Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Recovery & Wind-Down Plan and Related Rules, 871-884 [2018-00079]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices loss allocation rules of the DTCC Clearing Agencies, (ii) increase the transparency and accessibility of provisions in the Rules governing loss allocation, and (iii) make conforming and technical changes, would impact competition.45 These changes would apply equally to all members. Alignment of the loss allocation rules of the DTCC Clearing Agencies are intended to increase the consistency of the Rules with the rules of other DTCC Clearing Agencies in order to provide consistent treatment, to the extent practicable and appropriate, especially for firms that are participants of two or more DTCC Clearing Agencies. Having transparent and accessible provisions in the Rules governing loss allocation are intended to improve the readability and clarity of the Rules regarding the loss allocation process. Making conforming and technical changes to ensure the Rules remain clear and accurate would facilitate members’ understanding of the Rules and their obligations thereunder. As such, FICC believes that these proposed rule changes would not have any impact on competition. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments relating to this proposed rule change have not been solicited or received. FICC will notify the Commission of any written comments received by FICC. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will: (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions required with respect to the proposal are completed. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule 45 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission’s internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– FICC–2017–022 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549–1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–FICC–2017–022. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission’s internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FICC and on DTCC’s website (https://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rulefilings.aspx). All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–FICC– 2017–022 and should be submitted on or before January 29, 2018. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.46 Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018–00075 Filed 1–5–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 46 17 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 871 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94–409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission Fixed Income Market Structure Advisory Committee will hold a public meeting on Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. TIME AND DATE: The meeting will be held in Multi-Purpose Room LL–006 at the Commission’s headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC. PLACE: The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. and will be open to the public. Seating will be on a first-come, firstserved basis. Doors will open at 9:00 a.m. Visitors will be subject to security checks. The meeting will be webcast on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. STATUS: On December 15, 2017, the Commission published notice of the Committee meeting (Release No. 34–82338) indicating that the meeting is open to the public (except during that portion of the meeting reserved for an administrative work session during lunch) and inviting the public to submit written comments to the Committee. This Sunshine Act notice is being issued because a majority of the Commission may attend the meeting. The agenda for the meeting will focus on liquidity in the bond markets as well as various administrative items. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information, please contact Brent J. Fields from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551–5400. Brent J. Fields, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018–00212 Filed 1–4–18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–82431; File No. SR–FICC– 2017–021] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Recovery & Wind-Down Plan and Related Rules January 2, 2018. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 872 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 18, 2017, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the clearing agency.3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change of FICC would adopt the Recovery & Winddown Plan of FICC (‘‘R&W Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’). The R&W Plan would be maintained by FICC in compliance with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act by providing plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of FICC necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any other losses, as described below.4 The proposed rule change would also (1) amend FICC’s Government Securities Division (‘‘GSD’’) Rulebook (‘‘GSD Rules’’) in order to (a) adopt Rule 22D (Wind-down of the Corporation) and Rule 50 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure), and (b) make conforming changes to Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members), Rule 3B (Centrally Cleared Institutional Triparty Service) and Rule 13 (FundsOnly Settlement) related to the adoption of these Proposed Rules to the GSD Rules; (2) amend FICC’s MortgageBacked Securities Division (‘‘MBSD,’’ and, together with GSD, the ‘‘Divisions’’) Clearing Rules (‘‘MBSD Rules’’) in order to (a) adopt Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation) and Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure); and (b) make conforming changes to Rule 3A (Cash Settlement Bank Members) related to the adoption of these Proposed Rules to the MBSD Rules; and (3) amend Rule 1 of the Electronic Pool Netting (‘‘EPN’’) Rules of MBSD (‘‘EPN Rules’’) in order to provide that EPN Users, as defined therein, are bound by proposed Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation) 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). CFR 240.19b–4. 3 On December 18, 2017, FICC filed this proposed rule change as an advance notice (SR–FICC–2017– 805) with the Commission pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1), and Rule 19b– 4(n)(1)(i) of the Act, 17 CFR 240.19b–4(n)(1)(i). A copy of the advance notice is available at https:// www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings. 4 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 2 17 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 and proposed Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) to be adopted to the MBSD Rules.5 Each of the proposed rules is referred to herein as a ‘‘Proposed Rule,’’ and are collectively referred to as the ‘‘Proposed Rules.’’ The Proposed Rules are designed to (1) facilitate the implementation of the R&W Plan when necessary and, in particular, allow FICC to effectuate its strategy for winding down and transferring its business; (2) provide Members and Limited Members with transparency around critical provisions of the R&W Plan that relate to their rights, responsibilities and obligations; 6 and (3) provide FICC with the legal basis to implement those provisions of the R&W Plan when necessary, as described below. II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The clearing agency has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose FICC is proposing to adopt the R&W Plan to be used by the Board and management of FICC in the event FICC encounters scenarios that could potentially prevent it from being able to provide its critical services as a going concern. The R&W Plan would identify (i) the recovery tools available to FICC to address the risks of (a) uncovered losses or liquidity shortfalls resulting from the default of one or more Members, and (b) losses arising from non-default events, such as damage to its physical assets, a cyber-attack, or custody and investment losses, and (ii) 5 The GSD Rules and the MBSD Rules are referred to collectively herein as the ‘‘Rules.’’ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the Rules. The Rules and the EPN Rules are available at https:// www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures. 6 References herein to ‘‘Members’’ refer to GSD Netting Members and MBSD Clearing Members. References herein to ‘‘Limited Members’’ refer to participants of GSD or MBSD other than GSD Netting Members and MBSD Clearing Members, including, for example, GSD Comparison-Only Members, GSD Sponsored Members, GSD CCIT Members, and MBSD EPN Users. PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the strategy for implementation of such tools. The R&W Plan would also establish the strategy and framework for the orderly wind-down of FICC and the transfer of its business in the remote event the implementation of the available recovery tools does not successfully return FICC to financial viability. As discussed in greater detail below, the R&W Plan would provide, among other matters, (i) an overview of the business of FICC and its parent, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (‘‘DTCC’’); (ii) an analysis of FICC’s intercompany arrangements and an existing link to another financial market infrastructures (‘‘FMIs’’); (iii) a description of FICC’s services, and the criteria used to determine which services are considered critical; (iv) a description of the FICC and DTCC governance structure; (v) a description of the governance around the overall recovery and wind-down program; (vi) a discussion of tools available to FICC to mitigate credit/market and liquidity risks, including recovery indicators and triggers, and the governance around management of a stress event along a ‘‘Crisis Continuum’’ timeline; (vii) a discussion of potential non-default losses and the resources available to FICC to address such losses, including recovery triggers and tools to mitigate such losses; (viii) an analysis of the recovery tools’ characteristics, including how they are comprehensive, effective, and transparent, how the tools provide appropriate incentives to Members to, among other things, control and monitor the risks they may present to FICC, and how FICC seeks to minimize the negative consequences of executing its recovery tools; and (ix) the framework and approach for the orderly winddown and transfer of FICC’s business, including an estimate of the time and costs to effect a recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC. The R&W Plan would be structured as a roadmap, and would identify and describe the tools that FICC may use to effect a recovery from the events and scenarios described therein. Certain recovery tools that would be identified in the R&W Plan are based in the Rules (including the Proposed Rules) and, as such, descriptions of those tools would include descriptions of, and reference to, the applicable Rules and any related internal policies and procedures. Other recovery tools that would be identified in the R&W Plan are based in contractual arrangements to which FICC is a party, including, for example, existing committed or pre-arranged liquidity arrangements. Further, the R&W Plan would state that FICC may E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES develop further supporting internal guidelines and materials that may provide operationally for matters described in the Plan, and that such documents would be supplemental and subordinate to the Plan. Key factors considered in developing the R&W Plan and the types of tools available to FICC were its governance structure and the nature of the markets within which FICC operates. As a result of these considerations, many of the tools available to FICC that would be described in the R&W Plan are FICC’s existing, business-as-usual risk management and default management tools, which would continue to be applied in scenarios of increasing stress. In addition to these existing, businessas-usual tools, the R&W Plan would describe FICC’s other principal recovery tools, which include, for example, (i) identifying, monitoring and managing general business risk and holding sufficient liquid net assets funded by equity (‘‘LNA’’) to cover potential general business losses pursuant to the Clearing Agency Policy on Capital Requirements (‘‘Capital Policy’’),7 (ii) maintaining the Clearing Agency Capital Replenishment Plan (‘‘Replenishment Plan’’) as a viable plan for the replenishment of capital should FICC’s equity fall close to or below the amount being held pursuant to the Capital Policy,8 and (iii) the process for the allocation of losses among Members, as provided in Rule 4 of the GSD Rules and Rule 4 of the MBSD Rules.9 The R&W Plan would provide governance around the selection and implementation of the recovery tool or tools most relevant to mitigate a stress scenario and any applicable loss or liquidity shortfall. The development of the R&W Plan is facilitated by the Office of Recovery & Resolution Planning (‘‘R&R Team’’) of DTCC.10 The R&R Team reports to the 7 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81105 (July 7, 2017), 82 FR 32399 (July 13, 2017) (SR– DTC–2017–003, SR–FICC–2017–007, SR–NSCC– 2017–004). 8 See id. 9 See GSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) and MBSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation), supra note 5. FICC is proposing changes to GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4, and other related rules, regarding allocation of losses in a separate filing submitted simultaneously with this filing (File Nos. SR–FICC–2017–022 and SR–FICC– 2017–806, referred to collectively herein as the ‘‘Loss Allocation Filing’’). FICC expects the Commission to review both proposals together, and, as such, the proposal described in this filing anticipates the approval and implementation of those proposed changes to the Rules. 10 DTCC operates on a shared services model with respect to FICC and its other subsidiaries. Most corporate functions are established and managed on an enterprise-wide basis pursuant to intercompany agreements under which it is generally DTCC that VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 DTCC Management Committee (‘‘Management Committee’’) and is responsible for maintaining the R&W Plan and for the development and ongoing maintenance of the overall recovery and wind-down planning process. The Board, or such committees as may be delegated authority by the Board from time to time pursuant to its charter, would review and approve the R&W Plan biennially, and would also review and approve any changes that are proposed to the R&W Plan outside of the biennial review. As discussed in greater detail below, the Proposed Rules would define the procedures that may be employed in the event of FICC’s wind-down and would provide for FICC’s authority to take certain actions on the occurrence of a ‘‘Market Disruption Event,’’ as defined therein. Significantly, the Proposed Rules would provide Members and Limited Members with transparency and certainty with respect to these matters. The Proposed Rules would facilitate the implementation of the R&W Plan, particularly FICC’s strategy for winding down and transferring its business, and would provide FICC with the legal basis to implement those aspects of the R&W Plan. FICC R&W Plan The R&W Plan is intended to be used by the Board and FICC’s management in the event FICC encounters scenarios that could potentially prevent it from being able to provide its critical services as a going concern. The R&W Plan would be structured to provide a roadmap, define the strategy, and identify the tools available to FICC to either (i) recover in the event it experiences losses that exceed its prefunded resources (such strategies and tools referred to herein as the ‘‘Recovery Plan’’) or (ii) wind-down its business in a manner designed to permit the continuation of its critical services in the event that such recovery efforts are not successful (such strategies and tools referred to herein as the ‘‘Winddown Plan’’). The description of the R&W Plan below is intended to highlight the purpose and expected effects of the material aspects of the R&W Plan, and to provide Members and Limited Members with appropriate transparency into these features. Business Overview, Critical Services, and Governance The introduction to the R&W Plan would identify the document’s purpose and its regulatory background, and provides a relevant service to a subsidiary, including FICC. PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 873 would outline a summary of the Plan. The stated purpose of the R&W Plan is that it is to be used by the Board and FICC management in the event FICC encounters scenarios that could potentially prevent it from being able to provide its critical services as a going concern. The R&W Plan would be maintained by FICC in compliance with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act 11 by providing plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of FICC. The R&W Plan would describe DTCC’s business profile, provide a summary of the services of FICC as offered by each of the Divisions, and identify the intercompany arrangements and links between FICC and other entities, most notably a link between GSD and Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (‘‘CME’’), which is also an FMI. This overview section would provide a context for the R&W Plan by describing FICC’s business, organizational structure and critical links to other entities. By providing this context, this section would facilitate the analysis of the potential impact of utilizing the recovery tools set forth in later sections of the Recovery Plan, and the analysis of the factors that would be addressed in implementing the Wind-down Plan. DTCC is a user-owned and usergoverned holding company and is the parent company of FICC and its affiliates, The Depository Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’) and National Securities Clearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’, and, together with FICC and DTC, the ‘‘Clearing Agencies’’). The Plan would describe how corporate support services are provided to FICC from DTCC and DTCC’s other subsidiaries through intercompany agreements under a shared services model. The Plan would provide a description of the critical contractual and operational arrangements between FICC and other legal entities, including the cross-margining agreement between GSD and CME, which is also an FMI.12 Pursuant to this arrangement, GSD offsets each cross-margining participant’s residual margin amount (based on related positions) at GSD against the offsetting residual margin amounts of the participant (or its affiliate) at CME. GSD and CME may then reduce the amount of collateral that they collect to reflect the offsets between the cross-margining participant’s positions at GSD and its (or 11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). at https://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/ Files/Downloads/legal/rules/ficc_cme_crossmargin_ agreement.pdf. See also GSD Rule 43 (CrossMargining Arrangements), supra note 5. 12 Available E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 874 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices its affiliate’s) positions at CME. This section of the Plan, identifying and briefly describing FICC’s established links, would provide a mapping of critical connections and dependencies that may need to be relied on or otherwise addressed in connection with the implementation of either the Recovery Plan or the Wind-down Plan. The Plan would define the criteria for classifying certain of FICC’s services as ‘‘critical,’’ and would identify those critical services and the rationale for their classification. This section would provide an analysis of the potential systemic impact from a service disruption, and is important for evaluating how the recovery tools and the wind-down strategy would facilitate and provide for the continuation of FICC’s critical services to the markets it serves. The criteria that would be used to identify an FICC service or function as critical would include consideration as to (1) whether there is a lack of alternative providers or products; (2) whether failure of the service could impact FICC’s ability to perform its central counterparty services through either Division; (3) whether failure of the service could impact FICC’s ability to perform its multilateral netting services through either Division and, as such, could impact the volume of transactions; (4) whether failure of the service could impact FICC’s ability to perform its book-entry delivery and settlement services through either Division and, as such, could impact transaction costs; (5) whether failure of the service could impact FICC’s ability to perform its cash payment processing services through either Division and, as such, could impact the flow of liquidity in the U.S. financial markets; and (6) whether the service is interconnected with other participants and processes within the U.S. financial system, for example, with other FMIs, settlement banks, and broker-dealers. The Plan would then list each of those services, functions or activities that FICC has identified as ‘‘critical’’ based on the applicability of these six criteria. GSD’s critical services would include, for example, its Real-Time Trade Matching (‘‘RTTM®’’) service,13 its services related to netting and settlement of submitted trades for Netting Members,14 13 See GSD Rule 5 (Comparison System), GSD Rule 6A (Bilateral Comparison), GSD Rule 6B (Demand Comparison), and GSD Rule 6C (LockedIn Comparison), supra note 5. 14 See GSD Rule 11 (Netting System), GSD Rule 12 (Securities Settlement), and GSD Rule 13 (Funds-Only Settlement), supra note 5. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 the Auction Takedown service,15 and the Repurchase Agreement Netting Service.16 MBSD’s critical services would include, for example, its RTTM® service,17 its netting service for to-beannounced (‘‘TBA’’) transactions,18 its Electronic Pool Notification service,19 and its pool netting and settlement.20 The R&W Plan would also include a non-exhaustive list of FICC services that are not deemed critical. The evaluation of which services provided by FICC are deemed critical is important for purposes of determining how the R&W Plan would facilitate the continuity of those services. As discussed further below, while FICC’s Wind-down Plan would provide for the transfer of all critical services to a transferee in the event FICC’s winddown is implemented, it would anticipate that any non-critical services that are ancillary and beneficial to a critical service, or that otherwise have substantial user demand from the continuing membership, would also be transferred. The Plan would describe the governance structure of both DTCC and FICC. This section of the Plan would identify the ownership and governance model of these entities at both the Board of Directors and management levels. The Plan would state that the stages of escalation required to manage recovery under the Recovery Plan or to invoke FICC’s wind-down under the Winddown Plan would range from relevant business line managers up to the Board through FICC’s governance structure. The Plan would then identify the parties responsible for certain activities under both the Recovery Plan and the Winddown Plan, and would describe their respective roles. The Plan would identify the Risk Committee of the Board (‘‘Board Risk Committee’’) as being responsible for oversight of risk management activities at FICC, which include focusing on both oversight of risk management systems and processes designed to identify and manage various risks faced by FICC, and, due to FICC’s critical role in the markets in which it operates, oversight of FICC’s efforts to mitigate systemic risks that could impact those markets and the broader financial system.21 The Plan would identify the DTCC Management Risk Committee (‘‘Management Risk Committee’’) as primarily responsible for general, day-to-day risk management through delegated authority from the Board Risk Committee. The Plan would state that the Management Risk Committee has delegated specific dayto-day risk management, including management of risks addressed through margining systems and related activities, to the DTCC Group Chief Risk Office (‘‘GCRO’’), which works with staff within the DTCC Financial Risk Management group. Finally, the Plan would describe the role of the Management Committee, which provides overall direction for all aspects of FICC’s business, technology, and operations and the functional areas that support these activities. The Plan would describe the governance of recovery efforts in response to both default losses and nondefault losses under the Recovery Plan, identifying the groups responsible for those recovery efforts. Specifically, the Plan would state that the Management Risk Committee provides oversight of actions relating to the default of a Member, which would be reported and escalated to it through the GCRO, and the Management Committee provides oversight of actions relating to nondefault events that could result in a loss, which would be reported and escalated to it from the DTCC Chief Financial Officer (‘‘CFO’’) and the DTCC Treasury group that reports to the CFO, and from other relevant subject matter experts based on the nature and circumstances of the non-default event.22 More generally, the Plan would state that the type of loss and the nature and circumstances of the events that lead to the loss would dictate the components of governance to address that loss, including the escalation path to authorize those actions. As described further below, both the Recovery Plan 15 See GSD Rule 6C (Locked-In Comparison) and GSD Rule 17 (Netting and Settlement of NettingEligible Auction Purchases), supra note 5. 16 See GSD Rule 7 (Repo Transactions), GSD Rule 11 (Netting System), GSD Rule 18 (Special Provisions for Repo Transactions), GSD Rule 19 (Special Provisions for Brokered Repo Transactions), and GSD Rule 20 (Special Provisions for GCF Repo Transactions), supra note 5. 17 See MBSD Rule 5 (Trade Comparison), supra note 5. 18 See MBSD Rule 6 (TBA Netting), supra note 5. 19 See EPN Rules, supra note 5. 20 See MBSD Rule 8 (Pool Netting System) and MBSD Rule 9 (Pool Settlement with the Corporation), supra note 5. 21 The charter of the Board Risk Committee is available at https://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/Files/ Downloads/legal/policy-and-compliance/DTCCBOD-Risk-Committee-Charter.pdf. 22 The Plan would state that these groups would be involved to address how to mitigate the financial impact of non-default losses, and in recommending mitigating actions, the Management Committee would consider information and recommendations from relevant subject matter experts based on the nature and circumstances of the non-default event. Any necessary operational response to these events, however, would be managed in accordance with applicable incident response/business continuity process; for example, processes established by the DTCC Technology Risk Management group would be followed in response to a cyber event. PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices and the Wind-down Plan would describe the governance of escalations, decisions, and actions under each of those plans. Finally, the Plan would describe the role of the R&R Team in managing the overall recovery and wind-down program and plans for each of the Clearing Agencies. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES FICC Recovery Plan The Recovery Plan is intended to be a roadmap of those actions that FICC may employ across both Divisions to monitor and, as needed, stabilize its financial condition. As each event that could lead to a financial loss could be unique in its circumstances, the Recovery Plan would not be prescriptive and would permit FICC to maintain flexibility in its use of identified tools and in the sequence in which such tools are used, subject to any conditions in the Rules or the contractual arrangement on which such tool is based. FICC’s Recovery Plan would consist of (1) a description of the risk management surveillance, tools, and governance that FICC would employ across evolving stress scenarios that it may face as it transitions through a ‘‘Crisis Continuum,’’ described below; (2) a description of FICC’s risk of losses that may result from non-default events, and the financial resources and recovery tools available to FICC to manage those risks and any resulting losses; and (3) an evaluation of the characteristics of the recovery tools that may be used in response to either default losses or nondefault losses, as described in greater detail below. In all cases, FICC would act in accordance with the Rules, within the governance structure described in the R&W Plan, and in accordance with applicable regulatory oversight to address each situation in order to best protect FICC, the Members, and the markets in which it operates. Managing Member Default Losses and Liquidity Needs Through the Crisis Continuum. The Recovery Plan would describe the risk management surveillance, tools, and governance that FICC may employ across an increasing stress environment, which is referred to as the ‘‘Crisis Continuum.’’ This description would identify those tools that can be employed to mitigate losses, and mitigate or minimize liquidity needs, as the market environment becomes increasingly stressed. The phases of the Crisis Continuum would include (1) a stable market phase, (2) a stressed market phase, (3) a phase commencing with FICC’s decision to cease to act for a Member or Affiliated VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 Family of Members,23 and (4) a recovery phase. This section of the Recovery Plan would address conditions and circumstances relating to FICC’s decision to cease to act for a Member (referred to in the R&W Plan as a ‘‘defaulting Member,’’ and the event as a ‘‘Member default’’) pursuant to the applicable Rules.24 The Recovery Plan would provide context to its roadmap through this Crisis Continuum by describing FICC’s ongoing management of credit, market and liquidity risk across the Divisions, and its existing process for measuring and reporting its risks as they align with established thresholds for its tolerance of those risks. The Recovery Plan would discuss the management of credit/ market risk and liquidity exposures together, because the tools that address these risks can be deployed either separately or in a coordinated approach in order to address both exposures. FICC manages these risk exposures collectively to limit their overall impact on FICC and the memberships of the Divisions. As part of its market risk management strategy, FICC manages its credit exposure to Members by determining the appropriate required deposits to the GSD and MBSD Clearing Fund and monitoring its sufficiency, as provided for in the applicable Rules.25 FICC manages its liquidity risks with an objective of maintaining sufficient resources to be able to fulfill obligations that have been guaranteed by FICC in the event of a Member default that presents the largest aggregate liquidity exposure to FICC over the settlement cycle.26 The Recovery Plan would outline the metrics and indicators that FICC has developed to evaluate a stress situation against established risk tolerance thresholds. Each risk mitigation tool identified in the Recovery Plan would include a description of the escalation 23 The Plan would define an ‘‘Affiliated Family’’ of Members as a number of affiliated entities that are all Members of either GSD or MBSD. 24 See GSD Rule 21 (Restrictions on Access to Services) and MBSD Rule 14 (Restrictions on Access to Services), supra note 5. 25 See GSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) and MBSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation), supra note 5. FICC’s market risk management strategy for both Divisions is designed to comply with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4) under the Act, where these risks are referred to as ‘‘credit risks.’’ See also 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4). 26 FICC’s liquidity risk management strategy, including the manner in which FICC utilizes its liquidity tools, is described in the Clearing Agency Liquidity Risk Management Framework. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80489 (April 19, 2017), 82 FR 19120 (April 25, 2017) (SR–DTC– 2017–004, SR–NSCC–2017–005, SR–FICC–2017– 008); 81194 (July 24, 2017), 82 FR 35241 (July 28, 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–004, SR–NSCC–2017–005, SR–FICC–2017–008). PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 875 thresholds that allow for effective and timely reporting to the appropriate internal management staff and committees, or to the Board. The Recovery Plan would make clear that these tools and escalation protocols would be calibrated across each phase of the Crisis Continuum. The Recovery Plan would also establish that FICC would retain the flexibility to deploy such tools either separately or in a coordinated approach, and to use other alternatives to these actions and tools as necessitated by the circumstances of a particular Member default in accordance with the applicable Rules. Therefore, the Recovery Plan would both provide FICC with a roadmap to follow within each phase of the Crisis Continuum, and would permit it to adjust its risk management measures to address the unique circumstances of each event. The Recovery Plan would describe the conditions that mark each phase of the Crisis Continuum, and would identify actions that FICC could take as it transitions through each phase in order to both prevent losses from materializing through active risk management, and to restore the financial health of FICC during a period of stress. The ‘‘stable market phase’’ of the Crisis Continuum would describe active risk management activities in the normal course of business. These activities would include (1) routine monitoring of margin adequacy through daily review of back testing and stress testing results that review the adequacy of the margin calculations for each of GSD and MBSD, and escalation of those results to internal and Board committees; 27 and (2) routine monitoring of liquidity adequacy through review of daily liquidity studies that measure sufficiency of available liquidity resources to meet cash settlement obligations of the Member that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation.28 The Recovery Plan would describe some of the indicators of the ‘‘stressed market phase’’ of the Crisis Continuum, which would include, for example, volatility in market prices of certain assets where there is increased uncertainty among market participants about the fundamental value of those 27 FICC’s stress testing practices are described in the Clearing Agency Stress Testing Framework (Market Risk). See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80485 (April 19, 2017), 82 FR 19131 (April 25, 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–005, SR–FICC–2017–009, SR–NSCC–2017–006); 81192 (July 24, 2017), 82 FR 35245 (July 28, 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–005, SR– FICC–2017–009, SR–NSCC–2017–006). 28 See supra note 26. E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 876 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices assets. This phase would involve general market stresses, when no Member default would be imminent. Within the description of this phase, the Recovery Plan would provide that FICC may take targeted, routine risk management measures as necessary and as permitted by the Rules. Within the ‘‘Member default phase’’ of the Crisis Continuum, the Recovery Plan would provide a roadmap for the existing procedures that FICC would follow in the event of a Member default and any decision by FICC to cease to act for that Member.29 The Recovery Plan would provide that the objectives of FICC’s actions upon a Member or Affiliated Family default are to (1) minimize losses and market exposure of the affected Members and the applicable Division’s non-defaulting Members; and (2), to the extent practicable, minimize disturbances to the affected markets. The Recovery Plan would describe tools, actions, and related governance for both market risk monitoring and liquidity risk monitoring through this phase. For example, in connection with managing its market risk during this phase, FICC would, pursuant to the applicable Division’s Rules, (1) monitor and assess the adequacy of the GSD and MBSD Clearing Fund resources; (2), when necessary and appropriate pursuant to the applicable Division’s Rules, assess and collect additional margin requirements; and (3) follow its operational procedures to liquidate the defaulting Member’s portfolio. Management of liquidity risk through this phase would involve ongoing monitoring of the adequacy of FICC’s liquidity resources, and the Recovery Plan would identify certain actions FICC may deploy as it deems necessary to mitigate a potential liquidity shortfall, which would include, for example, adjusting its strategy for closing out the defaulting Member’s portfolio or seeking additional liquidity resources. The Recovery Plan would state that, throughout this phase, relevant information would be escalated and reported to both internal management committees and the Board Risk Committee. The Recovery Plan would also identify financial resources available to FICC, pursuant to the Rules, to address losses arising out of a Member default. Specifically, GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4, as each are proposed to be amended by the Loss Allocation Filing, 29 See GSD Rule 21 (Restrictions on Access to Services), GSD Rule 22A (Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act), MBSD Rule 14 (Restrictions on Access to Services), and MBSD Rule 17 (Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act), supra note 5. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 would provide that losses be satisfied first by applying a ‘‘Corporate Contribution,’’ and then, if necessary, by allocating remaining losses to nondefaulting Members.30 The ‘‘recovery phase’’ of the Crisis Continuum would describe actions that FICC may take to avoid entering into a wind-down of its business. In order to provide for an effective and timely recovery, the Recovery Plan would describe two stages of this phase: (1) A recovery corridor, during which FICC may experience stress events or observe early warning indicators that allow it to evaluate its options and prepare for the recovery phase; and (2) the recovery phase, which would begin on the date that FICC issues the first Loss Allocation Notice of the second loss allocation round with respect to a given ‘‘Event Period.’’ 31 FICC expects that significant deterioration of liquidity resources would cause it to enter the recovery corridor stage of this phase, and, as such, the actions it may take at this stage would be aimed at replenishing those resources. Circumstances that could cause it to enter the recovery corridor may include, for example, a rapid and material change in market prices or substantial intraday activity volume by the defaulting Member, neither of which are mitigated by intraday margin calls, or subsequent defaults by other Members or Affiliated Families during a compressed time period. Throughout the recovery 30 See supra note 9. The Loss Allocation Filing proposes to amend GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4 to define the amount FICC would contribute to address a loss resulting from either a Member default or a non-default event as the ‘‘Corporate Contribution.’’ This amount would be 50 percent (50%) of the ‘‘General Business Risk Capital Requirement,’’ which is calculated pursuant to the Capital Policy and is an amount sufficient to cover potential general business losses so that FICC can continue operations and services as a going concern if those losses materialize, in compliance with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15) under the Act. See also supra note 7; 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(15). 31 The Loss Allocation Filing proposes to amend Rule 4 to introduce the concept of an ‘‘Event Period’’ as the ten (10) Business Days beginning on (i) with respect to a Member default, the day on which NSCC notifies Members that it has ceased to act for a Member under the Rules, or (ii) with respect to a non-default loss, the day that NSCC notifies Members of the determination by the Board that there is a non-default loss event, as described in greater detail in that filing. The proposed GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4 would define a ‘‘round’’ as a series of loss allocations relating to an Event Period, and would provide that the first Loss Allocation Notice in a first, second, or subsequent round shall expressly state that such notice reflects the beginning of a first, second, or subsequent round. The maximum allocable loss amount of a round is equal to the sum of the ‘‘Loss Allocation Caps’’ (as defined in the proposed GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4) of those Members included in the round. See supra note 9. PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 corridor, FICC would monitor the adequacy of the Divisions’ respective resources and the expected timing of replenishment of those resources, and would do so through the monitoring of certain metrics referred to as ‘‘Corridor Indicators.’’ The majority of the Corridor Indicators, as identified in the Recovery Plan, relate directly to conditions that may require either Division to adjust its strategy for hedging and liquidating a defaulting Member’s portfolio, and any such changes would include an assessment of the status of the Corridor Indicators. Corridor Indicators would include, for example, effectiveness and speed of FICC’s efforts to close out the portfolio of the defaulting Member, and an impediment to the availability of its financial resources. For each Corridor Indicator, the Recovery Plan would identify (1) measures of the indicator, (2) evaluations of the status of the indicator, (3) metrics for determining the status of the deterioration or improvement of the indicator, and (4) ‘‘Corridor Actions,’’ which are steps that may be taken to improve the status of the indicator,32 as well as management escalations required to authorize those steps. Because FICC has never experienced the default of multiple Members, it has not, historically, measured the deterioration or improvements metrics of the Corridor Indicators. As such, these metrics were chosen based on the business judgment of FICC management. The Recovery Plan would also describe the reporting and escalation of the status of the Corridor Indicators throughout the recovery corridor. Significant deterioration of a Corridor Indicator, as measured by the metrics set out in the Recovery Plan, would be escalated to the Board. FICC management would review the Corridor Indicators and the related metrics at least annually, and would modify these metrics as necessary in light of observations from simulations of Member defaults and other analyses. Any proposed modifications would be reviewed by the Management Risk Committee and the Board Risk Committee. The Recovery Plan would estimate that FICC may remain in the recovery corridor stage between one day and two weeks. This estimate is based on historical data observed in past 32 The Corridor Actions that would be identified in the Plan are indicative, but not prescriptive; therefore, if FICC needs to consider alternative actions due to the applicable facts and circumstances, the escalation of those alternative actions would follow the same escalation protocol identified in the Plan for the Corridor Indicator to which the action relates. E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices Member defaults, the results of simulations of Member defaults, and periodic liquidity analyses conducted by FICC. The actual length of a recovery corridor would vary based on actual market conditions observed on the date and time FICC enters the recovery corridor stage of the Crisis Continuum, and FICC would expect the recovery corridor to be shorter in market conditions of increased stress. The Recovery Plan would outline steps by which FICC may allocate its losses, and would state that the available tools related to allocation of losses would only be used in this and subsequent phases of the Crisis Continuum.33 The Recovery Plan would also identify tools that may be used to address foreseeable shortfalls of FICC’s liquidity resources following a Member default, and would provide that these tools may be used throughout the Crisis Continuum to address liquidity shortfalls if they arise. The goal in managing FICC’s qualified liquidity resources is to maximize resource availability in an evolving stress situation, to maintain flexibility in the order and use of sources of liquidity, and to repay any third party lenders of liquidity in a timely manner. Additional voluntary or uncommitted tools to address potential liquidity shortfalls, for example uncommitted bank loans, which may supplement FICC’s other liquid resources described herein, would also be identified in the Recovery Plan. The Recovery Plan would state that, due to the extreme nature of a stress event that would cause FICC to consider the use of these liquidity tools, the availability and capacity of these liquidity tools, and the willingness of counterparties to lend, cannot be accurately predicted and are dependent on the circumstances of the applicable stress period, including market price volatility, actual or perceived disruptions in financial markets, the costs to FICC of utilizing these tools, and any potential impact on FICC’s credit rating. As stated above, the Recovery Plan would state that FICC will have entered the recovery phase on the date that it issues the first Loss Allocation Notice of the second loss allocation round with respect to a given Event Period. The Recovery Plan would provide that, during the recovery phase, FICC would continue and, as needed, enhance, the monitoring and remedial actions already 33 As these matters are described in greater detail in the Loss Allocation Filing and in the proposed amendments to GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4, described therein, reference is made to that filing and the details are not repeated here. See supra note 9. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 described in connection with previous phases of the Crisis Continuum, and would remain in the recovery phase until its financial resources are expected to be or are fully replenished, or until the Wind-down Plan is triggered, as described below. The Recovery Plan would describe governance for the actions and tools that may be employed within the Crisis Continuum, which would be dictated by the facts and circumstances applicable to the situation being addressed. Such facts and circumstances would be measured by the Corridor Indicators applicable to that phase of the Crisis Continuum, and, in most cases, by the measures and metrics that are assigned to those Corridor Indicators, as described above. Each of these indicators would have a defined review period and escalation protocol that would be described in the Recovery Plan. The Recovery Plan would also describe the governance procedures around a decision to cease to act for a Member, pursuant to the applicable Division’s Rules, and around the management and oversight of the subsequent liquidation of the defaulting Member’s portfolio. The Recovery Plan would state that, overall, FICC would retain flexibility in accordance with each Division’s Rules, its governance structure, and its regulatory oversight, to address a particular situation in order to best protect FICC and the Members, and to meet the primary objectives, throughout the Crisis Continuum, of minimizing losses and, where consistent and practicable, minimizing disturbance to affected markets. Non-Default Losses. The Recovery Plan would outline how FICC may address losses that result from events other than a Member default. While these matters are addressed in greater detail in other documents, this section of the Plan would provide a roadmap to those documents and an outline for FICC’s approach to monitoring and managing losses that could result from a non-default event. The Plan would first identify some of the risks FICC faces that could lead to these losses, which include, for example, the business and profit/loss risks of unexpected declines in revenue or growth of expenses; the operational risks of disruptions to systems or processes that could lead to large losses, including those resulting from, for example, a cyber-attack; and custody or investment risks that could lead to financial losses. The Recovery Plan would describe FICC’s overall strategy for the management of these risks, which includes a ‘‘three lines of defense’’ approach to risk management PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 877 that allows for comprehensive management of risk across the organization.34 The Recovery Plan would also describe FICC’s approach to financial risk and capital management. The Plan would identify key aspects of this approach, including, for example, an annual budget process, business line performance reviews with management, and regular review of capital requirements against LNA. These risk management strategies are collectively intended to allow FICC to effectively identify, monitor, and manage risks of non-default losses. The Plan would identify the two categories of financial resources FICC maintains to cover losses and expenses arising from non-default risks or events as (1) LNA, maintained, monitored, and managed pursuant to the Capital Policy, which include (a) amounts held in satisfaction of the General Business Risk Capital Requirement,35 (b) the Corporate Contribution,36 and (c) other amounts held in excess of FICC’s capital requirements pursuant to the Capital Policy; and (2) resources available pursuant to the loss allocation provisions of GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4.37 The Plan would address the process by which the CFO and the DTCC Treasury group would determine which available LNA resources are most appropriate to cover a loss that is caused by a non-default event. This determination involves an evaluation of a number of factors, including the current and expected size of the loss, the expected time horizon over when the loss or additional expenses would materialize, the current and projected available LNA, and the likelihood LNA could be successfully replenished pursuant to the Replenishment Plan, if triggered.38 Finally the Plan would discuss how FICC would apply its resources to address losses resulting from a non-default event, including the 34 The Clearing Agency Risk Management Framework includes a description of this ‘‘three lines of defense’’ approach to risk management, and addresses how FICC comprehensively manages various risks, including operational, general business, investment, custody, and other risks that arise in or are borne by it. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81635 (September 15, 2017), 82 FR 44224 (September 21, 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–013, SR–FICC–2017–016, SR–NSCC–2017–012). The Clearing Agency Operational Risk Management Framework describes the manner in which FICC manages operational risks, as defined therein. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81745 (September 28, 2017), 82 FR 46332 (October 4, 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–014, SR–FICC–2017–017, SR–NSCC–2017–013). 35 See supra note 30. 36 See supra note 30. 37 See supra note 9. 38 See supra note 7. E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 878 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices order of resources it would apply if the loss or liability exceeds FICC’s excess LNA amounts, or is large relative thereto, and the Board has declared the event a ‘‘Declared Non-Default Loss Event’’ pursuant to GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4.39 The Plan would also describe proposed GSD Rule 50 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) and proposed MBSD Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure), which FICC is proposing to adopt in the GSD Rule and MBSD Rules, respectively. This Proposed Rule would provide transparency around how FICC would address extraordinary events that may occur outside its control. Specifically, the Proposed Rule would define a ‘‘Market Disruption Event’’ and the governance around a determination that such an event has occurred. The Proposed Rule would also describe FICC’s authority to take actions during the pendency of a Market Disruption Event that it deems appropriate to address such an event and facilitate the continuation of its services, if practicable, as described in greater detail below. The Plan would describe the interaction between the Proposed Rule and FICC’s existing processes and procedures addressing business continuity management and disaster recovery (generally, the ‘‘BCM/DR procedures’’), making clear that the Proposed Rule is designed to support those BCM/DR procedures and to address circumstances that may be exogenous to FICC and not necessarily addressed by the BCM/DR procedures. Finally, the Plan would describe that, because the operation of the Proposed Rule is specific to each applicable Market Disruption Event, the Proposed Rule does not define a time limit on its application. However, the Plan would note that actions authorized by the Proposed Rule would be limited to the pendency of the applicable Market Disruption Event, as made clear in the Proposed Rule. Overall, the Proposed Rule is designed to mitigate risks caused by Market Disruption Events and, thereby, minimize the risk of financial loss that may result from such events. Recovery Tool Characteristics. The Recovery Plan would describe FICC’s evaluation of the tools identified within the Recovery Plan, and its rationale for concluding that such tools are comprehensive, effective, and transparent, and that such tools provide appropriate incentives to Members and minimize negative impact on Members and the financial system, in compliance 39 See supra note 9. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 with guidance published by the Commission in connection with the adoption of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act.40 FICC’s analysis and the conclusions set forth in this section of the Recovery Plan are described in greater detail in Item 3(b) of this filing, below. FICC Wind-Down Plan The Wind-down Plan would provide the framework and strategy for the orderly wind-down of FICC if the use of the recovery tools described in the Recovery Plan do not successfully return FICC to financial viability. While FICC believes that, given the comprehensive nature of the recovery tools, such event is extremely unlikely, as described in greater detail below, FICC is proposing a wind-down strategy that provides for (1) the transfer of FICC’s business, assets and memberships of both Divisions to another legal entity, (2) such transfer being effected in connection with proceedings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code,41 and (3) after effectuating this transfer, FICC liquidating any remaining assets in an orderly manner in bankruptcy proceedings. FICC believes that the proposed transfer approach to a winddown would meet its objectives of (1) assuring that FICC’s critical services will be available to the market as long as there are Members in good standing, and (2) minimizing disruption to the operations of Members and financial markets generally that might be caused by FICC’s failure. In describing the transfer approach to FICC’s Wind-down Plan, the Plan would identify the factors that FICC considered in developing this approach, including the fact that FICC does not own material assets that are unrelated to its clearance and settlement activities. As such, a business reorganization or ‘‘bail-in’’ of debt approach would be unlikely to mitigate significant losses. Additionally, FICC’s approach was developed in consideration of its critical and unique position in the U.S. markets, which precludes any approach that would cause FICC’s critical services to no longer be available. First, the Wind-down Plan would describe the potential scenarios that could lead to the wind-down of FICC, and the likelihood of such scenarios. The Wind-down Plan would identify the time period leading up to a decision to wind-down FICC as the ‘‘Runway 40 Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78961 (September 28, 2016), 81 FR 70786 (October 13, 2016) (S7–03–14). 41 11 U.S.C. 1101 et seq. PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Period.’’ This period would follow the implementation of any recovery tools, as it may take a period of time, depending on the severity of the market stress at that time, for these tools to be effective or for FICC to realize a loss sufficient to cause it to be unable to effectuate settlements and repay its obligations.42 The Wind-down Plan would identify some of the indicators that it has entered this Runway Period, which would include, for example, successive Member defaults, significant Member retirements thereafter, and FICC’s inability to replenish its financial resources following the liquidation of the portfolio of the defaulting Member(s). The trigger for implementing the Wind-down Plan would be a determination by the Board that recovery efforts have not been, or are unlikely to be, successful in returning FICC to viability as a going concern. As described in the Plan, FICC believes this is an appropriate trigger because it is both broad and flexible enough to cover a variety of scenarios, and would align incentives of FICC and the Members to avoid actions that might undermine FICC’s recovery efforts. Additionally, this approach takes into account the characteristics of FICC’s recovery tools and enables the Board to consider (1) the presence of indicators of a successful or unsuccessful recovery, and (2) potential for knock-on effects of continued iterative application of FICC’s recovery tools. The Wind-down Plan would describe the general objectives of the transfer strategy, and would address assumptions regarding the transfer of FICC’s critical services, business, assets and membership, and the assignment of GSD’s link with another FMI, to another legal entity that is legally, financially, and operationally able to provide FICC’s critical services to entities that wish to continue their membership following the transfer (‘‘Transferee’’). The Winddown Plan would provide that the Transferee would be either (1) a third party legal entity, which may be an existing or newly established legal entity or a bridge entity formed to operate the business on an interim basis to enable the business to be transferred subsequently (‘‘Third Party Transferee’’); or (2) an existing, debt-free failover legal entity established ex-ante 42 The Wind-down Plan would state that, given FICC’s position as a user-governed financial market utility, it is possible that Members might voluntarily elect to provide additional support during the recovery phase leading up to a potential trigger of the Wind-down Plan, but would also make clear that FICC cannot predict the willingness of Members to do so. E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices by DTCC (‘‘Failover Transferee’’) to be used as an alternative Transferee in the event that no viable or preferable Third Party Transferee timely commits to acquire FICC’s business. FICC would seek to identify the proposed Transferee, and negotiate and enter into transfer arrangements during the Runway Period and prior to making any filings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code.43 As stated above, the Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the transfer to the Transferee be effected in connection with proceedings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code, and pursuant to a bankruptcy court order under Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, such that the transfer would be free and clear of claims against, and interests in, FICC, except to the extent expressly provided in the court’s order.44 In order to effect a timely transfer of its services and minimize the market and operational disruption of such transfer, FICC would expect to transfer all of its critical services and any noncritical services that are ancillary and beneficial to a critical service, or that otherwise have substantial user demand from the continuing membership. Following the transfer, the Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the Transferee and its continuing membership would determine whether to continue to provide any transferred non-critical service on an ongoing basis, or terminate the non-critical service following some transition period. FICC’s Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the Transferee would enter into a transition services agreement with DTCC so that DTCC would continue to provide the shared services it currently provides to FICC, including staffing, infrastructure and operational support. The Wind-down Plan would also anticipate the assignment of FICC’s link arrangements, including its arrangements with clearing banks and GSD’s cross-margining arrangement with CME, described above, to the Transferee.45 The Wind-down Plan would provide that Members’ open 43 See 11 U.S.C. et seq. id. at 363. 45 The proposed transfer arrangements outlined in the Wind-down Plan do not contemplate the transfer of any credit or funding agreements, which are generally not assignable by FICC. However, to the extent the Transferee adopts rules substantially identical to those FICC has in effect prior to the transfer, it would have the benefit of any rulesbased liquidity funding. The Wind-down Plan contemplates that neither of the Divisions’ respective Clearing Funds would be transferred to the Transferee, as they are not held in a bankruptcy remote manner and they are the primary prefunded liquidity resource to be accessed in the recovery phase. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 44 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 positions existing prior to the effective time of the transfer would be addressed by the provisions of the proposed Winddown Rule, as defined and described below, and the existing GSD Rule 22B (Corporation Default) and MBSD Rule 17 (Corporation Default) (collectively, ‘‘Corporation Default Rule’’), as applicable, and that the Transferee would not acquire any pending or open transactions with the transfer of the business.46 The Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the Transferee would accept transactions for processing with a trade date from and after the effective time of the transfer. The Wind-down Plan would provide that, following the effectiveness of the transfer to the Transferee, the winddown of FICC would involve addressing any residual claims against FICC through the bankruptcy process and liquidating the legal entity. As such, and as stated above, the Wind-down Plan does not contemplate FICC continuing to provide services in any capacity following the transfer time, and any services not transferred would be terminated. The Wind-down Plan would also identify the key dependencies for the effectiveness of the transfer, which include regulatory approvals that would permit the Transferee to be legally qualified to provide the transferred services from and after the transfer, and approval by the applicable bankruptcy court of, among other things, the proposed sale, assignments, and transfers to the Transferee. The Wind-down Plan would address governance matters related to the execution of the transfer of FICC’s business and its wind-down. The Winddown Plan would address the duties of the Board to execute the wind-down of FICC in conformity with (1) the Rules, (2) the Board’s fiduciary duties, which mandate that it exercise reasonable business judgment in performing these duties, and (3) FICC’s regulatory obligations under the Act as a registered clearing agency. The Wind-down Plan would also identify certain factors the Board may consider in making these decisions, which would include, for example, whether FICC could safely stabilize the business and protect its value without seeking bankruptcy protection, and FICC’s ability to continue to meet its regulatory requirements. The Wind-down Plan would describe (1) actions FICC or DTCC may take to prepare for wind-down in the period before FICC experiences any financial distress, (2) actions FICC would take both during the recovery phase and the Runway Period to prepare for the execution of the Wind-down Plan, and (3) actions FICC would take upon commencement of bankruptcy proceedings to effectuate the Winddown Plan. Finally, the Wind-down Plan would include an analysis of the estimated time and costs to effectuate the plan, and would provide that this estimate be reviewed and approved by the Board annually. In order to estimate the length of time it might take to achieve a recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC’s critical operations, as contemplated by the R&W Plan, the Wind-down Plan would include an analysis of the possible sequencing and length of time it might take to complete an orderly wind-down and transfer of critical operations, as described in earlier sections of the R&W Plan. The Wind-down Plan would also include in this analysis consideration of other factors, including the time it might take to complete any further attempts at recovery under the Recovery Plan. The Wind-down Plan would then multiply this estimated length of time by FICC’s average monthly operating expenses, including adjustments to account for changes to FICC’s profit and expense profile during these circumstances, over the previous twelve months to determine the amount of LNA that it should hold to achieve a recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC’s critical operations. The estimated wind-down costs would constitute the ‘‘Recovery/ Wind-down Capital Requirement’’ under the Capital Policy.47 Under that policy, the General Business Risk Capital Requirement is calculated as the greatest of three estimated amounts, one of which is this Recovery/Wind-down Capital Requirement.48 The R&W Plan is designed as a roadmap, and the types of actions that may be taken both leading up to and in connection with implementation of the Wind-down Plan would be primarily addressed in other supporting documentation referred to therein. The Wind-down Plan would address proposed GSD Rule 22D and MBSD Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation), which would be adopted to facilitate the implementation of the Wind-down Plan, and are discussed below. Proposed Rules In connection with the adoption of the R&W Plan, FICC is proposing to adopt the Proposed Rules, each described below. The Proposed Rules 47 See 46 See PO 00000 supra note 5. Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 48 See Sfmt 4703 879 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM supra note 7. supra note 7. 08JAN1 880 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES would facilitate the execution of the R&W Plan and would provide Members and Limited Members with transparency as to critical aspects of the Plan, particularly as they relate to the rights and responsibilities of both FICC and Members. The Proposed Rules also provide a legal basis to these aspects of the Plan. GSD Rule 22D and MBSD Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation) The proposed GSD Rule 22D and MBSD Rule 17B (collectively, ‘‘Winddown Rule’’) would be adopted by both Divisions to facilitate the execution of the Wind-down Plan. The Wind-down Rule would include a proposed set of defined terms that would be applicable only to the provisions of this Proposed Rule. The Wind-down Rule would make clear that a wind-down of FICC’s business would occur (1) after a decision is made by the Board, and (2) in connection with the transfer of FICC’s services to a Transferee, as described therein. Because GSD and MBSD are both divisions of FICC, the individual Wind-down Rules are designed to work together. A decision by the Board to initiate the Wind-down Plan would be pursuant to, and trigger the provisions of, the Wind-down Rule of each Division simultaneously. Generally, the proposed Wind-down Rule is designed to create clear mechanisms for the transfer of Eligible Members, Eligible Limited Members, and Settling Banks (as these terms would be defined in the Wind-down Rule), and FICC’s business in order to provide for continued access to critical services and to minimize disruption to the markets in the event the Wind-down Plan is initiated. Wind-down Trigger. First, the Proposed Rule would make clear that the Board is responsible for initiating the Wind-down Plan, and would identify the criteria the Board would consider when making this determination. As provided for in the Wind-down Plan and in the proposed Wind-down Rule, the Board would initiate the Plan if, in the exercise of its business judgment and subject to its fiduciary duties, it has determined that the execution of the Recovery Plan has not or is not likely to restore FICC to viability as a going concern, and the implementation of the Wind-down Plan, including the transfer of FICC’s business, is in the best interests of FICC, Members and Limited Members of both Divisions, its shareholders and creditors, and the U.S. financial markets. Identification of Critical Services; Designation of Dates and Times for Specific Actions. The Proposed Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 would provide that, upon making a determination to initiate the Winddown Plan, the Board would identify the critical and non-critical services that would be transferred to the Transferee at the Transfer Time (as defined below and in the Proposed Rule), as well as any non-critical services that would not be transferred to the Transferee. The proposed Wind-down Rule would establish that any services transferred to the Transferee will only be provided by the Transferee as of the Transfer Time, and that any non-critical services that are not transferred to the Transferee would be terminated at the Transfer Time. The Proposed Rule would also provide that the Board would establish (1) an effective time for the transfer of FICC’s business to a Transferee (‘‘Transfer Time’’), (2) the last day that transactions may be submitted to either Division for processing (‘‘Last Transaction Acceptance Date’’), and (3) the last day that transactions submitted to either Division will be settled (‘‘Last Settlement Date’’). Treatment of Pending Transactions. The Wind-down Rule would also authorize the Board to provide for the settlement of pending transactions of either Division prior to the Transfer Time, so long as the applicable Division’s Corporation Default Rule has not been triggered. For example, the Proposed Rule would provide the Board with the ability to, if it deems practicable, based on FICC’s resources at that time, allow pending transactions of either Division to complete prior to the transfer of FICC’s business to a Transferee. The Board would also have the ability to allow Members to only submit trades to the applicable Division that would effectively offset pending positions or provide that transactions will be processed in accordance with special or exception processing procedures. The Proposed Rule is designed to enable these actions in order to facilitate settlement of pending transactions of the applicable Division and reduce claims against FICC that would have to be satisfied after the transfer has been effected. If none of these actions are deemed practicable (or if the applicable Division’s Corporation Default Rule has been triggered with respect to a Division), then the provisions of the proposed Corporation Default Rule would apply to the treatment of open, pending transactions of such Division. The Proposed Rule would make clear, however, that neither Division would accept any transactions for processing after the Last Transaction Acceptance Date or which are designated to settle after the Last Settlement Date for such PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Division. Any transactions to be processed and/or settled after the Transfer Time would be required to be submitted to the Transferee, and would not be FICC’s responsibility. Notice Provisions. The proposed Wind-down Rule would provide that, upon a decision to implement the Winddown Plan, FICC would provide its Members and Limited Members and its regulators with a notice that includes material information relating to the Wind-down Plan and the anticipated transfer of the membership of both Divisions and business, including, for example, (1) a brief statement of the reasons for the decision to implement the Wind-down Plan; (2) identification of the Transferee and information regarding the transaction by which the transfer of FICC’s business would be effected; (3) the Transfer Time, Last Transaction Acceptance Date, and Last Settlement Date; and (4) identification of Eligible Members and Eligible Limited Members, and the critical and non-critical services that would be transferred to the Transferee at the Transfer Time, as well as those NonEligible Members and Non-Eligible Limited Members (as defined in the Proposed Rule), and any non-critical services that would not be included in the transfer. FICC would also make available the rules and procedures and membership agreements of the Transferee. Transfer of Membership. The proposed Wind-down Rule would address the expected transfer of both Divisions’ membership to the Transferee, which FICC would seek to effectuate by entering into an arrangement with a Failover Transferee, or by using commercially reasonable efforts to enter into such an arrangement with a Third Party Transferee. Therefore, the Wind-down Rule would provide Members, Limited Members and Settling Banks with notice that, in connection with the implementation of the Wind-down Plan and with no further action required by any party, (1) their membership with the applicable Division would transfer to the Transferee, (2) they would become party to a membership agreement with such Transferee, and (3) they would have all of the rights and be subject to all of the obligations applicable to their membership status under the rules of the Transferee. These provisions would not apply to any Member or Limited Member that is either in default of an obligation to FICC or has provided notice of its election to withdraw its membership from the applicable Division. Further, the proposed Winddown Rule would make clear that it E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices would not prohibit (1) Members and Limited Members that are not transferred by operation of the Winddown Rule from applying for membership with the Transferee, or (2) Members, Limited Members, and Settling Banks that would be transferred to the Transferee from withdrawing from membership with the Transferee.49 Comparability Period. The proposed automatic mechanism for the transfer of both Divisions’ memberships is intended to provide the membership with continuous access to critical services in the event of FICC’s winddown, and to facilitate the continued prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. Further to this goal, the proposed Winddown Rule would provide that FICC would enter into arrangements with a Failover Transferee, or would use commercially reasonable efforts to enter into arrangements with a Third Party Transferee, providing that, in either case, with respect to the critical services and any non-critical services that are transferred from FICC to the Transferee, for at least a period of time to be agreed upon (‘‘Comparability Period’’), the business transferred from FICC to the Transferee would be operated in a manner that is comparable to the manner in which the business was previously operated by FICC. Specifically, the proposed Wind-down Rule would provide that: (1) The rules of the Transferee and terms of membership agreements would be comparable in substance and effect to the analogous Rules and membership agreements of FICC; (2) the rights and obligations of any Members, Limited Members and Settling Banks that are transferred to the Transferee would be comparable in substance and effect to their rights and obligations as to FICC; and (3) the Transferee would operate the transferred business and provide any services that are transferred in a comparable manner to which such services were provided by FICC. The purpose of these provisions and the intended effect of the proposed Winddown Rule is to facilitate a smooth transition of FICC’s business to a Transferee and to provide that, for at least the Comparability Period, the Transferee (1) would operate the transferred business in a manner that is comparable in substance and effect to the manner in which the business was 49 The Members and Limited Members whose membership is transferred to the Transferee pursuant to the proposed Wind-down Rule would submit transactions to be processed and settled subject to the rules and procedures of the Transferee, including any applicable margin charges or other financial obligations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 operated by FICC, and (2) would not require sudden and disruptive changes in the systems, operations and business practices of the new members of the Transferee. Subordination of Claims Provisions and Miscellaneous Matters. The proposed Wind-down Rule would also include a provision addressing the subordination of unsecured claims against FICC of its Members and Limited Members who fail to participate in FICC’s recovery efforts (i.e., such firms are delinquent in their obligations to FICC or elect to retire from FICC in order to minimize their obligations with respect to the allocation of losses, pursuant to the Rules). This provision is designed to incentivize Members to participate in FICC’s recovery efforts.50 The proposed Wind-down Rule would address other ex-ante matters, including provisions providing that its Members, Limited Members and Settling Banks (1) will assist and cooperate with FICC to effectuate the transfer of FICC’s business to a Transferee, (2) consent to the provisions of the rule, and (3) grant FICC power of attorney to execute and deliver on their behalf documents and instruments that may be requested by the Transferee. Finally, the Proposed Rule would include a limitation of liability for any actions taken or omitted to be taken by FICC pursuant to the Proposed Rule. GSD Rule 50 and MBSD Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) The proposed GSD Rule 50 and MBSD Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) (collectively, ‘‘Force Majeure Rule’’) would address FICC’s authority to take certain actions upon the occurrence, and during the pendency, of a ‘‘Market Disruption Event,’’ as defined therein. Because GSD and MBSD are both divisions of FICC, the individual Force Majeure Rules are designed to work together. A decision by the Board or management of FICC that a Market Disruption Event has occurred in accordance with the Force Majeure Rule would trigger the provisions of the Force Majeure Rule of each Division simultaneously. The Proposed Rule is designed to clarify FICC’s ability to take actions to address extraordinary events outside of the control of FICC and of the 50 Nothing in the proposed Wind-down Rule would seek to prevent a Member, Limited Member or Settling Bank that retired its membership at either of the Divisions from applying for membership with the Transferee. Once its FICC membership is terminated, however, such firm would not be able to benefit from the membership assignment that would be effected by this proposed Wind-down Rule, and it would have to apply for membership directly with the Transferee, subject to its membership application and review process. PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 881 memberships of the Divisions, and to mitigate the effect of such events by facilitating the continuity of services (or, if deemed necessary, the temporary suspension of services). To that end, under the proposed Force Majeure Rule, FICC would be entitled, during the pendency of a Market Disruption Event, to (1) suspend the provision of any or all services, and (2) take, or refrain from taking, or require its Members and Limited Members to take, or refrain from taking, any actions it considers appropriate to address, alleviate, or mitigate the event and facilitate the continuation of FICC’s services as may be practicable. The proposed Force Majeure Rule would identify the events or circumstances that would be considered a ‘‘Market Disruption Event,’’ including, for example, events that lead to the suspension or limitation of trading or banking in the markets in which FICC operates, or the unavailability or failure of any material payment, bank transfer, wire or securities settlement systems. The proposed Force Majeure Rule would define the governance procedures for how FICC would determine whether, and how, to implement the provisions of the rule. A determination that a Market Disruption Event has occurred would generally be made by the Board, but the Proposed Rule would provide for limited, interim delegation of authority to a specified officer or management committee if the Board would not be able to take timely action. In the event such delegated authority is exercised, the proposed Force Majeure Rule would require that the Board be convened as promptly as practicable, no later than five Business Days after such determination has been made, to ratify, modify, or rescind the action. The proposed Force Majeure Rule would also provide for prompt notification to the Commission, and advance consultation with Commission staff, when practicable. The Proposed Rule would require Members and Limited Members to notify FICC immediately upon becoming aware of a Market Disruption Event, and, likewise, would require FICC to notify Members and Limited Members if it has triggered the Proposed Rule. Finally, the Proposed Rule would address other related matters, including a limitation of liability for any failure or delay in performance, in whole or in part, arising out of the Market Disruption Event. Proposed Changes to GSD Rules, MBSD Rules, and EPN Rules In order to incorporate the Proposed Rules into the Rules and the EPN Rules, E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 882 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES FICC is also proposing to amend (1) GSD Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members), GSD Rule 3B (Centrally Cleared Institutional Triparty Service) and GSD Rule 13 (Funds-Only Settlement); (2) MBSD Rule 3A (Cash Settlement Bank Members); and (3) Rule 1 of the EPN Rules. As shown on Exhibit 5b, these proposed changes would clarify that certain types of Limited Members, as identified in those rules, would be subject to the Proposed Rules. 2. Statutory Basis FICC believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a registered clearing agency. In particular, FICC believes that the R&W Plan, each of the Proposed Rules and the other proposed changes to the Rules and the EPN Rules are consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,51 the R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules are consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act,52 and the R&W Plan is consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii) under the Act,53 for the reasons described below. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules of FICC be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible.54 The Recovery Plan and the proposed Force Majeure Rule would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions by providing FICC with a roadmap for actions it may employ to mitigate losses, and monitor and, as needed, stabilize, its financial condition, which would allow it to continue its critical clearance and settlement services in stress situations. Further, as described above, the Recovery Plan is designed to identify the actions and tools FICC may use to address and minimize losses to both FICC and Members. The Recovery Plan and the proposed Force Majeure Rule would provide FICC’s management and the Board with guidance in this regard by identifying the indicators and governance around the use and application of such tools to enable them to address stress situations in a manner most appropriate for the circumstances. Therefore, the Recovery Plan and the proposed Force Majeure Rule would also contribute to the safeguarding of 51 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). 53 Id. at 240.17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii). 54 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 52 17 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible by enabling actions that would address and minimize losses. The Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule, which would facilitate the implementation of the Wind-down Plan, would also promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible. The Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule would collectively establish a framework for the transfer and orderly wind-down of FICC’s business. These proposals would establish clear mechanisms for the transfer of FICC’s critical services and membership. By doing so, the Wind-down Plan and this Proposed Rule are designed to facilitate the continuity of FICC’s critical services and enable Members and Limited Members to maintain access to FICC’s services through the transfer of the Divisions’ memberships in the event the Wind-down Plan is triggered by the Board. Therefore, by facilitating the continuity of FICC’s critical clearance and settlement services, FICC believes the proposals would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. Further, by creating a framework for the transfer and orderly wind-down of FICC’s business, FICC believes the proposals would enhance the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible. Finally, the other proposed changes to the Rules and the EPN Rules would clarify the application of the Proposed Rules to certain types of Limited Members and would enable these Limited Members to readily understand their rights and obligations. As such, FICC believes these proposed changes would enable Limited Members that are governed by the applicable rules to have a better understanding of those rules and, thereby, would assist in promoting the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan, each of the Proposed Rules, and the other proposed changes are consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.55 Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act requires FICC to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to maintain a sound risk management framework for comprehensively managing legal, credit, liquidity, operational, general business, investment, custody, and other risks that arise in or are borne by the covered clearing agency, which includes plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of the covered clearing agency necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any other losses.56 The R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules are designed to meet the requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii).57 The R&W Plan would be maintained by FICC in compliance with Rule 17Ad– 22(e)(3)(ii) in that it provides plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of FICC necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any other losses, as described above.58 Specifically, the Recovery Plan would define the risk management activities, stress conditions and indicators, and tools that FICC may use to address stress scenarios that could eventually prevent it from being able to provide its critical services as a going concern. Through the framework of the Crisis Continuum, the Recovery Plan would address measures that FICC may take to address risks of credit losses and liquidity shortfalls, and other losses that could arise from a Member default. The Recovery Plan would also address the management of general business risks and other non-default risks that could lead to losses. The Wind-down Plan would be triggered by a determination by the Board that recovery efforts have not been, or are unlikely to be, successful in returning FICC to viability as a going concern. Once triggered, the Winddown Plan would set forth clear mechanisms for the transfer of the memberships of both Divisions and FICC’s business, and would be designed to facilitate continued access to FICC’s critical services and to minimize market impact of the transfer. By establishing the framework and strategy for the execution of the transfer and winddown of FICC in order to facilitate continuous access to FICC’s critical services, the Wind-down Plan establishes a plan for the orderly winddown of FICC. Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan would provide plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of the covered clearing agency necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any other losses, and, as such, meets the 56 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). 57 Id. 55 Id. Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 58 Id. Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices requirements of Rule 17Ad– 22(e)(3)(ii).59 As described in greater detail above, the Proposed Rules are designed to facilitate the execution of the R&W Plan, provide Members and Limited Members with transparency regarding the material provisions of the Plan, and provide FICC with a legal basis for implementation of those provisions. As such, FICC also believes the Proposed Rules meet the requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii).60 FICC has evaluated the recovery tools that would be identified in the Recovery Plan and has determined that these tools are comprehensive, effective, and transparent, and that such tools provide appropriate incentives to Members to manage the risks they present. The recovery tools, as outlined in the Recovery Plan and in the proposed Force Majeure Rule, provide FICC with a comprehensive set of options to address its material risks and support the resiliency of its critical services under a range of stress scenarios. FICC also believes the recovery tools are effective, as FICC has both legal basis and operational capability to execute these tools in a timely and reliable manner. Many of the recovery tools are provided for in the Rules; Members are bound by the Rules through their membership agreements with FICC, and the Rules are adopted pursuant to a framework established by Rule 19b–4 under the Act,61 providing a legal basis for the recovery tools found therein. Other recovery tools have legal basis in contractual arrangements to which FICC is a party, as described above. Further, as many of the tools are embedded in FICC’s ongoing risk management practices or are embedded into its predefined default-management procedures, FICC is able to execute these tools, in most cases, when needed and without material operational or organizational delay. The majority of the recovery tools are also transparent, as they are, or are proposed to be, included in the Rules, which are publicly available. FICC believes the recovery tools also provide appropriate incentives to Members, as they are designed to control the amount of risk they present to FICC’s clearance and settlement system. Members’ financial obligations to FICC, particularly their required deposits to the applicable Division’s Clearing Fund, are measured by the risk posed by the Members’ activity in FICC’s systems, which incentivizes them to manage that risk which would correspond to lower financial obligations. Finally, FICC’s Recovery Plan provides for a continuous evaluation of the systemic consequences of executing its recovery tools, with the goal of minimizing their negative impact. The Recovery Plan would outline various indicators over a timeline of increasing stress, the Crisis Continuum, with escalation triggers to FICC management or the Board, as appropriate. This approach would allow for timely evaluation of the situation and the possible impacts of the use of a recovery tool in order to minimize the negative effects of the stress scenario. Therefore, FICC believes that the recovery tools that would be identified and described in its Recovery Plan, including the authority provided to it in the proposed Force Majeure Rule, would meet the criteria identified within guidance published by the Commission in connection with the adoption of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii).62 Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules are consistent with Rule 17Ad– 22(e)(3)(ii).63 Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii) under the Act requires FICC to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify, monitor, and manage its general business risk and hold sufficient LNA to cover potential general business losses so that FICC can continue operations and services as a going concern if those losses materialize, including by holding LNA equal to the greater of either (x) six months of the covered clearing agency’s current operating expenses, or (y) the amount determined by the board of directors to be sufficient to ensure a recovery or orderly wind-down of critical operations and services of the covered clearing agency.64 While the Capital Policy addresses how FICC holds LNA in compliance with these requirements, the Wind-down Plan would include an analysis that would estimate the amount of time and the costs to achieve a recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC’s critical operations and services, and would provide that the Board review and approve this analysis and estimation annually. The Wind-down Plan would also provide that the estimate would be the ‘‘Recovery/Winddown Capital Requirement’’ under the Capital Policy. Under that policy, the General Business Risk Capital Requirement, which is the sufficient amount of LNA that FICC should hold 59 Id. 63 17 61 Id. note 40. CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). 64 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii). to cover potential general business losses so that it can continue operations and services as a going concern if those losses materialize, is calculated as the greatest of three estimated amounts, one of which is this Recovery/Wind-down Capital Requirement. Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan, as it interrelates with the Capital Policy, is consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii).65 (B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on Burden on Competition FICC does not believe the proposal would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.66 The proposal would apply uniformly to all Members and Limited Members. FICC does not anticipate that the proposal would affect its day-to-day operations under normal circumstances, or in the management of a typical Member default scenario or non-default event. FICC is not proposing to alter the standards or requirements for becoming or remaining a Member, or otherwise using its services. FICC also does not propose to change either Division’s methodology for calculation of margin or their respective Clearing Fund contributions. The proposal is intended to (1) address the risk of loss events and identify the tools and resources available to it to withstand and recover from such events, so that it can restore normal operations, and (2) provide a framework for its orderly wind-down and the transfer of its business in the event those recovery tools do not restore FICC to financial viability, as described herein. The R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules have been developed and documented in order to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, as discussed above. With respect to the Recovery Plan, the proposal generally reflects FICC’s existing tools and existing internal procedures. Existing tools that would have a direct impact on the rights, responsibilities or obligations of Members are reflected in the existing Rules or are proposed to be included in the Rules. Accordingly, the Recovery Plan and the proposed Force Majeure Rule are intended to provide a roadmap, define the strategy and identify the tools available to FICC in connection with its recovery efforts. By proposing to enhance FICC’s existing internal management and its regulatory compliance related to its recovery efforts, FICC does not believe the Recovery Plan or the proposed Force 62 Supra 60 Id. at 240.19b–4. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 883 65 Id. 66 15 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(I). 08JAN1 884 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Notices Majeure Rule would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition. With respect to the Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule, which facilitate the execution of the Wind-down Plan, the proposal would operate to effect the transfer of all eligible Members and Limited Members of both Divisions to the Transferee, and would not prohibit any market participant from either bidding to become the Transferee or from applying for membership with the Transferee. The proposal also would not prohibit any Member or Limited Member from withdrawing from FICC prior to the Transfer Time, as is permitted under the Rules today, or from applying for membership with the Transferee. Therefore, as the proposal would treat each similarly situated Member identically under the Wind-down Plan and this Proposed Rule, FICC does not believe the Wind-down Plan or the proposed Wind-down Rule would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition. FICC does not believe that the other proposed changes to the Rules and the EPN Rules would have any impact on competition because these proposed changes to incorporate the Proposed Rules into the Rules and the EPN Rules are technical clarifications, which would not, on their own, change FICC’s current practices or the rights or obligations of the Members or EPN Users. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others While FICC has not solicited or received any written comments relating to this proposal, FICC has conducted outreach to its Members in order to provide them with notice of the proposal. FICC will notify the Commission of any written comments received by FICC. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the clearing agency consents, the Commission will: (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:29 Jan 05, 2018 Jkt 244001 The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions required with respect to the proposal are completed. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission’s internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– FICC–2017–021 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549–1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–FICC–2017–021. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission’s internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FICC and on DTCC’s website (https://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rulefilings.aspx). All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–FICC– 2017–021 and should be submitted on or before January 29, 2018. PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.67 Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018–00079 Filed 1–5–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–82432; File No. SR–DTC– 2017–021] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Recovery & Wind-Down Plan and Related Rules January 2, 2018. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 18, 2017, The Depository Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the clearing agency.3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change of DTC would (1) adopt the Recovery & Winddown Plan of DTC (‘‘R&W Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’); and (2) amend the Rules, ByLaws and Organization Certificate of DTC (‘‘Rules’’) 4 in order to adopt Rule 32(A) (Wind-down of the Corporation) and Rule 38 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) (each proposed Rule 32(A) and proposed Rule 38, a ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and, collectively, the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’). The R&W Plan would be maintained by DTC in compliance with Rule 17Ad– 22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act by providing 67 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 3 On December 18, 2017, DTC filed this proposed rule change as an advance notice (SR–DTC–2017– 803) with the Commission pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1), and Rule 19b– 4(n)(1)(i) of the Act, 17 CFR 240.19b–4(n)(1)(i). A copy of the advance notice is available at https:// www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings. 4 Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein are defined in the Rules, available at www.dtcc.com/∼/media/Files/Downloads/legal/ rules/DTC_rules.pdf. 1 15 E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM 08JAN1

Agencies

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 5 (Monday, January 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 871-884]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00079]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82431; File No. SR-FICC-2017-021]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; 
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Recovery & Wind-
Down Plan and Related Rules

January 2, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

[[Page 872]]

(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that 
on December 18, 2017, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') 
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the 
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which 
Items have been prepared by the clearing agency.\3\ The Commission is 
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change 
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ On December 18, 2017, FICC filed this proposed rule change 
as an advance notice (SR-FICC-2017-805) with the Commission pursuant 
to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 
Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, 
and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1), and 
Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) of the Act, 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i). A copy of 
the advance notice is available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the 
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change of FICC would adopt the Recovery & Wind-
down Plan of FICC (``R&W Plan'' or ``Plan''). The R&W Plan would be 
maintained by FICC in compliance with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the 
Act by providing plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of FICC 
necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from 
general business risk, or any other losses, as described below.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would also (1) amend FICC's Government 
Securities Division (``GSD'') Rulebook (``GSD Rules'') in order to (a) 
adopt Rule 22D (Wind-down of the Corporation) and Rule 50 (Market 
Disruption and Force Majeure), and (b) make conforming changes to Rule 
3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members), Rule 3B (Centrally 
Cleared Institutional Triparty Service) and Rule 13 (Funds-Only 
Settlement) related to the adoption of these Proposed Rules to the GSD 
Rules; (2) amend FICC's Mortgage-Backed Securities Division (``MBSD,'' 
and, together with GSD, the ``Divisions'') Clearing Rules (``MBSD 
Rules'') in order to (a) adopt Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation) 
and Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure); and (b) make 
conforming changes to Rule 3A (Cash Settlement Bank Members) related to 
the adoption of these Proposed Rules to the MBSD Rules; and (3) amend 
Rule 1 of the Electronic Pool Netting (``EPN'') Rules of MBSD (``EPN 
Rules'') in order to provide that EPN Users, as defined therein, are 
bound by proposed Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation) and proposed 
Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) to be adopted to the MBSD 
Rules.\5\ Each of the proposed rules is referred to herein as a 
``Proposed Rule,'' and are collectively referred to as the ``Proposed 
Rules.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The GSD Rules and the MBSD Rules are referred to 
collectively herein as the ``Rules.'' Capitalized terms not defined 
herein are defined in the Rules. The Rules and the EPN Rules are 
available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Proposed Rules are designed to (1) facilitate the 
implementation of the R&W Plan when necessary and, in particular, allow 
FICC to effectuate its strategy for winding down and transferring its 
business; (2) provide Members and Limited Members with transparency 
around critical provisions of the R&W Plan that relate to their rights, 
responsibilities and obligations; \6\ and (3) provide FICC with the 
legal basis to implement those provisions of the R&W Plan when 
necessary, as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ References herein to ``Members'' refer to GSD Netting 
Members and MBSD Clearing Members. References herein to ``Limited 
Members'' refer to participants of GSD or MBSD other than GSD 
Netting Members and MBSD Clearing Members, including, for example, 
GSD Comparison-Only Members, GSD Sponsored Members, GSD CCIT 
Members, and MBSD EPN Users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis 
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included 
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule 
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule 
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places 
specified in Item IV below. The clearing agency has prepared summaries, 
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 
aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis 
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    FICC is proposing to adopt the R&W Plan to be used by the Board and 
management of FICC in the event FICC encounters scenarios that could 
potentially prevent it from being able to provide its critical services 
as a going concern. The R&W Plan would identify (i) the recovery tools 
available to FICC to address the risks of (a) uncovered losses or 
liquidity shortfalls resulting from the default of one or more Members, 
and (b) losses arising from non-default events, such as damage to its 
physical assets, a cyber-attack, or custody and investment losses, and 
(ii) the strategy for implementation of such tools. The R&W Plan would 
also establish the strategy and framework for the orderly wind-down of 
FICC and the transfer of its business in the remote event the 
implementation of the available recovery tools does not successfully 
return FICC to financial viability.
    As discussed in greater detail below, the R&W Plan would provide, 
among other matters, (i) an overview of the business of FICC and its 
parent, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''); (ii) an 
analysis of FICC's intercompany arrangements and an existing link to 
another financial market infrastructures (``FMIs''); (iii) a 
description of FICC's services, and the criteria used to determine 
which services are considered critical; (iv) a description of the FICC 
and DTCC governance structure; (v) a description of the governance 
around the overall recovery and wind-down program; (vi) a discussion of 
tools available to FICC to mitigate credit/market and liquidity risks, 
including recovery indicators and triggers, and the governance around 
management of a stress event along a ``Crisis Continuum'' timeline; 
(vii) a discussion of potential non-default losses and the resources 
available to FICC to address such losses, including recovery triggers 
and tools to mitigate such losses; (viii) an analysis of the recovery 
tools' characteristics, including how they are comprehensive, 
effective, and transparent, how the tools provide appropriate 
incentives to Members to, among other things, control and monitor the 
risks they may present to FICC, and how FICC seeks to minimize the 
negative consequences of executing its recovery tools; and (ix) the 
framework and approach for the orderly wind-down and transfer of FICC's 
business, including an estimate of the time and costs to effect a 
recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC.
    The R&W Plan would be structured as a roadmap, and would identify 
and describe the tools that FICC may use to effect a recovery from the 
events and scenarios described therein. Certain recovery tools that 
would be identified in the R&W Plan are based in the Rules (including 
the Proposed Rules) and, as such, descriptions of those tools would 
include descriptions of, and reference to, the applicable Rules and any 
related internal policies and procedures. Other recovery tools that 
would be identified in the R&W Plan are based in contractual 
arrangements to which FICC is a party, including, for example, existing 
committed or pre-arranged liquidity arrangements. Further, the R&W Plan 
would state that FICC may

[[Page 873]]

develop further supporting internal guidelines and materials that may 
provide operationally for matters described in the Plan, and that such 
documents would be supplemental and subordinate to the Plan.
    Key factors considered in developing the R&W Plan and the types of 
tools available to FICC were its governance structure and the nature of 
the markets within which FICC operates. As a result of these 
considerations, many of the tools available to FICC that would be 
described in the R&W Plan are FICC's existing, business-as-usual risk 
management and default management tools, which would continue to be 
applied in scenarios of increasing stress. In addition to these 
existing, business-as-usual tools, the R&W Plan would describe FICC's 
other principal recovery tools, which include, for example, (i) 
identifying, monitoring and managing general business risk and holding 
sufficient liquid net assets funded by equity (``LNA'') to cover 
potential general business losses pursuant to the Clearing Agency 
Policy on Capital Requirements (``Capital Policy''),\7\ (ii) 
maintaining the Clearing Agency Capital Replenishment Plan 
(``Replenishment Plan'') as a viable plan for the replenishment of 
capital should FICC's equity fall close to or below the amount being 
held pursuant to the Capital Policy,\8\ and (iii) the process for the 
allocation of losses among Members, as provided in Rule 4 of the GSD 
Rules and Rule 4 of the MBSD Rules.\9\ The R&W Plan would provide 
governance around the selection and implementation of the recovery tool 
or tools most relevant to mitigate a stress scenario and any applicable 
loss or liquidity shortfall.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81105 (July 7, 
2017), 82 FR 32399 (July 13, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-003, SR-FICC-2017-
007, SR-NSCC-2017-004).
    \8\ See id.
    \9\ See GSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) and MBSD 
Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation), supra note 5. FICC is 
proposing changes to GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4, and other related 
rules, regarding allocation of losses in a separate filing submitted 
simultaneously with this filing (File Nos. SR-FICC-2017-022 and SR-
FICC-2017-806, referred to collectively herein as the ``Loss 
Allocation Filing''). FICC expects the Commission to review both 
proposals together, and, as such, the proposal described in this 
filing anticipates the approval and implementation of those proposed 
changes to the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The development of the R&W Plan is facilitated by the Office of 
Recovery & Resolution Planning (``R&R Team'') of DTCC.\10\ The R&R Team 
reports to the DTCC Management Committee (``Management Committee'') and 
is responsible for maintaining the R&W Plan and for the development and 
ongoing maintenance of the overall recovery and wind-down planning 
process. The Board, or such committees as may be delegated authority by 
the Board from time to time pursuant to its charter, would review and 
approve the R&W Plan biennially, and would also review and approve any 
changes that are proposed to the R&W Plan outside of the biennial 
review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ DTCC operates on a shared services model with respect to 
FICC and its other subsidiaries. Most corporate functions are 
established and managed on an enterprise-wide basis pursuant to 
intercompany agreements under which it is generally DTCC that 
provides a relevant service to a subsidiary, including FICC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in greater detail below, the Proposed Rules would 
define the procedures that may be employed in the event of FICC's wind-
down and would provide for FICC's authority to take certain actions on 
the occurrence of a ``Market Disruption Event,'' as defined therein. 
Significantly, the Proposed Rules would provide Members and Limited 
Members with transparency and certainty with respect to these matters. 
The Proposed Rules would facilitate the implementation of the R&W Plan, 
particularly FICC's strategy for winding down and transferring its 
business, and would provide FICC with the legal basis to implement 
those aspects of the R&W Plan.
FICC R&W Plan
    The R&W Plan is intended to be used by the Board and FICC's 
management in the event FICC encounters scenarios that could 
potentially prevent it from being able to provide its critical services 
as a going concern. The R&W Plan would be structured to provide a 
roadmap, define the strategy, and identify the tools available to FICC 
to either (i) recover in the event it experiences losses that exceed 
its prefunded resources (such strategies and tools referred to herein 
as the ``Recovery Plan'') or (ii) wind-down its business in a manner 
designed to permit the continuation of its critical services in the 
event that such recovery efforts are not successful (such strategies 
and tools referred to herein as the ``Wind-down Plan''). The 
description of the R&W Plan below is intended to highlight the purpose 
and expected effects of the material aspects of the R&W Plan, and to 
provide Members and Limited Members with appropriate transparency into 
these features.
Business Overview, Critical Services, and Governance
    The introduction to the R&W Plan would identify the document's 
purpose and its regulatory background, and would outline a summary of 
the Plan. The stated purpose of the R&W Plan is that it is to be used 
by the Board and FICC management in the event FICC encounters scenarios 
that could potentially prevent it from being able to provide its 
critical services as a going concern. The R&W Plan would be maintained 
by FICC in compliance with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act \11\ by 
providing plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of FICC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The R&W Plan would describe DTCC's business profile, provide a 
summary of the services of FICC as offered by each of the Divisions, 
and identify the intercompany arrangements and links between FICC and 
other entities, most notably a link between GSD and Chicago Mercantile 
Exchange Inc. (``CME''), which is also an FMI. This overview section 
would provide a context for the R&W Plan by describing FICC's business, 
organizational structure and critical links to other entities. By 
providing this context, this section would facilitate the analysis of 
the potential impact of utilizing the recovery tools set forth in later 
sections of the Recovery Plan, and the analysis of the factors that 
would be addressed in implementing the Wind-down Plan.
    DTCC is a user-owned and user-governed holding company and is the 
parent company of FICC and its affiliates, The Depository Trust Company 
(``DTC'') and National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'', and, 
together with FICC and DTC, the ``Clearing Agencies''). The Plan would 
describe how corporate support services are provided to FICC from DTCC 
and DTCC's other subsidiaries through intercompany agreements under a 
shared services model.
    The Plan would provide a description of the critical contractual 
and operational arrangements between FICC and other legal entities, 
including the cross-margining agreement between GSD and CME, which is 
also an FMI.\12\ Pursuant to this arrangement, GSD offsets each cross-
margining participant's residual margin amount (based on related 
positions) at GSD against the offsetting residual margin amounts of the 
participant (or its affiliate) at CME. GSD and CME may then reduce the 
amount of collateral that they collect to reflect the offsets between 
the cross-margining participant's positions at GSD and its (or

[[Page 874]]

its affiliate's) positions at CME. This section of the Plan, 
identifying and briefly describing FICC's established links, would 
provide a mapping of critical connections and dependencies that may 
need to be relied on or otherwise addressed in connection with the 
implementation of either the Recovery Plan or the Wind-down Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Available at https://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/
legal/rules/ficc_cme_crossmargin_agreement.pdf. See also GSD Rule 43 
(Cross-Margining Arrangements), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan would define the criteria for classifying certain of 
FICC's services as ``critical,'' and would identify those critical 
services and the rationale for their classification. This section would 
provide an analysis of the potential systemic impact from a service 
disruption, and is important for evaluating how the recovery tools and 
the wind-down strategy would facilitate and provide for the 
continuation of FICC's critical services to the markets it serves. The 
criteria that would be used to identify an FICC service or function as 
critical would include consideration as to (1) whether there is a lack 
of alternative providers or products; (2) whether failure of the 
service could impact FICC's ability to perform its central counterparty 
services through either Division; (3) whether failure of the service 
could impact FICC's ability to perform its multilateral netting 
services through either Division and, as such, could impact the volume 
of transactions; (4) whether failure of the service could impact FICC's 
ability to perform its book-entry delivery and settlement services 
through either Division and, as such, could impact transaction costs; 
(5) whether failure of the service could impact FICC's ability to 
perform its cash payment processing services through either Division 
and, as such, could impact the flow of liquidity in the U.S. financial 
markets; and (6) whether the service is interconnected with other 
participants and processes within the U.S. financial system, for 
example, with other FMIs, settlement banks, and broker-dealers. The 
Plan would then list each of those services, functions or activities 
that FICC has identified as ``critical'' based on the applicability of 
these six criteria. GSD's critical services would include, for example, 
its Real-Time Trade Matching (``RTTM[supreg]'') service,\13\ its 
services related to netting and settlement of submitted trades for 
Netting Members,\14\ the Auction Takedown service,\15\ and the 
Repurchase Agreement Netting Service.\16\ MBSD's critical services 
would include, for example, its RTTM[supreg] service,\17\ its netting 
service for to-be-announced (``TBA'') transactions,\18\ its Electronic 
Pool Notification service,\19\ and its pool netting and settlement.\20\ 
The R&W Plan would also include a non-exhaustive list of FICC services 
that are not deemed critical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See GSD Rule 5 (Comparison System), GSD Rule 6A (Bilateral 
Comparison), GSD Rule 6B (Demand Comparison), and GSD Rule 6C 
(Locked-In Comparison), supra note 5.
    \14\ See GSD Rule 11 (Netting System), GSD Rule 12 (Securities 
Settlement), and GSD Rule 13 (Funds-Only Settlement), supra note 5.
    \15\ See GSD Rule 6C (Locked-In Comparison) and GSD Rule 17 
(Netting and Settlement of Netting-Eligible Auction Purchases), 
supra note 5.
    \16\ See GSD Rule 7 (Repo Transactions), GSD Rule 11 (Netting 
System), GSD Rule 18 (Special Provisions for Repo Transactions), GSD 
Rule 19 (Special Provisions for Brokered Repo Transactions), and GSD 
Rule 20 (Special Provisions for GCF Repo Transactions), supra note 
5.
    \17\ See MBSD Rule 5 (Trade Comparison), supra note 5.
    \18\ See MBSD Rule 6 (TBA Netting), supra note 5.
    \19\ See EPN Rules, supra note 5.
    \20\ See MBSD Rule 8 (Pool Netting System) and MBSD Rule 9 (Pool 
Settlement with the Corporation), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The evaluation of which services provided by FICC are deemed 
critical is important for purposes of determining how the R&W Plan 
would facilitate the continuity of those services. As discussed further 
below, while FICC's Wind-down Plan would provide for the transfer of 
all critical services to a transferee in the event FICC's wind-down is 
implemented, it would anticipate that any non-critical services that 
are ancillary and beneficial to a critical service, or that otherwise 
have substantial user demand from the continuing membership, would also 
be transferred.
    The Plan would describe the governance structure of both DTCC and 
FICC. This section of the Plan would identify the ownership and 
governance model of these entities at both the Board of Directors and 
management levels. The Plan would state that the stages of escalation 
required to manage recovery under the Recovery Plan or to invoke FICC's 
wind-down under the Wind-down Plan would range from relevant business 
line managers up to the Board through FICC's governance structure. The 
Plan would then identify the parties responsible for certain activities 
under both the Recovery Plan and the Wind-down Plan, and would describe 
their respective roles. The Plan would identify the Risk Committee of 
the Board (``Board Risk Committee'') as being responsible for oversight 
of risk management activities at FICC, which include focusing on both 
oversight of risk management systems and processes designed to identify 
and manage various risks faced by FICC, and, due to FICC's critical 
role in the markets in which it operates, oversight of FICC's efforts 
to mitigate systemic risks that could impact those markets and the 
broader financial system.\21\ The Plan would identify the DTCC 
Management Risk Committee (``Management Risk Committee'') as primarily 
responsible for general, day-to-day risk management through delegated 
authority from the Board Risk Committee. The Plan would state that the 
Management Risk Committee has delegated specific day-to-day risk 
management, including management of risks addressed through margining 
systems and related activities, to the DTCC Group Chief Risk Office 
(``GCRO''), which works with staff within the DTCC Financial Risk 
Management group. Finally, the Plan would describe the role of the 
Management Committee, which provides overall direction for all aspects 
of FICC's business, technology, and operations and the functional areas 
that support these activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The charter of the Board Risk Committee is available at 
https://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/policy-and-
compliance/DTCC-BOD-Risk-Committee-Charter.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan would describe the governance of recovery efforts in 
response to both default losses and non-default losses under the 
Recovery Plan, identifying the groups responsible for those recovery 
efforts. Specifically, the Plan would state that the Management Risk 
Committee provides oversight of actions relating to the default of a 
Member, which would be reported and escalated to it through the GCRO, 
and the Management Committee provides oversight of actions relating to 
non-default events that could result in a loss, which would be reported 
and escalated to it from the DTCC Chief Financial Officer (``CFO'') and 
the DTCC Treasury group that reports to the CFO, and from other 
relevant subject matter experts based on the nature and circumstances 
of the non-default event.\22\ More generally, the Plan would state that 
the type of loss and the nature and circumstances of the events that 
lead to the loss would dictate the components of governance to address 
that loss, including the escalation path to authorize those actions. As 
described further below, both the Recovery Plan

[[Page 875]]

and the Wind-down Plan would describe the governance of escalations, 
decisions, and actions under each of those plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The Plan would state that these groups would be involved to 
address how to mitigate the financial impact of non-default losses, 
and in recommending mitigating actions, the Management Committee 
would consider information and recommendations from relevant subject 
matter experts based on the nature and circumstances of the non-
default event. Any necessary operational response to these events, 
however, would be managed in accordance with applicable incident 
response/business continuity process; for example, processes 
established by the DTCC Technology Risk Management group would be 
followed in response to a cyber event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Plan would describe the role of the R&R Team in 
managing the overall recovery and wind-down program and plans for each 
of the Clearing Agencies.
FICC Recovery Plan
    The Recovery Plan is intended to be a roadmap of those actions that 
FICC may employ across both Divisions to monitor and, as needed, 
stabilize its financial condition. As each event that could lead to a 
financial loss could be unique in its circumstances, the Recovery Plan 
would not be prescriptive and would permit FICC to maintain flexibility 
in its use of identified tools and in the sequence in which such tools 
are used, subject to any conditions in the Rules or the contractual 
arrangement on which such tool is based. FICC's Recovery Plan would 
consist of (1) a description of the risk management surveillance, 
tools, and governance that FICC would employ across evolving stress 
scenarios that it may face as it transitions through a ``Crisis 
Continuum,'' described below; (2) a description of FICC's risk of 
losses that may result from non-default events, and the financial 
resources and recovery tools available to FICC to manage those risks 
and any resulting losses; and (3) an evaluation of the characteristics 
of the recovery tools that may be used in response to either default 
losses or non-default losses, as described in greater detail below. In 
all cases, FICC would act in accordance with the Rules, within the 
governance structure described in the R&W Plan, and in accordance with 
applicable regulatory oversight to address each situation in order to 
best protect FICC, the Members, and the markets in which it operates.
    Managing Member Default Losses and Liquidity Needs Through the 
Crisis Continuum. The Recovery Plan would describe the risk management 
surveillance, tools, and governance that FICC may employ across an 
increasing stress environment, which is referred to as the ``Crisis 
Continuum.'' This description would identify those tools that can be 
employed to mitigate losses, and mitigate or minimize liquidity needs, 
as the market environment becomes increasingly stressed. The phases of 
the Crisis Continuum would include (1) a stable market phase, (2) a 
stressed market phase, (3) a phase commencing with FICC's decision to 
cease to act for a Member or Affiliated Family of Members,\23\ and (4) 
a recovery phase. This section of the Recovery Plan would address 
conditions and circumstances relating to FICC's decision to cease to 
act for a Member (referred to in the R&W Plan as a ``defaulting 
Member,'' and the event as a ``Member default'') pursuant to the 
applicable Rules.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Plan would define an ``Affiliated Family'' of Members 
as a number of affiliated entities that are all Members of either 
GSD or MBSD.
    \24\ See GSD Rule 21 (Restrictions on Access to Services) and 
MBSD Rule 14 (Restrictions on Access to Services), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Plan would provide context to its roadmap through this 
Crisis Continuum by describing FICC's ongoing management of credit, 
market and liquidity risk across the Divisions, and its existing 
process for measuring and reporting its risks as they align with 
established thresholds for its tolerance of those risks. The Recovery 
Plan would discuss the management of credit/market risk and liquidity 
exposures together, because the tools that address these risks can be 
deployed either separately or in a coordinated approach in order to 
address both exposures. FICC manages these risk exposures collectively 
to limit their overall impact on FICC and the memberships of the 
Divisions. As part of its market risk management strategy, FICC manages 
its credit exposure to Members by determining the appropriate required 
deposits to the GSD and MBSD Clearing Fund and monitoring its 
sufficiency, as provided for in the applicable Rules.\25\ FICC manages 
its liquidity risks with an objective of maintaining sufficient 
resources to be able to fulfill obligations that have been guaranteed 
by FICC in the event of a Member default that presents the largest 
aggregate liquidity exposure to FICC over the settlement cycle.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See GSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) and MBSD 
Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation), supra note 5. FICC's 
market risk management strategy for both Divisions is designed to 
comply with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Act, where these risks are 
referred to as ``credit risks.'' See also 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
    \26\ FICC's liquidity risk management strategy, including the 
manner in which FICC utilizes its liquidity tools, is described in 
the Clearing Agency Liquidity Risk Management Framework. See 
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80489 (April 19, 2017), 82 FR 
19120 (April 25, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-004, SR-NSCC-2017-005, SR-FICC-
2017-008); 81194 (July 24, 2017), 82 FR 35241 (July 28, 2017) (SR-
DTC-2017-004, SR-NSCC-2017-005, SR-FICC-2017-008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Plan would outline the metrics and indicators that 
FICC has developed to evaluate a stress situation against established 
risk tolerance thresholds. Each risk mitigation tool identified in the 
Recovery Plan would include a description of the escalation thresholds 
that allow for effective and timely reporting to the appropriate 
internal management staff and committees, or to the Board. The Recovery 
Plan would make clear that these tools and escalation protocols would 
be calibrated across each phase of the Crisis Continuum. The Recovery 
Plan would also establish that FICC would retain the flexibility to 
deploy such tools either separately or in a coordinated approach, and 
to use other alternatives to these actions and tools as necessitated by 
the circumstances of a particular Member default in accordance with the 
applicable Rules. Therefore, the Recovery Plan would both provide FICC 
with a roadmap to follow within each phase of the Crisis Continuum, and 
would permit it to adjust its risk management measures to address the 
unique circumstances of each event.
    The Recovery Plan would describe the conditions that mark each 
phase of the Crisis Continuum, and would identify actions that FICC 
could take as it transitions through each phase in order to both 
prevent losses from materializing through active risk management, and 
to restore the financial health of FICC during a period of stress.
    The ``stable market phase'' of the Crisis Continuum would describe 
active risk management activities in the normal course of business. 
These activities would include (1) routine monitoring of margin 
adequacy through daily review of back testing and stress testing 
results that review the adequacy of the margin calculations for each of 
GSD and MBSD, and escalation of those results to internal and Board 
committees; \27\ and (2) routine monitoring of liquidity adequacy 
through review of daily liquidity studies that measure sufficiency of 
available liquidity resources to meet cash settlement obligations of 
the Member that would generate the largest aggregate payment 
obligation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ FICC's stress testing practices are described in the 
Clearing Agency Stress Testing Framework (Market Risk). See 
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80485 (April 19, 2017), 82 FR 
19131 (April 25, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-005, SR-FICC-2017-009, SR-NSCC-
2017-006); 81192 (July 24, 2017), 82 FR 35245 (July 28, 2017) (SR-
DTC-2017-005, SR-FICC-2017-009, SR-NSCC-2017-006).
    \28\ See supra note 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Plan would describe some of the indicators of the 
``stressed market phase'' of the Crisis Continuum, which would include, 
for example, volatility in market prices of certain assets where there 
is increased uncertainty among market participants about the 
fundamental value of those

[[Page 876]]

assets. This phase would involve general market stresses, when no 
Member default would be imminent. Within the description of this phase, 
the Recovery Plan would provide that FICC may take targeted, routine 
risk management measures as necessary and as permitted by the Rules.
    Within the ``Member default phase'' of the Crisis Continuum, the 
Recovery Plan would provide a roadmap for the existing procedures that 
FICC would follow in the event of a Member default and any decision by 
FICC to cease to act for that Member.\29\ The Recovery Plan would 
provide that the objectives of FICC's actions upon a Member or 
Affiliated Family default are to (1) minimize losses and market 
exposure of the affected Members and the applicable Division's non-
defaulting Members; and (2), to the extent practicable, minimize 
disturbances to the affected markets. The Recovery Plan would describe 
tools, actions, and related governance for both market risk monitoring 
and liquidity risk monitoring through this phase. For example, in 
connection with managing its market risk during this phase, FICC would, 
pursuant to the applicable Division's Rules, (1) monitor and assess the 
adequacy of the GSD and MBSD Clearing Fund resources; (2), when 
necessary and appropriate pursuant to the applicable Division's Rules, 
assess and collect additional margin requirements; and (3) follow its 
operational procedures to liquidate the defaulting Member's portfolio. 
Management of liquidity risk through this phase would involve ongoing 
monitoring of the adequacy of FICC's liquidity resources, and the 
Recovery Plan would identify certain actions FICC may deploy as it 
deems necessary to mitigate a potential liquidity shortfall, which 
would include, for example, adjusting its strategy for closing out the 
defaulting Member's portfolio or seeking additional liquidity 
resources. The Recovery Plan would state that, throughout this phase, 
relevant information would be escalated and reported to both internal 
management committees and the Board Risk Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See GSD Rule 21 (Restrictions on Access to Services), GSD 
Rule 22A (Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act), MBSD 
Rule 14 (Restrictions on Access to Services), and MBSD Rule 17 
(Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act), supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Plan would also identify financial resources available 
to FICC, pursuant to the Rules, to address losses arising out of a 
Member default. Specifically, GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4, as each are 
proposed to be amended by the Loss Allocation Filing, would provide 
that losses be satisfied first by applying a ``Corporate 
Contribution,'' and then, if necessary, by allocating remaining losses 
to non-defaulting Members.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See supra note 9. The Loss Allocation Filing proposes to 
amend GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4 to define the amount FICC would 
contribute to address a loss resulting from either a Member default 
or a non-default event as the ``Corporate Contribution.'' This 
amount would be 50 percent (50%) of the ``General Business Risk 
Capital Requirement,'' which is calculated pursuant to the Capital 
Policy and is an amount sufficient to cover potential general 
business losses so that FICC can continue operations and services as 
a going concern if those losses materialize, in compliance with Rule 
17Ad-22(e)(15) under the Act. See also supra note 7; 17 CFR 
240.17Ad-22(e)(15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``recovery phase'' of the Crisis Continuum would describe 
actions that FICC may take to avoid entering into a wind-down of its 
business. In order to provide for an effective and timely recovery, the 
Recovery Plan would describe two stages of this phase: (1) A recovery 
corridor, during which FICC may experience stress events or observe 
early warning indicators that allow it to evaluate its options and 
prepare for the recovery phase; and (2) the recovery phase, which would 
begin on the date that FICC issues the first Loss Allocation Notice of 
the second loss allocation round with respect to a given ``Event 
Period.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ The Loss Allocation Filing proposes to amend Rule 4 to 
introduce the concept of an ``Event Period'' as the ten (10) 
Business Days beginning on (i) with respect to a Member default, the 
day on which NSCC notifies Members that it has ceased to act for a 
Member under the Rules, or (ii) with respect to a non-default loss, 
the day that NSCC notifies Members of the determination by the Board 
that there is a non-default loss event, as described in greater 
detail in that filing. The proposed GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4 would 
define a ``round'' as a series of loss allocations relating to an 
Event Period, and would provide that the first Loss Allocation 
Notice in a first, second, or subsequent round shall expressly state 
that such notice reflects the beginning of a first, second, or 
subsequent round. The maximum allocable loss amount of a round is 
equal to the sum of the ``Loss Allocation Caps'' (as defined in the 
proposed GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4) of those Members included in 
the round. See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC expects that significant deterioration of liquidity resources 
would cause it to enter the recovery corridor stage of this phase, and, 
as such, the actions it may take at this stage would be aimed at 
replenishing those resources. Circumstances that could cause it to 
enter the recovery corridor may include, for example, a rapid and 
material change in market prices or substantial intraday activity 
volume by the defaulting Member, neither of which are mitigated by 
intraday margin calls, or subsequent defaults by other Members or 
Affiliated Families during a compressed time period. Throughout the 
recovery corridor, FICC would monitor the adequacy of the Divisions' 
respective resources and the expected timing of replenishment of those 
resources, and would do so through the monitoring of certain metrics 
referred to as ``Corridor Indicators.''
    The majority of the Corridor Indicators, as identified in the 
Recovery Plan, relate directly to conditions that may require either 
Division to adjust its strategy for hedging and liquidating a 
defaulting Member's portfolio, and any such changes would include an 
assessment of the status of the Corridor Indicators. Corridor 
Indicators would include, for example, effectiveness and speed of 
FICC's efforts to close out the portfolio of the defaulting Member, and 
an impediment to the availability of its financial resources. For each 
Corridor Indicator, the Recovery Plan would identify (1) measures of 
the indicator, (2) evaluations of the status of the indicator, (3) 
metrics for determining the status of the deterioration or improvement 
of the indicator, and (4) ``Corridor Actions,'' which are steps that 
may be taken to improve the status of the indicator,\32\ as well as 
management escalations required to authorize those steps. Because FICC 
has never experienced the default of multiple Members, it has not, 
historically, measured the deterioration or improvements metrics of the 
Corridor Indicators. As such, these metrics were chosen based on the 
business judgment of FICC management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Corridor Actions that would be identified in the Plan 
are indicative, but not prescriptive; therefore, if FICC needs to 
consider alternative actions due to the applicable facts and 
circumstances, the escalation of those alternative actions would 
follow the same escalation protocol identified in the Plan for the 
Corridor Indicator to which the action relates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Recovery Plan would also describe the reporting and escalation 
of the status of the Corridor Indicators throughout the recovery 
corridor. Significant deterioration of a Corridor Indicator, as 
measured by the metrics set out in the Recovery Plan, would be 
escalated to the Board. FICC management would review the Corridor 
Indicators and the related metrics at least annually, and would modify 
these metrics as necessary in light of observations from simulations of 
Member defaults and other analyses. Any proposed modifications would be 
reviewed by the Management Risk Committee and the Board Risk Committee. 
The Recovery Plan would estimate that FICC may remain in the recovery 
corridor stage between one day and two weeks. This estimate is based on 
historical data observed in past

[[Page 877]]

Member defaults, the results of simulations of Member defaults, and 
periodic liquidity analyses conducted by FICC. The actual length of a 
recovery corridor would vary based on actual market conditions observed 
on the date and time FICC enters the recovery corridor stage of the 
Crisis Continuum, and FICC would expect the recovery corridor to be 
shorter in market conditions of increased stress.
    The Recovery Plan would outline steps by which FICC may allocate 
its losses, and would state that the available tools related to 
allocation of losses would only be used in this and subsequent phases 
of the Crisis Continuum.\33\ The Recovery Plan would also identify 
tools that may be used to address foreseeable shortfalls of FICC's 
liquidity resources following a Member default, and would provide that 
these tools may be used throughout the Crisis Continuum to address 
liquidity shortfalls if they arise. The goal in managing FICC's 
qualified liquidity resources is to maximize resource availability in 
an evolving stress situation, to maintain flexibility in the order and 
use of sources of liquidity, and to repay any third party lenders of 
liquidity in a timely manner. Additional voluntary or uncommitted tools 
to address potential liquidity shortfalls, for example uncommitted bank 
loans, which may supplement FICC's other liquid resources described 
herein, would also be identified in the Recovery Plan. The Recovery 
Plan would state that, due to the extreme nature of a stress event that 
would cause FICC to consider the use of these liquidity tools, the 
availability and capacity of these liquidity tools, and the willingness 
of counterparties to lend, cannot be accurately predicted and are 
dependent on the circumstances of the applicable stress period, 
including market price volatility, actual or perceived disruptions in 
financial markets, the costs to FICC of utilizing these tools, and any 
potential impact on FICC's credit rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ As these matters are described in greater detail in the 
Loss Allocation Filing and in the proposed amendments to GSD Rule 4 
and MBSD Rule 4, described therein, reference is made to that filing 
and the details are not repeated here. See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, the Recovery Plan would state that FICC will have 
entered the recovery phase on the date that it issues the first Loss 
Allocation Notice of the second loss allocation round with respect to a 
given Event Period. The Recovery Plan would provide that, during the 
recovery phase, FICC would continue and, as needed, enhance, the 
monitoring and remedial actions already described in connection with 
previous phases of the Crisis Continuum, and would remain in the 
recovery phase until its financial resources are expected to be or are 
fully replenished, or until the Wind-down Plan is triggered, as 
described below.
    The Recovery Plan would describe governance for the actions and 
tools that may be employed within the Crisis Continuum, which would be 
dictated by the facts and circumstances applicable to the situation 
being addressed. Such facts and circumstances would be measured by the 
Corridor Indicators applicable to that phase of the Crisis Continuum, 
and, in most cases, by the measures and metrics that are assigned to 
those Corridor Indicators, as described above. Each of these indicators 
would have a defined review period and escalation protocol that would 
be described in the Recovery Plan. The Recovery Plan would also 
describe the governance procedures around a decision to cease to act 
for a Member, pursuant to the applicable Division's Rules, and around 
the management and oversight of the subsequent liquidation of the 
defaulting Member's portfolio. The Recovery Plan would state that, 
overall, FICC would retain flexibility in accordance with each 
Division's Rules, its governance structure, and its regulatory 
oversight, to address a particular situation in order to best protect 
FICC and the Members, and to meet the primary objectives, throughout 
the Crisis Continuum, of minimizing losses and, where consistent and 
practicable, minimizing disturbance to affected markets.
    Non-Default Losses. The Recovery Plan would outline how FICC may 
address losses that result from events other than a Member default. 
While these matters are addressed in greater detail in other documents, 
this section of the Plan would provide a roadmap to those documents and 
an outline for FICC's approach to monitoring and managing losses that 
could result from a non-default event. The Plan would first identify 
some of the risks FICC faces that could lead to these losses, which 
include, for example, the business and profit/loss risks of unexpected 
declines in revenue or growth of expenses; the operational risks of 
disruptions to systems or processes that could lead to large losses, 
including those resulting from, for example, a cyber-attack; and 
custody or investment risks that could lead to financial losses. The 
Recovery Plan would describe FICC's overall strategy for the management 
of these risks, which includes a ``three lines of defense'' approach to 
risk management that allows for comprehensive management of risk across 
the organization.\34\ The Recovery Plan would also describe FICC's 
approach to financial risk and capital management. The Plan would 
identify key aspects of this approach, including, for example, an 
annual budget process, business line performance reviews with 
management, and regular review of capital requirements against LNA. 
These risk management strategies are collectively intended to allow 
FICC to effectively identify, monitor, and manage risks of non-default 
losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The Clearing Agency Risk Management Framework includes a 
description of this ``three lines of defense'' approach to risk 
management, and addresses how FICC comprehensively manages various 
risks, including operational, general business, investment, custody, 
and other risks that arise in or are borne by it. See Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 81635 (September 15, 2017), 82 FR 44224 
(September 21, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-013, SR-FICC-2017-016, SR-NSCC-
2017-012). The Clearing Agency Operational Risk Management Framework 
describes the manner in which FICC manages operational risks, as 
defined therein. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81745 
(September 28, 2017), 82 FR 46332 (October 4, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-
014, SR-FICC-2017-017, SR-NSCC-2017-013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan would identify the two categories of financial resources 
FICC maintains to cover losses and expenses arising from non-default 
risks or events as (1) LNA, maintained, monitored, and managed pursuant 
to the Capital Policy, which include (a) amounts held in satisfaction 
of the General Business Risk Capital Requirement,\35\ (b) the Corporate 
Contribution,\36\ and (c) other amounts held in excess of FICC's 
capital requirements pursuant to the Capital Policy; and (2) resources 
available pursuant to the loss allocation provisions of GSD Rule 4 and 
MBSD Rule 4.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See supra note 30.
    \36\ See supra note 30.
    \37\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan would address the process by which the CFO and the DTCC 
Treasury group would determine which available LNA resources are most 
appropriate to cover a loss that is caused by a non-default event. This 
determination involves an evaluation of a number of factors, including 
the current and expected size of the loss, the expected time horizon 
over when the loss or additional expenses would materialize, the 
current and projected available LNA, and the likelihood LNA could be 
successfully replenished pursuant to the Replenishment Plan, if 
triggered.\38\ Finally the Plan would discuss how FICC would apply its 
resources to address losses resulting from a non-default event, 
including the

[[Page 878]]

order of resources it would apply if the loss or liability exceeds 
FICC's excess LNA amounts, or is large relative thereto, and the Board 
has declared the event a ``Declared Non-Default Loss Event'' pursuant 
to GSD Rule 4 and MBSD Rule 4.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See supra note 7.
    \39\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan would also describe proposed GSD Rule 50 (Market 
Disruption and Force Majeure) and proposed MBSD Rule 40 (Market 
Disruption and Force Majeure), which FICC is proposing to adopt in the 
GSD Rule and MBSD Rules, respectively. This Proposed Rule would provide 
transparency around how FICC would address extraordinary events that 
may occur outside its control. Specifically, the Proposed Rule would 
define a ``Market Disruption Event'' and the governance around a 
determination that such an event has occurred. The Proposed Rule would 
also describe FICC's authority to take actions during the pendency of a 
Market Disruption Event that it deems appropriate to address such an 
event and facilitate the continuation of its services, if practicable, 
as described in greater detail below.
    The Plan would describe the interaction between the Proposed Rule 
and FICC's existing processes and procedures addressing business 
continuity management and disaster recovery (generally, the ``BCM/DR 
procedures''), making clear that the Proposed Rule is designed to 
support those BCM/DR procedures and to address circumstances that may 
be exogenous to FICC and not necessarily addressed by the BCM/DR 
procedures. Finally, the Plan would describe that, because the 
operation of the Proposed Rule is specific to each applicable Market 
Disruption Event, the Proposed Rule does not define a time limit on its 
application. However, the Plan would note that actions authorized by 
the Proposed Rule would be limited to the pendency of the applicable 
Market Disruption Event, as made clear in the Proposed Rule. Overall, 
the Proposed Rule is designed to mitigate risks caused by Market 
Disruption Events and, thereby, minimize the risk of financial loss 
that may result from such events.
    Recovery Tool Characteristics. The Recovery Plan would describe 
FICC's evaluation of the tools identified within the Recovery Plan, and 
its rationale for concluding that such tools are comprehensive, 
effective, and transparent, and that such tools provide appropriate 
incentives to Members and minimize negative impact on Members and the 
financial system, in compliance with guidance published by the 
Commission in connection with the adoption of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) 
under the Act.\40\ FICC's analysis and the conclusions set forth in 
this section of the Recovery Plan are described in greater detail in 
Item 3(b) of this filing, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies, Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 78961 (September 28, 2016), 81 FR 70786 
(October 13, 2016) (S7-03-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FICC Wind-Down Plan
    The Wind-down Plan would provide the framework and strategy for the 
orderly wind-down of FICC if the use of the recovery tools described in 
the Recovery Plan do not successfully return FICC to financial 
viability. While FICC believes that, given the comprehensive nature of 
the recovery tools, such event is extremely unlikely, as described in 
greater detail below, FICC is proposing a wind-down strategy that 
provides for (1) the transfer of FICC's business, assets and 
memberships of both Divisions to another legal entity, (2) such 
transfer being effected in connection with proceedings under Chapter 11 
of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code,\41\ and (3) after effectuating 
this transfer, FICC liquidating any remaining assets in an orderly 
manner in bankruptcy proceedings. FICC believes that the proposed 
transfer approach to a wind-down would meet its objectives of (1) 
assuring that FICC's critical services will be available to the market 
as long as there are Members in good standing, and (2) minimizing 
disruption to the operations of Members and financial markets generally 
that might be caused by FICC's failure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 11 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In describing the transfer approach to FICC's Wind-down Plan, the 
Plan would identify the factors that FICC considered in developing this 
approach, including the fact that FICC does not own material assets 
that are unrelated to its clearance and settlement activities. As such, 
a business reorganization or ``bail-in'' of debt approach would be 
unlikely to mitigate significant losses. Additionally, FICC's approach 
was developed in consideration of its critical and unique position in 
the U.S. markets, which precludes any approach that would cause FICC's 
critical services to no longer be available.
    First, the Wind-down Plan would describe the potential scenarios 
that could lead to the wind-down of FICC, and the likelihood of such 
scenarios. The Wind-down Plan would identify the time period leading up 
to a decision to wind-down FICC as the ``Runway Period.'' This period 
would follow the implementation of any recovery tools, as it may take a 
period of time, depending on the severity of the market stress at that 
time, for these tools to be effective or for FICC to realize a loss 
sufficient to cause it to be unable to effectuate settlements and repay 
its obligations.\42\ The Wind-down Plan would identify some of the 
indicators that it has entered this Runway Period, which would include, 
for example, successive Member defaults, significant Member retirements 
thereafter, and FICC's inability to replenish its financial resources 
following the liquidation of the portfolio of the defaulting Member(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The Wind-down Plan would state that, given FICC's position 
as a user-governed financial market utility, it is possible that 
Members might voluntarily elect to provide additional support during 
the recovery phase leading up to a potential trigger of the Wind-
down Plan, but would also make clear that FICC cannot predict the 
willingness of Members to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The trigger for implementing the Wind-down Plan would be a 
determination by the Board that recovery efforts have not been, or are 
unlikely to be, successful in returning FICC to viability as a going 
concern. As described in the Plan, FICC believes this is an appropriate 
trigger because it is both broad and flexible enough to cover a variety 
of scenarios, and would align incentives of FICC and the Members to 
avoid actions that might undermine FICC's recovery efforts. 
Additionally, this approach takes into account the characteristics of 
FICC's recovery tools and enables the Board to consider (1) the 
presence of indicators of a successful or unsuccessful recovery, and 
(2) potential for knock-on effects of continued iterative application 
of FICC's recovery tools.
    The Wind-down Plan would describe the general objectives of the 
transfer strategy, and would address assumptions regarding the transfer 
of FICC's critical services, business, assets and membership, and the 
assignment of GSD's link with another FMI, to another legal entity that 
is legally, financially, and operationally able to provide FICC's 
critical services to entities that wish to continue their membership 
following the transfer (``Transferee''). The Wind-down Plan would 
provide that the Transferee would be either (1) a third party legal 
entity, which may be an existing or newly established legal entity or a 
bridge entity formed to operate the business on an interim basis to 
enable the business to be transferred subsequently (``Third Party 
Transferee''); or (2) an existing, debt-free failover legal entity 
established ex-ante

[[Page 879]]

by DTCC (``Failover Transferee'') to be used as an alternative 
Transferee in the event that no viable or preferable Third Party 
Transferee timely commits to acquire FICC's business. FICC would seek 
to identify the proposed Transferee, and negotiate and enter into 
transfer arrangements during the Runway Period and prior to making any 
filings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code.\43\ As 
stated above, the Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the transfer to 
the Transferee be effected in connection with proceedings under Chapter 
11 of the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Code, and pursuant to a bankruptcy 
court order under Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, such that the 
transfer would be free and clear of claims against, and interests in, 
FICC, except to the extent expressly provided in the court's order.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See 11 U.S.C. et seq.
    \44\ See id. at 363.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to effect a timely transfer of its services and minimize 
the market and operational disruption of such transfer, FICC would 
expect to transfer all of its critical services and any non-critical 
services that are ancillary and beneficial to a critical service, or 
that otherwise have substantial user demand from the continuing 
membership. Following the transfer, the Wind-down Plan would anticipate 
that the Transferee and its continuing membership would determine 
whether to continue to provide any transferred non-critical service on 
an ongoing basis, or terminate the non-critical service following some 
transition period. FICC's Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the 
Transferee would enter into a transition services agreement with DTCC 
so that DTCC would continue to provide the shared services it currently 
provides to FICC, including staffing, infrastructure and operational 
support. The Wind-down Plan would also anticipate the assignment of 
FICC's link arrangements, including its arrangements with clearing 
banks and GSD's cross-margining arrangement with CME, described above, 
to the Transferee.\45\ The Wind-down Plan would provide that Members' 
open positions existing prior to the effective time of the transfer 
would be addressed by the provisions of the proposed Wind-down Rule, as 
defined and described below, and the existing GSD Rule 22B (Corporation 
Default) and MBSD Rule 17 (Corporation Default) (collectively, 
``Corporation Default Rule''), as applicable, and that the Transferee 
would not acquire any pending or open transactions with the transfer of 
the business.\46\ The Wind-down Plan would anticipate that the 
Transferee would accept transactions for processing with a trade date 
from and after the effective time of the transfer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The proposed transfer arrangements outlined in the Wind-
down Plan do not contemplate the transfer of any credit or funding 
agreements, which are generally not assignable by FICC. However, to 
the extent the Transferee adopts rules substantially identical to 
those FICC has in effect prior to the transfer, it would have the 
benefit of any rules-based liquidity funding. The Wind-down Plan 
contemplates that neither of the Divisions' respective Clearing 
Funds would be transferred to the Transferee, as they are not held 
in a bankruptcy remote manner and they are the primary prefunded 
liquidity resource to be accessed in the recovery phase.
    \46\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Wind-down Plan would provide that, following the effectiveness 
of the transfer to the Transferee, the wind-down of FICC would involve 
addressing any residual claims against FICC through the bankruptcy 
process and liquidating the legal entity. As such, and as stated above, 
the Wind-down Plan does not contemplate FICC continuing to provide 
services in any capacity following the transfer time, and any services 
not transferred would be terminated. The Wind-down Plan would also 
identify the key dependencies for the effectiveness of the transfer, 
which include regulatory approvals that would permit the Transferee to 
be legally qualified to provide the transferred services from and after 
the transfer, and approval by the applicable bankruptcy court of, among 
other things, the proposed sale, assignments, and transfers to the 
Transferee.
    The Wind-down Plan would address governance matters related to the 
execution of the transfer of FICC's business and its wind-down. The 
Wind-down Plan would address the duties of the Board to execute the 
wind-down of FICC in conformity with (1) the Rules, (2) the Board's 
fiduciary duties, which mandate that it exercise reasonable business 
judgment in performing these duties, and (3) FICC's regulatory 
obligations under the Act as a registered clearing agency. The Wind-
down Plan would also identify certain factors the Board may consider in 
making these decisions, which would include, for example, whether FICC 
could safely stabilize the business and protect its value without 
seeking bankruptcy protection, and FICC's ability to continue to meet 
its regulatory requirements.
    The Wind-down Plan would describe (1) actions FICC or DTCC may take 
to prepare for wind-down in the period before FICC experiences any 
financial distress, (2) actions FICC would take both during the 
recovery phase and the Runway Period to prepare for the execution of 
the Wind-down Plan, and (3) actions FICC would take upon commencement 
of bankruptcy proceedings to effectuate the Wind-down Plan.
    Finally, the Wind-down Plan would include an analysis of the 
estimated time and costs to effectuate the plan, and would provide that 
this estimate be reviewed and approved by the Board annually. In order 
to estimate the length of time it might take to achieve a recovery or 
orderly wind-down of FICC's critical operations, as contemplated by the 
R&W Plan, the Wind-down Plan would include an analysis of the possible 
sequencing and length of time it might take to complete an orderly 
wind-down and transfer of critical operations, as described in earlier 
sections of the R&W Plan. The Wind-down Plan would also include in this 
analysis consideration of other factors, including the time it might 
take to complete any further attempts at recovery under the Recovery 
Plan. The Wind-down Plan would then multiply this estimated length of 
time by FICC's average monthly operating expenses, including 
adjustments to account for changes to FICC's profit and expense profile 
during these circumstances, over the previous twelve months to 
determine the amount of LNA that it should hold to achieve a recovery 
or orderly wind-down of FICC's critical operations. The estimated wind-
down costs would constitute the ``Recovery/Wind-down Capital 
Requirement'' under the Capital Policy.\47\ Under that policy, the 
General Business Risk Capital Requirement is calculated as the greatest 
of three estimated amounts, one of which is this Recovery/Wind-down 
Capital Requirement.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See supra note 7.
    \48\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The R&W Plan is designed as a roadmap, and the types of actions 
that may be taken both leading up to and in connection with 
implementation of the Wind-down Plan would be primarily addressed in 
other supporting documentation referred to therein.
    The Wind-down Plan would address proposed GSD Rule 22D and MBSD 
Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation), which would be adopted to 
facilitate the implementation of the Wind-down Plan, and are discussed 
below.
Proposed Rules
    In connection with the adoption of the R&W Plan, FICC is proposing 
to adopt the Proposed Rules, each described below. The Proposed Rules

[[Page 880]]

would facilitate the execution of the R&W Plan and would provide 
Members and Limited Members with transparency as to critical aspects of 
the Plan, particularly as they relate to the rights and 
responsibilities of both FICC and Members. The Proposed Rules also 
provide a legal basis to these aspects of the Plan.
GSD Rule 22D and MBSD Rule 17B (Wind-down of the Corporation)
    The proposed GSD Rule 22D and MBSD Rule 17B (collectively, ``Wind-
down Rule'') would be adopted by both Divisions to facilitate the 
execution of the Wind-down Plan. The Wind-down Rule would include a 
proposed set of defined terms that would be applicable only to the 
provisions of this Proposed Rule. The Wind-down Rule would make clear 
that a wind-down of FICC's business would occur (1) after a decision is 
made by the Board, and (2) in connection with the transfer of FICC's 
services to a Transferee, as described therein. Because GSD and MBSD 
are both divisions of FICC, the individual Wind-down Rules are designed 
to work together. A decision by the Board to initiate the Wind-down 
Plan would be pursuant to, and trigger the provisions of, the Wind-down 
Rule of each Division simultaneously. Generally, the proposed Wind-down 
Rule is designed to create clear mechanisms for the transfer of 
Eligible Members, Eligible Limited Members, and Settling Banks (as 
these terms would be defined in the Wind-down Rule), and FICC's 
business in order to provide for continued access to critical services 
and to minimize disruption to the markets in the event the Wind-down 
Plan is initiated.
    Wind-down Trigger. First, the Proposed Rule would make clear that 
the Board is responsible for initiating the Wind-down Plan, and would 
identify the criteria the Board would consider when making this 
determination. As provided for in the Wind-down Plan and in the 
proposed Wind-down Rule, the Board would initiate the Plan if, in the 
exercise of its business judgment and subject to its fiduciary duties, 
it has determined that the execution of the Recovery Plan has not or is 
not likely to restore FICC to viability as a going concern, and the 
implementation of the Wind-down Plan, including the transfer of FICC's 
business, is in the best interests of FICC, Members and Limited Members 
of both Divisions, its shareholders and creditors, and the U.S. 
financial markets.
    Identification of Critical Services; Designation of Dates and Times 
for Specific Actions. The Proposed Rule would provide that, upon making 
a determination to initiate the Wind-down Plan, the Board would 
identify the critical and non-critical services that would be 
transferred to the Transferee at the Transfer Time (as defined below 
and in the Proposed Rule), as well as any non-critical services that 
would not be transferred to the Transferee. The proposed Wind-down Rule 
would establish that any services transferred to the Transferee will 
only be provided by the Transferee as of the Transfer Time, and that 
any non-critical services that are not transferred to the Transferee 
would be terminated at the Transfer Time. The Proposed Rule would also 
provide that the Board would establish (1) an effective time for the 
transfer of FICC's business to a Transferee (``Transfer Time''), (2) 
the last day that transactions may be submitted to either Division for 
processing (``Last Transaction Acceptance Date''), and (3) the last day 
that transactions submitted to either Division will be settled (``Last 
Settlement Date'').
    Treatment of Pending Transactions. The Wind-down Rule would also 
authorize the Board to provide for the settlement of pending 
transactions of either Division prior to the Transfer Time, so long as 
the applicable Division's Corporation Default Rule has not been 
triggered. For example, the Proposed Rule would provide the Board with 
the ability to, if it deems practicable, based on FICC's resources at 
that time, allow pending transactions of either Division to complete 
prior to the transfer of FICC's business to a Transferee. The Board 
would also have the ability to allow Members to only submit trades to 
the applicable Division that would effectively offset pending positions 
or provide that transactions will be processed in accordance with 
special or exception processing procedures. The Proposed Rule is 
designed to enable these actions in order to facilitate settlement of 
pending transactions of the applicable Division and reduce claims 
against FICC that would have to be satisfied after the transfer has 
been effected. If none of these actions are deemed practicable (or if 
the applicable Division's Corporation Default Rule has been triggered 
with respect to a Division), then the provisions of the proposed 
Corporation Default Rule would apply to the treatment of open, pending 
transactions of such Division.
    The Proposed Rule would make clear, however, that neither Division 
would accept any transactions for processing after the Last Transaction 
Acceptance Date or which are designated to settle after the Last 
Settlement Date for such Division. Any transactions to be processed 
and/or settled after the Transfer Time would be required to be 
submitted to the Transferee, and would not be FICC's responsibility.
    Notice Provisions. The proposed Wind-down Rule would provide that, 
upon a decision to implement the Wind-down Plan, FICC would provide its 
Members and Limited Members and its regulators with a notice that 
includes material information relating to the Wind-down Plan and the 
anticipated transfer of the membership of both Divisions and business, 
including, for example, (1) a brief statement of the reasons for the 
decision to implement the Wind-down Plan; (2) identification of the 
Transferee and information regarding the transaction by which the 
transfer of FICC's business would be effected; (3) the Transfer Time, 
Last Transaction Acceptance Date, and Last Settlement Date; and (4) 
identification of Eligible Members and Eligible Limited Members, and 
the critical and non-critical services that would be transferred to the 
Transferee at the Transfer Time, as well as those Non-Eligible Members 
and Non-Eligible Limited Members (as defined in the Proposed Rule), and 
any non-critical services that would not be included in the transfer. 
FICC would also make available the rules and procedures and membership 
agreements of the Transferee.
    Transfer of Membership. The proposed Wind-down Rule would address 
the expected transfer of both Divisions' membership to the Transferee, 
which FICC would seek to effectuate by entering into an arrangement 
with a Failover Transferee, or by using commercially reasonable efforts 
to enter into such an arrangement with a Third Party Transferee. 
Therefore, the Wind-down Rule would provide Members, Limited Members 
and Settling Banks with notice that, in connection with the 
implementation of the Wind-down Plan and with no further action 
required by any party, (1) their membership with the applicable 
Division would transfer to the Transferee, (2) they would become party 
to a membership agreement with such Transferee, and (3) they would have 
all of the rights and be subject to all of the obligations applicable 
to their membership status under the rules of the Transferee. These 
provisions would not apply to any Member or Limited Member that is 
either in default of an obligation to FICC or has provided notice of 
its election to withdraw its membership from the applicable Division. 
Further, the proposed Wind-down Rule would make clear that it

[[Page 881]]

would not prohibit (1) Members and Limited Members that are not 
transferred by operation of the Wind-down Rule from applying for 
membership with the Transferee, or (2) Members, Limited Members, and 
Settling Banks that would be transferred to the Transferee from 
withdrawing from membership with the Transferee.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ The Members and Limited Members whose membership is 
transferred to the Transferee pursuant to the proposed Wind-down 
Rule would submit transactions to be processed and settled subject 
to the rules and procedures of the Transferee, including any 
applicable margin charges or other financial obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comparability Period. The proposed automatic mechanism for the 
transfer of both Divisions' memberships is intended to provide the 
membership with continuous access to critical services in the event of 
FICC's wind-down, and to facilitate the continued prompt and accurate 
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. Further to this 
goal, the proposed Wind-down Rule would provide that FICC would enter 
into arrangements with a Failover Transferee, or would use commercially 
reasonable efforts to enter into arrangements with a Third Party 
Transferee, providing that, in either case, with respect to the 
critical services and any non-critical services that are transferred 
from FICC to the Transferee, for at least a period of time to be agreed 
upon (``Comparability Period''), the business transferred from FICC to 
the Transferee would be operated in a manner that is comparable to the 
manner in which the business was previously operated by FICC. 
Specifically, the proposed Wind-down Rule would provide that: (1) The 
rules of the Transferee and terms of membership agreements would be 
comparable in substance and effect to the analogous Rules and 
membership agreements of FICC; (2) the rights and obligations of any 
Members, Limited Members and Settling Banks that are transferred to the 
Transferee would be comparable in substance and effect to their rights 
and obligations as to FICC; and (3) the Transferee would operate the 
transferred business and provide any services that are transferred in a 
comparable manner to which such services were provided by FICC. The 
purpose of these provisions and the intended effect of the proposed 
Wind-down Rule is to facilitate a smooth transition of FICC's business 
to a Transferee and to provide that, for at least the Comparability 
Period, the Transferee (1) would operate the transferred business in a 
manner that is comparable in substance and effect to the manner in 
which the business was operated by FICC, and (2) would not require 
sudden and disruptive changes in the systems, operations and business 
practices of the new members of the Transferee.
    Subordination of Claims Provisions and Miscellaneous Matters. The 
proposed Wind-down Rule would also include a provision addressing the 
subordination of unsecured claims against FICC of its Members and 
Limited Members who fail to participate in FICC's recovery efforts 
(i.e., such firms are delinquent in their obligations to FICC or elect 
to retire from FICC in order to minimize their obligations with respect 
to the allocation of losses, pursuant to the Rules). This provision is 
designed to incentivize Members to participate in FICC's recovery 
efforts.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Nothing in the proposed Wind-down Rule would seek to 
prevent a Member, Limited Member or Settling Bank that retired its 
membership at either of the Divisions from applying for membership 
with the Transferee. Once its FICC membership is terminated, 
however, such firm would not be able to benefit from the membership 
assignment that would be effected by this proposed Wind-down Rule, 
and it would have to apply for membership directly with the 
Transferee, subject to its membership application and review 
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Wind-down Rule would address other ex-ante matters, 
including provisions providing that its Members, Limited Members and 
Settling Banks (1) will assist and cooperate with FICC to effectuate 
the transfer of FICC's business to a Transferee, (2) consent to the 
provisions of the rule, and (3) grant FICC power of attorney to execute 
and deliver on their behalf documents and instruments that may be 
requested by the Transferee. Finally, the Proposed Rule would include a 
limitation of liability for any actions taken or omitted to be taken by 
FICC pursuant to the Proposed Rule.
GSD Rule 50 and MBSD Rule 40 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure)
    The proposed GSD Rule 50 and MBSD Rule 40 (Market Disruption and 
Force Majeure) (collectively, ``Force Majeure Rule'') would address 
FICC's authority to take certain actions upon the occurrence, and 
during the pendency, of a ``Market Disruption Event,'' as defined 
therein. Because GSD and MBSD are both divisions of FICC, the 
individual Force Majeure Rules are designed to work together. A 
decision by the Board or management of FICC that a Market Disruption 
Event has occurred in accordance with the Force Majeure Rule would 
trigger the provisions of the Force Majeure Rule of each Division 
simultaneously. The Proposed Rule is designed to clarify FICC's ability 
to take actions to address extraordinary events outside of the control 
of FICC and of the memberships of the Divisions, and to mitigate the 
effect of such events by facilitating the continuity of services (or, 
if deemed necessary, the temporary suspension of services). To that 
end, under the proposed Force Majeure Rule, FICC would be entitled, 
during the pendency of a Market Disruption Event, to (1) suspend the 
provision of any or all services, and (2) take, or refrain from taking, 
or require its Members and Limited Members to take, or refrain from 
taking, any actions it considers appropriate to address, alleviate, or 
mitigate the event and facilitate the continuation of FICC's services 
as may be practicable.
    The proposed Force Majeure Rule would identify the events or 
circumstances that would be considered a ``Market Disruption Event,'' 
including, for example, events that lead to the suspension or 
limitation of trading or banking in the markets in which FICC operates, 
or the unavailability or failure of any material payment, bank 
transfer, wire or securities settlement systems. The proposed Force 
Majeure Rule would define the governance procedures for how FICC would 
determine whether, and how, to implement the provisions of the rule. A 
determination that a Market Disruption Event has occurred would 
generally be made by the Board, but the Proposed Rule would provide for 
limited, interim delegation of authority to a specified officer or 
management committee if the Board would not be able to take timely 
action. In the event such delegated authority is exercised, the 
proposed Force Majeure Rule would require that the Board be convened as 
promptly as practicable, no later than five Business Days after such 
determination has been made, to ratify, modify, or rescind the action. 
The proposed Force Majeure Rule would also provide for prompt 
notification to the Commission, and advance consultation with 
Commission staff, when practicable. The Proposed Rule would require 
Members and Limited Members to notify FICC immediately upon becoming 
aware of a Market Disruption Event, and, likewise, would require FICC 
to notify Members and Limited Members if it has triggered the Proposed 
Rule.
    Finally, the Proposed Rule would address other related matters, 
including a limitation of liability for any failure or delay in 
performance, in whole or in part, arising out of the Market Disruption 
Event.
Proposed Changes to GSD Rules, MBSD Rules, and EPN Rules
    In order to incorporate the Proposed Rules into the Rules and the 
EPN Rules,

[[Page 882]]

FICC is also proposing to amend (1) GSD Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and 
Sponsored Members), GSD Rule 3B (Centrally Cleared Institutional 
Triparty Service) and GSD Rule 13 (Funds-Only Settlement); (2) MBSD 
Rule 3A (Cash Settlement Bank Members); and (3) Rule 1 of the EPN 
Rules. As shown on Exhibit 5b, these proposed changes would clarify 
that certain types of Limited Members, as identified in those rules, 
would be subject to the Proposed Rules.
2. Statutory Basis
    FICC believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements 
of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a 
registered clearing agency. In particular, FICC believes that the R&W 
Plan, each of the Proposed Rules and the other proposed changes to the 
Rules and the EPN Rules are consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the 
Act,\51\ the R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules are consistent 
with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act,\52\ and the R&W Plan is 
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(15)(ii) under the Act,\53\ for the 
reasons described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \52\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
    \53\ Id. at 240.17Ad-22(e)(15)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules 
of FICC be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and 
settlement of securities transactions, and to assure the safeguarding 
of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or 
for which it is responsible.\54\ The Recovery Plan and the proposed 
Force Majeure Rule would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and 
settlement of securities transactions by providing FICC with a roadmap 
for actions it may employ to mitigate losses, and monitor and, as 
needed, stabilize, its financial condition, which would allow it to 
continue its critical clearance and settlement services in stress 
situations. Further, as described above, the Recovery Plan is designed 
to identify the actions and tools FICC may use to address and minimize 
losses to both FICC and Members. The Recovery Plan and the proposed 
Force Majeure Rule would provide FICC's management and the Board with 
guidance in this regard by identifying the indicators and governance 
around the use and application of such tools to enable them to address 
stress situations in a manner most appropriate for the circumstances. 
Therefore, the Recovery Plan and the proposed Force Majeure Rule would 
also contribute to the safeguarding of securities and funds which are 
in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible by 
enabling actions that would address and minimize losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule, which would 
facilitate the implementation of the Wind-down Plan, would also promote 
the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities 
transactions and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which 
are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible. 
The Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule would collectively 
establish a framework for the transfer and orderly wind-down of FICC's 
business. These proposals would establish clear mechanisms for the 
transfer of FICC's critical services and membership. By doing so, the 
Wind-down Plan and this Proposed Rule are designed to facilitate the 
continuity of FICC's critical services and enable Members and Limited 
Members to maintain access to FICC's services through the transfer of 
the Divisions' memberships in the event the Wind-down Plan is triggered 
by the Board. Therefore, by facilitating the continuity of FICC's 
critical clearance and settlement services, FICC believes the proposals 
would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of 
securities transactions. Further, by creating a framework for the 
transfer and orderly wind-down of FICC's business, FICC believes the 
proposals would enhance the safeguarding of securities and funds which 
are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible.
    Finally, the other proposed changes to the Rules and the EPN Rules 
would clarify the application of the Proposed Rules to certain types of 
Limited Members and would enable these Limited Members to readily 
understand their rights and obligations. As such, FICC believes these 
proposed changes would enable Limited Members that are governed by the 
applicable rules to have a better understanding of those rules and, 
thereby, would assist in promoting the prompt and accurate clearance 
and settlement of securities transactions.
    Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan, each of the Proposed Rules, 
and the other proposed changes are consistent with the requirements of 
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act requires FICC to establish, 
implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures 
reasonably designed to maintain a sound risk management framework for 
comprehensively managing legal, credit, liquidity, operational, general 
business, investment, custody, and other risks that arise in or are 
borne by the covered clearing agency, which includes plans for the 
recovery and orderly wind-down of the covered clearing agency 
necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from 
general business risk, or any other losses.\56\ The R&W Plan and each 
of the Proposed Rules are designed to meet the requirements of Rule 
17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
    \57\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The R&W Plan would be maintained by FICC in compliance with Rule 
17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) in that it provides plans for the recovery and 
orderly wind-down of FICC necessitated by credit losses, liquidity 
shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any other losses, as 
described above.\58\ Specifically, the Recovery Plan would define the 
risk management activities, stress conditions and indicators, and tools 
that FICC may use to address stress scenarios that could eventually 
prevent it from being able to provide its critical services as a going 
concern. Through the framework of the Crisis Continuum, the Recovery 
Plan would address measures that FICC may take to address risks of 
credit losses and liquidity shortfalls, and other losses that could 
arise from a Member default. The Recovery Plan would also address the 
management of general business risks and other non-default risks that 
could lead to losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Wind-down Plan would be triggered by a determination by the 
Board that recovery efforts have not been, or are unlikely to be, 
successful in returning FICC to viability as a going concern. Once 
triggered, the Wind-down Plan would set forth clear mechanisms for the 
transfer of the memberships of both Divisions and FICC's business, and 
would be designed to facilitate continued access to FICC's critical 
services and to minimize market impact of the transfer. By establishing 
the framework and strategy for the execution of the transfer and wind-
down of FICC in order to facilitate continuous access to FICC's 
critical services, the Wind-down Plan establishes a plan for the 
orderly wind-down of FICC. Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan would 
provide plans for the recovery and orderly wind-down of the covered 
clearing agency necessitated by credit losses, liquidity shortfalls, 
losses from general business risk, or any other losses, and, as such, 
meets the

[[Page 883]]

requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in greater detail above, the Proposed Rules are 
designed to facilitate the execution of the R&W Plan, provide Members 
and Limited Members with transparency regarding the material provisions 
of the Plan, and provide FICC with a legal basis for implementation of 
those provisions. As such, FICC also believes the Proposed Rules meet 
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC has evaluated the recovery tools that would be identified in 
the Recovery Plan and has determined that these tools are 
comprehensive, effective, and transparent, and that such tools provide 
appropriate incentives to Members to manage the risks they present. The 
recovery tools, as outlined in the Recovery Plan and in the proposed 
Force Majeure Rule, provide FICC with a comprehensive set of options to 
address its material risks and support the resiliency of its critical 
services under a range of stress scenarios. FICC also believes the 
recovery tools are effective, as FICC has both legal basis and 
operational capability to execute these tools in a timely and reliable 
manner. Many of the recovery tools are provided for in the Rules; 
Members are bound by the Rules through their membership agreements with 
FICC, and the Rules are adopted pursuant to a framework established by 
Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\61\ providing a legal basis for the recovery 
tools found therein. Other recovery tools have legal basis in 
contractual arrangements to which FICC is a party, as described above. 
Further, as many of the tools are embedded in FICC's ongoing risk 
management practices or are embedded into its predefined default-
management procedures, FICC is able to execute these tools, in most 
cases, when needed and without material operational or organizational 
delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ Id. at 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The majority of the recovery tools are also transparent, as they 
are, or are proposed to be, included in the Rules, which are publicly 
available. FICC believes the recovery tools also provide appropriate 
incentives to Members, as they are designed to control the amount of 
risk they present to FICC's clearance and settlement system. Members' 
financial obligations to FICC, particularly their required deposits to 
the applicable Division's Clearing Fund, are measured by the risk posed 
by the Members' activity in FICC's systems, which incentivizes them to 
manage that risk which would correspond to lower financial obligations. 
Finally, FICC's Recovery Plan provides for a continuous evaluation of 
the systemic consequences of executing its recovery tools, with the 
goal of minimizing their negative impact. The Recovery Plan would 
outline various indicators over a timeline of increasing stress, the 
Crisis Continuum, with escalation triggers to FICC management or the 
Board, as appropriate. This approach would allow for timely evaluation 
of the situation and the possible impacts of the use of a recovery tool 
in order to minimize the negative effects of the stress scenario. 
Therefore, FICC believes that the recovery tools that would be 
identified and described in its Recovery Plan, including the authority 
provided to it in the proposed Force Majeure Rule, would meet the 
criteria identified within guidance published by the Commission in 
connection with the adoption of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Supra note 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan and each of the Proposed 
Rules are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(15)(ii) under the Act requires FICC to establish, 
implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures 
reasonably designed to identify, monitor, and manage its general 
business risk and hold sufficient LNA to cover potential general 
business losses so that FICC can continue operations and services as a 
going concern if those losses materialize, including by holding LNA 
equal to the greater of either (x) six months of the covered clearing 
agency's current operating expenses, or (y) the amount determined by 
the board of directors to be sufficient to ensure a recovery or orderly 
wind-down of critical operations and services of the covered clearing 
agency.\64\ While the Capital Policy addresses how FICC holds LNA in 
compliance with these requirements, the Wind-down Plan would include an 
analysis that would estimate the amount of time and the costs to 
achieve a recovery or orderly wind-down of FICC's critical operations 
and services, and would provide that the Board review and approve this 
analysis and estimation annually. The Wind-down Plan would also provide 
that the estimate would be the ``Recovery/Wind-down Capital 
Requirement'' under the Capital Policy. Under that policy, the General 
Business Risk Capital Requirement, which is the sufficient amount of 
LNA that FICC should hold to cover potential general business losses so 
that it can continue operations and services as a going concern if 
those losses materialize, is calculated as the greatest of three 
estimated amounts, one of which is this Recovery/Wind-down Capital 
Requirement. Therefore, FICC believes the R&W Plan, as it interrelates 
with the Capital Policy, is consistent with Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(15)(ii).\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(15)(ii).
    \65\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    FICC does not believe the proposal would have any impact, or impose 
any burden, on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance 
of the purpose of the Act.\66\ The proposal would apply uniformly to 
all Members and Limited Members. FICC does not anticipate that the 
proposal would affect its day-to-day operations under normal 
circumstances, or in the management of a typical Member default 
scenario or non-default event. FICC is not proposing to alter the 
standards or requirements for becoming or remaining a Member, or 
otherwise using its services. FICC also does not propose to change 
either Division's methodology for calculation of margin or their 
respective Clearing Fund contributions. The proposal is intended to (1) 
address the risk of loss events and identify the tools and resources 
available to it to withstand and recover from such events, so that it 
can restore normal operations, and (2) provide a framework for its 
orderly wind-down and the transfer of its business in the event those 
recovery tools do not restore FICC to financial viability, as described 
herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The R&W Plan and each of the Proposed Rules have been developed and 
documented in order to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, as 
discussed above.
    With respect to the Recovery Plan, the proposal generally reflects 
FICC's existing tools and existing internal procedures. Existing tools 
that would have a direct impact on the rights, responsibilities or 
obligations of Members are reflected in the existing Rules or are 
proposed to be included in the Rules. Accordingly, the Recovery Plan 
and the proposed Force Majeure Rule are intended to provide a roadmap, 
define the strategy and identify the tools available to FICC in 
connection with its recovery efforts. By proposing to enhance FICC's 
existing internal management and its regulatory compliance related to 
its recovery efforts, FICC does not believe the Recovery Plan or the 
proposed Force

[[Page 884]]

Majeure Rule would have any impact, or impose any burden, on 
competition.
    With respect to the Wind-down Plan and the proposed Wind-down Rule, 
which facilitate the execution of the Wind-down Plan, the proposal 
would operate to effect the transfer of all eligible Members and 
Limited Members of both Divisions to the Transferee, and would not 
prohibit any market participant from either bidding to become the 
Transferee or from applying for membership with the Transferee. The 
proposal also would not prohibit any Member or Limited Member from 
withdrawing from FICC prior to the Transfer Time, as is permitted under 
the Rules today, or from applying for membership with the Transferee. 
Therefore, as the proposal would treat each similarly situated Member 
identically under the Wind-down Plan and this Proposed Rule, FICC does 
not believe the Wind-down Plan or the proposed Wind-down Rule would 
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition.
    FICC does not believe that the other proposed changes to the Rules 
and the EPN Rules would have any impact on competition because these 
proposed changes to incorporate the Proposed Rules into the Rules and 
the EPN Rules are technical clarifications, which would not, on their 
own, change FICC's current practices or the rights or obligations of 
the Members or EPN Users.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change 
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    While FICC has not solicited or received any written comments 
relating to this proposal, FICC has conducted outreach to its Members 
in order to provide them with notice of the proposal. FICC will notify 
the Commission of any written comments received by FICC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the 
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be 
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to 
which the clearing agency consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule 
change should be disapproved.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions 
required with respect to the proposal are completed.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and 
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of 
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
File Number SR-FICC-2017-021 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2017-021. This file 
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help 
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). 
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written 
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with 
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed 
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those 
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions 
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in 
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection 
and copying at the principal office of FICC and on DTCC's website 
(https://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received 
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are 
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying 
information from comment submissions. You should submit only 
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions 
should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2017-021 and should be submitted on 
or before January 29, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00079 Filed 1-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.