Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Codify the Processing of Conditional Prepayment Rate Claims in the MBSD Rules and Make Other Changes, 48675-48678 [2018-20885]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 26, 2018 / Notices
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposal is
consistent with the Act. Comments may
be submitted by any of the following
methods:
• 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 No. SR–
CboeBYX–2018–019 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
• 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 No.
SR–CboeBYX–2018–019. 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 the Exchange. 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 No.
SR–CboeBYX–2018–019 and should be
submitted on or before October 17,
2018.
19:21 Sep 25, 2018
[FR Doc. 2018–20878 Filed 9–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–84236; File No. SR–FICC–
2018–006]
Electronic Comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.16
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
Jkt 244001
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation; Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule
Change To Codify the Processing of
Conditional Prepayment Rate Claims in
the MBSD Rules and Make Other
Changes
September 20, 2018.
On July 26, 2018, Fixed Income
Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) filed
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) proposed
rule change SR–FICC–2018–006
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder.2
The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on August 8, 2018.3 The
Commission did not receive any
comment letters on the proposed rule
change. For the reasons discussed
below, the Commission approves the
proposed rule change.
I. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
The proposed rule change would
make amendments to FICC’s MortgageBacked Securities Division (‘‘MBSD’’)
Clearing Rules (‘‘MBSD Rules’’) 4 in
order to (i) add terms governing MBSD’s
current processing of conditional
prepayment rate (‘‘CPR’’) claims to the
MBSD Rules, and (ii) make certain
clarifications and corrections in the
MBSD Rules, as described below.5
A. CPR Claims
Mortgage pools 6 are often traded in
To-Be-Announced (‘‘TBA’’) trades,
which are trades for which the actual
16 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83767
(August 2, 2018), 83 FR 39143 (August 8, 2018)
(SR–FICC–2018–006) (‘‘Notice’’).
4 Available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/rulesand-procedures.
5 Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
6 A mortgage pool is a collection of mortgage
loans or other collateral assembled by an originator
or master services as collateral for a mortgaged-back
security. Id.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48675
identities of and/or the number of pools
underlying each trade are unknown at
the time of trade execution.7 MBSD
guidelines provide that two business
days prior to the established settlement
date of the TBA settlement obligations,
the FICC MBSD clearing member
(‘‘Clearing Member’’) that has an
obligation to deliver pools for the TBA
transaction (i.e., the ‘‘seller’’) must
allocate the pools to be delivered.8 FICC
states that pursuant to the MBSD Rules,
Clearing Members may substitute an
underlying pool after it has been
allocated with respect to a pool deliver
obligation by providing instructions to
FICC.9
CPR is the percentage of the
outstanding loan balance for a pool that
is expected to be repaid over a one-year
period.10 A CPR claim arises when an
underlying TBA pool is allocated or
substituted with a pool that pays down
at a faster rate (i.e., has a higher CPR)
than the average pay down rate for pools
of the same type as the underlying pool
being replaced.11 The result is that the
buyer is receiving a pool with less value
than anticipated based on the TBA
terms.
As provided in the SIFMA
Guidelines,12 the industry currently has
a process pursuant to which a buyer
may make a CPR claim against the
seller. The CPR claim process is
intended to compensate the buyer for
the excess amount that it is paying for
the pool being delivered.13 Pursuant to
SIFMA Guidelines, an entity is entitled
to make a CPR claim if (i) the allocation
or substitution giving rise to the CPR
claim occurred after the factor release
date 14 following the scheduled
contractual settlement date relating to
the trade; (ii) the pools involved in the
claim meet the criteria for fast paying
pools in accordance with SIFMA
Guidelines; (iii) the amount of the CPR
claim is $10,000 or greater, or, in the
7 Notice,
83 FR, at 39144.
8 Id.
9 Id.
10 Id.
11 Notice,
83 FR, at 39144.
at https://www.sifma.org/resources/
general/tba-market-governance/ under ‘‘Uniform
Practices Manual.’’ The SIFMA Guidelines are
trading, clearing and settlement guidelines prepared
by SIFMA intended to reflect common industry
practices relating to confirming, comparing and
settling mortgage-backed securities.
13 Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
14 The term ‘‘factor release date’’ means, with
respect to a pool, the date on which the Federal
National Mortgage Association (‘‘Fannie Mae’’), the
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (‘‘Freddie
Mac’’) or the Government National Mortgage
Association (‘‘Ginnie Mae’’), as applicable, release
the ‘‘factor’’ that represents the percentage of the
agency’s original balance of the pool that remains
outstanding as of such date. Id.
12 Available
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
48676
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 26, 2018 / Notices
case that an entity is submitting a retransmittal 15 of a CPR claim, the CPR
claim is $500 or greater; and (iv) 90
percent of the buyer’s claimable unit has
settled.16
The proposed rule change would
codify FICC’s existing CPR claims
process in the MBSD Rules, including
adding a provision providing that a
Clearing Member’s cash settlement
obligations would include the positive
or negative amount of any valid CPR
claim.17 FICC states that the proposed
MBSD CPR claims process would
generally follow the CPR claims process
set forth in the SIFMA Guidelines and
MBSD’s current CPR claims process,
with the following exceptions:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
1. Definition of Claimable Unit
The proposed rule change would add
to the MBSD Rules two definitions of
‘‘claimable unit,’’ the use of which
would depend on the type of
transaction.18 According to SIFMA
Guidelines and FICC’s current process,
CPR claims are based on a ‘‘claimable
unit’’ which defines the pool or group
of pools that are included in a particular
CPR claim.19 Also according to SIFMA
Guidelines, a claimable unit is based on
all pools allocated for a trade between
factor release dates that have the same
underlying TBA characteristics, such as
product, coupon, trade date, settlement
date and price.20
FICC states that it currently processes
CPR claims using a different definition
of claimable unit than the SIFMA
definition. FICC states that its CPR
claims process currently uses a
definition of claimable unit based on
characteristics of pools after MBSD Pool
Netting 21 takes place rather than based
on underlying TBA characteristics. The
Pool Netting process generally reduces
the number of pool settlements by
aggregating and matching offsetting
allocated pools submitted by Clearing
Members to arrive at a single net
position per counterparty in a particular
pool number.22 FICC states that if a pool
obligation is a result of Pool Netting,
FICC is unable to track the pool
obligation to an original TBA trade or
15 A re-transmittal of a CPR claim occurs when a
party with the pool deliver obligation passes the
CPR claims it received to the entities that sent it the
pools it used for delivery. Id.
16 Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
17 Id.
18 Id.
19 Id.
20 Id.
21 Pursuant to the MBSD Rules, the term ‘‘Pool
Netting’’ means the service provided to Clearing
Members, as applicable, and the operations carried
out by FICC in the course of providing such service
in accordance with MBSD Rule 8.
22 Notice, 83 FR, at 39145.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Sep 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
trades and would be unable to group
pool obligations for CPR claims based
on TBA characteristics as provided in
SIFMA Guidelines.23
FICC proposes to use the same
definition of claimable unit for CPR
claims as SIFMA Guidelines if the pool
obligations upon which the CPR claims
are based have not been through MBSD
Pool Netting. FICC states that this
definition would be used for pool
allocations or substitutions for pool
obligations that have been allocated
after the factor release date because pool
obligations allocated after the factor
release date do not go through the Pool
Netting process.24 As a result, FICC
states that it would be able to track the
pool obligation to an original TBA trade,
which would allow FICC to group the
pool obligation with other pool
obligations based on TBA
characteristics.25
FICC proposes to use a different
definition of a claimable unit from the
SIFMA Guidelines definition for CPR
claims based on pool obligations that
are a result of Pool Netting.26 FICC
proposes to define a claimable unit for
such pool obligations based on pool
characteristics after Pool Netting, rather
than based on the original TBA pool
characteristics.27 FICC states that this
definition would be used for
substitutions for pool obligations that
are a result of Pool Netting because FICC
would be unable to track the pool
obligation to an original TBA trade and
thus unable to group such pool
obligation with other pool obligations
based on TBA characteristics.28
2. Re-Transmittal Threshold
The minimum threshold for a retransmittal of a CPR claim under SIFMA
Guidelines is $500.29 FICC’s current
process provides that the minimum
threshold for re-transmittals is $5,000.30
FICC proposes to use the $500 retransmittal minimum threshold for
allocations (and related substitutions),
where the allocations were made after
the applicable factor release date, in
order to be more consistent with SIFMA
Guidelines and established industry
practice.31 Meanwhile, FICC proposes to
use a $5,000 re-transmittal threshold for
substitutions relating to allocations that
were made prior to the factor release
date following the contractual
23 Id.
24 Id.
25 Id.
26 Id.
27 Id.
settlement date to avoid having to
process multiple smaller transactions,
which FICC believes would likely be
administratively burdensome.32
B. Proposed MBSD Rule Changes
To codify the CPR claims process as
described above, the proposed rule
change would add a description of the
CPR claim process in a new Section 10
of MBSD Rule 9, including a defined
term for ‘‘CPR Claim.’’ 33 In addition, the
proposed rule change would specify the
validation process for CPR claims,
which, as described above, would
codify existing FICC practices relating to
CPR claims and provide that the process
for CPR claims is consistent with
SIFMA Guidelines, in each case, with
the exceptions noted above.34
Specifically, the proposed rule change
would specify that CPR claims
submitted would be reviewed by FICC
to validate the following: (i) The
claimable unit with respect to the CPR
claim meets the criteria for fast paying
pools as set forth in SIFMA Guidelines;
(ii) the CPR claim amount is $10,000 or
greater, unless the CPR claim is a retransmittal of a CPR claim, in which
case, (a) if the CPR claim relates to an
allocation of a pool effected after the
factor release date following the
contractual settlement date and/or
substitution of related pools, the amount
is $500 or greater, or (b) if the CPR claim
relates to a substitution of a pool that
was allocated prior to the factor release
date following the contractual
settlement date, the amount is $5,000 or
greater; and (iii) 90 percent of the
Clearing Member’s claimable unit has
settled.
Consistent with FICC’s current CPR
claims process, the proposed rule
change would also specify that (1) FICC
maintains the right to process CPR
claims with no minimum denomination,
(2) CPR claims may be apportioned to
more than one participant, (3) CPR
claims may be comprised of both debits
and credits, (4) FICC would process all
CPR claims on the Class ‘‘B’’ settlement
date in the month following the
transmittal month, and (5) FICC would
notify the Clearing Member that the CPR
claim has been rejected if the CPR claim
is determined to be invalid.
In addition, that the proposed rule
change would specify that FICC shall
not guaranty CPR claim payments, and
any credit to be received with respect to
a CPR claim would be reduced to the
extent the corresponding debit in
28 Id.
29 Id.
32 Id.
30 Id.
33 Id.
31 Id.
34 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 26, 2018 / Notices
connection with a CPR claim is not
paid.35
FICC states that to ensure that
Clearing Members understand the
potential credits and debits relating to
CPR claims, the proposed rule change
would add credits and debits relating to
CPR claims in Section 7 of MBSD Rule
11 as items for end of day cash balance
computations.36
FICC states that to further describe the
CPR claims process as set forth above,
a cross-reference for the defined term
‘‘CPR Claim’’ and new defined terms
‘‘Claimable Unit’’ and ‘‘Factor Release
Date’’ would be added to MBSD Rule 1,
which are consistent with existing FICC
practices relating to CPR claims and
with SIFMA Guidelines, in each case,
with the exceptions noted above.37
FICC states that the definitions for
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie
Mae would be corrected in MBSD Rule
1 to be consistent with industry practice
and with their usage throughout the
MBSD Rules.38 In addition, the
definition of ‘‘SIFMA Guidelines’’
would be clarified by adding a link
identifying the location of the SIFMA
Guidelines on the SIFMA website.39
II. Discussion and Commission
Findings
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act 40
directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a selfregulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. The
Commission believes the proposal is
consistent with the Act, specifically
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act and Rule
17Ad–22(e)(23)(i) under the Act, as
discussed below.41
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
A. Consistency With Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 42
requires, inter alia, that the rules of the
clearing agency be designed to promote
the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions.
As described above, FICC proposes to
codify its existing CPR claims process
and to specify the validation process for
CPR claims. First, FICC proposes to
specify that CPR claims submitted
would be reviewed by FICC to validate
35 Id.
36 Id.
37 Id.
38 Id.
39 Id.
40 15
41 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F); 17 CFR 240.17Ad–
22(20).
42 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Sep 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
(i) the claimable unit with respect to the
CPR claim meets the criteria for fast
paying pools as set forth in SIFMA
Guidelines; (ii) the CPR claim amount is
$10,000 or greater, unless the CPR claim
is a re-transmittal of a CPR claim, in
which case, (a) if the CPR claim relates
to an allocation of a pool effected after
the factor release date following the
contractual settlement date and/or
substitution of related pools, the amount
is $500 or greater, or (b) if the CPR claim
relates to a substitution of a pool that
was allocated prior to the factor release
date following the contractual
settlement date, the amount is $5,000 or
greater; and (iii) 90 percent of the
Clearing Member’s claimable unit has
settled.
Consistent with FICC’s current CPR
claims process, FICC also proposes to
specify that (1) FICC maintains the right
to process CPR claims with no
minimum denomination, (2) CPR claims
may be apportioned to more than one
participant, (3) CPR claims may be
comprised of both debits and credits, (4)
FICC would process all CPR claims on
the Class ‘‘B’’ settlement date in the
month following the transmittal month,
and (5) FICC would notify the Clearing
Member that the CPR claim has been
rejected if the CPR claim is determined
to be invalid.
In addition, FICC proposes to specify
that FICC shall not guaranty CPR claim
payments, and any credit to be received
with respect to a CPR claim would be
reduced to the extent the corresponding
debit in connection with a CPR claim is
not paid.
These proposed changes would codify
FICC’s existing processes surrounding
CPR claims and make the CPR claims
process more consistent with SIFMA
Guidelines. The Commission believes
that the codification would enable
Clearing Members to better understand
how CPR claims would be validated and
processed through FICC’s facilities and
how FICC’s CPR claims process would
differ from SIFMA Guidelines with
respect to the definition of claimable
unit and the re-transmittal minimum
threshold, as set forth above. By
enabling Clearing Members to better
understand the CPR claims process, the
proposal is designed to help ensure that
CPR claims are submitted and processed
correctly and thus promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of
such securities transactions.
Additionally, FICC proposes to make
several clarifying changes. First, as
described above, the proposed rule
change would add credits and debits
relating to CPR claims in Section 7 of
MBSD Rule 11 as items for end of day
cash balance computations. In Second,
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48677
a cross-reference for the defined term
‘‘CPR Claim’’ and new defined terms
‘‘Claimable Unit’’ and ‘‘Factor Release
Date’’ would be added to MBSD Rule 1,
which are consistent with existing FICC
practices relating to CPR claims and
with SIFMA Guidelines, in each case,
with the exceptions noted above. Third,
the proposed rule change would correct
the definitions for Fannie Mae, Freddie
Mac and Ginnie Mae in MBSD Rule 1
to be consistent with industry practice
and with their usage throughout the
MBSD Rules. Fourth, FICC proposes to
add a description of the CPR claim
process in a new Section 10 of MBSD
Rule 9, including a defined term for
‘‘CPR Claim.’’ Finally, the definition of
‘‘SIFMA Guidelines’’ would be clarified
by adding a link identifying the location
of the SIFMA Guidelines on the SIFMA
website.
By proposing these clarifying changes
to the CPR claims rules, the Commission
believes that the proposed changes are
designed to help Clearing Members
better understand and remain compliant
with the CPR claims rules to help
ensure that CPR claims are submitted
and processed correctly, and thus
promoting the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of such
securities transactions.
As each of the aforementioned
changes are designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A(b)(3)(F).
B. Consistency with Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(23)(i)
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(23)(i) under the Act
requires a covered clearing agency 43 to
establish, implement, maintain and
enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to provide for
publicly disclosing all relevant rules
and material procedures.44
As described above, the proposed rule
changes would (1) codify FICC’s
existing CPR claims process and (2)
make clarifications to the existing CPR
claims process. The Commission
43 A ‘‘covered clearing agency’’ means, among
other things, a clearing agency registered with the
Commission under Section 17A of the Exchange
Act (15 U.S.C. 78q–1 et seq.) that is designated
systemically important by the Financial Stability
Oversight Counsel (‘‘FSOC’’) pursuant to the
Clearing Supervision Act (12 U.S.C. 5461 et seq.).
See 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(a)(5)–(6). On July 18,
2012, FSOC designated FICC as systemically
important. U.S. Department of the Treasury, ‘‘FSOC
Makes First Designations in Effort to Protect Against
Future Financial Crises,’’ available at https://
www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/
Pages/tg1645.aspx. Therefore, FICC is a covered
clearing agency.
44 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(23)(i).
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
48678
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 26, 2018 / Notices
believes these proposed changes to
codify and clarify FICC’s existing
practices in regards to the CPR claims
process would assist in publicly
disclosing all relevant and material
procedures regarding the CPR claims
process. Therefore, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(23)(i) under the Act.
III. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of the
Act, in particular the requirements of
Section 17A of the Act 45 and the rules
and regulations thereunder.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that
proposed rule change SR–FICC–2018–
006 be, and hereby is, approved.46
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.47
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–20885 Filed 9–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[Release No. 34–84238; File No. SR–GEMX–
2018–32]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Risk
Protections
September 20, 2018.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
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
September 11, 2018, Nasdaq GEMX,
LLC (‘‘GEMX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
U.S.C. 78q–1.
approving the proposed rule change, the
Commission considered the proposal’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
47 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
46 In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Sep 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange 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
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
45 15
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
GEMX Rules 100(a)(5) which contains
definitions, Rule 711, ‘‘Acceptance of
Quotes and Orders’’ and Rule 714,
‘‘Automatic Execution of Orders.’’
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://nasdaqgemx.cchwallstreet.com/,
at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
1. Purpose
GEMX proposes to amend Rule 714,
Automatic Execution of Orders, by
placing all risk protections within this
rule and further creating sections to
distinguish order protections, order and
quote protections and quote protections.
The Exchange believes that providing
Members with a single rule with all risk
protections will provide an easy
reference to the mandatory single leg
risk protections on GEMX.
The Exchange is amending Rule
714(b) to rename the caption from
‘‘Other Order Protections’’ to ‘‘Other
Risk Protections.’’ The Exchange is
amending references to ‘‘order
protections’’ to ‘‘risk protections’’
within that rule to more broadly
describe the type of protections offered
on GEMX. Finally, the Exchange is
relocating rule text from Rule 714(c) to
the end of proposed Rule 714(b), which
states, ‘‘In the event of unusual market
conditions and in the interest of a fair
and orderly market, the Exchange may
temporarily establish the levels at which
the order protections contained in this
paragraph are triggered as necessary and
appropriate.’’ These non-substantive
rule changes are intended to bring
greater clarity to the rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Exchange proposes to add the
following to proposed Rule 714(b)(1),
‘‘The following are order risk
protections on GEMX:’’ The Exchange
proposes to list all order protections
within Rule 714(b)(1). The Exchange
proposes to relocate Limit Order Price
Protection from Rule 714(b)(2) to
proposed Rule 714(b)(1)(A). The
Exchange also proposes to add a new
sentence to the end of proposed Rule
714(b)(1)(A) which provides, ‘‘Limit
Order Price Protection shall not apply to
the Opening Process or during a trading
halt.’’ The Exchange is adding this
sentence, which was not contained in
the initial rule change, to make clear the
limitations as to when this protection is
available on GEMX. The Exchange notes
the Limit Order Price Protection rejects
orders to buy (sell) as the greater of the
Exchange’s best offer (bid) plus (minus)
either an absolute dollar or a percentage.
The Exchange notes that the bid or offer
is not established until after an option
series options for trading. Applying this
protection during the Opening Process
is not necessary as the quote width
allowance is tighter during the Opening
Process.3 With respect to trading halts,
Opening Process procedures will be
used to reopen an option series after a
trading halt, therefore, the same
protections noted for the Opening
Process will apply for a trading halt and
the same restrictive boundaries would
apply.4 This sentence memorializes the
Exchange’s current practice. The
Exchange believes that this rule text will
bring greater clarity to the Limit Order
Price Protection functionality.
The Exchange proposes to relocate
and re-number Market Order Spread
Protection from Rule 711(c) to proposed
Rule 714(b)(1)(B). The Exchange also
proposes to add a sentence which
provides, ‘‘Market Order Spread
Protection shall not apply to the
Opening Process or during a trading
halt.’’ The Exchange believes that the
Market Order Spread Protection is
unnecessary during the Opening Process
and during a trading halt because
protections are in place during the
Opening Process to ensure that the best
bid and offer displayed on the Exchange
are within a reasonable range.5 The
3 With respect to the Opening Process, a Quality
Opening Market is required. A Quality Opening
Market a bid/ask differential applicable to the best
bid and offer from all Valid Width Quotes defined
in a table to be determined by the Exchange and
published on the Exchange’s website. See GEMX
Rule 701(a)(7).
4 See GEMX Rule 701(d).
5 See note 3 above. With respect to trading halts,
Opening Process procedures will be used to reopen
an option series after a trading halt, therefore, the
same protections noted for the Opening Process will
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48675-48678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20885]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-84236; File No. SR-FICC-2018-006]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Codify the
Processing of Conditional Prepayment Rate Claims in the MBSD Rules and
Make Other Changes
September 20, 2018.
On July 26, 2018, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'')
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
proposed rule change SR-FICC-2018-006 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on August 8, 2018.\3\ The Commission did not
receive any comment letters on the proposed rule change. For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83767 (August 2, 2018),
83 FR 39143 (August 8, 2018) (SR-FICC-2018-006) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
The proposed rule change would make amendments to FICC's Mortgage-
Backed Securities Division (``MBSD'') Clearing Rules (``MBSD Rules'')
\4\ in order to (i) add terms governing MBSD's current processing of
conditional prepayment rate (``CPR'') claims to the MBSD Rules, and
(ii) make certain clarifications and corrections in the MBSD Rules, as
described below.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.
\5\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. CPR Claims
Mortgage pools \6\ are often traded in To-Be-Announced (``TBA'')
trades, which are trades for which the actual identities of and/or the
number of pools underlying each trade are unknown at the time of trade
execution.\7\ MBSD guidelines provide that two business days prior to
the established settlement date of the TBA settlement obligations, the
FICC MBSD clearing member (``Clearing Member'') that has an obligation
to deliver pools for the TBA transaction (i.e., the ``seller'') must
allocate the pools to be delivered.\8\ FICC states that pursuant to the
MBSD Rules, Clearing Members may substitute an underlying pool after it
has been allocated with respect to a pool deliver obligation by
providing instructions to FICC.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ A mortgage pool is a collection of mortgage loans or other
collateral assembled by an originator or master services as
collateral for a mortgaged-back security. Id.
\7\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
\8\ Id.
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CPR is the percentage of the outstanding loan balance for a pool
that is expected to be repaid over a one-year period.\10\ A CPR claim
arises when an underlying TBA pool is allocated or substituted with a
pool that pays down at a faster rate (i.e., has a higher CPR) than the
average pay down rate for pools of the same type as the underlying pool
being replaced.\11\ The result is that the buyer is receiving a pool
with less value than anticipated based on the TBA terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.
\11\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As provided in the SIFMA Guidelines,\12\ the industry currently has
a process pursuant to which a buyer may make a CPR claim against the
seller. The CPR claim process is intended to compensate the buyer for
the excess amount that it is paying for the pool being delivered.\13\
Pursuant to SIFMA Guidelines, an entity is entitled to make a CPR claim
if (i) the allocation or substitution giving rise to the CPR claim
occurred after the factor release date \14\ following the scheduled
contractual settlement date relating to the trade; (ii) the pools
involved in the claim meet the criteria for fast paying pools in
accordance with SIFMA Guidelines; (iii) the amount of the CPR claim is
$10,000 or greater, or, in the
[[Page 48676]]
case that an entity is submitting a re-transmittal \15\ of a CPR claim,
the CPR claim is $500 or greater; and (iv) 90 percent of the buyer's
claimable unit has settled.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Available at https://www.sifma.org/resources/general/tba-market-governance/ under ``Uniform Practices Manual.'' The SIFMA
Guidelines are trading, clearing and settlement guidelines prepared
by SIFMA intended to reflect common industry practices relating to
confirming, comparing and settling mortgage-backed securities.
\13\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
\14\ The term ``factor release date'' means, with respect to a
pool, the date on which the Federal National Mortgage Association
(``Fannie Mae''), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
(``Freddie Mac'') or the Government National Mortgage Association
(``Ginnie Mae''), as applicable, release the ``factor'' that
represents the percentage of the agency's original balance of the
pool that remains outstanding as of such date. Id.
\15\ A re-transmittal of a CPR claim occurs when a party with
the pool deliver obligation passes the CPR claims it received to the
entities that sent it the pools it used for delivery. Id.
\16\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change would codify FICC's existing CPR claims
process in the MBSD Rules, including adding a provision providing that
a Clearing Member's cash settlement obligations would include the
positive or negative amount of any valid CPR claim.\17\ FICC states
that the proposed MBSD CPR claims process would generally follow the
CPR claims process set forth in the SIFMA Guidelines and MBSD's current
CPR claims process, with the following exceptions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Definition of Claimable Unit
The proposed rule change would add to the MBSD Rules two
definitions of ``claimable unit,'' the use of which would depend on the
type of transaction.\18\ According to SIFMA Guidelines and FICC's
current process, CPR claims are based on a ``claimable unit'' which
defines the pool or group of pools that are included in a particular
CPR claim.\19\ Also according to SIFMA Guidelines, a claimable unit is
based on all pools allocated for a trade between factor release dates
that have the same underlying TBA characteristics, such as product,
coupon, trade date, settlement date and price.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id.
\19\ Id.
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC states that it currently processes CPR claims using a
different definition of claimable unit than the SIFMA definition. FICC
states that its CPR claims process currently uses a definition of
claimable unit based on characteristics of pools after MBSD Pool
Netting \21\ takes place rather than based on underlying TBA
characteristics. The Pool Netting process generally reduces the number
of pool settlements by aggregating and matching offsetting allocated
pools submitted by Clearing Members to arrive at a single net position
per counterparty in a particular pool number.\22\ FICC states that if a
pool obligation is a result of Pool Netting, FICC is unable to track
the pool obligation to an original TBA trade or trades and would be
unable to group pool obligations for CPR claims based on TBA
characteristics as provided in SIFMA Guidelines.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Pursuant to the MBSD Rules, the term ``Pool Netting'' means
the service provided to Clearing Members, as applicable, and the
operations carried out by FICC in the course of providing such
service in accordance with MBSD Rule 8.
\22\ Notice, 83 FR, at 39145.
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC proposes to use the same definition of claimable unit for CPR
claims as SIFMA Guidelines if the pool obligations upon which the CPR
claims are based have not been through MBSD Pool Netting. FICC states
that this definition would be used for pool allocations or
substitutions for pool obligations that have been allocated after the
factor release date because pool obligations allocated after the factor
release date do not go through the Pool Netting process.\24\ As a
result, FICC states that it would be able to track the pool obligation
to an original TBA trade, which would allow FICC to group the pool
obligation with other pool obligations based on TBA
characteristics.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC proposes to use a different definition of a claimable unit
from the SIFMA Guidelines definition for CPR claims based on pool
obligations that are a result of Pool Netting.\26\ FICC proposes to
define a claimable unit for such pool obligations based on pool
characteristics after Pool Netting, rather than based on the original
TBA pool characteristics.\27\ FICC states that this definition would be
used for substitutions for pool obligations that are a result of Pool
Netting because FICC would be unable to track the pool obligation to an
original TBA trade and thus unable to group such pool obligation with
other pool obligations based on TBA characteristics.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Id.
\27\ Id.
\28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Re-Transmittal Threshold
The minimum threshold for a re-transmittal of a CPR claim under
SIFMA Guidelines is $500.\29\ FICC's current process provides that the
minimum threshold for re-transmittals is $5,000.\30\ FICC proposes to
use the $500 re-transmittal minimum threshold for allocations (and
related substitutions), where the allocations were made after the
applicable factor release date, in order to be more consistent with
SIFMA Guidelines and established industry practice.\31\ Meanwhile, FICC
proposes to use a $5,000 re-transmittal threshold for substitutions
relating to allocations that were made prior to the factor release date
following the contractual settlement date to avoid having to process
multiple smaller transactions, which FICC believes would likely be
administratively burdensome.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id.
\30\ Id.
\31\ Id.
\32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Proposed MBSD Rule Changes
To codify the CPR claims process as described above, the proposed
rule change would add a description of the CPR claim process in a new
Section 10 of MBSD Rule 9, including a defined term for ``CPR Claim.''
\33\ In addition, the proposed rule change would specify the validation
process for CPR claims, which, as described above, would codify
existing FICC practices relating to CPR claims and provide that the
process for CPR claims is consistent with SIFMA Guidelines, in each
case, with the exceptions noted above.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the proposed rule change would specify that CPR
claims submitted would be reviewed by FICC to validate the following:
(i) The claimable unit with respect to the CPR claim meets the criteria
for fast paying pools as set forth in SIFMA Guidelines; (ii) the CPR
claim amount is $10,000 or greater, unless the CPR claim is a re-
transmittal of a CPR claim, in which case, (a) if the CPR claim relates
to an allocation of a pool effected after the factor release date
following the contractual settlement date and/or substitution of
related pools, the amount is $500 or greater, or (b) if the CPR claim
relates to a substitution of a pool that was allocated prior to the
factor release date following the contractual settlement date, the
amount is $5,000 or greater; and (iii) 90 percent of the Clearing
Member's claimable unit has settled.
Consistent with FICC's current CPR claims process, the proposed
rule change would also specify that (1) FICC maintains the right to
process CPR claims with no minimum denomination, (2) CPR claims may be
apportioned to more than one participant, (3) CPR claims may be
comprised of both debits and credits, (4) FICC would process all CPR
claims on the Class ``B'' settlement date in the month following the
transmittal month, and (5) FICC would notify the Clearing Member that
the CPR claim has been rejected if the CPR claim is determined to be
invalid.
In addition, that the proposed rule change would specify that FICC
shall not guaranty CPR claim payments, and any credit to be received
with respect to a CPR claim would be reduced to the extent the
corresponding debit in
[[Page 48677]]
connection with a CPR claim is not paid.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC states that to ensure that Clearing Members understand the
potential credits and debits relating to CPR claims, the proposed rule
change would add credits and debits relating to CPR claims in Section 7
of MBSD Rule 11 as items for end of day cash balance computations.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC states that to further describe the CPR claims process as set
forth above, a cross-reference for the defined term ``CPR Claim'' and
new defined terms ``Claimable Unit'' and ``Factor Release Date'' would
be added to MBSD Rule 1, which are consistent with existing FICC
practices relating to CPR claims and with SIFMA Guidelines, in each
case, with the exceptions noted above.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FICC states that the definitions for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and
Ginnie Mae would be corrected in MBSD Rule 1 to be consistent with
industry practice and with their usage throughout the MBSD Rules.\38\
In addition, the definition of ``SIFMA Guidelines'' would be clarified
by adding a link identifying the location of the SIFMA Guidelines on
the SIFMA website.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Id.
\39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion and Commission Findings
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \40\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and rules and regulations thereunder applicable
to such organization. The Commission believes the proposal is
consistent with the Act, specifically Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) under the Act, as discussed below.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
\41\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F); 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \42\ requires, inter alia, that the
rules of the clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described above, FICC proposes to codify its existing CPR claims
process and to specify the validation process for CPR claims. First,
FICC proposes to specify that CPR claims submitted would be reviewed by
FICC to validate (i) the claimable unit with respect to the CPR claim
meets the criteria for fast paying pools as set forth in SIFMA
Guidelines; (ii) the CPR claim amount is $10,000 or greater, unless the
CPR claim is a re-transmittal of a CPR claim, in which case, (a) if the
CPR claim relates to an allocation of a pool effected after the factor
release date following the contractual settlement date and/or
substitution of related pools, the amount is $500 or greater, or (b) if
the CPR claim relates to a substitution of a pool that was allocated
prior to the factor release date following the contractual settlement
date, the amount is $5,000 or greater; and (iii) 90 percent of the
Clearing Member's claimable unit has settled.
Consistent with FICC's current CPR claims process, FICC also
proposes to specify that (1) FICC maintains the right to process CPR
claims with no minimum denomination, (2) CPR claims may be apportioned
to more than one participant, (3) CPR claims may be comprised of both
debits and credits, (4) FICC would process all CPR claims on the Class
``B'' settlement date in the month following the transmittal month, and
(5) FICC would notify the Clearing Member that the CPR claim has been
rejected if the CPR claim is determined to be invalid.
In addition, FICC proposes to specify that FICC shall not guaranty
CPR claim payments, and any credit to be received with respect to a CPR
claim would be reduced to the extent the corresponding debit in
connection with a CPR claim is not paid.
These proposed changes would codify FICC's existing processes
surrounding CPR claims and make the CPR claims process more consistent
with SIFMA Guidelines. The Commission believes that the codification
would enable Clearing Members to better understand how CPR claims would
be validated and processed through FICC's facilities and how FICC's CPR
claims process would differ from SIFMA Guidelines with respect to the
definition of claimable unit and the re-transmittal minimum threshold,
as set forth above. By enabling Clearing Members to better understand
the CPR claims process, the proposal is designed to help ensure that
CPR claims are submitted and processed correctly and thus promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of such securities
transactions.
Additionally, FICC proposes to make several clarifying changes.
First, as described above, the proposed rule change would add credits
and debits relating to CPR claims in Section 7 of MBSD Rule 11 as items
for end of day cash balance computations. In Second, a cross-reference
for the defined term ``CPR Claim'' and new defined terms ``Claimable
Unit'' and ``Factor Release Date'' would be added to MBSD Rule 1, which
are consistent with existing FICC practices relating to CPR claims and
with SIFMA Guidelines, in each case, with the exceptions noted above.
Third, the proposed rule change would correct the definitions for
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae in MBSD Rule 1 to be consistent
with industry practice and with their usage throughout the MBSD Rules.
Fourth, FICC proposes to add a description of the CPR claim process in
a new Section 10 of MBSD Rule 9, including a defined term for ``CPR
Claim.'' Finally, the definition of ``SIFMA Guidelines'' would be
clarified by adding a link identifying the location of the SIFMA
Guidelines on the SIFMA website.
By proposing these clarifying changes to the CPR claims rules, the
Commission believes that the proposed changes are designed to help
Clearing Members better understand and remain compliant with the CPR
claims rules to help ensure that CPR claims are submitted and processed
correctly, and thus promoting the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of such securities transactions.
As each of the aforementioned changes are designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F).
B. Consistency with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) under the Act requires a covered clearing
agency \43\ to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for publicly
disclosing all relevant rules and material procedures.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ A ``covered clearing agency'' means, among other things, a
clearing agency registered with the Commission under Section 17A of
the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78q-1 et seq.) that is designated
systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel
(``FSOC'') pursuant to the Clearing Supervision Act (12 U.S.C. 5461
et seq.). See 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(a)(5)-(6). On July 18, 2012, FSOC
designated FICC as systemically important. U.S. Department of the
Treasury, ``FSOC Makes First Designations in Effort to Protect
Against Future Financial Crises,'' available at https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1645.aspx.
Therefore, FICC is a covered clearing agency.
\44\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described above, the proposed rule changes would (1) codify
FICC's existing CPR claims process and (2) make clarifications to the
existing CPR claims process. The Commission
[[Page 48678]]
believes these proposed changes to codify and clarify FICC's existing
practices in regards to the CPR claims process would assist in publicly
disclosing all relevant and material procedures regarding the CPR
claims process. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) under the Act.
III. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act, in particular
the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \45\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that proposed rule change SR-FICC-2018-006 be, and hereby is,
approved.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-20885 Filed 9-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P