Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating To Remove Functionality in the Government Securities Division's Rules That Is No Longer Utilized by Participants, 25522-25523 [2012-10308]
Download as PDF
25522
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices
contact: The Office of the Secretary at
(202) 551–5400.
Dated: April 26, 2012
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–10512 Filed 4–26–12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–66853; File No. SR–ICC–
2012–02]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE
Clear Credit LLC; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change to Provide for
a T+1 Settlement of the Initial Payment
Related to the CDS Contracts Cleared
by ICE Clear Credit LLC
April 24, 2012.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Introduction
On March 1, 2012, ICE Clear Credit
LLC (‘‘ICC’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change SR–ICC–2012–02 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’).1 The
proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on
March 12, 2012.2 The Commission
received no comment letters. For the
reasons discussed below, the
Commission is granting approval of the
proposed rule change.
II. Description
ICC proposed rule amendments that
were intended to modify the terms of
each of the various CDS Contracts
cleared by ICC (CDX.NA Untranched
Contracts, Standard North American
Corporate (‘‘SNAC’’) Single Name
Contracts and Standard Emerging
Sovereign (‘‘SES’’) Single Name
Contracts) to make the Initial Payment 3
date the first business day immediately
following the trade date, provided that
with respect to CDS Contracts that are
accepted for clearing after the trade
date, the Initial Payment date will be the
date that is the first business day
following the date when the CDS
Contract is accepted for clearing. The
Initial Payment under a CDS Contract is
established at the time the contract is
executed and may be payable from
either the protection buyer to the
protection seller or vice versa. Under
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
Exchange Act Release No. 34–66517
(March 6, 2012), 77 FR 14578 (March 12, 2012).
3 The Initial Payment is an obligation by either
counterparty to make an upfront payment
established at the time the contract is executed. See
ICE Clear Credit Clearing Rules, Section 301(b).
2 Securities
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:59 Apr 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
the current ICC Rules (by way of the
incorporated ISDA Credit Derivatives
Definitions), and consistent with
practice in the market for uncleared
credit default swaps, the Initial Payment
is required to be made on the third
business day following the trade date
(the execution date). ICC proposed to
add the definition of Initial Payment
Date to its Clearing Rules to provide
instead that the Initial Payment is to be
made on the first business day following
the trade date (or, if the transaction is
accepted for clearing after the trade
date, the Initial Payment is to be made
on the first business day following the
date of acceptance for clearing). ICC
believes that this change from ‘‘T+3’’
settlement to ‘‘T+1’’ settlement for the
Initial Payment will facilitate customerrelated clearing. In addition, this change
will improve margin efficiency (as
margin requirements will no longer
need to take into account the additional
risk from a T+3 as opposed to a T+1
settlement rule).
The other proposed changes in the
ICC Rules reflect updates to crossreferences and defined terms and
similar drafting clarifications, and do
not affect the substance of the ICC Rules
or cleared products.
III. Discussion
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act 4 directs
the Commission to approve a proposed
rule change of a self-regulatory
organization if it finds that such
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 5 requires, among
other things, that the rules of a clearing
agency be designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions
and, to the extent applicable, derivative
agreements, contracts, and transactions.
Because the proposed rule change
will accelerate the Initial Payment date,
it will improve margin efficiency (as
margin requirements will no longer
need to take into account the additional
risk from a T+3 as opposed to a T+1
settlement rule) thereby promoting the
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions, and
therefore is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act.
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
4 15
5 15
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
consistent with the requirements of the
Act and in particular with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act 6
and the rules and regulations
thereunder.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–ICC–
2012–02) be, and hereby is, approved.8
For the Commission by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.9
Kevin O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–10307 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–66856; File No. SR–FICC–
2012–02]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change
Relating To Remove Functionality in
the Government Securities Division’s
Rules That Is No Longer Utilized by
Participants
April 25, 2012.
I. Introduction
On February 29, 2012, the Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change SR–FICC–2012–
02 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 2 thereunder.
The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on March 16, 2012.3 The
Commission received no comment
letters on the proposed rule change.
This order approves the proposed rule
change.
II. Description
This rule change revises certain rules
of the Government Securities Division
(‘‘GSD’’) to eliminate references to
functions or classifications that are
either technologically obsolete or no
longer utilized by GSD’s participants.
6 15
U.S.C. 78q–1.
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
8 In approving the proposed rule change, the
Commission considered the proposal’s impact on
efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 15822
(March 12, 2012), 77 FR 15822 (March 16, 2012).
7 15
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices
1. ‘‘Non-Conversion Participants’’/
‘‘Conversion Participants’’
When first implemented, the DVP
System required all participants that
submitted when issued trades to
resubmit those trades with final money
calculations on the night of Auction
Date, after the Treasury auction results
were announced. Subsequent to the
initial implementation, enhancements
were incorporated such that the DVP
System recalculated trades (repriced)
based on auction results. FICC also
incorporated an option whereby
participants could decide if they wanted
to resubmit their trades (participants
who elected this option were known as
‘‘Non-Conversion Participants’’) or take
FICC’s repricing notification
(participants who elected this option
were known as ‘‘Conversion
Participants’’). With the implementation
of Interactive Messaging in 2000, the
few remaining Non-Conversion
Participants agreed to take FICC’s
calculations, rather than resubmit their
trades to FICC. As such, FICC proposed
to remove references in the rules to
Non-Conversion Participants. Given that
all participants who submit whenissued transactions for matching/netting
are subject to accepting FICC’s
calculations for their trades based on
Treasury auction results, the proposed
rule changes replace references to
‘‘Conversion Participants’’ with
‘‘Participants.’’
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2. Auction Priority Delivery Requests
and Customer Delivery Requests
(‘‘CDR’’s)
Auction Priority Delivery Requests,
also known as CDRs, were originally
built for FICC’s batch file transfer,
which was the initial proprietary
method that participants used to submit
trade activity to FICC. This functionality
allowed the dealer to instruct FICC to
withhold certain auction trades from the
net to ensure that a priority client
received its auction allotment so the
trade could not be netted out during
FICC’s end of day netting process.
However, when Interactive Messaging
was implemented in 2000, this
instruction type was not supported as it
was no longer used. As a result, FICC
proposed to remove references in the
rules to Auction Priority Delivery
Requests and CDRs.
3. Repo Substitution Criteria
FICC initially provided optional fields
for Repo Substitution Criteria for trade
submissions. However, over the years,
participants generally have not used
these fields. Because the fields were
provided as an informational courtesy
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:59 Apr 27, 2012
Jkt 226001
that has not been used by participants,
FICC is deleting references to those
fields in its rules.
In addition to the above-referenced
changes, FICC proposed to make the
following additional technical
corrections to the GSD rules:
—Terminal interfaces and video display
terminals are currently referenced in
the rules. The terminals became
obsolete when FICC replaced them
with a web browser interface. Because
the terminals are no longer in
existence, FICC proposed to remove
references to these methods from the
GSD rules.
—Currently, the ‘‘Schedule of Required
and Other Data Submission Items
from GCF Repo Transactions’’ refers
to ‘‘Reverse dealer Exec. Id’’ and a
‘‘Repo dealer Exec Id.’’ When FICC
began using the GSD RTTM web
format, these fields were eliminated
because they did not have any
significance for GCF repo trades. As a
result, FICC proposed to remove these
references from the rules.
III. Discussion
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act 4 directs
the Commission to approve a proposed
rule change of a self-regulatory
organization if it finds that such
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the
rules of a registered clearing agency be
designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.5 The proposed
rule change clarifies GSD’s rules by
removing references to functions or
classifications that are either
technologically obsolete or no longer
utilized by GSD’s participants. The
Commission believes that these
clarifications will promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions for which FICC is
responsible by ensuring that GSD’s rules
describe only functions and
classifications that are actually offered
by GSD.
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of the
Act and in particular with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act 6
and the rules and regulations
thereunder.
4 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
U.S.C. 78a–1(b)(3)(F).
6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.
5 15
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25523
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) 7 of the Act, that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–
FICC–2012–02) be, and hereby is,
approved.8
For the Commission by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.9
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–10308 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
Semi-Annual Workforce Management
Conference
U.S. Department of
Transportation, Office of the Secretary
of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of Conference.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Transportation, Office of the Secretary,
announces the second Semi-Annual
Workforce Management Conference.
The Conference will be hosted by the
Secretary of Transportation, Ray
LaHood. It will be held in Washington,
DC. This conference was recommended
by the former Future of Aviation
Advisory Committee (FAAC).
DATES: The Conference will be held June
21, 2012, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
(EDT).
ADDRESSES: The Conference will be held
at the Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, in the atrium on
the ground floor of the West Building
located across the street from the Navy
Yard (Green Line) Metro station.
Public Access: Members of the public
and members of the aviation community
are invited to attend. Pre-registration is
required of all attendees. (See below for
registration instructions)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
agenda will include aviation workforce
development issues that focus on the
need for a future workforce with solid
foundations in the STEM disciplines,
best practices for addressing labor/
management issues, and safety.
SUMMARY:
Registration
• Space is limited. Registration will
be available on a first-come, first-serve
7 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
approving this proposed rule change the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact of efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
8 In
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25522-25523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10308]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-66856; File No. SR-FICC-2012-02]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating To Remove Functionality
in the Government Securities Division's Rules That Is No Longer
Utilized by Participants
April 25, 2012.
I. Introduction
On February 29, 2012, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
(``FICC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change SR-FICC-2012-02 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder. The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on March 16, 2012.\3\ The
Commission received no comment letters on the proposed rule change.
This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 15822 (March 12, 2012),
77 FR 15822 (March 16, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description
This rule change revises certain rules of the Government Securities
Division (``GSD'') to eliminate references to functions or
classifications that are either technologically obsolete or no longer
utilized by GSD's participants.
[[Page 25523]]
1. ``Non-Conversion Participants''/``Conversion Participants''
When first implemented, the DVP System required all participants
that submitted when issued trades to resubmit those trades with final
money calculations on the night of Auction Date, after the Treasury
auction results were announced. Subsequent to the initial
implementation, enhancements were incorporated such that the DVP System
recalculated trades (repriced) based on auction results. FICC also
incorporated an option whereby participants could decide if they wanted
to resubmit their trades (participants who elected this option were
known as ``Non-Conversion Participants'') or take FICC's repricing
notification (participants who elected this option were known as
``Conversion Participants''). With the implementation of Interactive
Messaging in 2000, the few remaining Non-Conversion Participants agreed
to take FICC's calculations, rather than resubmit their trades to FICC.
As such, FICC proposed to remove references in the rules to Non-
Conversion Participants. Given that all participants who submit when-
issued transactions for matching/netting are subject to accepting
FICC's calculations for their trades based on Treasury auction results,
the proposed rule changes replace references to ``Conversion
Participants'' with ``Participants.''
2. Auction Priority Delivery Requests and Customer Delivery Requests
(``CDR''s)
Auction Priority Delivery Requests, also known as CDRs, were
originally built for FICC's batch file transfer, which was the initial
proprietary method that participants used to submit trade activity to
FICC. This functionality allowed the dealer to instruct FICC to
withhold certain auction trades from the net to ensure that a priority
client received its auction allotment so the trade could not be netted
out during FICC's end of day netting process. However, when Interactive
Messaging was implemented in 2000, this instruction type was not
supported as it was no longer used. As a result, FICC proposed to
remove references in the rules to Auction Priority Delivery Requests
and CDRs.
3. Repo Substitution Criteria
FICC initially provided optional fields for Repo Substitution
Criteria for trade submissions. However, over the years, participants
generally have not used these fields. Because the fields were provided
as an informational courtesy that has not been used by participants,
FICC is deleting references to those fields in its rules.
In addition to the above-referenced changes, FICC proposed to make
the following additional technical corrections to the GSD rules:
--Terminal interfaces and video display terminals are currently
referenced in the rules. The terminals became obsolete when FICC
replaced them with a web browser interface. Because the terminals are
no longer in existence, FICC proposed to remove references to these
methods from the GSD rules.
--Currently, the ``Schedule of Required and Other Data Submission Items
from GCF Repo Transactions'' refers to ``Reverse dealer Exec. Id'' and
a ``Repo dealer Exec Id.'' When FICC began using the GSD RTTM web
format, these fields were eliminated because they did not have any
significance for GCF repo trades. As a result, FICC proposed to remove
these references from the rules.
III. Discussion
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \4\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
requires that the rules of a registered clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.\5\ The proposed rule change clarifies GSD's rules by
removing references to functions or classifications that are either
technologically obsolete or no longer utilized by GSD's participants.
The Commission believes that these clarifications will promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
for which FICC is responsible by ensuring that GSD's rules describe
only functions and classifications that are actually offered by GSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 78a-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \6\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \7\ of the
Act, that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FICC-2012-02) be, and
hereby is, approved.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\8\ In approving this proposed rule change the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact of efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
\9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-10308 Filed 4-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P