Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change Concerning the Implementation of New Sufficiency Scenarios in the Options Clearing Corporation's Stress Testing Inventory, 659-662 [2020-29217]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Notices
competitive environment because it
waives fees for Qualifying Firms and is
designed to reduce monthly costs for
Floor participants whose operations
continue to be disrupted even though
the Trading Floor has partially
reopened. In reducing this monthly
financial burden, the proposed change
would allow affected participants to
reallocate funds to assist with the cost
of shifting and maintaining their prior
fully staffed on-Floor operations to offFloor.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited
or received with respect to the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change is effective
upon filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) 16 of the Act and
subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 17
thereunder, because it establishes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the
Exchange.
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of such proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. If the
Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 18 of the Act to
determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
IV. Solicitation of Comments
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–NYSEArca–2020–115. 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
Number SR–NYSEArca–2020–115 and
should be submitted on or before
January 27, 2021.
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:
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.19
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
Electronic Comments
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[FR Doc. 2020–29285 Filed 1–5–21; 8:45 am]
• 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–
NYSEArca–2020–115 on the subject
line.
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
19:08 Jan 05, 2021
19 17
Jkt 253001
[Release No. 34–90827; File No. SR–OCC–
2020–015]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The
Options Clearing Corporation; Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change Concerning the
Implementation of New Sufficiency
Scenarios in the Options Clearing
Corporation’s Stress Testing Inventory
December 30, 2020.
I. Introduction
On December 2, 2020, the Options
Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change SR–OCC–2020–
015 (‘‘Proposed Rule Change’’) pursuant
to Section 19(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange
Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 2 thereunder to
implement additional stress test
scenarios to OCC’s Comprehensive
Stress Testing & Clearing Fund
Methodology, and to its Liquidity Risk
Management Description.3 The
Proposed Rule Change was published
for public comment in the Federal
Register on December 14, 2020.4 The
Commission has received no comments
regarding the Proposed Rule Change.
This order approves the Proposed Rule
Change on an accelerated basis.
II. Background
The Proposed Rule Change by OCC
would take existing informational stress
test scenarios and add them to the list
of stress test scenarios designed to test
the sufficiency of OCC’s prefunded
financial resources. The proposed
changes are to OCC’s Comprehensive
Stress Testing & Clearing Fund
Methodology, and to its Liquidity Risk
Management Description
(‘‘Methodology Description’’).
In 2018, OCC established its current
clearing fund methodology, using a
stress testing framework to measure its
credit exposure at a level sufficient to
cover potential losses under extreme but
plausible market conditions.5 OCC
performs daily stress testing using a
wide range of scenarios, both
hypothetical and historical. Its stress
testing scenario inventory includes four
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Notice of Filing infra note 4, 85 FR at 80829.
4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90603 (Dec.
8, 2020), 85 FR 80829 (Dec. 14, 2020) (File No. SR–
OCC–2020–015) (‘‘Notice of Filing’’).
5 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul.
27. 2018), 83 FR 37855 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR–
OCC–2018–008).
2 17
17 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
1 15
16 15
PO 00000
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
Frm 00160
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
659
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
06JAN1
660
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
different categories: (1) Scenarios that
determine whether the financial
resources collected from all Clearing
Members collectively are adequate to
cover OCC’s risk tolerance (‘‘Adequacy
Scenarios’’); (2) scenarios that establish
the monthly size of the Clearing Fund
at an amount necessary to cover losses
arising from the default of the two
Clearing Member Groups that would
potentially cause the largest aggregate
credit exposure as a result of a 1-in-80
year hypothetical market event (‘‘Sizing
Scenarios’’); (3) scenarios that measure
the exposure of the Clearing Fund to the
portfolios of individual Clearing
Member Groups and determine whether
any such exposure is sufficiently large
as to necessitate OCC calling for
additional resources to guard against
potential losses under a wide range of
stress scenarios, including extreme but
plausible market conditions
(‘‘Sufficiency Scenarios’’); 6 and (4)
scenarios that monitor and assess the
size of OCC’s prefunded financial
resources against a wide range of stress
scenarios that may include newly
developed stress scenarios for
evaluation as well as extreme but
implausible scenarios (‘‘Informational
Scenarios’’). Adequacy and
Informational Scenarios are not used
directly to size the Clearing Fund or
drive calls for additional financial
resources from OCC’s Clearing
Members.
As described in the Notice of Filing,
OCC proposes to elevate four of its
current Informational Scenarios to
Sufficiency Scenarios. These
Informational Scenarios are historical
scenarios designed to represent recent
market events from March 2020. The
proposed Sufficiency Scenarios would
include price shocks representing the
most extreme market decline and rally
moves in March 2020, and would
include variations of these scenarios
designed to account for specific wrongway risk exposures arising from cleared
6 Pursuant to OCC Rule 609 and OCC’s Clearing
Fund Methodology Policy, if any of OCC’s
Sufficiency Scenarios identifies exposures that
exceed 75% of the current Clearing Fund
requirement less deficits, OCC may require
additional margin deposits from the Clearing
Member Group(s) driving the breach. Additionally,
pursuant to Rule 1001(c) and the Clearing Fund
Methodology Policy, if a Sufficiency Scenario
identifies a Clearing Fund draw for any one or two
Clearing Member Groups that exceeds 90% of the
current Clearing Fund size (after subtracting any
monies deposited as a result of a margin call in
accordance with a breach of the 75% threshold),
OCC has the authority to reset the size of the
Clearing Fund on an intra-month basis to ensure
that it continues to maintain sufficient prefunded
financial resources. See Notice of Filing supra note
4, 85 FR at 80829–30.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:08 Jan 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
positions on issued exchange traded
notes (‘‘ETNs’’).7
These four scenarios, as Informational
Scenarios, currently do not drive the
size of the Clearing Fund or calls for
additional resources. Once elevated to
Sufficiency Scenarios, they would be
used to measure OCC’s Clearing Fund
exposure to the portfolios of individual
Clearing Member Groups and determine
whether any such exposure is
sufficiently large where it would
necessitate OCC calling for additional
resources in the form of margin or an
intra-month resizing of the Clearing
Fund. OCC asserts that by adding these
four Sufficiency Scenarios, it would be
able to test the sufficiency of its
financial resources under a wider range
of relevant stress scenarios and respond
quickly when OCC believes additional
financial resources are necessary.8
III. Commission’s Findings and Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of the
Proposed Rule Change
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange
Act 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 Exchange
Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to such
organization.9 After carefully
considering the Proposed Rule Change,
the Commission finds that the proposal
is consistent with the requirements of
the Exchange Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to
OCC. More specifically, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent
with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Exchange Act,10 and Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(4) 11 thereunder, as described in
detail below.
A. Consistency With Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange
Act requires that the rules of a clearing
agency be designed to, among other
things, 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
the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible.12 In 2018, the Commission
approved a Proposed Rule Change to
formalize OCC’s current Clearing Fund
Methodology Policy, including OCC’s
7 See Notice of Filing supra note 4, 85 FR at
80830.
8 Id.
9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
10 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4).
12 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
PO 00000
Frm 00161
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
current stress testing methodology, and
the Commission’s approval was based in
part on the same Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
requirements above.13 Based on its
review of the record, and for the reasons
described below, the Commission
believes that the proposed addition of
more stress test scenarios designed to
test the sufficiency of OCC’s prefunded
financial resources as described above is
consistent with the promotion of
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions,
and the assurance of the safeguarding of
securities and funds which are in OCC’s
custody or control or for which OCC is
responsible.
First, the proposal to elevate four
Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency
Scenarios would expand upon the scope
of stress scenarios against which OCC
monitors its financial resources. The
Commission continues to believe that
the historical scenarios replicating the
1987 market crash and financial crisis
provide additional depth to the
monitoring of OCC’s financial
resources.14 Similarly, for the present
proposal, the Commission believes that
the introduction of new historical
scenarios replicating the market events
of March 2020 would provide stress
exposure estimates that would be
meaningful for the monitoring of OCC’s
total financial resources. Elevating these
Informational Scenarios to become
Sufficiency Scenarios would increase
the likelihood that OCC will have
sufficient financial resources in excess
of margin to address credit losses that
could arise from the default of a
Clearing Member, and this would in
turn enhance OCC’s ability to continue
to promptly and accurately clear and
settle securities transactions for
participants in the options markets
during periods of market stress.
Therefore, the Commission believes that
the proposal is consistent with
promoting the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.
Second, adding the proposed
Sufficiency Scenarios would be
consistent with assuring the
safeguarding of securities and funds
currently in OCC’s custody and control
by creating a wider range of stress
scenarios that would improve the
likelihood of the Clearing Fund having
sufficient resources to cover potential
credit losses under adverse market
conditions. As noted above, Sufficiency
Scenarios are used to determine
whether any exposure of the Clearing
Fund to the portfolios of individual
13 See
14 See
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
supra note 5, 83 FR at 37861–62.
supra note 5, 83 FR at 37861.
06JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Notices
Clearing Member Groups is sufficiently
large as to necessitate OCC calling for
additional resources in the form of
margin to guard against potential losses.
Collecting this additional margin
reduces the likelihood that OCC must
mutualize the risk associated with these
potential losses through the use of
surviving Clearing Members’
contributions to the Clearing Fund. The
Commission continues to believe that
reducing the potentiality of loss
mutualization during periods of market
stress, while unavoidable in certain
circumstances, could reduce the
potential knock-on effects to nondefaulting Clearing Members, their
customers and the broader options
market.15 The addition of the four
scenarios representing recent market
events, previously uncaptured in OCC’s
Sufficiency stress testing, would widen
the set of Sufficiency Scenarios to
include such events, and further reduce
the likelihood of drawing upon
surviving Clearing Members’ Clearing
Fund collateral in the event that similar
market scenarios occur. Therefore, the
Commission believes that the proposal
is consistent with assuring the
safeguarding of securities and funds
which are in OCC’s custody or control.
The Commission believes, therefore,
that the proposal to elevate the four
Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency
Scenarios is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Exchange Act.16
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)
Under the Exchange Act
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)(vi) under the
Exchange Act requires OCC to establish,
implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to effectively
identify, measure, monitor, and manage
its credit exposures to participants and
those arising from its payment, clearing,
and settlement processes by testing the
sufficiency of its total financial
resources available to meet the
minimum financial resource
requirements under paragraphs Rules
17Ad–22(e)(4)(i) through (iii).17 Such
testing must include, among other
things, conducting stress testing of
OCC’s total financial resources once
each day using standard predetermined
parameters and assumptions.18
15 See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No.
86119 (Jun. 17. 2019), 84 FR 29267, 29269 (Jun. 21,
2019) (File No. SR–OCC–2019–004) (noting a new
liquidation cost model’s impact on reducing
potential loss mutualization).
16 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
17 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4)(vi) (citing 17 CFR
240.17Ad–22(e)(4)(i)–(iii)).
18 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4)(vi)(A).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:08 Jan 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
After reviewing and assessing the
proposal, the Commission believes that
the proposed changes described above
are consistent with Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(4)(vi) under the Exchange Act. As
it stated in 2018, the Commission
believes that expanding the scope of
stress scenarios against which OCC
monitors its financial resources would
increase the likelihood that OCC
maintains sufficient financial resources
at all times.19 Similarly, the
Commission believes that the elevation
of the four Informational Scenarios to
Sufficiency Scenarios is consistent with
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)(vi) because the
addition of the four Sufficiency
Scenarios would enhance OCC’s
financial resources testing, and the
broader scope of stress scenarios would
increase the chances that OCC
maintains sufficient financial resources.
The Commission also believes that the
daily testing of OCC’s financial
resources against the Sufficiency
Scenarios, including the four proposed
Sufficiency Scenarios based on the
March 2020 market events, would be
consistent with the daily stress testing
requirements of Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(4)(vi)(A), as described above.
The Commission also believes that the
proposed introduction of stress scenario
variations accounting for specific
wrong-way risk exposures arising from
cleared positions on issued ETNs would
be consistent with the requirements of
Rules 17Ad–22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).20
These Rules require that a covered
clearing agency establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to
effectively identify, measure, monitor,
and manage its credit exposures to
participants and those arising from its
payment, clearing, and settlement
processes, including by: (1) Maintaining
sufficient financial resources to cover its
credit exposure to each participant fully
with a high degree of confidence; (2)
maintaining additional financial
resources at the minimum to enable it
to cover a wide range of foreseeable
stress scenarios that include, but are not
limited to, the default of the participant
family that would potentially cause the
largest aggregate credit exposure for the
covered clearing agency in extreme but
plausible market conditions; and (3)
testing the sufficiency of its total
financial resources available to meet
these minimum financial resource
requirements. In its 2019 approval of
enhancements to OCC’s Clearing Fund
and stress testing methodology, the
Commission noted that OCC’s
19 See
20 17
PO 00000
supra note 5, 83 FR at 37863.
CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).
Frm 00162
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
661
introduction of new stress test scenarios
designed to capture single wrong-way
risk exposures for Clearing Memberissued ETNs would be consistent with
the requirements of Rules 17Ad–
22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi), because it
would enable OCC to test its total
financial resources and to call for
additional resources as necessary to
ensure the resources it holds would be
sufficient to enable OCC to cover
exposures arising under the relevant
stress scenarios.21 Likewise, for the
current proposal, the Commission
believes that OCC’s introduction of four
Sufficiency Scenarios reflecting the
market events of March 2020, including
its specific wrong-way risk exposure
variations, would also enable OCC to
more accurately measure its credit risks
and better test the sufficiency of its
overall financial resources. The
proposed rule change would thus
enhance OCC’s overall framework for
measuring and managing its credit risks
and would reduce the risk that OCC’s
financial resources would be
insufficient in the event of a Clearing
Member default consistent with Rules
17Ad–22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).
The Commission believes, therefore,
that the proposal to elevate the four
Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency
Scenarios is consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)
under the Exchange Act.22
C. Accelerated Approval of the
Proposed Rule Change
In its filing, OCC requests that the
Commission grant accelerated approval
of the Proposed Rule Change pursuant
to Secton 19(b)(C)(iii) of the Exchange
Act.23 Under Section 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of
the Exchange Act, the Commission may
grant accelerated approval of a proposed
rule change if the Commission finds
good cause for doing so.24 OCC believes
that there is good cause for the
Commission to accelerate effectiveness
because the proposed changes are
designed to improve OCC’s ability to
measure, monitor and manage its credit
exposures to its participants.25 Further,
OCC believes that implementation of the
proposed Sufficiency Scenarios would
promote the protection of investors and
the public interest by enabling OCC to
test the sufficiency of its prefunded
financial resources against a recent and
significant period of market volatility
and enhancing OCC’s ability to manage
21 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718
(Dec. 11, 2019), 84 FR 68992, 68995 (Dec. 17, 2019)
(File No. SR–OCC–2019–010).
22 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4).
23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii).
24 Id.
25 See Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 80830.
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
06JAN1
662
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Notices
the risks it faces as a systemically
important financial market utility.26
The Commission finds good cause,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of
the Exchange Act,27 for approving the
Proposed Rule Change on an accelerated
basis, prior to the 30th day after the date
of publication of notice in the Federal
Register, because accelerated approval
of this proposed rule change will
facilitate the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of options
contracts by ensuring that OCC has
expanded the range of stress scenarios
to measure, monitor, and manage its
credit exposures to its participants in a
timely fashion, thereby immediately
putting OCC in a better position to
manage the risks it faces as a
systemically important financial market
utility.
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Commission finds that the Proposed
Rule Change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act, and
in particular, the requirements of
Section 17A of the Exchange Act 28 and
the rules and regulations thereunder.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,29
that the Proposed Rule Change (SR–
OCC–2020–015) be, and hereby is,
approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.30
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–29217 Filed 1–5–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–90837; File No. SR–
NASDAQ–2020–099]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The
Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend
General 7: Consolidated Audit Trail
Compliance, the Exchange’s
Compliance Rule
December 31, 2020.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
26 Id.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
General 7: Consolidated Audit Trail
Compliance, the Exchange’s compliance
rule (‘‘Compliance Rule’’) regarding the
National Market System Plan Governing
the Consolidated Audit Trail (the ‘‘CAT
NMS Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’) 3 to be consistent
with a conditional exemption granted
by the Commission from certain
allocation reporting requirements set
forth in Sections 6.4(d)(ii)(A)(1) and (2)
of the CAT NMS Plan (‘‘Allocation
Exemption’’).4
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/nasdaq/rules, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, 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
1. Purpose
The purpose of this proposed rule
change is to amend the General 7:
Consolidated Audit Trail Compliance to
1 15
27 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii).
28 In approving this Proposed Rule Change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rules’
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
29 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
30 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on December
30, 2020, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
(‘‘Nasdaq’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, 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.
19:08 Jan 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms
used in this rule filing are defined as set forth in
the Compliance Rule.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Rel. No. 90223
(October 19, 2020), 85 FR 67576 (October 23, 2020)
(‘‘Allocation Exemptive Order’’).
2 17
PO 00000
Frm 00163
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
be consistent with the Allocation
Exemption. The Commission granted
the relief conditioned upon the
Participants’ adoption of Compliance
Rules that implement the alternative
approach to reporting allocations to the
Central Repository described in the
Allocation Exemption (referred to as the
‘‘Allocation Alternative’’).
(1) Request for Exemptive Relief
Pursuant to Section 6.4(d)(ii)(A) of the
CAT NMS Plan, each Participant must,
through its Compliance Rule, require its
Industry Members to record and report
to the Central Repository, if the order is
executed, in whole or in part: (1) An
Allocation Report; 5 (2) the SROAssigned Market Participant Identifier
of the clearing broker or prime broker,
if applicable; and the (3) CAT-Order-ID
of any contra-side order(s). Accordingly,
the Exchange and the other Participants
implemented Compliance Rules that
require their Industry Members that are
executing brokers to submit to the
Central Repository, among other things,
Allocation Reports and the SROAssigned Market Participant Identifier
of the clearing broker or prime broker,
if applicable.
On August 27, 2020, the Participants
submitted to the Commission a request
for an exemption from certain allocation
reporting requirements set forth in
Sections 6.4(d)(ii)(A)(1) and (2) of the
CAT NMS Plan (‘‘Exemption
Request’’).6 In the Exemption Request,
the Participants requested that they be
permitted to implement the Allocation
Alternative, which, as noted above, is an
alternative approach to reporting
allocations to the Central Repository.
Under the Allocation Alternative, any
Industry Member that performs an
allocation to a client account would be
required under the Compliance Rule to
submit an Allocation Report to the
Central Repository when shares/
contracts are allocated to a client
account regardless of whether the
Industry Member was involved in
executing the underlying order(s).
Under the Allocation Alternative, a
‘‘client account’’ would be any account
5 Section 1.1 of the CAT NMS Plan defines an
‘‘Allocation Report’’ as ‘‘a report made to the
Central Repository by an Industry Member that
identifies the Firm Designated ID for any account(s),
including subaccount(s), to which executed shares
are allocated and provides the security that has
been allocated, the identifier of the firm reporting
the allocation, the price per share of shares
allocated, the side of shares allocated, the number
of shares allocated to each account, and the time of
the allocation; provided for the avoidance of doubt,
any such Allocation Report shall not be required to
be linked to particular orders or executions.’’
6 See letter from the Participants to Vanessa
Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated August
27, 2020 (the ‘‘Exemption Request’’).
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
06JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 659-662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29217]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-90827; File No. SR-OCC-2020-015]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change Concerning
the Implementation of New Sufficiency Scenarios in the Options Clearing
Corporation's Stress Testing Inventory
December 30, 2020.
I. Introduction
On December 2, 2020, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2020-015 (``Proposed Rule Change'')
pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder to implement
additional stress test scenarios to OCC's Comprehensive Stress Testing
& Clearing Fund Methodology, and to its Liquidity Risk Management
Description.\3\ The Proposed Rule Change was published for public
comment in the Federal Register on December 14, 2020.\4\ The Commission
has received no comments regarding the Proposed Rule Change. This order
approves the Proposed Rule Change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Notice of Filing infra note 4, 85 FR at 80829.
\4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90603 (Dec. 8, 2020), 85
FR 80829 (Dec. 14, 2020) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-015) (``Notice of
Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
The Proposed Rule Change by OCC would take existing informational
stress test scenarios and add them to the list of stress test scenarios
designed to test the sufficiency of OCC's prefunded financial
resources. The proposed changes are to OCC's Comprehensive Stress
Testing & Clearing Fund Methodology, and to its Liquidity Risk
Management Description (``Methodology Description'').
In 2018, OCC established its current clearing fund methodology,
using a stress testing framework to measure its credit exposure at a
level sufficient to cover potential losses under extreme but plausible
market conditions.\5\ OCC performs daily stress testing using a wide
range of scenarios, both hypothetical and historical. Its stress
testing scenario inventory includes four
[[Page 660]]
different categories: (1) Scenarios that determine whether the
financial resources collected from all Clearing Members collectively
are adequate to cover OCC's risk tolerance (``Adequacy Scenarios'');
(2) scenarios that establish the monthly size of the Clearing Fund at
an amount necessary to cover losses arising from the default of the two
Clearing Member Groups that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure as a result of a 1-in-80 year hypothetical
market event (``Sizing Scenarios''); (3) scenarios that measure the
exposure of the Clearing Fund to the portfolios of individual Clearing
Member Groups and determine whether any such exposure is sufficiently
large as to necessitate OCC calling for additional resources to guard
against potential losses under a wide range of stress scenarios,
including extreme but plausible market conditions (``Sufficiency
Scenarios''); \6\ and (4) scenarios that monitor and assess the size of
OCC's prefunded financial resources against a wide range of stress
scenarios that may include newly developed stress scenarios for
evaluation as well as extreme but implausible scenarios
(``Informational Scenarios''). Adequacy and Informational Scenarios are
not used directly to size the Clearing Fund or drive calls for
additional financial resources from OCC's Clearing Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27. 2018),
83 FR 37855 (Aug. 2, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2018-008).
\6\ Pursuant to OCC Rule 609 and OCC's Clearing Fund Methodology
Policy, if any of OCC's Sufficiency Scenarios identifies exposures
that exceed 75% of the current Clearing Fund requirement less
deficits, OCC may require additional margin deposits from the
Clearing Member Group(s) driving the breach. Additionally, pursuant
to Rule 1001(c) and the Clearing Fund Methodology Policy, if a
Sufficiency Scenario identifies a Clearing Fund draw for any one or
two Clearing Member Groups that exceeds 90% of the current Clearing
Fund size (after subtracting any monies deposited as a result of a
margin call in accordance with a breach of the 75% threshold), OCC
has the authority to reset the size of the Clearing Fund on an
intra-month basis to ensure that it continues to maintain sufficient
prefunded financial resources. See Notice of Filing supra note 4, 85
FR at 80829-30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in the Notice of Filing, OCC proposes to elevate four
of its current Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency Scenarios. These
Informational Scenarios are historical scenarios designed to represent
recent market events from March 2020. The proposed Sufficiency
Scenarios would include price shocks representing the most extreme
market decline and rally moves in March 2020, and would include
variations of these scenarios designed to account for specific wrong-
way risk exposures arising from cleared positions on issued exchange
traded notes (``ETNs'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Notice of Filing supra note 4, 85 FR at 80830.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These four scenarios, as Informational Scenarios, currently do not
drive the size of the Clearing Fund or calls for additional resources.
Once elevated to Sufficiency Scenarios, they would be used to measure
OCC's Clearing Fund exposure to the portfolios of individual Clearing
Member Groups and determine whether any such exposure is sufficiently
large where it would necessitate OCC calling for additional resources
in the form of margin or an intra-month resizing of the Clearing Fund.
OCC asserts that by adding these four Sufficiency Scenarios, it would
be able to test the sufficiency of its financial resources under a
wider range of relevant stress scenarios and respond quickly when OCC
believes additional financial resources are necessary.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Change
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act 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 Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to such organization.\9\ After carefully
considering the Proposed Rule Change, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to OCC. More
specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act,\10\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)
\11\ thereunder, as described in detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires that the rules of
a clearing agency be designed to, among other things, 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 the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible.\12\ In 2018, the Commission approved a Proposed Rule
Change to formalize OCC's current Clearing Fund Methodology Policy,
including OCC's current stress testing methodology, and the
Commission's approval was based in part on the same Section
17A(b)(3)(F) requirements above.\13\ Based on its review of the record,
and for the reasons described below, the Commission believes that the
proposed addition of more stress test scenarios designed to test the
sufficiency of OCC's prefunded financial resources as described above
is consistent with the promotion of prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions, and the assurance of the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in OCC's custody or
control or for which OCC is responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\13\ See supra note 5, 83 FR at 37861-62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, the proposal to elevate four Informational Scenarios to
Sufficiency Scenarios would expand upon the scope of stress scenarios
against which OCC monitors its financial resources. The Commission
continues to believe that the historical scenarios replicating the 1987
market crash and financial crisis provide additional depth to the
monitoring of OCC's financial resources.\14\ Similarly, for the present
proposal, the Commission believes that the introduction of new
historical scenarios replicating the market events of March 2020 would
provide stress exposure estimates that would be meaningful for the
monitoring of OCC's total financial resources. Elevating these
Informational Scenarios to become Sufficiency Scenarios would increase
the likelihood that OCC will have sufficient financial resources in
excess of margin to address credit losses that could arise from the
default of a Clearing Member, and this would in turn enhance OCC's
ability to continue to promptly and accurately clear and settle
securities transactions for participants in the options markets during
periods of market stress. Therefore, the Commission believes that the
proposal is consistent with promoting the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See supra note 5, 83 FR at 37861.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, adding the proposed Sufficiency Scenarios would be
consistent with assuring the safeguarding of securities and funds
currently in OCC's custody and control by creating a wider range of
stress scenarios that would improve the likelihood of the Clearing Fund
having sufficient resources to cover potential credit losses under
adverse market conditions. As noted above, Sufficiency Scenarios are
used to determine whether any exposure of the Clearing Fund to the
portfolios of individual
[[Page 661]]
Clearing Member Groups is sufficiently large as to necessitate OCC
calling for additional resources in the form of margin to guard against
potential losses. Collecting this additional margin reduces the
likelihood that OCC must mutualize the risk associated with these
potential losses through the use of surviving Clearing Members'
contributions to the Clearing Fund. The Commission continues to believe
that reducing the potentiality of loss mutualization during periods of
market stress, while unavoidable in certain circumstances, could reduce
the potential knock-on effects to non-defaulting Clearing Members,
their customers and the broader options market.\15\ The addition of the
four scenarios representing recent market events, previously uncaptured
in OCC's Sufficiency stress testing, would widen the set of Sufficiency
Scenarios to include such events, and further reduce the likelihood of
drawing upon surviving Clearing Members' Clearing Fund collateral in
the event that similar market scenarios occur. Therefore, the
Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with assuring the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in OCC's custody or
control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86119 (Jun.
17. 2019), 84 FR 29267, 29269 (Jun. 21, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-
004) (noting a new liquidation cost model's impact on reducing
potential loss mutualization).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes, therefore, that the proposal to elevate
the four Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency Scenarios is consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) Under the Exchange Act
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) under the Exchange Act requires OCC to
establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure,
monitor, and manage its credit exposures to participants and those
arising from its payment, clearing, and settlement processes by testing
the sufficiency of its total financial resources available to meet the
minimum financial resource requirements under paragraphs Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(i) through (iii).\17\ Such testing must include, among other
things, conducting stress testing of OCC's total financial resources
once each day using standard predetermined parameters and
assumptions.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) (citing 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(e)(4)(i)-(iii)).
\18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing and assessing the proposal, the Commission believes
that the proposed changes described above are consistent with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) under the Exchange Act. As it stated in 2018, the
Commission believes that expanding the scope of stress scenarios
against which OCC monitors its financial resources would increase the
likelihood that OCC maintains sufficient financial resources at all
times.\19\ Similarly, the Commission believes that the elevation of the
four Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency Scenarios is consistent
with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) because the addition of the four
Sufficiency Scenarios would enhance OCC's financial resources testing,
and the broader scope of stress scenarios would increase the chances
that OCC maintains sufficient financial resources. The Commission also
believes that the daily testing of OCC's financial resources against
the Sufficiency Scenarios, including the four proposed Sufficiency
Scenarios based on the March 2020 market events, would be consistent
with the daily stress testing requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(vi)(A), as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See supra note 5, 83 FR at 37863.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also believes that the proposed introduction of
stress scenario variations accounting for specific wrong-way risk
exposures arising from cleared positions on issued ETNs would be
consistent with the requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and
(vi).\20\ These Rules require that a covered clearing agency establish,
implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and
manage its credit exposures to participants and those arising from its
payment, clearing, and settlement processes, including by: (1)
Maintaining sufficient financial resources to cover its credit exposure
to each participant fully with a high degree of confidence; (2)
maintaining additional financial resources at the minimum to enable it
to cover a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios that include, but
are not limited to, the default of the participant family that would
potentially cause the largest aggregate credit exposure for the covered
clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions; and (3)
testing the sufficiency of its total financial resources available to
meet these minimum financial resource requirements. In its 2019
approval of enhancements to OCC's Clearing Fund and stress testing
methodology, the Commission noted that OCC's introduction of new stress
test scenarios designed to capture single wrong-way risk exposures for
Clearing Member-issued ETNs would be consistent with the requirements
of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi), because it would enable OCC
to test its total financial resources and to call for additional
resources as necessary to ensure the resources it holds would be
sufficient to enable OCC to cover exposures arising under the relevant
stress scenarios.\21\ Likewise, for the current proposal, the
Commission believes that OCC's introduction of four Sufficiency
Scenarios reflecting the market events of March 2020, including its
specific wrong-way risk exposure variations, would also enable OCC to
more accurately measure its credit risks and better test the
sufficiency of its overall financial resources. The proposed rule
change would thus enhance OCC's overall framework for measuring and
managing its credit risks and would reduce the risk that OCC's
financial resources would be insufficient in the event of a Clearing
Member default consistent with Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi).
\21\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87718 (Dec. 11, 2019),
84 FR 68992, 68995 (Dec. 17, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes, therefore, that the proposal to elevate
the four Informational Scenarios to Sufficiency Scenarios is consistent
with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing, OCC requests that the Commission grant accelerated
approval of the Proposed Rule Change pursuant to Secton 19(b)(C)(iii)
of the Exchange Act.\23\ Under Section 19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of the Exchange
Act, the Commission may grant accelerated approval of a proposed rule
change if the Commission finds good cause for doing so.\24\ OCC
believes that there is good cause for the Commission to accelerate
effectiveness because the proposed changes are designed to improve
OCC's ability to measure, monitor and manage its credit exposures to
its participants.\25\ Further, OCC believes that implementation of the
proposed Sufficiency Scenarios would promote the protection of
investors and the public interest by enabling OCC to test the
sufficiency of its prefunded financial resources against a recent and
significant period of market volatility and enhancing OCC's ability to
manage
[[Page 662]]
the risks it faces as a systemically important financial market
utility.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii).
\24\ Id.
\25\ See Notice of Filing, 85 FR at 80830.
\26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(C)(iii) of the Exchange Act,\27\ for approving the Proposed
Rule Change on an accelerated basis, prior to the 30th day after the
date of publication of notice in the Federal Register, because
accelerated approval of this proposed rule change will facilitate the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of options contracts by
ensuring that OCC has expanded the range of stress scenarios to
measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to its participants
in a timely fashion, thereby immediately putting OCC in a better
position to manage the risks it faces as a systemically important
financial market utility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act, and in particular, the requirements of Section 17A of the
Exchange Act \28\ and the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ In approving this Proposed Rule Change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\29\ that the Proposed Rule Change (SR-OCC-2020-015) be,
and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-29217 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P