aspects of financial
transactions, including the delivery of
securities or other financial instruments
against payment, and related risks. The
Board expects that systems engaged in
the management or conduct of clearing
and settling financial transactions to
meet the expectations set forth in the
applicable set of CPSS–IOSCO
Recommendations.
a. Recommendations for Securities
Settlement Systems
1. Securities settlement systems
should have a well-founded, clear, and
transparent legal basis in the relevant
jurisdictions.
2. Confirmation of trades between
direct market participants should occur
as soon as possible after the trade
execution, but no later than the trade
date (T+0). Where confirmation of
trades by indirect market participants
(such as institutional investors) is
required, it should occur as soon as
possible after the trade execution,
preferably on T+0, but no later than
T+1.
3. Rolling settlement should be
adopted in all securities markets. Final
settlement should occur no later than
T+3. The benefits and costs of a
settlement cycle shorter than T+3
should be evaluated.
4. The benefits and costs of a central
counterparty should be evaluated.
Where such a mechanism is introduced,
the central counterparty should
rigorously control the risks it assumes.
5. Securities lending and borrowing
(or repurchase agreements and other
economically equivalent transactions)
should be encouraged as a method for
expediting the settlement of securities
transactions. Barriers that inhibit the
practice of lending securities for this
purpose should be removed.
6. Securities should be immobilized
or dematerialized and transferred by
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36809
book entry in central securities
depository to the greatest extent
possible.
7. Central securities depositories
should eliminate principal risk linking
securities transfers to funds transfers in
a way that achieves delivery versus
payment.
8. Final settlement should occur no
later than the end of the settlement day.
Intraday or real time finality should be
provided where necessary to reduce
risks.
9. Central securities depositories that
extend intraday credit to participants,
including central securities depositories
that operate net settlement systems,
should institute risk controls that, at a
minimum, ensure timely settlement in
the event that the participant with the
largest payment obligation is unable to
settle. The most reliable set of controls
is a combination of collateral
requirements and limits.
10. Assets used to settle the ultimate
payment obligations arising from
securities transaction should carry little
or no credit or liquidity risk. If central
bank money is not used, steps must be
taken to protect central securities
depository members from potential
losses and liquidity pressures arising
from the failure of the cash settlement
agent whose assets are used for that
purpose.
11. Sources of operational risk arising
in the clearing and settlement process
should be identified and minimized
through the development of appropriate
systems, controls and procedures.
Systems should be reliable and secure,
and have adequate, scalable capacity.
Contingency plans and backup facilities
should be established to allow for the
timely recovery of operations and
completion of the settlement process.
12. Entities holding securities in
custody should employ accounting
practices and safekeeping procedures
that fully protect customers’ securities.
It is essential that customers’ securities
be protected against the claims of a
custodian’s creditors.
13. Governance arrangements for
central securities depositories and
central counterparties should be
designed to fulfill public interest
requirement and to promote the
objectives of owners and users.
14. Central securities depositories and
central counterparties should have
objective and publicly disclosed criteria
for participation that permit fair and
open access.
15. While maintaining safe and secure
operations, securities settlement
systems should be cost-effective in
meeting the requirements of users.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
36810
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
16. Securities settlement systems
should use or accommodate the relevant
international communication
procedures and standards in order to
facilitate efficient settlement of crossborder transactions.
17. Central securities depositories and
central counterparties should provide
market participants with sufficient
information for them to identify and
evaluate accurately the risks and costs
associated with using the central
securities depository or central
counterparty services.
18. Securities settlement systems
should be subject to transparent and
effective regulation and oversight.
Central banks and securities regulators
should cooperate with each other and
with other relevant authorities.
19. Central securities depositories that
establish links to settle cross-border
trades should design and operate such
links to reduce effectively the risks
associated with cross-border settlement.
b. Recommendations for Central
Counterparties
1. A central counterparty should have
a well founded, transparent, and
enforceable legal framework for each
aspect of its activities in all relevant
jurisdictions.
2. A central counterparty should
require participants to have sufficient
financial resources and robust
operational capacity to meet obligations
arising from participation in the central
counterparty. A central counterparty
should have procedures in place to
monitor that participation requirements
are met on an ongoing basis. A central
counterparty’s participation
requirements should be objective,
publicly disclosed, and permit fair and
open access.
3. A central counterparty should
measure its credit exposures to its
participants at least once a day. Through
margin requirements, other risk control
mechanisms, or a combination of both,
a central counterparty should limit its
exposures to potential losses from
defaults by its participants in normal
market conditions so that the operations
of the central counterparty would not be
disrupted and non-defaulting
participants would not be exposed to
losses that they cannot anticipate or
control.
4. If a central counterparty relies on
margin requirements to limit its credit
exposures to participants, those
requirements should be sufficient to
cover potential exposures in normal
market conditions. The models and
parameters used in setting margin
requirements should be risk-based and
reviewed regularly.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
5. A central counterparty should
maintain sufficient financial resources
to withstand, at a minimum, a default
by the participant to which it has the
largest exposure in extreme but
plausible market conditions.
6. A central counterparty’s default
procedures should be clearly stated, and
they should ensure that the central
counterparty can take timely action to
contain losses and liquidity pressures
and to continue meeting its obligations.
Key aspects of the default procedures
should be publicly available.
7. A central counterparty should hold
assets in a manner whereby risk of loss
or of delay in its access to them is
minimized. Assets invested by a central
counterparty should be held in
instruments with minimal credit,
market, and liquidity risks.
8. A central counterparty should
identify sources of operational risk and
minimize them through the
development of appropriate systems,
controls, and procedures. Systems
should be reliable and secure, and have
adequate, scalable capacity. Business
continuity plans should allow for timely
recovery of operations and fulfillment of
a central counterparty’s obligations.
9. A central counterparty should
employ money settlement arrangements
that eliminate or strictly limit its
settlement bank risks, that is, its credit
and liquidity risks from the use of banks
to effect money settlements with its
participants. Funds transfers to a central
counterparty should be final when
effected.
10. A central counterparty should
clearly state its obligations with respect
to physical deliveries. The risks from
these obligations should be identified
and managed.
11. Central counterparties that
establish links either cross-border or
domestically to clear trades should
evaluate the potential sources of risks
that can arise, and ensure that the risks
are managed prudently on an ongoing
basis. There should be a framework for
cooperation and coordination between
the relevant regulators and overseers.
12. While maintaining safe and secure
operations, central counterparties
should be cost-effective in meeting the
requirements of participants.
13. Governance arrangements for a
central counterparty should be clear and
transparent to fulfill public interest
requirements and to support the
objectives of owners and participants. In
particular, they should promote the
effectiveness of a central counterparty’s
risk management procedures.
14. A central counterparty should
provide market participants with
sufficient information for them to
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
identify and evaluate accurately the
risks and costs associated with using its
services.
15. A central counterparty should be
subject to transparent and effective
regulation and oversight. In both a
domestic and an international context,
central banks and securities regulators
should cooperate with each other and
with other relevant authorities.
3. Self-Assessments by Systemically
Important Systems
The Board believes that the
implementation of these principles and
minimum standards by systemically
important systems can foster greater
financial stability in payments and
settlement systems. Users and others
commonly are interested in
understanding how these systems
function in order to manage their risks.
At this time, different disclosure
practices and requirements for
payments and settlement systems have
resulted in varying levels of information
being disseminated to users and others.
Users and others outside the user
community (such as prospective users
or other public authorities) may find it
difficult to obtain access to sufficient
information to understand and assess a
particular system’s approach to risk
management against internationally
accepted principles and minimum
standards. Broadening the availability of
information concerning a system’s risk
management controls, governance, and
legal framework, for example, can assist
those interested in a system in
evaluating and managing their risk
exposures. The Board believes that
operators of systemically important
systems are well positioned to assess
and demonstrate the extent to which
they have implemented the principles
or minimum standards in this policy.
Therefore, in furtherance of its policy
objectives, the Board expects
systemically important systems subject
to its authority to complete
comprehensive, objective selfassessments against the applicable
principles or minimum standards in this
policy and disclose publicly the results
of these efforts. Adopting this selfassessment framework, however, does
not preclude the Federal Reserve from
independently assessing compliance of
systemically important systems with
relevant rules, regulations, and Federal
Reserve policies.
The Board expects systemically
important systems subject to its
authority to complete self-assessments
based on the following guidelines. First,
systemically important systems are
expected to document the basis for their
self-assessment and support any
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 28, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
conclusions regarding the extent to
which they meet a particular principle
or minimum standard.24 The Board
notes that the CPSS and CPSS–IOSCO
have developed implementation
measures and assessment methodologies
that can assist system operators in
structuring their self-assessments.25
Accordingly, payment system operators
are encouraged to consult Section 7 of
the Core Principles for guidance when
developing their self-assessments and in
measuring the extent to which the
system meets each principle. Likewise
system operators for securities
settlement systems and central
counterparties are encouraged to consult
the assessment methodology for the
relevant minimum standards for further
guidance on each minimum standard
and are encouraged to respond to the
key questions included therein.26 A
system may consult the Board for
assistance with respect to the principles
and minimum standards and the
completion of its assessment. Second, to
further ensure system accountability for
accuracy and completeness, the Board
expects the system’s senior management
and board of directors to review and
approve self-assessments upon
completion. Third, to achieve broad
disclosure, the system is expected to
make its self-assessments readily
available to the public, such as by
posting the self-assessment on the
system’s public Web site. Finally, in
order for self-assessments to reflect
correctly the system’s current rules,
procedures, and operations, the Board
expects a systemically important system
to update the relevant parts of the selfassessment following material changes
to the system or its environment. At a
minimum, a systemically important
system would be expected to review its
self-assessment annually to ensure
continued accuracy.
As part of its ongoing oversight of
systemically important payments and
settlement systems, the Federal Reserve
will review published self-assessments
by systems subject to the Board’s
authority to ensure the Board’s policy
objectives and expectations are being
met.27 Where necessary, the Federal
Reserve will provide feedback to these
systems regarding the content of their
self-assessments and their effectiveness
in achieving the policy objectives
discussed above.28 The Board
acknowledges that payments and
settlement systems vary in terms of the
scope of instruments they settle and
markets they serve. It also recognizes
that systems may operate under
different legal and regulatory constraints
and within particular market
infrastructures or institutional
frameworks. The Board will consider
these factors when reviewing selfassessments and in evaluating how a
systemically important system
addresses a particular principle or
minimum standard and complies with
the policy generally. Where the Board
does not have exclusive authority over
a systemically important system, it will
encourage appropriate domestic or
foreign financial system authorities to
promote self-assessments by
systemically important systems as a
means to achieve greater safety and
efficiency in the financial system.
24 System operators should use one of the
following assessment categories to describe the
extent to which the system meets a particular
principle or minimum standard: Observed, broadly
observed, partly observed, or non-observed. The
assessment should contain information robust
enough to enable users and other interested persons
to assess the risks associated with the system. The
Board, however, does not expect payments and
settlement systems to disclose publicly sensitive
information that would expose system
vulnerabilities or otherwise put the system at risk
(e.g., specific business continuity plans).
25 The Core Principles include an implementation
summary for each principle. The CPSS, however,
has not developed an assessment methodology for
the Core Principles. In November 2002, CPSS–
IOSCO published an Assessment Methodology for
the Recommendations for SSS available at https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss51.htm. In November 2004,
CPSS–IOSCO published the CCP Recommendations
and an Assessment Methodology available at https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss64.htm.
26 The assessment methodologies for the CPSS–
IOSCO Recommendations include key questions to
assist an assessor in determining to what extent a
system meets a particular minimum standard.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:52 Jun 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, June 22, 2006.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 06–5843 Filed 6–27–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
Public Notice
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Health and Human
Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
27 Any review of an assessment by the Federal
Reserve should not be viewed as an approval or
guaranty of the accuracy of a system’s selfassessment.
28 If the Federal Reserve materially disagrees with
the content of a system’s self-assessment, it will
communicate its concerns to the system’s senior
management and possibly to its board of directors,
as appropriate. The Federal Reserve may also
discuss its concerns with other relevant financial
system authorities, as appropriate.
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36811
SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC),
Coordinating Center for Infectious
Disease (CCID), through its component
Centers and Divisions has lead technical
responsibility for a number of Category
A, B and C bioterrorism agents and their
associated toxins (Bacillus anthracis,
Clostridium botulinum, Brucella sps.,
Burkholderia sps., Staphylococcus
entertoxin B, other food- or waterborne
bacterial pathogens, and other bacterial
agents). CCID uses epidemiologic,
laboratory, clinical, and biostatistical
sciences to control and prevent bacterial
and mycotic infectious disease. The
Centers also conduct applied research in
a variety of settings, and translate the
findings of this research into public
health practice.
The purpose of this announcement is
to make interested parties aware that
CCID is currently engaged in a research
activity to establish and evaluate an
intravenous infusion rabbit model for
delivery of therapeutic molecules for the
treatment of inhalation anthrax. The
activity is in the early stage of feasibility
assessment. The protocols for these
studies may be made available to
interested parties upon request. The
short term objective of making these
protocols available is to promote
standardization of the approach to in
vivo model development for anthrax
therapy evaluation to meet the Nation’s
bioterrorism defense needs. The longer
term objective is to develop these or
subsequent protocols into standardized
in vivo models that may meet the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA)
acceptance criteria for product
development and licensure.
Interested organizations may request
an electronic copy of the protocols by
contacting CDC at the address below. To
ensure a response, requests must be
submitted within thirty days of
publication of this notice.
Responses are preferred in electronic
format and can be e-mailed to the
attention of Dr. Conrad Quinn at
CQUINN@CDC.GOV. Mailed responses
can be sent to the following address: Dr.
Conrad Quinn, Division of Bacterial
Diseases, Coordinating Center for
Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton
Rd., NE., Mail Stop C–09, Atlanta, GA
30333.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Technical: Dr. Conrad Quinn,
Division of Bacterial and Mycotic
Diseases, National Center for Infectious
Diseases, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC), 1600 Clifton Rd.,
NE., Mail Stop D–11, Atlanta, GA
30333. Telephone (404) 639–2858,
e-mail at CQUINN@CDC.GOV.
E:\FR\FM\28JNN1.SGM
28JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 28, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36800-36811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-5843]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
[Docket No. OP-1259]
Policy on Payments System Risk
AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Policy statement; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Board requests comments on proposed changes to Part I of
its Policy on Payments System Risk (PSR policy) addressing risk
management in payments and settlement systems. The proposed policy
changes include (1) incorporating into the PSR policy the
Recommendations for Central Counterparties (Recommendations for CCP) as
the Board's minimum standards for central counterparties, (2)
clarifying the purpose of Part I of the policy and revising its scope
with regard to central counterparties, and (3) establishing an
expectation that systemically important systems disclose publicly self-
assessments against the Core Principles for Systemically Important
Payment Systems (Core Principles), Recommendations for Securities
Settlement Systems (Recommendations for SSS), or Recommendations for
CCP, as appropriate, demonstrating the extent to which these systems
meet the principles or minimum standards. The Board is also making
other technical changes.
DATES: Comments must be received by September 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. OP-1259,
by any of the following methods:
Agency Web Site: https://www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments at https://www.federalreserve.gov/
generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: regs.comments@federalreserve.gov. Include the
docket number in the subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 452-3819 or (202) 452-3102.
Mail: Address to Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20551.
All public comments will be made available on the Board's Web site at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as
submitted, unless modified for technical reasons. Accordingly, comments
will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.
Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper in Room
MP-500 of the Board's Martin Building (20th and C Streets, NW.) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Stehm, Assistant Director (202/
452-2217), Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems, or
Jennifer Lucier, Senior Financial Services Analyst (202/872-7581),
Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems; for the
hearing impaired only: Telecommunications Device for the Deaf, 202/263-
4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Since the early 1980s, the Board has published and periodically
revised a series of policies encouraging the reduction and management
of risks in payments and securities settlement systems.\1\ In 1992, the
Board issued its ``Policy Statement on Payments System Risk,'' which
provided a comprehensive statement of its previously adopted policies
regarding payments system risk reduction, including risk management in
private large-dollar funds transfer networks, private delivery-against-
payment securities systems, offshore dollar clearing and netting
systems, and private small-dollar clearing and settlement systems.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 50 FR 21120, May 22, 1985; 52 FR 29255, August 6, 1987;
and 54 FR 26104 and 26092, June 21, 1989.
\2\ 57 FR 40455, September 3, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During this same period, the Federal Reserve also worked with other
central
[[Page 36801]]
banks and securities regulators to develop standards to strengthen
payments and securities settlement infrastructures and to promote
financial stability. These efforts initially produced the Lamfalussy
Minimum Standards, which were incorporated into the Board's PSR policy
in 1994.\3\ More recently, this work resulted in the publication of the
Core Principles and the Recommendations for SSS in 2001, which were
incorporated into the Board's PSR policy in 2004.4 5 The
Core Principles extended and replaced the Lamfalussy Minimum Standards,
while the Recommendations for SSS provided, for the first time,
explicit standards for securities settlement systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 59 FR 67534, December 29, 1994. The Lamfalussy Minimum
Standards were set out in the ``Report of the Committee on Interbank
Netting Schemes of the Central Banks of the Group of Ten
Countries,'' published by the Bank for International Settlements in
November 1990. See the full report at https://www.bis.org/publ/
cpss04.pdf.
\4\ The Core Principles were developed by the Committee on
Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS) of the Central banks of the
Group of Ten countries, and the Recommendations were developed by
the CPSS in conjunction with the Technical Committee of the
International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). In
addition to the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission participated
in the development of the Recommendations for SSS. Both the Core
Principles and the Recommendations for SSS were published by the
CPSS and IOSCO for public comment before being adopted in their
final form, and in their final form have been adopted as part of the
Financial Stability Forum's Compendium of Standards that are widely
recognized and endorsed by U.S. authorities as integral to
strengthening global financial stability. The full reports on the
Core Principles and the Recommendations for SSS are available at
https://www.bis.org/publ/cpss43.htm and https://www.bis.org/publ/
cpss46.htm, respectively.
\5\ 69 FR 69926, December 1, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to establishing specific principles and standards, the
Core Principles and Recommendations for SSS call for central banks to
state clearly their roles and policies regarding payments and
securities settlement systems, assess compliance with the Core
Principles and the Recommendations for SSS when overseeing relevant
systems, and coordinate with other authorities in overseeing systems.
Moreover, the Core Principles and Recommendations for SSS are intended
to apply to systems operated by both central banks and the private
sector.
Concurrent with the drafting and adoption of the 2004 policy
revisions, the Federal Reserve was working with the CPSS and IOSCO to
finalize the Recommendations for CCP.\6\ These recommendations
establish minimum standards for central counterparty risk management,
operational reliability, efficiency, governance, transparency, and
regulation and oversight. The Recommendations for CCP build upon the
Recommendations for SSS and supersede those recommendations where
central counterparties are concerned (these two sets of recommendations
are collectively referred to as the ``CPSS-IOSCO Recommendations''). At
the time it incorporated the Core Principles and Recommendations for
SSS into the PSR policy, the Board noted that the CPSS and IOSCO were
developing the Recommendations for CCP and that it would review the
Recommendations for CCP at a later time and determine whether it would
be appropriate to incorporate them into its PSR policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Final recommendations were issued in November 2004. In
addition to the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission also
participated in the development of the Recommendations for CCP. The
full report on the Recommendations for CCP is available at https://
www.bis.org/publ/cpss64.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion of Proposed Policy Changes
The policy changes proposed by the Board include (1) incorporating
into the PSR policy the Recommendations for CCP as the Board's minimum
standards for central counterparties, (2) clarifying the purpose of
Part I of the policy and revising its scope with regard to central
counterparties, and (3) establishing an expectation that systemically
important systems disclose publicly self-assessments against the Core
Principles, Recommendations for SSS, or Recommendations for CCP
demonstrating the extent to which these systems meet the principles or
minimum standards. The Board is also making other technical changes.
A. Incorporation of the Recommendations for CCP
The Board is proposing to incorporate the Recommendations for CCP
with no modifications as the Board's minimum standards for central
counterparties. Central counterparties occupy an important place in the
financial system, interposing themselves between counterparties to
financial transactions. Given a central counterparty's position in a
market, its risk management practices can have implications for the
stability of the financial system and pose risks to the Federal
Reserve. The Board believes the Recommendations for CCP are an
important framework for promoting sound risk management in central
counterparties and believes that adherence to these recommendations can
promote financial stability. The Federal Reserve, along with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, were actively involved in developing these recommendations,
which reflect broad input and a balanced view of acceptable risk
management practices.
The incorporation of the Recommendations for CCP into the PSR
policy continues the Board's long-standing interest in the safety and
soundness of the nation's payments and settlement systems. The Board
believes that its incorporation of the Recommendations for CCP
continues its past efforts to adopt appropriate international standards
for key payments and settlement systems and to enhance the
understanding and management of risks by users and other stakeholders
in these systems. The Board also believes that this change is
consistent with the spirit and intention of the 2004 PSR policy
revisions, clarifying the Board's policy objectives and expectations
for payments and settlement systems subject to its authority, and
providing further guidance on how it expects systems to manage and
disclose their risks. Accordingly, the Board is proposing to
incorporate the Recommendations for CCP into the policy to highlight
the importance of central counterparties to the financial markets and
to demonstrate the Board's desire to encourage the use of
Recommendations for CCP globally in cooperation with other domestic and
foreign financial system authorities.
B. Purpose and Scope of Part I of the PSR Policy
In support of incorporating the Recommendations for CCP, the Board
is proposing to clarify the purpose of Part I of the policy and revise
its scope with regard to central counterparties. First, the Board is
proposing to revise the purpose of Part I of the PSR policy to set
forth the Board's views and related principles and minimum standards
regarding the management of risks in payments and settlement systems
generally. A range of payments and settlement systems operate in the
financial markets and a failure in one or more of them could affect
financial stability and expose the Federal Reserve to certain risks.
While the Federal Reserve does not directly oversee all of these
systems, it does have a fundamental interest in financial stability for
the financial system as whole. Robust risk management by these systems
plays an important role in maintaining financial stability. Therefore,
the Board is proposing to
[[Page 36802]]
revise its policy to broadly state its views on risk management for all
systems that could affect financial stability.
In this context, the Board encourages key payments and settlement
systems and their primary regulators to take the principles and minimum
standards in the PSR policy into consideration in the design,
operation, monitoring, and assessment of these systems. Private- and
public-sector systems subject to the Board's authority, however, are
expected to meet the Board's expectations as described in the PSR
policy. The Board's proposed revisions also clarify this latter point.
Second, the Board is also proposing to revise the scope to include
central counterparties as key systems that could affect financial
stability. The Board's current PSR policy applies to public- and
private-sector ``payments and securities settlement systems,'' that
meet certain volume thresholds. The term ``securities settlement
system'' currently includes foreign-exchange settlement systems and
central counterparties in the securities markets.\7\ The Board is
proposing to revise the scope to refer to ``settlement systems,'' which
can include a range of systems, including a settlement system for
foreign exchange transactions, a securities settlement system, or a
central counterparty. To affect this change, the Board has deleted the
exemption for clearance and settlement systems for exchange-traded
futures and options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Board's current PSR policy explicitly does not cover
central counterparties for exchange-traded futures and options, and
is silent on the coverage of central counterparties for foreign
exchange contracts and over-the-counter derivative contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board recognizes that several of the systems within the revised
scope of Part I of the policy are supervised, regulated, or overseen by
other financial system authorities. Where the Board does not have
authority or does not have exclusive authority over systems covered by
the policy, it will work with other domestic and foreign financial
system authorities to promote the Core Principles and CPSS-IOSCO
Recommendations and the objectives of this policy.\8\ The Board
believes clarifying the purpose of Part I and revising its scope to
include the full range of current and future central counterparties for
contracts in financial markets are warranted for several reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The revised scope will include central counterparties to
contracts in financial markets, including derivatives and foreign
exchange markets. The Board acknowledges that the policy's current
$5 billion threshold and factors for considering a system's systemic
importance may not be useful benchmarks for central counterparties
operating in these markets. Therefore, the Board encourages the
appropriate financial system authorities to apply appropriate
benchmarks or standards for determining whether central
counterparties should meet specific risk management expectations,
such as those included in the policy, or whether they should meet
the Recommendations for CCP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, the Board's policy rests on a fundamental interest of the
Federal Reserve as the central bank in financial stability and the role
that payments and settlement systems play in promoting and maintaining
resilience in the financial system. Therefore, the Board believes that
its policy should reflect the Board's views on risk management for the
full range of systems that clear and settle payments and other
financial instruments that could affect financial stability, including
central counterparties.
Second, revising the scope will enable the policy to conform to
changes in the payments and settlement landscape as it continues to
evolve. The benefits of central counterparty clearing have been
considered and implemented in multiple markets, including the
securities, options, and futures markets. In addition, the financial
services industry has proposed or implemented central counterparties
for foreign exchange transactions in the past, such as Multinet and
ECHO,\9\ and continues to debate the efficacy of central counterparties
for over-the-counter derivatives products. Should the industry pursue
the implementation of central counterparty clearing models in these
markets, introduce new systems, or redesign existing ones, the
designers and owners of these systems will have clear ex ante knowledge
of the Board's views and expectations regarding risk management for
central counterparties as they design and develop their systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In 1996, Multinet was authorized as a limited-purpose bank
under New York Law to provide multilateral netting services;
Multinet, however, never became operational. ECHO, Exchange Clearing
House Limited, was a London-based clearing house that, from 1995 to
1997, provided multilateral netting and settlement of spot and
forward foreign exchange obligations for its users. In 1997,
Multinet and ECHO merged forming the basis for the Continuous Linked
Settlement (CLS) Bank which currently provides payment-versus-
payment services to its users trading in the 15 currencies eligible
for settlement at CLS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, in their role as providers of payments and settlement
services, the Reserve Banks provide settlement services to a variety of
private-sector payments and settlement arrangements. In providing such
services, the Reserve Banks need to consider the risks that they might
incur should a system fail to settle. One reason the Board developed
its PSR policy was to address the risks that systems present not only
to the financial system, but also to the Federal Reserve Banks.
Revising the scope to cover the full range of potential payments and
settlement systems, therefore, would provide a defined set of
principles and standards that the Reserve Banks could look to for
assessing the risks of systems seeking settlement services, if needed.
C. Self-Assessments by Systemically Important Systems
The Board believes that the effective implementation of the risk
management concepts embodied in the Core Principles and CPSS-IOSCO
Recommendations will further strengthen the financial system. The Core
Principles and CPSS-IOSCO Recommendations establish an expectation that
a system will disclose sufficient information to allow users and other
stakeholders to identify, understand, and evaluate accurately the risks
and costs of using the system's services. Central banks as well as
systems have pursued a variety of disclosure practices, resulting in
varying levels of information being disseminated to users and the
public generally. Given these varying practices, users and others may
find it difficult to obtain access to sufficient information in order
to assess a particular system against internationally accepted
principles or minimum standards. The Board believes that broadening the
availability of information concerning a system's risk management
controls, governance, and legal framework, for example, can assist
users and other interested persons in evaluating and managing their
risk exposures while furthering global financial stability.
The Board acknowledges that disclosure can be achieved in several
ways, including through public disclosure of assessments by the central
bank. Certain central banks in other countries functioning as overseers
publish oversight reports that have included summarized and, in some
cases, detailed assessments of systemically important systems against
the same principles and minimum standards in the Board's policy. The
Board, however, supervises as well as oversees certain systemically
important systems. In order to produce robust assessments, it is
important for the Board to draw upon all relevant and available
information, including supervisory information that traditionally has
been treated confidentially. This constrains the ability of the Board
to issue a public assessment that relies, at least in part, on
confidential information. In this context, and in order to promote
[[Page 36803]]
appropriate disclosure, the Board believes the individual system
operators are well positioned to make informed, accurate disclosures to
meet both the information needs of users and other persons and the
stated policy objectives.
Therefore, in furtherance of its objectives, the Board is proposing
to revise its policy to establish an expectation that systemically
important systems subject to the Board's authority will complete self-
assessments against the principles or minimum standards, as applicable,
in the policy and publicly disclose those assessments. The Board is
proposing several guidelines to assist the system operator in
developing a self-assessment consistent with the Board's expectations.
The Board expects the content of a self-assessment to be
comprehensive and objective. The Board is proposing that a system
determine its level of implementation and state whether each principle
or minimum standard is observed, broadly observed, partly observed, or
non-observed; all conclusions should be fully supported in the self-
assessment. In documenting the basis for the self-assessment, however,
the Board does not expect the system to disclose sensitive information
that may expose system vulnerabilities, such as specific business
continuity plans. For further guidance in developing a self-assessment
and understanding the relevant principles or minimum standards, the
Board would encourage a system operator to consult the interpretation
discussion in the Core Principles or the assessment methodology for the
relevant CPSS-IOSCO Recommendations as further guidance. A system may
also consult the Board for assistance with respect to the individual
principles and minimum standards and the completion of its self-
assessment.
The Board believes that in order for a self-assessment to be useful
to users and others in understanding and managing their risks the
content must be accurate and readily available. Therefore, the Board is
proposing that the system's senior management and board of directors
review and approve a self-assessment prior to publication to ensure
system accountability for accuracy and completeness. To achieve broad
disclosure, the Board is proposing that the system publish its self-
assessment on its public Web site. The Board is also proposing that a
system complete and publish its first self-assessment within twelve
months of the effective date of the final policy changes. Lastly, to
ensure continued accuracy, the Board is proposing that the system
update statements in its assessment following material changes to the
system or its environment, and, at a minimum, review annually its self-
assessment.
As part of its ongoing oversight of systemically important payments
and settlement systems over which it exercises authority, the Federal
Reserve will review published self-assessments and, if the Federal
Reserve materially disagrees with the content of a self-assessment of a
system, it will communicate its concerns to the system's senior
management or the board of directors, as appropriate. The Federal
Reserve may also discuss its concerns with other relevant financial
system authorities, as appropriate. The Board would evaluate the
effectiveness of this self-assessment framework after a few years to
determine if the self-assessment process is meeting its policy
objectives.
III. Request for Comment
The Board requests comment on the proposed revisions to its PSR
policy. In particular, the Board requests comment on whether the
revisions to the scope and application of the policy are sufficiently
clear and provide the appropriate coverage to achieve the policy's
intended objectives. The Board will carefully consider comments
submitted to ensure the final self-assessment framework is appropriate
for all systems subject to this policy and subject to the Board's
authority. The Board also requests comment on the following specific
questions:
1. Are the proposed policy objectives clear?
2. Is the incorporation of the Recommendations for CCP reasonable
and appropriate?
3. Are the clarifications to the purpose and revisions to the scope
with regard to central counterparties reasonable and appropriate?
4. Do you believe that self-assessments are an effective method to
facilitate the availability of information for users and other
interested parties to identify, understand, and evaluate the risks of a
systemically important system?
5. Are the proposed guidelines regarding self-assessments clear and
do they provide sufficient guidance to system operators?
6. Do the implementation measures included in the Core Principles
and the assessment methodologies for the CPSS-IOSCO Recommendations
provide sufficiently clear and useful frameworks to complete
comprehensive and objective self-assessments? If not, please explain.
Are there alternatives to these frameworks that can provide equally
robust and objective self-assessments?
7. Will the inclusion of ratings (observed, broadly observed,
partly observed, and non-observed) be helpful to persons evaluating a
particular systemically important system against the principles and
minimum standards? What are the pros and cons of including self-ratings
as part of self-assessments?
8. Are there any drawbacks to the public disclosure of self-
assessments? If so, what are they? Given the stated policy objectives,
are there valid reasons to consider a more limited distribution of
self-assessments and/or self-ratings (e.g., only to a system's users)?
9. Is the proposed twelve month time frame for a system to complete
and publish its first self-assessment appropriate?
10. Are the proposed triggers for reviewing and updating a self-
assessment appropriate? If not, what other triggers would ensure
published self-assessments remain accurate?
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Board has determined that this proposed policy statement would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposal would require payments and securities settlement
systems to address material risks in their systems. The proposal is
designed to minimize regulatory burden on smaller systems that do not
raise material risks.
V. Competitive Impact Analysis
The Board has established procedures for assessing the competitive
impact of rule or policy changes that have a substantial impact on
payments system participants.\10\ Under these procedures, the Board
will assess whether a change would have a direct and material adverse
effect on the ability of other service providers to compete effectively
with the Federal Reserve in providing similar services due to differing
legal powers or constraints, or due to a dominant market position of
the Federal Reserve deriving from such differences. If no reasonable
modifications would mitigate the adverse competitive effects, the Board
will determine whether the anticipated benefits are significant enough
to proceed with the change despite the adverse effects. The proposed
policy revisions provide that Reserve Bank systems will be treated
similarly to private-sector systems and thus will have no material
adverse effect on the ability of other service providers
[[Page 36804]]
to compete effectively with the Federal Reserve Banks in providing
payments and securities settlement services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ These procedures are described in the Board's policy
statement ``The Federal Reserve in the Payments System,'' as revised
in March 1990 (55 FR 11648, March 29, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Ch. 3506; 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1), the Board reviewed the policy
statement under the authority delegated to the Board by the Office of
Management and Budget. The Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor,
and an organization is not required to respond to, this information
collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. An
OMB control number will be assigned upon approval of the new
information collection.
The collection of information that is proposed to be implemented by
this notice is found in Part I of the Board's Policy on Payments System
Risk (PSR policy). This information is required to evidence compliance
with the requirements of the PSR policy. The respondents are
systemically important systems, as defined in the PSR policy.
The Board proposes that systemically important systems, subject to
the Board's authority, complete initial comprehensive self-assessments
and thereafter, review and update self-assessments annually or as
otherwise provided in the PSR policy. The Board also proposes that
these self-assessments be reviewed and approved by the system's senior
management and board of directors. Upon approval and in order to
achieve broad disclosure, the systems should publish self-assessments
on their public Websites. In order to help minimize burden the Board is
proposing guidelines to assist system operators in developing self-
assessments consistent with the Board's expectations.
The proposed burden for the initial reporting and disclosure
requirements associated with this policy statement is estimated to be
on average 310 hours per system (ranging from 200 to 400 hours). The
burden includes: 215 hours for staff to review the requirements and
complete the self-assessment; 30 hours for senior management to review
that each principle was fully assessed; 50 hours for the board of
directors to review and approve the self-assessment; and 15 hours for
type-setting and technical editing of the document and preparing the
website. The Board estimates that currently about three private-sector
systems are systemically important and subject to the Board's
authority; therefore, the total burden for systems under the Board's
authority is estimated to 930 hours to complete the initial self-
assessments.
Following the initial assessment, the Board estimates that the
burden will decrease for a system to conduct an annual review and
report and disclose updates to its self-assessment. The proposed burden
for annual reviews and updates associated with this policy is estimated
to be on average 70 hours per system (ranging from 50-100 hours). The
burden includes: 25 hours for staff to review the self-assessment and
update relevant sections; 15 hours for senior management to review the
self-assessment; 25 hours for the board of directors to review and
approve the self-assessment; and 5 hours for technical editing and
Website activities. The total burden for the approximately three
private-sector systems under the Board's authority would be an
estimated 210 hours. These initial estimates will be adjusted in the
future, as appropriate.
Comments are invited on a. Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the Federal
Reserve's functions, including whether the information has practical
utility; b. The accuracy of the Federal Reserve's estimate of the
burden of the proposed information collection, including the cost of
compliance; c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and d. Ways to minimize the burden of
information collection on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. Comments on the collections of information should be sent
to Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,
Washington, DC 20551, with copies of such comments to be sent to the
Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (7100-PSR
Policy), Washington, DC 20503.
VII. Federal Reserve Policy on Payments System Risk
Introduction [Revised]
Risks in Payments and Settlement Systems [Revised]
I. Risk Management in Payments and Settlement Systems [Revised]
A. Scope
B. General Policy Expectations
C. Systemically Important Systems
1. Principles for Systemically Important Payments Systems
2. Minimum Standards for Systemically Important Securities
Settlement Systems and Central Counterparties
II. Federal Reserve Daylight Credit Policies [No Change]
A. Daylight Overdraft Definition and Measurement
B. Pricing
C. Net Debit Caps
D. Collateral
E. Special Situations
F. Monitoring
G. Transfer-size Limit on Book-Entry Securities
III. Other Policies [No Change]
A. Rollovers and Continuing Contracts
Introduction
Payments and settlement systems are critical components of the
nation's financial system. The smooth functioning of these systems is
vital to the financial stability of the U.S. economy. Given the
importance of these systems, the Board has developed this policy to
address the risks that payments and settlement activity present to the
financial system and to the Federal Reserve Banks (Reserve Banks).
In adopting this policy, the Board's objectives are to foster the
safety and efficiency of payments and settlement systems. These policy
objectives are consistent with (1) the Board's long-standing objectives
to promote the integrity, efficiency, and accessibility of the payments
mechanism; (2) industry and supervisory methods for risk management;
and (3) internationally accepted risk management principles and minimum
standards for systemically important payments and settlement
systems.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the Board's long-standing objectives in the payments
system, see ``The Federal Reserve in the Payments System,''
September 2001, FRRS 9-1550, available at https://
www.federalreserve.gov/paymentssystems/pricing/frpaysys.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I of this policy sets out the Board's views, and related
principles and minimum standards, regarding the management of risks in
payments and settlement systems, including those operated by the
Reserve Banks. In setting out its views, the Board seeks to encourage
payments and settlement systems, and their primary regulators, to take
the principles and minimum standards in this policy into consideration
in the design, operation, monitoring, and assessing of these systems.
The Board also will be guided by this part, in conjunction with
relevant laws and other Federal Reserve policies, when exercising its
authority over certain systems or their participants, when providing
payment and settlement services to systems, or when providing intraday
credit to Federal Reserve account holders.
Part II of this policy governs the provision of intraday or
``daylight'' overdrafts in accounts at the Reserve Banks and sets out
the general methods used by the Reserve Banks to control their intraday
credit exposures.\2\ Under
[[Page 36805]]
this part, the Board expects depository institutions to manage their
Federal Reserve accounts effectively and minimize their use of Federal
Reserve daylight credit.\3\ Although some intraday credit may be
necessary, the Board expects that, as a result of this policy,
relatively few institutions will consistently rely on intraday credit
supplied by the Federal Reserve to conduct their business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ To assist depository institutions in implementing this part
of the Board's payments system risk policy, the Federal Reserve has
prepared two documents, the ``Overview of the Federal Reserve's
Payments System Risk Policy'' and the ``Guide to the Federal
Reserve's Payments System Risk Policy,'' which are available online
at https://www.federalreserve.gov/ paymentssystems/PSR or from any
Reserve Bank. The ``Overview of the Federal Reserve's Payments
System Risk Policy'' summarizes the Board's policy on the provision
of daylight credit, including net debit caps and daylight overdraft
fees. The overview is intended for use by institutions that incur
only small and infrequent daylight overdrafts. The ``Guide to the
Federal Reserve's Payments System Risk Policy'' explains in detail
how these policies apply to different institutions and includes
procedures for completing a self-assessment and filing a cap
resolution as well as information on other aspects of the policy.
\3\ The term ``depository institution,'' as used in this policy,
refers not only to institutions defined as depository institutions''
in 12 U.S.C. 461(b)(1)(A), but also to U.S. branches and agencies of
foreign banking organizations, Edge and agreement corporations,
trust companies, and bankers' banks, unless the context indicates a
different reading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through this policy, the Board expects financial system
participants, including the Reserve Banks, to reduce and control
settlement and systemic risks arising in payments and settlement
systems, consistent with the smooth operation of the financial system.
This policy is designed to fulfill that aim by (1) making financial
system participants and system operators aware of the types of basic
risks that arise in the settlement process and the Board's expectations
with regard to risk management, (2) setting explicit risk management
expectations for systemically important systems, and (3) establishing
the policy conditions governing the provision of Federal Reserve
intraday credit to account holders. The Board's adoption of this policy
in no way diminishes the primary responsibilities of financial system
participants generally and settlement system operators, participants,
and Federal Reserve account holders more specifically, to address the
risks that may arise through their operation of, or participation in,
payments and settlement systems.
Risks in Payments and Settlement Systems
The basic risks in payments and settlement systems are credit risk,
liquidity risk, operational risk, and legal risk. In the context of
this policy, these risks are defined as follows.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ These definitions of credit risk, liquidity risk, and legal
risk are based upon those presented in the Core Principles for
Systemically Important Payment Systems (Core Principles) and the
Recommendations for Securities Settlement Systems (Recommendations
for SSS). The definition of operational risk is based on the Basel
Committee on Banking Supervision's ``Sound Practices for the
Management and Supervision of Operational Risk,'' available at
https://www.bis.org/pub/bcbs96.htm. Each of these definitions is
largely consistent with those included in the Recommendations for
Central Counterparties (Recommendations for CCP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit Risk. The risk that a counterparty will not settle an
obligation for full value either when due, or anytime thereafter.
Liquidity Risk. The risk that a counterparty will not settle an
obligation for full value when due.
Operational Risk. The risk of loss resulting from inadequate or
failed internal processes, people, and systems, or from external
events. This type of risk includes various physical and information
security risks.
Legal Risk. The risk of loss because of the unexpected application
of a law or regulation or because a contract cannot be enforced.
These risks arise between financial institutions as they settle
payments and other financial transactions and must be managed by
institutions, both individually and collectively.\5 6\ Multilateral
payments and settlement systems, in particular, may increase, shift,
concentrate, or otherwise transform risks in unanticipated ways. These
systems also may pose systemic risk to the financial system where the
inability of a system participant to meet its obligations when due may
cause other participants to be unable to meet their obligations when
due. The failure of one or more participants to settle their payments
or other financial transactions, in turn, could create credit or
liquidity problems for other participants, the system operator, or
depository institutions. Systemic risk might lead ultimately to a
disruption in the financial system more broadly or undermine public
confidence in the nation's financial infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The term ``financial institution,'' as used in this policy,
includes a broad array of types of organizations that engage in
financial activity, including depository institutions and securities
dealers.
\6\ Several existing regulatory and bank supervision guidelines
and polices also are directed at institutions' management of the
risks posed by interbank payments and settlement activity. For
example, Federal Reserve Regulation F (12 CFR 206) directs insured
depository institutions to establish policies and procedures to
avoid excessive exposures to any other depository institutions,
including exposures that may be generated through the clearing and
settlement of payments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These risks stem, in part, from the multilateral and time-sensitive
credit and liquidity interdependencies among financial institutions.
These interdependencies often create complex transaction flows that, in
combination with a system's design, can lead to significant demands for
intraday credit, either on a regular or extraordinary basis. Some level
of intraday credit is appropriate to ensure the smooth functioning of
payments and settlement systems. To the extent that financial
institutions or the Reserve Banks are the direct or indirect source of
such intraday credit, they may face a direct risk of loss if daylight
credit is not extinguished as planned. In addition, measures taken by
Reserve Banks to limit their intraday credit exposures may shift some
or all of the associated risks to private-sector systems.
The smooth functioning of payments and settlement systems is also
critical to certain public policy objectives in the areas of monetary
policy and banking supervision. The effective implementation of
monetary policy, for example, depends on both the orderly settlement of
open market operations and the efficient distribution of reserve
balances throughout the banking system via the money market and
payments system. Likewise, supervisory objectives regarding the safety
and soundness of depository institutions must take into account the
risks payments and settlement systems pose to depository institutions
that participate directly or indirectly in, or provide settlement,
custody, or credit services to, such systems.
Part I: Risk Management in Payments and Settlement Systems
This part sets out the Board's views regarding the management of
risk in payments and settlement systems, including those operated by
the Reserve Banks. The Board will be guided by this part, in
conjunction with relevant laws and other Federal Reserve policies, when
exercising its authority in (1) supervising state member banks, Edge
and agreement corporations, bank holding companies, and clearinghouse
arrangements, including the exercise of authority under the Bank
Service Company Act, where applicable,\7\ (2) setting or reviewing the
terms and conditions for the use of Federal Reserve payments and
settlement services by system operators and participants, (3)
developing and applying policies for the provision of intraday
liquidity to Reserve Bank account holders, and (4) interacting with
other domestic and foreign
[[Page 36806]]
financial system authorities on payments and settlement risk management
issues. The Board's adoption of this policy is not intended to exert or
create new supervisory or regulatory authority over any particular
class of institutions or arrangements where the Board does not
currently have such authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 12 U.S.C. 1861 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where the Board does not have exclusive authority over systems
covered by this policy, it will work with other domestic and foreign
financial system authorities to promote effective risk management in
payments and settlement systems, as appropriate. The Board encourages
other relevant authorities to consider the principles and minimum
standards embodied in this policy when evaluating the risks posed by
and to payments and settlement systems and individual system
participants that they oversee, supervise, or regulate. In working with
other financial system authorities, the Board will be guided, as
appropriate, by Responsibility D of the Core Principles, Recommendation
18 of the Recommendations for SSS, Recommendation 15 of the
Recommendations for CCP, the ``Principles for Cooperative Central Bank
Oversight of Cross-border and Multi-currency Netting and Settlement
Schemes,'' and the Principles for International Cooperative Oversight
(Part B) of the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS)
report, ``Central Bank Oversight of Payment and Settlement Systems.''
\8\ The Board believes these international principles provide an
appropriate framework for cooperating and coordinating with other
authorities to address risks in domestic, cross-border, multi-currency,
and, where appropriate, offshore payments and settlement systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Payments and settlement systems within the scope of this
policy may be subject to oversight or supervision by multiple public
authorities, as a result of the legal framework or the system's
operating structure (e.g., multi-currency or cross-border systems).
As such, the Federal Reserve, other central banks, securities
regulators, or other financial system authorities may need to find
practical ways to cooperate in order to discharge fully their own
responsibilities. In some cases, multiple authorities may have
responsibility for a multi-currency, cross-border, or other
arrangement. In these situations, financial authorities need to be
sensitive to the potential for duplicative or conflicting
requirements, oversight gaps, or unnecessary costs and burdens
imposed on the system. The ``Principles for Cooperative Central Bank
Oversight and Multi-currency Netting and Settlement Schemes'' are
set out in the ``Report of the Committee on Interbank Netting
Schemes of the Central Banks of the Group of Ten Countries''
(Lamafalussy Minimum Standards). The CPSS report, ``Central Bank
Oversight of Payment and Settlement Systems'' (Oversight Report),
Part B, ``Principles for international cooperative oversight,''
provides further information on the practical application of the
Lamfalussy Cooperative Oversight Principles. The Lamfalussy Minimum
Standards and the Oversight Report are available at https://
www.bis.org/cpss/cpsspub.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Scope
This policy applies to public- and private-sector payments and
settlement systems that expect to settle a daily aggregate gross value
of U.S. dollar-denominated transactions exceeding $5 billion on any day
during the next 12 months.9 \10\ For purposes of this
policy, a payments or settlement system is considered to be a
multilateral arrangement (three or more participants) among financial
institutions for the purposes of clearing, netting, and/or settling
payments, securities, or other financial transactions among themselves
or between each of them and a central party, such as a system operator
or central counterparty.11 12 13 A system generally embodies
one or more of the following characteristics: (1) A set of rules and
procedures, common to all participants, that govern the clearing
(comparison and/or netting) and settlement of payments, securities, or
other financial transactions, (2) a common technical infrastructure for
conducting the clearing or settlement process, and (3) a risk
management or capital structure where any credit losses are ultimately
borne by system participants rather than the system operator, a central
counterparty or guarantor, or the system's shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The $5 billion threshold was designed to apply to cash
markets and may not be a useful benchmark for central counterparties
operating in derivatives markets. The appropriate financial system
authorities in derivatives markets may therefore have different
benchmarks and standards relevant to such central counterparties.
\10\ The `next' twelve-month period is determined by reference
to the date a determination is being made as to whether the policy
applies to a particular system. Aggregate gross value of U.S.
dollar-denominated transactions refers to the total dollar value of
individual U.S. dollar transactions settled in the system which also
represents the sum of total U.S. dollar debits (or credits) to all
participants prior to or in absence of any netting of transactions.
\11\ A system includes all of the governance, management, legal,
and operational arrangements used to effect settlement as well as
the relevant parties to such arrangements, such as the system
operator, system participants, and system owners.
\12\ The types of systems that may fall within the scope of this
policy include, but are not limited to, large-value funds transfer
systems, automated clearinghouse (ACH) systems, check
clearinghouses, and credit and debit card settlement systems, as
well as central counterparties, clearing corporations, and central
securities depositories. For purposes of this policy, the system
operator is the entity that manages and oversees the operations of
the system.
\13\ For the purposes of this policy, a ``settlement system''
includes a payment-versus-payment settlement system for foreign
exchange transactions, a securities settlement system, and a system
operating as central counterparty. The CPSS defines ``payment-
versus-payment'' as ``* * * a foreign exchange settlement system
which ensures that a final transfer of one currency occurs if and
only if a final transfer of the other currency or currencies takes
place.'' The CPSS and the Technical Committee of the International
Organization of Securities Commission (IOSCO) define a ``securities
settlement system'' as the full set of institutional arrangements
for confirmation, clearance, and settlement of securities trades and
safekeeping of securities and a ``central counterparty'' is an
entity that interposes itself between counterparties to contracts
traded in one or more financial markets, becoming the buyer to every
seller and the seller to every buyer. A central counterparty can
include a derivatives clearing organization, such as a
clearinghouse, clearing association, clearing corporation, or
similar entity, facility, system, or organization that, with respect
to an agreement, contract, or transaction, acts as a central
counterparty to each party to an agreement, contract, or
transaction; arranges or provides for multilateral netting; or
provide clearing services or arrangements that mutualize or transfer
credit risk among participants in the organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These systems may be organized, located, or operated within the
United States (domestic systems), outside the United States (offshore
systems), or both (cross-border systems) and may involve other
currencies in addition to the U.S. dollar (multi-currency systems). The
policy also applies to any system based or operated in the United
States that engages in the settlement of non-U.S. dollar transactions
if that system would be otherwise subject to the policy.\14\
This policy does not apply to bilateral relationships between
financial institutions and their customers, such as traditional
correspondent banking, including traditional government securities
clearing services. The Board believes that these relationships do not
constitute ``a system'' for purposes of this policy and that relevant
safety and soundness issues associated with these relationships are
more appropriately addressed through the bank supervisory process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The daily gross value threshold will be calculated on a
U.S. dollar equivalent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. General Policy Expectations
The Board encourages payments and settlement systems within the
scope of this policy and expects systems subject to its authority to
implement a risk management framework appropriate for the risks the
system poses to the system operator, system participants, and other
relevant parties as well as the financial
[[Page 36807]]
system more broadly. A risk management framework is the set of
objectives, policies, arrangements, procedures, and resources that a
system employs to limit and manage risk. While there are a number of
ways to structure a sound risk management framework, all frameworks
should
Clearly identify risks and set sound risk management
objectives;
Establish sound governance arrangements;
Establish clear and appropriate rules and procedures; and,
Employ the resources necessary to achieve the system's
risk management objectives and implement effectively its rules and
procedures.
In addition to establishing a risk management framework that
includes these key elements, the Board expects systems subject to its
authority that it determines are systemically important to meet the
policy expectations set out in Section C (Core Principles,
Recommendations for SSS, or Recommendations for CCP, as applicable).
Identify Risks and Set Sound Risk Management Objectives. The first
element of a sound risk management framework is the clear
identification of all risks that have the potential to arise in or
result from the system's settlement process and the development of
clear and transparent objectives regarding the system's tolerance for
and management of such risks.
System operators should identify the forms of risk present in their
system's settlement process as well as the parties posing and bearing
each risk. In particular, system operators should identify the risks
posed to and borne by themselves, the system participants, and other
key parties such as a system's settlement banks, custody banks, and
third-party service providers. System operators should also analyze
whether risks might be imposed on other external parties and the
financial system more broadly.
In addition, system operators should analyze how risk is
transformed or concentrated by the settlement process. System operators
should also consider the possibility that attempts to limit one type of
risk could lead to an increase in another type of risk. Moreover,
system operators should be aware of risks that might be unique to
certain instruments, participants, or market practices. System
operators should also analyze how risks are correlated among
instruments or participants.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Where systems have inter-relationships with or dependencies
on other systems (e.g., cross-guarantees, cross-collaterization,
cross-margining, common operating platforms), system operators
should also analyze whether and to what extent any cross-system
risks exist and who bears them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon its clear identification of risks, a system should
establish its risk tolerance, including the levels of risk exposure
that are acceptable to the system operator, system participants, and
other relevant parties. The system operator should then set risk
management objectives that clearly allocate acceptable risks among the
relevant parties and set out strategies to manage this risk. Risk
management objectives should be consistent with the objectives of this
policy, the system's business purposes, and the type of instruments and
markets for which the system clears and settles. Risk management
objectives should also be communicated to and understood by both the
system operator's staff and system participants.
System operators should reevaluate their risks in conjunction with
any major changes in the settlement process or operations, the
instruments or transactions settled, a system's rules or procedures, or
the relevant legal and market environments. Systems should revisit
their risk management objectives regularly to ensure that they are
appropriate for the risks posed by the system, continue to be aligned
with the system's purposes, remain consistent with this policy, and are
being effectively adhered to by the system operator and participants.
Sound Governance Arrangements. Systems should have sound governance
arrangements to implement and oversee their risk management frameworks.
The responsibility for sound governance rests with a system operator's
board of directors or similar body and with the system operator's
senior management. Governance structures and processes should be
transparent; enable the establishment of clear risk management
objectives; set and enforce clear lines of responsibility and
accountability for achieving these objectives; ensure that there is
appropriate oversight of the risk management process; and enable the
effective use of information reported by the system operator's
management, internal auditors, and external auditors to monitor the
performance of the risk management process.\16\ Individuals responsible
for governance should be qualified for their positions, understand
their responsibilities, and understand their system's risk management
framework. Governance arrangements should also ensure that risk
management information is shared in forms, and at times, that allow
individuals responsible for governance to fulfill their duties
effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The risk management and internal audit functions should
also be independent of those responsible for day-do-day functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear and Appropriate Rules and Procedures. Systems should
implement rules and procedures that are appropriate and sufficient to
carry out the system's risk management objectives and that have a well-
founded legal basis. Such rules and procedures should specify the
respective responsibilities of the system operator, system
participants, and other relevant parties. Rules and procedures should
establish the key features of a system's settlement and risk management
design and specify clear and transparent crisis management procedures
and settlement failure procedures, if applicable.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Examples of key features that might be specified in a
system's rules and procedures are controls to limit participant-
based risks, such as membership criteria based on participant's
financial and operational health, limits on settlement exposures,
and the procedures and resources to hedge, margin, or collateralize
settlement exposures. Other examples of key features might be
business continuity requirements and loss allocation procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employ Necessary Resources. Systems should ensure that the
appropriate resources and processes are in place to allow them to
achieve their risk management objectives and effectively implement
their rules and procedures. In particular, the system operator's staff
should have the appropriate skills,
[[Page 36808]]
information, and tools to apply the system's rules and procedures and
achieve the system's risk management objectives. System operators
should also ensure that their facilities and contingency arrangements,
including any information system resources, are sufficient to meet
their risk management objectives.
The Board recognizes that payments and settlement systems differ
widely in terms of form, function, scale, and scope of activities and
that these characteristics result in differing combinations and levels
of risks. Thus, the exact features of a system's risk management
framework should be tailored to the risks of that system. The Board
also recognizes that the specific features of a risk management
framework may entail trade-offs between efficiency and risk reduction
and that payments and settlement systems will need to consider these
trade-offs when designing appropriate rules and procedures. In
considering such trade-offs, however, it is critically important that
systems take into account the costs and risks that may be imposed on
all relevant parties, including parties with no direct role in the
system. Furthermore, in light of rapidly evolving technologies and risk
management practices, the Board encourages all systems to consider
periodically making cost-effective risk-management improvements.
To determine whether a system's current or proposed risk management
framework is consistent with this policy, the Board will seek to
understand how a system achieves the four elements of a sound risk
management framework set out above. In this context, it may be
necessary for the Board to obtain information from system operators
regarding their risk management framework, risk management objectives,
rules and procedures, significant legal analyses, general risk
analyses, analyses of the credit and liquidity effects of settlement
disruptions, business continuity plans, crisis management procedures,
and other relevant documentation.\18\ It may also be necessary for the
Board to obtain data or statistics on system activity on an ad-hoc or
ongoing basis. All information provided to the Federal Reserve for the
purposes of this policy will be handled in accordance with all
applicable Federal Reserve policies on information security,
confidentiality, and conflicts of interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ To facilitate analysis of settlement disruptions, systems
may need to develop the capability to simulate credit and liquidity
effects on participants and on the system resulting from one or more
participant defaults, or other possible sources of settlement
disruptions. Such simulations may need to include, if appropriate,
the effects of changes in market prices, volatilities, or other
factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Systemically