Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe Futures and Options Risk Policy and Futures and Options Risk Procedures and Retirement of the Futures and Options Concentration Charge Policy, 14478-14482 [2021-05339]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14478
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 16, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
radiological risk posed by TMI when
compared to operating reactors. The
reduced overall risk to the public at
decommissioning power plants does not
warrant that the licensee be required to
carry full operating reactor insurance
coverage after the requisite spent fuel
cooling period has elapsed following
final reactor shut down. The licensee’s
proposed financial protection limits will
maintain a level of liability insurance
coverage commensurate with the risk to
the public. These changes are consistent
with previous NRC policy as discussed
in SECY–00–0145 and exemptions
approved for other decommissioning
reactors. Thus, the underlying purpose
of the regulations will not be adversely
affected by the reductions in insurance
coverage. Accordingly, an exemption
from participation in the secondary
insurance pool (for TMI-1) and a
reduction in the primary insurance to
$100 million (for TMI-1 and TMI-2), a
value more in line with the potential
consequences of accidents, would be in
the public interest in that this ensures
that there will be adequate funds to
address any of those consequences and
helps to ensure the safe and timely
decommissioning of the reactor.
Therefore, the NRC staff has
concluded that the requested
exemptions from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) at
the requested effective date of 16
months after the permanent cessation of
power operations, are in the public
interest.
C. Environmental Considerations
The NRC’s approval of an exemption
from insurance or indemnity
requirements belongs to a category of
actions that the Commission, by rule or
regulation, has declared to be a
categorical exclusion after first finding
that the category of actions does not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. Specifically, the
exemption is categorically excluded
from the requirement to prepare an
environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement in
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25).
Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting
of an exemption from the requirements
of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR
is a categorical exclusion provided that:
(i) There is no significant hazards
consideration; (ii) there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite; (iii) there is
no significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no
significant construction impact; (v)
there is no significant increase in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Mar 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents; and (vi) the
requirements from which an exemption
is sought involve surety, insurance, or
indemnity requirements.
As the Director, Division of
Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery,
and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, I have
determined that approval of the
exemption request involves no
significant hazards consideration, as
defined in 10 CFR 50.92, because
reducing a licensee’s offsite liability
requirements at TMI does not: (1)
Involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; (2) create
the possibility of a new or different kind
of accident from any accident
previously evaluated; or (3) involve a
significant reduction in a margin of
safety. The exempted financial
protection regulation is unrelated to the
operation of TMI or site activities.
Accordingly, there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite and no
significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure. The exempted
regulation is not associated with
construction so there is no significant
construction impact. The exempted
regulation does not concern the source
term (i.e., potential amount of radiation
in an accident) nor any activities
conducted at the site. Therefore, there is
no significant increase in the potential
for, or consequences of, a radiological
accident. In addition, there would be no
significant impacts to biota, water
resources, historic properties, cultural
resources, or socioeconomic conditions
in the region resulting from issuance of
the requested exemptions. The
requirement for offsite liability
insurance involves surety, insurance, or
indemnity matters only.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR
51.22(b) and 51.22(c)(25), no
environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment need be
prepared in connection with the
approval of this exemption request.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
140.8, the requested exemptions are
authorized by law and are otherwise in
the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission hereby grants Exelon and
TMI-2 Solutions exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) for
the TMI site. TMI-1 permanently ceased
power operations on September 20,
2019. The exemptions from 10 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
140.11(a)(4) permit TMI-1 to reduce the
required level of primary financial
protection from $450 million to $100
million and to withdraw from
participation in the secondary layer of
financial protection 16 months after the
permanent cessation of power
operations. Further, the exemptions
permit TMI-2 relief from the
requirements to maintain primary offsite
liability insurance for ENOs at a level
above $100 million.
The exemptions are effective as of 16
months after permanent cessation of
power operations.
Dated, this 9th day of March, 2021.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patricia K. Holahan,
Director, Division of Decommissioning,
Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2021–05396 Filed 3–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–91290; File No. SR–ICEEU–
2021–007]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE
Clear Europe Limited; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe
Futures and Options Risk Policy and
Futures and Options Risk Procedures
and Retirement of the Futures and
Options Concentration Charge Policy
March 10, 2021.
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 March 3,
2021, ICE Clear Europe Limited (‘‘ICE
Clear Europe’’ or the ‘‘Clearing House’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule changes described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared primarily by ICE
Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule
19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 4 thereunder, such that
the proposed rule was immediately
effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii).
2 17
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 16, 2021 / Notices
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the
Terms of Substance of the Proposed
Rule Change
The principal purpose of the
proposed amendments is for ICE Clear
Europe to (i) modify its Futures and
Options Risk Policy (the ‘‘F&O Risk
Policy’’) and Futures and Options Risk
Procedures (the ‘‘F&O Risk Procedures’’
or the ‘‘Procedures’’) to update certain
aspects of the F&O initial margin
methodology, including with respect to
the capital to margin ratio, use of
delivery margin, calculation of net
liquidating value and certain buffers,
and (ii) retire its Futures and Options
Concentration Charge Policy (‘‘F&O
Concentration Charge Policy’’) once
such proposed amendment are made, as
such policy would be made redundant
as a result of the proposed amendments.
II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the
Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the
Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, ICE
Clear Europe 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. ICE
Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C)
below, of the most significant aspects of
such statements.
(A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the
Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the
Proposed Rule Change
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
(a) Purpose
ICE Clear Europe is proposing to
revise the F&O Policy to remove the
description of the capital to margin ratio
as a basis for requesting additional
initial margin or a reduction in
positions to reduce the required initial
margin level.
ICE Clear Europe is also proposing to
amend its F&O Procedures to (i) update
certain processes, escalations and
controls with respect to the review of
the IRM margin rate parameters, (ii)
update the existing descriptions of
review and testing processes for
additional margin calculation
methodologies, (iii) add a description of
the Clearing House’s use of delivery
margin, net liquidating value, intraday
buffers, overnight buffers, and ad hoc
buffers as margin calculation
methodologies and (iv) make various
other drafting clarifications and
improvements. These proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Mar 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
amendments would result in the retiring
of ICE Clear Europe’s F&O
Concentration Charge Policy as the F&O
Risk Policy and F&O Risk Procedures
(as amended) would render such Future
and Options Concentration Charge
Policy redundant.
I. Futures and Options Risk Policy
The Policy would be revised to
remove section 2.2.6, which describes
the capital to margin ratio, from the
additional margin requirements
discussion. The description is being
removed as the ratio is not in itself
necessarily the basis of additional
margin requirements and is addressed
in other existing ICE Clear Europe
policies and procedures. This
amendment does not reflect a change in
Clearing House practice or margin
methodology. Certain minor nonsubstantive typographical updates
would also be made to the Policy.
II. F&O Risk Procedures
IRM Margin Rate Parameters
Amendments to the Procedures would
update the standard parameters for daily
calculation of the calibrated IM rate (the
so-called ‘‘Autopilot’’ or ‘‘AP’’ rate) to
reference inter-contract volatility
spreads. The amendments would update
and clarify certain processes for the
routine periodic review of the
production margin rate (which is the
actual rate used in the margin
calculation generating CMs’ Core IM
requirements, and is typically based on
the Autopilot rate). Specifically, the
amendments would clarify that details
of proposed parameters and margin
impact along with justification for any
manual overrides from the Autopilot
rate would need to be approved by the
CRO and the President of ICEU or their
deputies. The amendments would
provide that the CRD can inform
exchange staff (instead of sales staff) at
its discretion for information about the
margin update. The amendments would
also remove a process for the CRD to
receive feedback on proposed
parameters by sales staff or
management, which the Clearing House
views as unnecessary in light of the
procedures for senior management
approval.
Furthermore, the amendments would
provide that upon review and approval
of specific Senior Management Team
members, the CRD would promote the
rates into the risk system. The CRD
would refresh the Product Report to
perform a check on the rates to go live.
One such check would be to ensure no
cross-asset class inter-commodity
spread (ICS) parameters are larger than
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14479
80%. Any correction to the promoted
rates would be made at such point. The
summary table of the review and
promotion process for IRM margin rate
parameters would be updated to reflect
the Clearing House’s current practices
with respect to the testing and
frequency of testing for such IRM
margin rate parameters. Specifically,
daily checks flagging any difference
between production rate and AP rate
using a threshold of 20% where AP is
larger than production would be used.
Additionally, monthly checks would
flag any difference between production
rate and AP rate for material parameters
using a threshold of 20% relative
difference where AP is larger than
production scanning rate, and 20%
absolute difference where production is
larger than AP ICS rate.
Parameter Review and Recalibration
The amendments would clarify that
exceptions driving an ad hoc review and
parameter recalibration would be
subject to notification to the Risk
Oversight Department (‘‘ROD’’) in
addition to Senior CRD (director or
above) decision. This clarification
would be made throughout the
Procedures with respect to parameter
review and recalibration.
IRM Parameterization
This section would be amended to
correctly reference relevant model
documentation. The summary of the
review process would be updated to add
that ad hoc reviews would be triggered
by large deviations in the daily
sensitivity report.
Additional Initial Margin
Amendments to the section of the
Procedures relating to concentration
charges would update the testing
frequency for product review and group
mapping requirements from at least
annually to monthly for a subset of
products, and otherwise quarterly.
With respect to the Stress Margin or
Stress Loss Charge (‘‘SLC’’) additional
Initial Margin calculation methodology,
the Procedures would update the testing
and frequency with respect to the SLC
process from no specific test to provide
for Daily Cover 1 and Cover 2 tests
where the largest uncollateralized stress
loss of a single member and pair of
members, respectively, is determined.
Any SLC top up would be called from
the member. Furthermore, with respect
to the SLC process for stress scenarios
and proxy mapping, the amendments
would update the frequency of review to
provide that PCA EVT scenarios (i.e.,
those combining principal component
analysis and extreme value theory)
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
14480
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 16, 2021 / Notices
would be reviewed at least quarterly.
Monthly testing with respect to PCA
EVT monitoring would be reported to
the MOC.
The amendments would update the
description of F&O guarantee fund (GF)
requirements to clarify that GF size
corresponds to the maximum of the
largest cover 2 loss over the last month
or the average cover two losses over the
last three months plus one standard
deviation. This change conforms to
current practice and does not reflect a
change in methodology.
Regarding the Clearing House’s
Wrong-Way Risk (WWR) Requirements,
the amendments would update the
testing/frequency of the WWR process
to add that index weights would be
reviewed quarterly.
With respect to the EMIR add-on
calculation methodology, the testing
frequency would be updated to provide
for monthly backtesting on benchmark
products using a one-day margin period
of risk and a daily check for benchmark
products using a two-day margin period
of risk. Ad hoc review would be
dependent on test results, margin
behavior during high volatility periods,
and market expert feedback, rather than
being only applicable for H and F
accounts.
The updates to the procedures would
add a new section addressing ‘‘Delivery
Margins’’, which would add a
description of the Clearing House’s
existing use of delivery margins to
mitigate any payment or delivery risks
during the delivery timeline of
physically delivered products. Such
delivery margins include: (i) Delivery
margin, which is designed to cover any
price movement on the product in
delivery, (ii) buyer security, which is
the notional value of the prompt portion
of the contract in delivery, (iii) seller
security, which is the additional charge
on the seller to cover the situation
where the seller is unable to deliver
agreed product, and (iv) contingent
variation margin, collected against
difference between spot price and end
of day settlement price between the last
trading day and collection of buyer’s
security. The amended Procedures
would also include a summary table
that describes details of the delivery
margin, buyer/seller security, and
contingent variation margin.
The amendments to the Procedures
would also add a new section describing
the Clearing House’s existing practices
regarding net liquidating value of
certain ‘‘equity-style’’ margined F&O
options. For such options, the option
premium must be paid/received at
inception of the trade and the daily
option value held as a credit or debit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Mar 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
against the margin account for the
remainder of the open position. The
level of NLV credit/debit would be
recalculated each day according to the
option settlement price and any top up
would be called the following day. A
summary table of the details of the NLV
determination would be included.
The updates to the Procedures would
add a new section regarding ‘‘Intraday
and Overnight Buffer’’, which would
summarize the existing ability of
Clearing Members to post an additional
buffer each day to offset intraday margin
shortfall. The provisions would
reference existing descriptions of
intraday and overnight buffers in the
Procedures. A summary table of the
intraday and overnight buffers would
also be included.
Finally, the updates to the Procedures
would add a new section describing
‘‘Ad-Hoc Buffer’’, which would state
that Clearing Members may be requested
to post additional buffers for various
risks not otherwise covered in the
Procedures. Such requirements would
be set by the Risk Senior Management
and the Credit Risk team. A summary
table of the ad-hoc buffer would be
included. The amendments are intended
to describe more clearly an existing
authority of the Clearing House.
Other General Drafting Clarifications
and Improvements
The amendments would define
previously undefined terms such as
‘‘CRO’’ (Chief Risk Officer). Various
typographical and similar corrections
would also be made throughout the
Procedures.
(b) Statutory Basis
ICE Clear Europe believes that the
proposed amendments to the F&O Risk
Policy and the F&O Risk Procedures are
consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A of the Act 5 and the
regulations thereunder applicable to it.
In particular, Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act 6 requires, among other things, that
the rules of a clearing agency be
designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions, the
safeguarding of securities and funds in
the custody or control of the clearing
agency or for which it is responsible,
and the protection of investors and the
public interest.
The proposed changes to the F&O
Procedures and F&O Policy are designed
to strengthen ICE Clear Europe’s tools to
manage the risk of losses resulting from
defaulting Clearing Members’ portfolios.
The amendments would update and
clarify the processes, controls and
escalations with respect to the testing
and reviewing Clearing Members’ Initial
Margin requirements and related
parameters. The amendments would
also more clearly describe certain types
of additional margin and calculation
methodologies, and clarify the
procedures for the testing and review
thereof. Through better managing risks
in default scenarios and promoting
market stability, the proposed
amendments would promote the
stability of the Clearing House and the
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of cleared contracts. The
enhanced risk management is therefore
also generally consistent with the
protection of investors and the public
interest in the safe operation of the
Clearing House. (ICE Clear Europe
would not expect the amendments to
affect the safeguarding of securities and
funds in ICE Clear Europe’s custody or
control or for which it is responsible.)
Accordingly, the amendments satisfy
the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F).7
The amendments are also consistent
with relevant provisions of Rule 17Ad–
22. Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(i) 8 requires
clearing agencies to maintain a sound
risk management framework that
identifies, measures, monitors and
manages the range of risks that it faces.
The amendments to the F&O Risk Policy
and the F&O Risk Procedures are
intended to better reflect margin and
guaranty fund methodologies that
calibrate resources held by ICE Clear
Europe to the risks faced by the Clearing
House, through improvements to the
description and review and testing of
relevant methodologies. The
amendments will thus strengthen the
management of default risks, and risk
management more generally. In ICE
Clear Europe’s view, the amendments
are therefore consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(i).9
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(6)(i) 10 requires a
covered clearing agency to consider and
produce margin levels commensurate
with, the risks and particular attributes
of each relevant product, portfolio, and
market. The proposed amendments
update the existing descriptions of
calculation methodologies for additional
margin to provide further detail,
including with respect to ongoing
testing and review processes. The
7 15
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(3)(i).
9 17 CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(3)(i).
10 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(i).
8 17
5 15
6 15
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78q–1.
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 16, 2021 / Notices
amendments further add a description
of the Clearing House’s existing use of
delivery margin, net liquidating value,
intraday buffers, overnight buffers, and
ad hoc buffers. These amendments thus
enhance the clarity of ICE Clear
Europe’s overall margin framework and
documentation, and facilitate
compliance with the requirements of
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(6)(i).11
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B) 12
requires that a clearing agency cover its
credit exposures to its participants by
establishing a risk-based margin system
that is monitored by management and
regularly reviewed by ‘‘(A) [c]onducting
backtests of its margin model at least
once each day using standard
predetermined parameters and
assumptions’’ and ‘‘(B) [c]onducting a
sensitivity analysis of its margin model
and a review of its parameters and
assumptions for backtesting on at least
a monthly basis . . .’’ The proposed
amendments describing the EMIR
margin add-on methodology provide for
monthly backtesting on 1-day margin
period of risk benchmark products using
predetermined parameters and a daily
check for other products. In ICE Clear
Europe’s view, these amendments are
therefore consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).13
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)(v) 14 requires a
covered clearing agency to maintain
financial resources that would at a
minimum enable it to cover a wide
range of foreseeable stress scenarios that
include, but are not limited to, the
default of the two participant families
that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure for the
covered clearing agency in extreme but
plausible market conditions. The
amendments to the Procedures are
consistent with this requirement by
providing that the GF size corresponds
to the maximum of the largest cover 2
loss over the last month or the average
cover 2 two losses over the last three
months plus one standard deviation. In
ICE Clear Europe’s view, these
amendments are therefore consistent
with the requirements of Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(4)(v).15
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(2) 16 requires
clearing agencies to establish reasonably
designed policies and procedures to
provide for governance arrangements
that are clear and transparent and
specify clear and direct lines of
11 17
CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(i).
CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).
13 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).
14 17 CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(4)(v).
15 17 CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(4)(v).
16 17 CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(2).
12 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Mar 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
responsibility. The proposed
amendments to the Procedures would
update the processes for the review of
the relevant parameters to clarify the
role of the CRD and deputies of the
Chief Risk Officer and the President of
the Clearing House. They would also
describe for the role of Senior
Management Team members and the
Risk Oversight Department in this
process. In ICE Clear Europe’s view, the
amendments are therefore consistent
with the requirements of Rule 17Ad–
22(e)(2).17
(B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on
Burden on Competition
ICE Clear Europe does not believe the
proposed amendments would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on
competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted to update and clarify
the F&O Risk Policy and the F&O Risk
Procedures and will apply to all F&O
Clearing Members. The proposed
amendments are not expected to
materially change F&O Guaranty Fund
Contributions or margin requirements
for F&O Clearing Members. ICE Clear
Europe does not believe the
amendments would affect the costs of
clearing, the ability to market
participants to access clearing, or the
market for clearing services generally.
Therefore, ICE Clear Europe does not
believe the proposed rule change
imposes any burden on competition that
is inappropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
(C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on
Comments on the Proposed Rule
Change Received From Members,
Participants or Others
Written comments relating to the
proposed amendments have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear
Europe. ICE Clear Europe will notify the
Commission of any written comments
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 has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act 18 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 19 thereunder. At any time within
60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
17 17
CFR 240.17 Ad–22(e)(2).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f).
18 15
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14481
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
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 proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml) or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
ICEEU–2021–007 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ICEEU–2021–007. 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 such
filings will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE
Clear Europe’s website at https://
www.theice.com/notices/
Notices.shtml?regulatoryFilings.
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–ICEEU–2021–007
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14482
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 16, 2021 / Notices
and should be submitted on or before
April 6, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.20
J. Mathew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–05339 Filed 3–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[Release No. 34–91295; File No. SR–ISE–
2021–03]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the
Exchange’s Pricing Schedule at
Options 7, Section 3
March 10, 2021.
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 March 2,
2021, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ 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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Exchange’s Pricing Schedule at Options
7, Section 3 (Regular Order Fees and
Rebates), as described further below.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/ise/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
20 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
16:52 Mar 15, 2021
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
Jkt 253001
The purpose of the proposed rule
change is to amend the Exchange’s
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section
3 (Regular Order Fees and Rebates) to:
(i) Decrease the Priority Customer 3 taker
fee in Select Symbols,4 and (ii) increase
the Non-Priority Customer 5 maker fee
in Select Symbols.
The Exchange initially filed the
proposed pricing changes on March 1,
2021 (SR–ISE–2021–02). On March 2,
2021, the Exchange withdrew that filing
and submitted this filing.
Today, Priority Customers are charged
a taker fee of $0.41 per contract for
regular orders in Select Symbols. The
Exchange now proposes to decrease this
fee to $0.37 per contract for Priority
Customers.
Today, all Non-Priority Customers are
charged a maker fee of $0.11 per
contract for regular orders in Select
Symbols. The Exchange now proposes
to increase this fee to $0.18 per contract
for all Non-Priority Customers.6
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)
of the Act,7 in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)
of the Act,8 in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among members and issuers and other
persons using any facility, and is not
designed to permit unfair
3 A ‘‘Priority Customer’’ is a person or entity that
is not a broker/dealer in securities, and does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day
on average during a calendar month for its own
beneficial account(s), as defined in Nasdaq ISE
Options 1, Section 1(a)(37).
4 ‘‘Select Symbols’’ are options overlying all
symbols listed on the Nasdaq ISE that are in the
Penny Interval Program.
5 ‘‘Non-Priority Customers’’ include Market
Makers, Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers, Firm
Proprietary/Broker Dealers, and Professional
Customers.
6 The Exchange notes that under this proposal,
Market Makers that qualify for Market Maker Plus
in Select Symbols will continue to receive the
applicable Market Maker Plus rebates in Select
Symbols set forth in note 5 of Options 7, Section
3, and will not pay the proposed $0.18 per contract
maker fee.
7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange’s proposed changes to
its Pricing Schedule are reasonable in
several respects. As a threshold matter,
the Exchange is subject to significant
competitive forces in the market for
options securities transaction services
that constrain its pricing determinations
in that market. The fact that this market
is competitive has long been recognized
by the courts. In NetCoalition v.
Securities and Exchange Commission,
the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ‘‘[n]o
one disputes that competition for order
flow is ‘fierce.’ . . . As the SEC
explained, ‘[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities,
and the broker-dealers that act as their
order-routing agents, have a wide range
of choices of where to route orders for
execution’; [and] ‘no exchange can
afford to take its market share
percentages for granted’ because ‘no
exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution
of order flow from broker
dealers’. . . .’’ 9
The Commission and the courts have
repeatedly expressed their preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, while
adopting a series of steps to improve the
current market model, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO
revenues and, also, recognized that
current regulation of the market system
‘‘has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 10
Numerous indicia demonstrate the
competitive nature of this market. For
example, clear substitutes to the
Exchange exist in the market for options
security transaction services. The
Exchange is only one of sixteen options
exchanges to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Within this
environment, market participants can
freely and often do shift their order flow
among the Exchange and competing
venues in response to changes in their
respective pricing schedules. As such,
the proposal represents a reasonable
attempt by the Exchange to increase its
liquidity and market share relative to its
competitors.
9 NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir.
2010) (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782–83
(December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21)).
10 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’).
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14478-14482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05339]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-91290; File No. SR-ICEEU-2021-007]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe Futures and Options Risk Policy
and Futures and Options Risk Procedures and Retirement of the Futures
and Options Concentration Charge Policy
March 10, 2021.
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 March 3, 2021, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or the
``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule changes described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily by ICE Clear
Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii) \4\
thereunder, such that the proposed rule was immediately effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit
[[Page 14479]]
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a).
\4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change
The principal purpose of the proposed amendments is for ICE Clear
Europe to (i) modify its Futures and Options Risk Policy (the ``F&O
Risk Policy'') and Futures and Options Risk Procedures (the ``F&O Risk
Procedures'' or the ``Procedures'') to update certain aspects of the
F&O initial margin methodology, including with respect to the capital
to margin ratio, use of delivery margin, calculation of net liquidating
value and certain buffers, and (ii) retire its Futures and Options
Concentration Charge Policy (``F&O Concentration Charge Policy'') once
such proposed amendment are made, as such policy would be made
redundant as a result of the proposed amendments.
II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe 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. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change
(a) Purpose
ICE Clear Europe is proposing to revise the F&O Policy to remove
the description of the capital to margin ratio as a basis for
requesting additional initial margin or a reduction in positions to
reduce the required initial margin level.
ICE Clear Europe is also proposing to amend its F&O Procedures to
(i) update certain processes, escalations and controls with respect to
the review of the IRM margin rate parameters, (ii) update the existing
descriptions of review and testing processes for additional margin
calculation methodologies, (iii) add a description of the Clearing
House's use of delivery margin, net liquidating value, intraday
buffers, overnight buffers, and ad hoc buffers as margin calculation
methodologies and (iv) make various other drafting clarifications and
improvements. These proposed amendments would result in the retiring of
ICE Clear Europe's F&O Concentration Charge Policy as the F&O Risk
Policy and F&O Risk Procedures (as amended) would render such Future
and Options Concentration Charge Policy redundant.
I. Futures and Options Risk Policy
The Policy would be revised to remove section 2.2.6, which
describes the capital to margin ratio, from the additional margin
requirements discussion. The description is being removed as the ratio
is not in itself necessarily the basis of additional margin
requirements and is addressed in other existing ICE Clear Europe
policies and procedures. This amendment does not reflect a change in
Clearing House practice or margin methodology. Certain minor non-
substantive typographical updates would also be made to the Policy.
II. F&O Risk Procedures
IRM Margin Rate Parameters
Amendments to the Procedures would update the standard parameters
for daily calculation of the calibrated IM rate (the so-called
``Autopilot'' or ``AP'' rate) to reference inter-contract volatility
spreads. The amendments would update and clarify certain processes for
the routine periodic review of the production margin rate (which is the
actual rate used in the margin calculation generating CMs' Core IM
requirements, and is typically based on the Autopilot rate).
Specifically, the amendments would clarify that details of proposed
parameters and margin impact along with justification for any manual
overrides from the Autopilot rate would need to be approved by the CRO
and the President of ICEU or their deputies. The amendments would
provide that the CRD can inform exchange staff (instead of sales staff)
at its discretion for information about the margin update. The
amendments would also remove a process for the CRD to receive feedback
on proposed parameters by sales staff or management, which the Clearing
House views as unnecessary in light of the procedures for senior
management approval.
Furthermore, the amendments would provide that upon review and
approval of specific Senior Management Team members, the CRD would
promote the rates into the risk system. The CRD would refresh the
Product Report to perform a check on the rates to go live. One such
check would be to ensure no cross-asset class inter-commodity spread
(ICS) parameters are larger than 80%. Any correction to the promoted
rates would be made at such point. The summary table of the review and
promotion process for IRM margin rate parameters would be updated to
reflect the Clearing House's current practices with respect to the
testing and frequency of testing for such IRM margin rate parameters.
Specifically, daily checks flagging any difference between production
rate and AP rate using a threshold of 20% where AP is larger than
production would be used. Additionally, monthly checks would flag any
difference between production rate and AP rate for material parameters
using a threshold of 20% relative difference where AP is larger than
production scanning rate, and 20% absolute difference where production
is larger than AP ICS rate.
Parameter Review and Recalibration
The amendments would clarify that exceptions driving an ad hoc
review and parameter recalibration would be subject to notification to
the Risk Oversight Department (``ROD'') in addition to Senior CRD
(director or above) decision. This clarification would be made
throughout the Procedures with respect to parameter review and
recalibration.
IRM Parameterization
This section would be amended to correctly reference relevant model
documentation. The summary of the review process would be updated to
add that ad hoc reviews would be triggered by large deviations in the
daily sensitivity report.
Additional Initial Margin
Amendments to the section of the Procedures relating to
concentration charges would update the testing frequency for product
review and group mapping requirements from at least annually to monthly
for a subset of products, and otherwise quarterly.
With respect to the Stress Margin or Stress Loss Charge (``SLC'')
additional Initial Margin calculation methodology, the Procedures would
update the testing and frequency with respect to the SLC process from
no specific test to provide for Daily Cover 1 and Cover 2 tests where
the largest uncollateralized stress loss of a single member and pair of
members, respectively, is determined. Any SLC top up would be called
from the member. Furthermore, with respect to the SLC process for
stress scenarios and proxy mapping, the amendments would update the
frequency of review to provide that PCA EVT scenarios (i.e., those
combining principal component analysis and extreme value theory)
[[Page 14480]]
would be reviewed at least quarterly. Monthly testing with respect to
PCA EVT monitoring would be reported to the MOC.
The amendments would update the description of F&O guarantee fund
(GF) requirements to clarify that GF size corresponds to the maximum of
the largest cover 2 loss over the last month or the average cover two
losses over the last three months plus one standard deviation. This
change conforms to current practice and does not reflect a change in
methodology.
Regarding the Clearing House's Wrong-Way Risk (WWR) Requirements,
the amendments would update the testing/frequency of the WWR process to
add that index weights would be reviewed quarterly.
With respect to the EMIR add-on calculation methodology, the
testing frequency would be updated to provide for monthly backtesting
on benchmark products using a one-day margin period of risk and a daily
check for benchmark products using a two-day margin period of risk. Ad
hoc review would be dependent on test results, margin behavior during
high volatility periods, and market expert feedback, rather than being
only applicable for H and F accounts.
The updates to the procedures would add a new section addressing
``Delivery Margins'', which would add a description of the Clearing
House's existing use of delivery margins to mitigate any payment or
delivery risks during the delivery timeline of physically delivered
products. Such delivery margins include: (i) Delivery margin, which is
designed to cover any price movement on the product in delivery, (ii)
buyer security, which is the notional value of the prompt portion of
the contract in delivery, (iii) seller security, which is the
additional charge on the seller to cover the situation where the seller
is unable to deliver agreed product, and (iv) contingent variation
margin, collected against difference between spot price and end of day
settlement price between the last trading day and collection of buyer's
security. The amended Procedures would also include a summary table
that describes details of the delivery margin, buyer/seller security,
and contingent variation margin.
The amendments to the Procedures would also add a new section
describing the Clearing House's existing practices regarding net
liquidating value of certain ``equity-style'' margined F&O options. For
such options, the option premium must be paid/received at inception of
the trade and the daily option value held as a credit or debit against
the margin account for the remainder of the open position. The level of
NLV credit/debit would be recalculated each day according to the option
settlement price and any top up would be called the following day. A
summary table of the details of the NLV determination would be
included.
The updates to the Procedures would add a new section regarding
``Intraday and Overnight Buffer'', which would summarize the existing
ability of Clearing Members to post an additional buffer each day to
offset intraday margin shortfall. The provisions would reference
existing descriptions of intraday and overnight buffers in the
Procedures. A summary table of the intraday and overnight buffers would
also be included.
Finally, the updates to the Procedures would add a new section
describing ``Ad-Hoc Buffer'', which would state that Clearing Members
may be requested to post additional buffers for various risks not
otherwise covered in the Procedures. Such requirements would be set by
the Risk Senior Management and the Credit Risk team. A summary table of
the ad-hoc buffer would be included. The amendments are intended to
describe more clearly an existing authority of the Clearing House.
Other General Drafting Clarifications and Improvements
The amendments would define previously undefined terms such as
``CRO'' (Chief Risk Officer). Various typographical and similar
corrections would also be made throughout the Procedures.
(b) Statutory Basis
ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments to the F&O
Risk Policy and the F&O Risk Procedures are consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the regulations
thereunder applicable to it. In particular, Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act \6\ requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing
agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent applicable,
derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions, the safeguarding of
securities and funds in the custody or control of the clearing agency
or for which it is responsible, and the protection of investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed changes to the F&O Procedures and F&O Policy are
designed to strengthen ICE Clear Europe's tools to manage the risk of
losses resulting from defaulting Clearing Members' portfolios. The
amendments would update and clarify the processes, controls and
escalations with respect to the testing and reviewing Clearing Members'
Initial Margin requirements and related parameters. The amendments
would also more clearly describe certain types of additional margin and
calculation methodologies, and clarify the procedures for the testing
and review thereof. Through better managing risks in default scenarios
and promoting market stability, the proposed amendments would promote
the stability of the Clearing House and the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of cleared contracts. The enhanced risk
management is therefore also generally consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest in the safe operation of the
Clearing House. (ICE Clear Europe would not expect the amendments to
affect the safeguarding of securities and funds in ICE Clear Europe's
custody or control or for which it is responsible.) Accordingly, the
amendments satisfy the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amendments are also consistent with relevant provisions of Rule
17Ad-22. Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(i) \8\ requires clearing agencies to
maintain a sound risk management framework that identifies, measures,
monitors and manages the range of risks that it faces. The amendments
to the F&O Risk Policy and the F&O Risk Procedures are intended to
better reflect margin and guaranty fund methodologies that calibrate
resources held by ICE Clear Europe to the risks faced by the Clearing
House, through improvements to the description and review and testing
of relevant methodologies. The amendments will thus strengthen the
management of default risks, and risk management more generally. In ICE
Clear Europe's view, the amendments are therefore consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(i).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
\9\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) \10\ requires a covered clearing agency to
consider and produce margin levels commensurate with, the risks and
particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio, and market.
The proposed amendments update the existing descriptions of calculation
methodologies for additional margin to provide further detail,
including with respect to ongoing testing and review processes. The
[[Page 14481]]
amendments further add a description of the Clearing House's existing
use of delivery margin, net liquidating value, intraday buffers,
overnight buffers, and ad hoc buffers. These amendments thus enhance
the clarity of ICE Clear Europe's overall margin framework and
documentation, and facilitate compliance with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
\11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B) \12\ requires that a clearing
agency cover its credit exposures to its participants by establishing a
risk-based margin system that is monitored by management and regularly
reviewed by ``(A) [c]onducting backtests of its margin model at least
once each day using standard predetermined parameters and assumptions''
and ``(B) [c]onducting a sensitivity analysis of its margin model and a
review of its parameters and assumptions for backtesting on at least a
monthly basis . . .'' The proposed amendments describing the EMIR
margin add-on methodology provide for monthly backtesting on 1-day
margin period of risk benchmark products using predetermined parameters
and a daily check for other products. In ICE Clear Europe's view, these
amendments are therefore consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).
\13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A) and (B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(v) \14\ requires a covered clearing agency to
maintain financial resources that would at a minimum enable it to cover
a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios that include, but are not
limited to, the default of the two participant families that would
potentially cause the largest aggregate credit exposure for the covered
clearing agency in extreme but plausible market conditions. The
amendments to the Procedures are consistent with this requirement by
providing that the GF size corresponds to the maximum of the largest
cover 2 loss over the last month or the average cover 2 two losses over
the last three months plus one standard deviation. In ICE Clear
Europe's view, these amendments are therefore consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(v).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(4)(v).
\15\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(4)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) \16\ requires clearing agencies to establish
reasonably designed policies and procedures to provide for governance
arrangements that are clear and transparent and specify clear and
direct lines of responsibility. The proposed amendments to the
Procedures would update the processes for the review of the relevant
parameters to clarify the role of the CRD and deputies of the Chief
Risk Officer and the President of the Clearing House. They would also
describe for the role of Senior Management Team members and the Risk
Oversight Department in this process. In ICE Clear Europe's view, the
amendments are therefore consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(2).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
\17\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition
ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted to update and clarify the F&O Risk Policy and the F&O
Risk Procedures and will apply to all F&O Clearing Members. The
proposed amendments are not expected to materially change F&O Guaranty
Fund Contributions or margin requirements for F&O Clearing Members. ICE
Clear Europe does not believe the amendments would affect the costs of
clearing, the ability to market participants to access clearing, or the
market for clearing services generally. Therefore, ICE Clear Europe
does not believe the proposed rule change imposes any burden on
competition that is inappropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act.
(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others
Written comments relating to the proposed amendments have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe will notify
the Commission of any written comments 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 has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \18\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \19\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2021-007 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2021-007. 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 such filings will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE
Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/notices/Notices.shtml?regulatoryFilings.
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-ICEEU-2021-007
[[Page 14482]]
and should be submitted on or before April 6, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Mathew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05339 Filed 3-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
