[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 245 (Thursday, December 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75487-75489]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30645]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68438; File No. AN-OCC-2012-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice Filing To Revise the Method
for Determining the Minimum Clearing Fund Size To Include Consideration
of the Amount Necessary To Draw on Secured Credit Facilities

December 14, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On October 18, 2012, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') an
advance notice concerning a proposed rule change AN-OCC-2012-04
pursuant to Section 806(e) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act''),\1\ entitled
the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (``Title
VIII'' or ``Clearing Supervision Act'') and Rule 19b-4 under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'').\2\ The advance
notice was published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2012.\3\
The Commission did not receive comments on the advance notice
publication. This publication serves as a notice of no objection to the
proposed rule change discussed in the advance notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,
Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68225 (November 14,
2012), 77 FR 69668 (November 20, 2012). OCC also filed a proposed
rule change under Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange Act relating to
these changes. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68130
(November 1, 2012), 77 FR 66900 (November 7, 2012) (Proposing
Release). The Commission did not receive comments on the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of Proposed Rule Change

A. Background

    On September 23, 2011, the Commission approved a proposed rule
change by OCC to establish the size of OCC's clearing fund as the
amount that is required, within a confidence level selected by OCC, to
sustain the maximum anticipated loss under a defined set of scenarios
as determined by OCC, subject to a minimum clearing fund size of $1
billion.\4\ OCC implemented this change in May 2012. Until that time,
the size of OCC's

clearing fund was calculated each month as a fixed percentage of the
average total daily margin requirement for the preceding month,
provided that the calculation resulted in a clearing fund of $1 billion
or more.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65386 (September 23,
2011), 76 FR 60572 (September 29, 2011) (SR-OCC-2011-10).
    \5\ If the calculation did not result in a clearing fund size of
$1 billion or more, then the percentage of the average total daily
margin requirement for the preceding month that resulted in a fund
level of at least $1 billion would be applied. However, in no event
was the percentage permitted to exceed 7%. With the rule change
approved in September 2011, this 7% limiting factor on the minimum
clearing fund size was eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the formula that is implemented for determining the size of
the clearing fund as a result of the May 2012 change, OCC's Rule 1001
provides that the amount of the fund is equal to the larger of the
amount of the charge to the fund that would result from (i) a default
by the single ``clearing member group'' \6\ whose default would be
likely to result in the largest draw against the clearing fund or (ii)
an event involving the near-simultaneous default of two randomly-
selected ``clearing member groups'' in each case as calculated by OCC
with a confidence level selected by OCC.\7\ The size of the clearing
fund continues to be recalculated monthly, based on a monthly averaging
of daily calculations for the previous month, and it is subject to a
requirement that its minimum size may not be less than $1 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``clearing member group'' is defined in Article I
of OCC's By-Laws to mean a clearing member and any member affiliates
of the clearing member.
    \7\ The confidence levels employed by OCC in calculating the
charge likely to result from a default by OCC's largest ``clearing
member group'' and the default of two randomly-selected ``clearing
member groups'' were approved by the Commission at 99% and 99.9%,
respectively. However, the Commission approval order notes that OCC
retains discretion to employ different confidence levels in these
calculations provided that OCC will not employ confidence levels of
less than 99% without first filing a proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Change

    The proposed rule change will implement a minimum clearing fund
size equal to 110% of the amount of committed credit facilities secured
by the clearing fund so that the amount of the clearing fund likely
will exceed the required collateral value that would be necessary for
OCC to be able to draw in full on such credit facilities. OCC's
clearing fund is primarily intended to provide a high degree of
assurance that market integrity will be maintained in the event that
one or more clearing members, settlement banks, or banks that issue
letters of credit on behalf of clearing members as a form of margin
fails to meet its obligations.\8\ This includes the potential use of
the clearing fund as a source of liquidity should it ever be the case
that OCC is unable to obtain prompt delivery of, or convert promptly to
cash, any asset credited to the account of a suspended clearing member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Under Article VIII, Section 1 of OCC's By-Laws, the clearing
fund may be used to pay losses suffered by OCC: (1) As a result of
the failure of a clearing member to perform its obligations with
regard to any exchange transaction accepted by OCC; (2) as a result
of a clearing member's failure to perform its obligations in respect
of an exchange transaction or an exercised/assigned options
contract, or any other contract or obligations in respect of which
OCC is liable; (3) as a result of the failure of a clearing member
to perform its obligations in respect of stock loan or borrow
positions; (4) as a result of a liquidation of a suspended clearing
member's open positions; (5) in connection with protective
transactions of a suspended clearing member; (6) as a result of a
failure of any clearing member to make any other required payment or
to render any other required performance; or (7) as a result of a
failure of any bank or securities or commodities clearing
organization to perform its obligations to OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC's committed credit facilities are secured by assets in the
clearing fund and certain margin deposits of the suspended clearing
member. In light of the uncertainty regarding the amount of margin
assets of a suspended clearing member that might be eligible at any
given point to support borrowing under the secured credit facilities,
OCC has considered the availability of funds based on a consideration
of the amount of the clearing fund deposits available as collateral. As
an example, for OCC to draw on the full amount of its current credit
facilities secured by the clearing fund, the size of the clearing fund
likely would need to be approximately $2.2 billion. The $2.2 billion
figure reflects a 10% increase above the total size of such credit
facilities, which is meant to account for the percentage discount
applied to collateral pledged by OCC in determining the amount
available for borrowing.
    Based on monthly recalculation information, the size of OCC's
clearing fund during the period from July 2011 to July 2012 was less
than $2.2 billion on eight occasions. Therefore, to reduce the risk
that the assets in the clearing fund might at any time be insufficient
to enable OCC to meet potential liquidity needs by accessing the full
amount of its committed credit facilities that are secured by the
clearing fund, OCC is amending the current minimum clearing fund be
size requirement of $1 billion by providing instead that the minimum
clearing fund size is the greater of either $1 billion or 110% of the
amount of such committed credit facilities. OCC is denoting the credit
facility component of the minimum clearing fund requirement as a
percentage of the total amount of the credit facilities that OCC
actually secures with clearing fund assets because OCC negotiates these
credit facility agreements, including size and other terms, on an
annual basis and the total size is therefore subject to change.

III. Analysis of Advance Notice

Standard of Review

    A registered clearing agency that has been designated as a
systemically important financial market utility (``FMU'') by the
Financial Stability Oversight Council (``FSOC'') must provide advance
notice of all proposed changes to its rules, procedures, or operations
that could, as defined in the rules of the supervisory agency,
materially affect the nature or level of risks presented by the
clearing agency.\9\ Absent an extension or request for additional
information, as discussed in greater detail below, the Commission is
required to notify the clearing agency of any objection regarding the
proposed change within the 60 day time frame established by Title
VIII.\10\ A designated clearing agency may not implement a change to
which its supervisory agency has objected; \11\ however, the clearing
agency is explicitly permitted to implement a change if it has not
received an objection from its supervisory agency within the same 60
day time period.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e). See also Process for Submissions for
Review of Security-Based Swaps for Mandatory Clearing and Notice
Filing Requirements for Clearing Agencies; Technical Amendments to
Rule 19b-4 and Form 19b-4 Applicable to All Self-Regulatory
Organizations, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67286 (June 28,
2012), 77 FR 41602 (July 13, 2012) (Adopting Release).
    \10\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(E).
    \11\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(F).
    \12\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Title VIII does not specify a standard that the Commission
must apply to determine whether to object to an advance notice, the
Commission believes that the purpose of Title VIII, as stated under
Section 802(b),\13\ is relevant to the review of advance notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 5461(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The stated purpose of Title VIII is to mitigate systemic risk in
the financial system and promote financial stability, by (among other
things) authorizing the Federal Reserve Board to promote uniform risk
management standards for systemically important FMUs, and providing an
enhanced role for the Federal Reserve Board in the supervising of risk
management standards for systemically important FMUs.\14\ Therefore,
the Commission believes that when reviewing advance

notices for FMUs, the consistency of an advance notice with Title VIII
may be judged principally by reference to the consistency of the
advance notice with applicable rules of the Federal Reserve Board
governing payment, clearing, and settlement activity of the designated
FMU.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 12 U.S.C. 5461(b).
    \15\ See Financial Market Utilities, 77 FR 45907 (Aug. 2, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 805(a) requires the Federal Reserve Board and authorizes
the Commission to prescribe standards for the payment, clearing, and
settlement activities of FMUs designated as systemically important, in
consultation with the supervisory agencies. Section 805(b) of the
Clearing Supervision Act \16\ requires that the objectives and
principles for the risk management standards prescribed under Section
805(a) shall be to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Promote robust risk management;
     Promote safety and soundness;
     Reduce systemic risks; and
     Support the stability of the broader financial system.
    The relevant rules of the Federal Reserve Board prescribing risk
management standards for designated FMUs by their terms do not apply to
designated FMUs that are clearing agencies registered with the
Commission.\17\ Therefore, the Commission believes that the objectives
and principles by which the Federal Reserve Board is required and the
Commission is authorized to promulgate such rules, as expressed in
Section 805(b) of Title VIII,\18\ are the appropriate standards at this
time by which to evaluate advance notices.\19\ Accordingly, the
analysis set forth below is organized by reference to the stated
objectives and principles in Section 805(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 12 CFR 234.1(b).
    \18\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
    \19\ The risk management standards that have been adopted by the
Commission in Rule 17Ad-22 are substantially similar to those of the
Federal Reserve Board applicable to designated FMUs other than those
designated clearing organizations registered with the CFTC or
clearing agencies registered with the Commission. See Clearing
Agency Standards, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68080 (Oct.
22, 2012), 77 FR 66219 (Nov. 2, 2012). To the extent such Commission
standards are in effect at the time advance notices are reviewed in
the future, the standards would be relevant to the analysis.
Moreover, the analysis of clearing agency rule filings under the
Exchange Act would incorporate such standards directly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion of Advance Notice

    The proposed rule change is designed to allow OCC to take full
advantage of its liquidity resources that are secured by the clearing
fund by collecting an amount that is at least 10% above the total size
of the credit facilities to account for any collateral haircut that may
be applied. This should assist OCC in maintaining market integrity in
the event that one or more clearing members, settlement banks, or banks
that issue letters of credit on behalf of clearing members as a form of
margin fails to meet its obligations. By increasing the likelihood that
OCC can take full advantage of its liquidity resources that are secured
by the clearing fund, the proposed rule change should promote robust
risk management and safety and soundness, reduce systemic risks, and
support the stability of the broader financial system. For these
reasons, the Commission does not object to the advance notice.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore noticed, pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the
Clearing Supervision Act,\20\ that, the Commission does not object to
proposed rule change (File No. AN-OCC-2012-04) and that OCC be and
hereby is authorized to implement proposed rule change (File No. AN-
OCC-2012-04) as of the date of this notice or the date of the ``Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change to Revise the Method for Determining the
Minimum Clearing Fund Size to Include Consideration of the Amount
Necessary to Draw on Secured Credit Facilities'' (File No. SR-OCC-2012-
22), whichever is later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(I).

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30645 Filed 12-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback. I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.