[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 238 (Friday, December 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77032-77035]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31176]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76565; File No. SR-ICEEU-2015-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Gross Margining for Certain Categories of Customer Accounts

December 7, 2015.
    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 November 24, 2015, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or
the ``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change described in Items
I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily by ICE
Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(i) and (ii) \4\
thereunder, so that the proposal was effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed changes is to amend certain
provisions relating to gross margining for various categories of
Customer Accounts.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization'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. 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. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

i. Purpose
    ICE Clear Europe submits certain proposed amendments to its
Clearing Rules (the ``Rules'') and Clearing Procedures relating to the
margining of Customer Accounts. The amendments provide additional
options for Clearing Members to use so-called ``gross margined''
Customer Accounts (and will require use of such accounts for certain
F&O products as discussed below). The amendments further clarify which
types of Customer Accounts are margined on a gross as opposed to a net
basis, as well as related procedures for the collection and transfer of
margin for such accounts and certain related information requirements,
as discussed herein. For this purpose, for a Customer Account margined
on a ``gross'' basis, initial or original margin requirements are
determined separately with respect to the positions of each customer of
the relevant Clearing Member (i.e., without netting of different
positions across multiple customers). By contrast, for a Customer
Account margined on a ``net'' basis, initial or original margin
requirements are determined for the entire account on a net basis
across the positions of all customers in that account.
    The proposed changes are principally relevant to the Customer
Accounts of Non-FCM/BD Clearing Members with respect to F&O Contracts.
ICE Clear Europe's existing rules provide several types of Customer
Accounts for such Clearing Members in light of relevant regulatory
requirements and

permissions. Currently, most such accounts for F&O Contracts are
margined on a net basis, which is permitted under the European Market
Infrastructure Regulation (``EMIR'').\5\ ICE Clear Europe is proposing
to revise its account structure to allow Clearing Members to use
Customer Accounts of the same types but which are margined on a gross
basis for certain products. Once the rule amendments are effective, ICE
Clear Europe will require the use of such gross margined accounts for
Non-FCM/BD Clearing Members in relation to certain F&O products in the
energy category that are margined using a one-day period of risk, as
specified below, such as oil contracts traded on ICE Futures Europe.
Gross or net margined accounts would be available on an optional basis
for other categories of F&O Contracts (which are margined using a two-
day period of risk). As a result of these changes, ICE Clear Europe
will no longer permit net margining of contracts for which margin is
calculated using a one-day period of risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central
counterparties and trade repositories, as well as various
implementing regulations and technical standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICE Clear Europe is adopting the requirement for the use of gross
margining to align the margin framework for certain energy contracts
cleared by Non-FCM/BD Clearing Members more closely with the
requirements that apply to FCM Clearing Members under CFTC rules and
the Clearing House's rules for FCM Customer Accounts, as implemented in
2012 when certain cleared OTC contracts were converted to economically-
equivalent futures contracts admitted to trading on ICE Futures US.
Such contracts are margined using a one-day period of risk. In this
regard, ICE Clear Europe also notes that the European Securities and
Markets Authority has issued a discussion paper for consultation as to
the use of gross margined customer accounts under certain circumstances
(and in particular, whether a gross margined account using a one-day
margin period of risk (of the type being provided under the rule
amendments) should be a permitted alternative to an account using a
two-day margin period of risk in order to satisfy requirements under
EMIR, in light of the fact that EMIR is currently silent on whether
accounts should be net or gross margined).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ESMA, Review of Article 26 of RTS No. 153/2013 with respect
to client accounts (26 August 2015) (Discussion Paper).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Customer Accounts with respect to CDS Contracts, the current
practice of margining on a gross basis would be maintained.
    The status of the DCM Customer Account and Swap Customer Account of
FCM/BD Clearing Members (which are currently gross margined, consistent
with U.S. regulatory requirements) would not be affected by the
proposed amendments. The amendments would clarify the option for FCM/BD
Clearing Members to use their Non-DCM/Swap Customer Account or General
Customer Account on either a gross margined or net margined basis, to
the extent permitted by applicable law. Certain other clarifications
and updates are made in the Rules and Clearing Procedures as well, as
discussed herein.
    Specifically, ICE Clear Europe proposes to make amendments to Parts
3, 4, 6, 7 and 16 of its Rules and to the Clearing Procedures.
    In Part 3 of the Rules, Rule 302, which addresses the procedures
for payments to and from the Clearing House in respect of various
categories of Customer Accounts, has been revised to take into account
the new set of gross margined accounts and to simplify some of the
drafting. As revised, the Rule clarifies that the Clearing House will
determine the required margin amount based on the relevant margin model
for that account type (net or gross). The Clearing House will then
calculate the net amount owed to or by the Clearing House for that
account based on that requirement. With respect to the Swap Customer
Account, Rule 302 has been revised to add a cross-reference to the
appropriate provisions in Rule 1605(h), which address the calculation
and settlement of margin for that account more specifically. In Rule
304, which addresses payments with respect to Sponsored Principal
accounts, certain changes have been made to conform to the changes made
in Rule 302.
    Rule 401(g) is amended to require each Clearing Member to submit on
a daily basis (or more frequently, if requested by ICE Clear Europe) a
breakdown of the open positions in each Customer Account on a per
customer basis, in order to permit the Clearing House to calculate
gross margin for that account, if applicable. Rule 406 is amended to
clarify that positions in a Customer Account of one customer are not to
be netted against opposite positions of another customer, and that
positions in separate Customer Accounts are not to be netted against
each other, consistent with other existing provisions of the Rules.
    Rule 702(c) is amended to set out more clearly how the cash
settlement amount for futures contracts is calculated based on the
positions held in different accounts, in light of the use of gross or
net margining discussed above. As revised, the rule refers to the
difference between the exchange settlement price and the price at which
the contract is recorded on the Clearing House's books (or, for new
contracts entered into on the day of settlement, the price at which the
contract was bought or sold). This is consistent with current practice
for such contracts. Similar clarifications are made in Rule 705(a) to
reflect the treatment of contracts entered into on the day of
settlement. In Rule 803(a), a similar change is made to reflect the
treatment of option contracts entered into on the same day as the
exercise date. Rule 810(d) is amended to set out more clearly the
calculation of the cash settlement amount for an option contract (based
on the difference between the relevant reference price and the price at
which the contract is recorded on the Clearing House's books (or, for
new contracts entered into on the day of exercise, the price at which
the contract was bought or sold). This is also consistent with current
practice for such option contracts.
    In Rule 1605(h), which addresses margin for the Swap Customer
Account of FCM/BD Clearing Members, certain amendments have been made
to refer more specifically to the relevant Rules and procedures used
for the transfer of relevant amounts to and from the Clearing House (in
line with the procedures applicable to transfers of Margin for other
accounts under the Rules and Finance Procedures). The amendments do not
materially change the operation of the Swap Customer Account, but
reflect the addition of the cross reference to Rule 1605(h) in Rule
302, which is intended to provide greater clarity to Clearing Members
and market participants.
    The Clearing Procedures have been amended to add the relevant new
account designations and to distinguish more clearly between net
margined and gross margined Customer Accounts, along with various
conforming and clarifying changes. In paragraph 2.3(b)(2), for FCM/BD
Clearing Members, the amendments state explicitly that the S, W and Z
accounts use gross margin models, and add a new E account that can be
used as a net margined account under the Non-DCM/Swap Customer Account
or General Customer Account category, to the extent permissible under
applicable law. In paragraphs 2.3(b)(3) and (4), for Non-FCM/BD
Clearing Members, the amendments state explicitly that the S,

C, F, and T accounts use a gross margin model, and the E, R and K
accounts use a net margin model. A change is made in paragraph 2.4(b)
to conform to the changes made in Rule 406. Conforming changes to the
relevant account designations have been made in paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2.
Amendments to paragraph 4.4 of the Clearing Procedures address the
difference between the calculation of net and gross margin for relevant
Customer Accounts, consistent with the account designations under
paragraph 2.3.
    ICE Clear Europe has made available to F&O Clearing Members,
pursuant to a member transition plan and the electronic GSPD file
provided to clearing members on a daily basis, the details of the
particular F&O Contracts that will be required to be held in gross
margined Customer Accounts, as well as those that may be held in either
gross or net margined Customer Accounts, in accordance with the amended
Rules and Procedures described above, upon implementation of the
amendments. Specifically, those ICE Futures Europe and ICE Futures US
energy contracts that currently are margined using a one-day margin
period of risk will be required to be carried in gross margined
Customer Accounts. These include contracts relating to coal, crude oil
and refined crude products, petrochemicals, US electricity, US
emissions, US natural gas and natural gas liquids. Other F&O Contracts
(including Financials & Softs contracts and certain energy contract
traded on ICE Futures Europe and ICE Endex that are currently margined
using a two-day margin period of risk) may be carried in either net or
gross margined Customer Accounts. ICE Clear Europe will notify F&O
Clearing Members by circular of the date of implementation of the
amendments and gross margining requirements discussed herein.
ii. Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments to the Rules
and Clearing Procedures are consistent with the requirements of Section
17A of the Act \7\ and the regulations thereunder applicable to it.\8\
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \9\ 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, to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which
are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible and to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments are designed principally to facilitate the use by
Non-FCM/BD Clearing Members of gross margined Customer Accounts for the
F&O product category. The amendments also more clearly distinguish
between net margined and gross margined accounts in the Rules and
Procedures, and clarify and simplify the rules and procedures relating
to the calling and return of initial and original margin for all
accounts. The amendments thus build on the existing customer account
structure established in the ICE Clear Europe rules. By facilitating
gross margining, and providing the Clearing House with customer-by-
customer position data that supports such margining, the amendments
will also enhance the Clearing House's risk management infrastructure
with respect to Customer Accounts. As described above, the amendments
are principally relevant to Non-FCM/BD Clearing Members for F&O
Contracts; the DCM Customer Account and Swap Customer Account
structures for FCM/BD Clearing Members (which are gross margined
accounts) are prescribed by applicable U.S. law and are not materially
changing as a result of the amendments. As a result, in ICE Clear
Europe's view, the amendments will promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of derivative transactions, are consistent
with the safeguarding of funds and securities in the custody or control
of ICE Clear Europe, and generally further the public interest. The
amendments are therefore consistent with the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \10\ and the regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed changes to the Rules
discussed herein would have any adverse impact, or impose any burden,
on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The proposed amendments are intended to provide
Clearing Members with additional ability to use gross margined Customer
Accounts. Such accounts will be available on the same terms to all Non-
FCM/BD Clearing Members. ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed
amendments would adversely affect access to clearing by Clearing
Members or their customers, adversely affect competition among Clearing
Members or adversely affect the market for clearing services or limit
market participants' choices for clearing transactions. Rather,
competition among Clearing Members, and access to clearing, may be
facilitated through the possibility of Clearing Members offering a
choice of net or gross margining, where permitted (in all cases subject
to applicable legal requirements and Clearing Rules). Although the
proposed amendments may impose additional compliance costs on Clearing
Members, including because of the requirements to provide customer-
related data to the Clearing House, ICE Clear Europe believes that such
costs are appropriate in light of the benefits (to each of the Clearing
House, Clearing Members and customers) from facilitating gross
margining for Customer Accounts. As a result, ICE Clear Europe does not
believe that the proposed amendments to the Rules will impose any
burden on competition not appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    On October 30, 2015, ICE Clear Europe solicited written comments
relating to the proposed Rule and Procedure changes via a circular.
Comments were due by November 13, 2015, and no comments had been
received as of the time of this filing. ICE Clear Europe will notify
the Commission of any written comments received by ICE Clear Europe.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \11\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(i) and (ii)
\12\ thereunder. The amendments principally effect a change in an
existing service of a registered clearing agency that primarily affects
the clearing operations of the clearing agency with respect to products
that are not securities, including futures that are not security
futures, swaps that are not security-based swaps or mixed swaps, and
forwards that are not security forwards, and does not significantly
affect any securities clearing operations of the clearing agency or any
rights or obligations of the clearing agency with respect to securities
clearing or persons using such securities-clearing service. Certain
other aspects of the amendments effect a change in an existing service
of

a registered clearing agency that does not adversely affect the
safeguarding of securities or funds in the custody or control of the
clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and does not
significantly affect the respective rights or obligations of the
clearing agency or persons using the service. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2015-019 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-2015-019. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://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 Web site 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 Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation#rule-filings.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2015-019
and should be submitted on or before January 4, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31176 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 217 (Monday, November 13, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 77509]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25027]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0871]

Special Local Regulation; Marine Events Within the Eleventh Coast
Guard District--Mission Bay Parade of Lights

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation on
the waters of Mission Bay, CA, during the Mission Bay Parade of Lights
on December 10, 2022. This special local regulation is necessary to
provide for the safety of the participants, crew, sponsor vessels of
the event, and general users of the waterway. During the enforcement
period, persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring within this regulated area unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector San Diego or their
designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 for the location described in
Item 6 in Table 1 to Sec.  100.1101, will be enforced from 5:30 p.m.
through 8 p.m. on December 10, 2023, and December 17, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Shelley Turner,
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone
(619) 278-7656, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special
local regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 for the location identified in
Item No. 6 in Table 1 to Sec.  100.1101, from 5:30 p.m. until 8 p.m. on
December 10, 2023, and December 17, 2023, for the Mission Bay Parade of
Lights in Mission Bay, CA. This action is being taken to provide for
the safety of life on the navigable waterways during the event. Our
regulation for recurring marine events in the San Diego Captain of the
Port Zone, Sec.  100.1101, Item No. 6 in table 1 to Sec.  100.1101,
specifies the location of the regulated area for the Mission Bay Parade
of Lights, which encompasses portions of Mission Bay. Under the
provisions of Sec.  100.1101, persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this regulated
area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal,
State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    In addition to this document in the Federal Register, the Coast
Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of
this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.

J.W. Spitler,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2023-25027 Filed 11-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16309-16311]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6616]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66591; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-036]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Eliminate the 100MB Connectivity Option and Fee

March 14, 2012.
    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 6, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate 100MB connectivity between the
Exchange and co-located servers, as well as associated fees, as set
forth in NASDAQ Rule 7034(b). The Exchange will implement the proposed
change on April 1, 2012. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at the Exchange's
principal office, 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 Exchange proposes to modify Rule 7034(b) to eliminate 100MB
connectivity between the Exchange and co-located servers, as well as
associated fees.\3\ NASDAQ currently offers each co-located customer
one 100MB connection to the Exchange at no charge; additional
connections are available for a $50 one-time installation fee and a
monthly fee of $100.\4\ Due to the continuous growth of the size of
consolidated and proprietary market data feeds, use of 100MB
connectivity to the Exchange may result in high data transmission
latencies, a loss of data packets, and a reduction in client service
satisfaction. As a result, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the 100MB
connection option to the Exchange. The proposal to eliminate the 100MB
connection option will eliminate potential latencies and loss of data
that could occur with lower bandwidths, issues that are potentially
damaging to investors.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All co-location services are provided by NASDAQ Technology
Services LLC and pursuant to agreements with the owner/operator of
its data center.
    \4\ See Exchange Rule 7034(b), Connectivity to Nasdaq. All co-
location services are provided by NASDAQ Technology Services LLC.
    \5\ The 100MB option that is being eliminated--which is used to
connect co-located servers to the Exchange--should be contrasted
with a recently introduced option for customers to establish 100MB
connections between their co-located servers and select external
locations. These external connections are generally combined with
other bandwidth options and are not utilized to transmit the same
volume of data as the 100MB connection between co-located servers
and the Exchange. For this reason, the Exchange believes that the
same latency and data loss considerations that are prompting it to
eliminate the 100MB connection to the Exchange do not apply to the
100MB connection to external locations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, there are seven co-located customers that utilize 100MB
connectivity to the Exchange. All seven clients also have larger
bandwidth connections to the Exchange. While these customers will need
to assess the adequacy of their bandwidth and may need to make
adjustments, NASDAQ strongly believes that these changes will be
beneficial to these customers because they will decrease the risk of
latency and data loss. In addition, as the number of customers making
use of 100MB connectivity to the Exchange dwindles, maintaining the
option would require NASDAQ to impose associated

fixed costs on a smaller customer base, or upon customers that are not
themselves using this legacy connectivity option. NASDAQ believes that
it is reasonable and equitable to avoid this result by eliminating the
option and helping customers migrate to more suitable connections.
    To provide all affected customers sufficient time to migrate from
their 100MB connections to larger bandwidths, the Exchange has proposed
(in a separate filing) to waive installation fees for 10Gb and 40Gb
connectivity until May 31, 2012.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66428 (February 21,
2012)(SR-NASDAQ-2012-028). The Exchange is not proposing to waive
fees for migrating to 1GB connectivity, since the Exchange is
concerned that this bandwidth level will prove inadequate for most
members in the near future. Accordingly, rather than creating a
scenario in which customers face repeated concerns about the
adequacy of their bandwidth, NASDAQ believes that it is reasonable
to use the fee waiver to encourage customers to move to connectivity
options that are likely to be adequate for a more extended period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to eliminate the word ``additional''
from the fee schedule in several instances to reflect the elimination
of the 100MB connection that was previously offered at no charge.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposal is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act \7\ in general, and with the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that it
is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest, and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, and
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Removes Impediments and Perfects Mechanism of a Free and Open Market

    The Exchange's proposal is designed to eliminate data transmission
latencies and loss of data risks that are associated with 100MB
connectivity, and thereby provide a more efficient mechanism for
trading. Since the migration to a higher bandwidth option will reduce
the potential disruption and consequently provide greater efficiency of
trading in the marketplace, the effects of this proposal will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, which in turn will protect investors and the
public interest.

Not Unfairly Discriminatory

    The proposal to eliminate the 100MB connectivity option applies to
all Exchange members that have voluntarily elected this service option.
Currently, there are seven co-located customers that utilize 100MB
connectivity to the Exchange. All seven clients also have larger
bandwidth connections to the Exchange. While these customers will need
to assess the adequacy of their bandwidth and may need to make
adjustments, NASDAQ strongly believes that these changes will be
beneficial to these customers because they will decrease the risk of
latency and data loss. In addition, as the number of customers making
use of 100MB connectivity to the Exchange dwindles, maintaining the
option would require NASDAQ to impose associated fixed costs on a
smaller customer base, or upon customers that are not themselves using
this legacy connectivity option.
    To assist co-located customers with migration to larger bandwidths,
the Exchange has proposed (in a separate filing) to waive installation
fees for 10Gb and 40Gb connectivity until May 31, 2012.\9\ Given the
ever-increasing size of market data, the Exchange decided to apply the
waiver of installation fees only to the 10Gb and 40Gb connection
instead of offering the waiver for the next available bandwidth, the
1Gb connection. This will provide the clients the opportunity to
migrate to a bandwidth that will more efficiently sustain the client's
business needs over a longer period of time. The co-located customers
that currently have the 100MB connectivity to the Exchange have until
March 31, 2012 to migrate from the 100MB connection to a larger
bandwidth. Furthermore, eliminating the 100MB connectivity to NASDAQ is
consistent with the connections offered by other exchanges,\10\ and
NASDAQ does not believe that it would be unfairly discriminatory to
eliminate a connectivity option that is not routinely offered by other
exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, supra note 6.
    \10\ See http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/NYSEArca_Equities_Fees.pdf,
page 13, for NYSE Equities, Inc. Fee Schedule where the bandwidth
starts at 1Gb. See also http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf, page 9, for the
International Securities Exchange Fee Schedule where the bandwidth
also starts at 1Gb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that eliminating the 100MB
connectivity service option will not burden competition since the 100MB
connectivity option is not routinely offered by other exchanges. In
fact, requiring NASDAQ to continue to offer this option would unfairly
burden competition by requiring it to incur costs that are not
typically incurred by any of its competitors.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\12\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-
operative waiting period contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii).\13\ The
Exchange represents that investors and the public interest are best
served by waiving the pre-operative delay to minimize potential risks
of market disruption associated with the use of lower bandwidth at a
time of increasing data traffic. For these reasons, the Commission
believes it is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest to waive the 30-day operative delay, and hereby grants
such waiver.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-036 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-036. 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 Web site (http://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 Web site 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
a.m. and 3 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; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2012-036 and should
be submitted on or before April 10, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6616 Filed 3-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 37648]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16241]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4222-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2015-0002]

Oklahoma; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4222-DR), dated May 26, 2015, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 12, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of May 26, 2015.

    Wagoner County for Individual Assistance.
    Beckham, Caddo, Canadian, Marshall, McIntosh, and Seminole
Counties for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public
Assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2015-16241 Filed 6-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 198 (Monday, October 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48090-48092]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22283]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-0329]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry
on Fees for Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing Facilities Under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by
November 15, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0776.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Guidance for Industry on Fees for Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing
Facilities Under Sections 503B and 744K of the FD&C Act OMB Control
Number 0910-0776--Extension

    This information collection supports the Agency's guidance on fees
for human drug compounding outsourcing facilities under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act). On November 27, 2013, the
President signed the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA) (Pub. L. 113-
54) into law. The DQSA added a new section, 503B (21 U.S.C. 353B), to
the FD&C Act, creating a category of entities called ``outsourcing
facilities.'' Outsourcing facilities, as defined in section 503B(d)(4)
of the FD&C Act, are facilities that meet certain requirements
described in section 503B, including registering with FDA as an
outsourcing facility and paying associated fees. Drug products
compounded in an outsourcing facility can qualify for exemptions from
the FDA approval requirements in section 505 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
355), and the requirement to label products with adequate directions
for use under section 502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1)),
if the requirements in section 503B of the FD&C Act are met.
    The guidance is intended for entities that compound human drugs and
elect to register as outsourcing facilities under section 503B of the
FD&C Act. Once an entity has elected to register as an outsourcing
facility, it must pay certain fees to be registered as an outsourcing
facility. The guidance describes the types and amounts of fees that
outsourcing facilities must pay, the adjustments to fees required by
law, the way in which outsourcing facilities may submit payment to FDA,
the consequences of outsourcing facilities' failure to pay fees, and
the way an outsourcing facility may qualify as a small business to
obtain a reduction in fees.
    In the Federal Register of June 15, 2017 (82 FR 27493), we
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
extension of this collection of information. No comments were received.
We therefore estimate the burden associated with the information
collection as follows:

                        Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden--Establishment Fee \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
      Type of reporting           Number of    responses  per   Total annual    Average  burden     Total hours
                                 respondents      respondent      responses      per  response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payment of annual                          60               1              60    .5 (30 minutes)              30
 establishment fee...........
Request for Small Business                 15               1              15                 25             375
 Establishment Fee Reduction
 (Form FDA 3908).............
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .................             405
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

        Table 2--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden--Re-Inspection Fee and Dispute Resolution Requests \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
      Type of reporting           Number of    responses  per   Total annual    Average  burden     Total hours
                                 respondents      respondent      responses      per  response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payment of re-inspection fee.              15               1              15    .5 (30 minutes)            7.50
Reconsideration request......               3               1               3                  1               3
Appeal request...............               1               1               1                  1               1
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .................           11.50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

                               Table 3--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
    Type of recordkeeping         Number of      record per     Total annual    Average  burden     Total hours
                                recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records        per  record
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copy of small business                     15               1              15    .5 (30 minutes)            7.50
 designation letter..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    As described in section III.A of the guidance, upon receiving
registration information from a facility seeking to register as an
outsourcing facility, FDA will send an invoice for an establishment fee
to the outsourcing facility. The invoice contains instructions for
paying the establishment fee, as discussed in section III.E of the
guidance. This process would be repeated annually under the timeframes
described in the guidance. An outsourcing facility is not considered
registered until the required establishment fee is paid for that fiscal
year.
    We estimate that annually a total of 60 outsourcing facilities
(``no. of respondents'' in table 1, row 1) will pay to FDA 60
establishment fees (``total annual responses'' in table 1, row 1) as
described in the guidance. We also estimate that it will take an
outsourcing facility 0.5 hour to prepare and submit to FDA each
establishment fee (``average burden per response'' in table 1, row 1).
    As described in section III.C of the guidance, outsourcing
facilities that are re-inspected will be assessed a re-inspection fee
for each re-inspection. The re-inspection fee is designed to reimburse
FDA when it must visit a particular outsourcing facility more than once
because of noncompliance identified during a previous inspection. A re-
inspection fee will be incurred for each re-inspection that occurs.
After FDA conducts a re-inspection, we will send an invoice to the
email address indicated in the facility's registration file. The
invoice contains instructions for paying the re-inspection fee, as
discussed in section III.E of the guidance.
    We estimate that annually a total of 15 outsourcing facilities
(``no. of respondents'' in table 2, row 1) will pay to FDA 15 re-
inspection fees (``total annual responses'' in table 2, row 1) as
described in the guidance. We also estimate that it will take an
outsourcing facility 0.5 hour to prepare and submit to FDA each re-
inspection fee (``average burden per response'' in table 2, row 1).
    As described in section III.D of the guidance, certain outsourcing
facilities may qualify for a small business reduction in the amount of
the annual establishment fee. To qualify for this reduction, an
outsourcing facility must submit to FDA a written request certifying
that the entity meets the requirements for the reduction. For every
fiscal year that the firm seeks to qualify as a small business and
receive the fee reduction, the written request must be submitted to FDA
by April 30 of the preceding fiscal year. For example, an outsourcing
facility must submit a written request for the small business reduction
by April 30, 2015, to qualify for a reduction in the fiscal year 2016
annual establishment fee. As described in the guidance, section 744K of
the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379j-62) also requires an outsourcing facility
to submit its written request for a small business reduction in a
format specified by FDA in the guidance. The guidance specifies that
Form FDA 3908 is the format for submitting requests for a small
business fee reduction.
    We estimate that annually a total of 15 outsourcing facilities
(``no. of respondents'' in table 1, row 2) will submit to FDA a request
for a small business reduction in the amount of the annual
establishment fee. We estimate that 15 outsourcing facilities will
submit Form FDA 3908 (``total annual responses'' in table 1, row 2) to
FDA annually, as described in the guidance, and that it will take an
outsourcing facility 25 hours to prepare and submit to FDA each Form
FDA 3908 (``average burden per response'' in table 1, row 2).

    As described in section III.D of the guidance, those outsourcing
facilities that request a small business reduction in the amount of the
annual establishment fee will receive a small business designation
letter notifying the facility of FDA's decision. Outsourcing facilities
eligible to pay a reduced fee should maintain a copy of the small
business designation letter applicable to that fiscal year for their
records.
    We estimate that annually a total of 15 outsourcing facilities
(``no. of recordkeepers'' in table 3) will keep a copy of their small
business designation letter (``total annual records'' in table 3), and
that maintaining each record will take 0.5 hour (``average burden per
recordkeeping'' in table 3).
    As described in section V.B of the guidance, an outsourcing
facility may request reconsideration under 21 CFR 10.75 of an FDA
decision related to the fee provisions of section 744K of the FD&C Act.
As explained in the guidance, the request should state the facility's
rationale for its position that the decision was in error and include
any additional information that is relevant to the outsourcing
facility's argument.
    We estimate that a total of three outsourcing facilities (``no. of
respondents'' in table 2, row 2) annually will submit to FDA a request
for reconsideration as described in the guidance. We estimate that it
will take an outsourcing facility approximately 1 hour to prepare and
submit to FDA each request for reconsideration (``average burden per
response'' in table 2, row 2).
    As described in section V.B of the guidance, an outsourcing
facility may appeal, as set forth in Sec.  10.75, an FDA denial of a
request for reconsideration of an FDA decision related to the fee
provisions of section 744K of the FD&C Act.
    We estimate that a total of one outsourcing facility (``no. of
respondents'' in table 2, row 3) annually will submit an appeal of an
FDA denial of a request for reconsideration. We estimate that it will
take an outsourcing facility 1 hour to prepare and submit each appeal
under Sec.  10.75 (``average burden per response'' in table 2, row 3).

    Dated: October 10, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-22283 Filed 10-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 243 (Friday, December 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79114-79117]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31818]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76641; File No. SR-OCC-2015-805]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of an Advance Notice, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1,
2 and 3, Concerning The Options Clearing Corporation's Non-Bank
Liquidity Facility

December 14, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 806(e)(1) of title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment,
Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (``Payment, Clearing
and Settlement Supervision Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 5, 2015, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') an
advance notice described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by OCC. On November 11, 2015, OCC filed Amendment No.1 to the
advance notice, which amended and replaced in its entirety the advance
notice as originally submitted on November 5, 2015. On November 17,
2005, OCC filed Amendment No. 2 to the advance notice, which partially
amended the advance notice as submitted on November 11, 2015. On
November 24, 2015, OCC filed Amendment No. 3 to the advance notice,
which amends and replaces in its entirety the advance notice as
submitted on November 11, 2015, and amended on November 17, 2015. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the advance
notice from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Advance
Notice

    As discussed in more detail below, this advance notice is filed by
OCC in connection with a proposed change to: (i) Extend the existing
confirmation (``Existing Confirmation'') \3\ for one year under the
Master Repurchase Agreement (``MRA'') with the same terms and
conditions; (ii) enter into a second confirmation (``Second
Confirmation,'' and collectively with the Existing Confirmation,
``Confirmations'') under the MRA also on the same terms and conditions
except with an expiration date in June 2016; and (iii) maintain,
between the Existing Confirmation and Second Confirmation, an aggregate
commitment amount of no less than $1 billion and no greater than $1.5
billion under the non-bank liquidity facility (``Non-Bank Liquidity
Facility'') with the existing institutional investor (``Counterparty'')
and its agent.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Existing Confirmation is the original $1 billion Master
Confirmation executed under the Master Repurchase Agreement as
described in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73979 (January 2,
2015), 80 FR 1062 (January 8, 2015) (SR-OCC-2014-809).
    \4\ OCC intends the commitment amount of the Second Confirmation
to be $500 million and the commitment amount of the extended
Existing Confirmation to be $500 million. OCC would have the
flexibility to change the commitment amount of each Confirmation at
each renewal provided that at all times OCC would maintain the
aggregate commitment level between the two Confirmations under the
Non-Bank Liquidity Facility at no less than $1 billion and no
greater than $1.5 billion. The MRA and any effective Confirmation(s)
constitute the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By this notice, OCC requests that the Commission not object to the
foregoing proposed changes for renewing, in the future, the Existing
Confirmation and the Second Confirmation on the same terms and
conditions \5\ with the same Counterparty without filing an advance
notice concerning the renewal, provided that there has been no negative
change to the Counterparty's credit profile or the Counterparty has not
experienced a material adverse change (as defined below) since entering
into the Confirmations or the latest renewal of the either
Confirmation, whichever is later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For the purposes of clarity, OCC would not consider changes
to the costs of entering into a Confirmation, or the rate of a
transaction permitted under a Confirmation, a change to a term or
condition that would require the filing of a subsequent advance
notice filing provide that such costs or rate is at the then
prevailing market rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Advance Notice

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Advance Notice
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the advance notice and none have been received.

(B) Advance Notice Filed Pursuant to Section 806(e) of the Payment,
Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act

    This Amendment No. 3 to SR-OCC-2015-805 (``Filing'') amends and
replaces in its entirety the Filing as originally submitted on November
5, 2015, and amended on November 11, 2015 and November 17, 2015. The
purpose of this Amendment No. 3 to the Filing is to clarify the
conditions under which OCC would be permitted to renew either of the
Confirmations without filing a subsequent advance notice filing.
Description of Change
    This advance notice is filed by OCC in connection with a proposed
change to: (i) Extend the Existing Confirmation, for one year under the
MRA, with the same terms and conditions, for a commitment amount of
$500 million; (ii) enter into a Second Confirmation under the MRA, also
on the same terms and conditions, except with an expiration date in
June 2016, for a commitment amount of $500 million; and, (iii)
maintain, between the Existing Confirmation and Second Confirmation, an
aggregate commitment amount of no less than $1 billion and no greater
than $1.5 billion under the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility with the
existing Counterparty and its agent.\6\ The Second Confirmation has the
same terms, conditions, operations, and mechanics as the Existing
Confirmation, except for the expiration date and commitment amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The substantive terms regarding each additional transaction
are set forth in the OCC Committed Repo Program Summary of
Indicative Terms, which are attached hereto as Exhibits 3A and 3B.
Such exhibits are non-public documents for which OCC has submitted a
request for confidential treatment to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    OCC's overall liquidity plan provides it with access to a diverse
set of liquidity funding sources, which include bank borrowing
arrangements (i.e., OCC's syndicated credit facility \7\) and the Non-
Bank Liquidity Facility. The Non-Bank Liquidity Facility is designed to
reduce the concentration of OCC's counterparty exposure with respect to
its overall liquidity plan by diversifying its lender base among banks
and non-bank, non-clearing member institutional investors, such as
pension funds or insurance companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76062 (October 1,
2015), 80 FR 64028 (October 22, 2015) (SR-OCC-2015-803).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The currently approved Non-Bank Liquidity Facility is comprised of
two parts: The MRA and the Existing

Confirmation, which contains certain individualized terms and
conditions of transactions executed between OCC, an institutional
investor and its agent. The MRA is structured like a typical repurchase
arrangement in which the buyer (i.e., the Counterparty) would purchase
from OCC, from time to time, United States government securities
(``Eligible Securities'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ OCC would use U.S. government securities that are included
in clearing fund contributions by clearing members and margin
deposits of any clearing member that has been suspended by OCC for
the repurchase arrangements. Article VIII, section 5(e) of OCC's By-
Laws and OCC Rule 1104(b) authorize OCC to obtain funds from third
parties through securities repurchases using these sources. The
officers who may exercise this authority include the Executive
Chairman and the President.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC, as the seller, would transfer Eligible Securities to the buyer
in exchange for a payment by the buyer to OCC in immediately available
funds (``Purchase Price''). The buyer would simultaneously agree to
transfer the purchased securities back to OCC at a specified later date
(``Repurchase Date'') or on OCC's demand against the transfer of funds
by OCC to the buyer in an amount equal to the outstanding Purchase
Price plus the accrued and unpaid price differential (together,
``Repurchase Price''), which is the interest component of the
Repurchase Price.
    The Confirmations establish tailored provisions of the actual
repurchase transactions permitted under the MRA. By entering into the
Confirmation, the Counterparty is obligated to enter repurchase
transactions even if OCC experiences a material adverse change,\9\
funds must be made available to OCC within 60 minutes of OCC's
delivering eligible securities, and the institutional investor is not
permitted to rehypothecate purchased securities.\10\ Additionally, the
Confirmations set forth the terms and maximum dollar amounts of the
transaction permitted under the MRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ When included in a contract, a ``material adverse change''
is typically defined as a change that would have a materially
adverse effect on the business or financial condition of a company.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73979 (January 2,
2015), 80 FR 1062 (January 8, 2015) (SR-OCC-2014-809).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extension of the Existing Confirmation
    In order to provide continued access to liquidity resources, OCC is
also proposing to extend the Existing Confirmation under the Non-Bank
Liquidity Facility. The extended Existing Confirmation would have the
same terms, conditions, operations, and mechanics as the Existing
Confirmation entered into under the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility, but
for the expiration date, which would be January 2017, and the
commitment amount, which would be $500 million.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73979 (January 2,
2015), 80 FR 1062 (January 8, 2015) (SR-OCC-2014-809).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The extended Existing Confirmation would, for example, continue to
state that OCC is entitled to receive funds from the Non-Bank Liquidity
Facility within 60 minutes of a request for such monies and delivery of
eligible securities. The buyer would not be able to rehypothocate
eligible securities sold to it in connection with a Non-Bank Liquidity
Facility transaction, and OCC would be able to substitute eligible
securities held by the buyer. Additionally, OCC would have early
termination rights with respect to any transaction entered into under
the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility as well as have additional remedies in
the case of ``material adverse changes'' to OCC. For example, OCC would
require that it would not be an event of default if OCC suffers a
material adverse change, such as the failure of a clearing member. This
provision is important because it provides OCC with certainty of
funding, even in adverse or difficult market conditions. This
commitment to provide funding would be a key distinction from ordinary
repurchase arrangements and a key requirement for OCC.
Second Confirmation
    OCC proposes to enter into the Second Confirmation that would
permit transactions of up to $500 million and would expire in June
2016. The proposed Second Confirmation would have the same terms,
conditions, operations, and mechanics as the Existing Confirmation of
the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility, but for the commitment amount and the
term.
    The proposed Second Confirmation, with a June 2016 expiration date,
would help ensure continued access to a minimum amount of liquidity to
OCC by staggering the expiration of the committed liquidity funding
sources. OCC's current committed liquidity funding sources, which are
its syndicated credit facility \12\ and the Existing Confirmation,
currently expire each year in October and January, respectively.
Staggering the expiration dates of Confirmations under the Non-Bank
Liquidity Facility in relationship to each other and in relationship to
the other liquidity funding source in OCC's overall liquidity plan
would mitigate the risk of a precipitous decrease in OCC's access to
liquidity as a result of a an unsuccessful renewal of any one funding
source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76062 (October 1,
2015), 80 FR 64028 (October 22, 2015) (SR-OCC-2015-803).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aggregate Commitment Amount Under the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility
    OCC's current aggregate committed funding available under its Non-
Bank Liquidity Facility ($1.0 billion) and its bank syndicated credit
facility ($2.0 billion) is $3.0 billion. OCC is proposing to maintain
the aggregate commitment amount under the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility
at no lower than $1.0 billion and no higher than $1.5 billion, so that
the aggregate total funding available is between $3.0 billion and $3.5
billion. This would provide OCC with the flexibility to: (i) React to
shifting liquidity needs in a swift manner within funding parameters
approved by the Commission, and (ii) reallocate the amount of funding
available under the Confirmations at the time either of the
Confirmations is to be renewed to manage liquidity needs and enhance
its ability to ensure continual liquidity resources.
    OCC would continue to evaluate the aggregate commitment amount of
the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility so that OCC's available liquidity
resources remain properly calibrated to its activities and settlement
obligations, and to the extent: (i) OCC determines its liquidity needs
merit funding levels below the $1.0 billion or above the $1.5 billion
thresholds for the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility, (ii) OCC should seek to
change the terms and conditions of the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility, or
(iii) the Counterparty has experienced a negative change to its credit
profile or a material adverse change since entering into the
Confirmations or the latest renewal of the either Confirmation, OCC
would submit a proposal with the Commission for approval first.
Anticipated Effect on and Management of Risk
    Completing timely settlement is a key aspect of OCC's role as a
clearing agency performing central counterparty services. The extension
of the Existing Confirmation would continue to promote the reduction of
risks to OCC, its clearing members and the options market in general
because it would allow OCC to continue to obtain short-term funds from
the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility to address liquidity demands arising
out of the default or suspension of a clearing member, in anticipation
of a potential default or suspension of clearing members, or the
insolvency of a bank or another securities or commodities clearing
organization.

    The Second Confirmation and the ability to seek an aggregate
commitment amount under the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility for no lower
than $1.0 billion and no greater than $1.5 billion would also help OCC
ensure the continued availability of its liquidity resources by
embedding the staggered expiration of the committed liquidity funding
sources and providing OCC with the flexibility to seek additional
funding amounts at the same terms, conditions, operations, and
mechanics of the Confirmations.
    The MRA, like any liquidity source, would involve certain risks,
but OCC would continue to structure the Non-Bank Liquidity Facility to
mitigate those risks. Most of these risks are standard in any master
repurchase agreement. For example, a buyer could fail to deliver, or
delay in delivering, purchased securities to OCC by the applicable
Repurchase Date. OCC will address this risk by seeking a security
interest from the buyer in that portion of the purchased securities
representing the excess of the market value over the Repurchase Price,
or by obtaining other comfort from the buyer that the purchased
securities will be timely returned. Further, the purchased securities
generally will not be ``on-the-run'' securities, i.e., the most
recently issued Treasury securities. The demand in the marketplace for
Treasury securities, for uses other than collateral, is much greater
for on-the-run Treasury securities, and, therefore, OCC believes buyers
will have little incentive to retain the securities transferred by OCC.
    The mechanics under the MRA would be structured so that OCC could
avoid losses by paying the Repurchase Price. For example, OCC will have
optional early termination rights in each Confirmation, under which OCC
would be able to accelerate the Repurchase Date of any transaction by
providing written notice to the buyer and paying the Repurchase Price.
Through this mechanism, OCC can maintain the benefit of the MRA, while
mitigating any risk associated with a particular transaction.
    The MRA would be structured to avoid potential third-party risks,
which are typical of repurchase arrangements. The prohibition on buyer
rehypothecation and use of purchased securities, along with OCC's
visibility into the buyer's custody account, would reduce the risk to
OCC of a buyer default.
    As with any repurchase arrangement, OCC is subject to the risk that
it may have to terminate existing transactions and accelerate the
applicable Repurchase Date with respect to a buyer due to changes in
the financial health or performance of the buyer. Terminating
transactions could negatively affect OCC's liquidity position. However,
any negative effect is reduced by the fact that OCC maintains a number
of different financing arrangements, and thus will have access to
liquidity sources in the event the MRA is no longer a viable source.
    Under the MRA, OCC would be obligated to transfer additional cash
or securities as margin in the event the market value of any purchased
securities decreases. OCC seeks to ensure it can meet any such
obligation by monitoring the value of the purchased securities and
maintaining adequate cash resources to make any required payments. Such
payments are expected to be small in comparison to the total amount of
cash received for each transfer of purchased securities.
    The proposed change would help OCC minimize losses in the event of
a default, suspension or insolvency, by allowing it to obtain funds
from sources not connected to OCC's clearing members on extremely short
notice to ensure clearance and settlement of transactions in options
and other contracts without interruption. OCC believes that the reduced
settlement risk presented by OCC resulting from the proposed change
would correspondingly reduce systemic risk and promote the safety and
soundness of the clearing system. The ability to borrow funds from the
Non-Bank Liquidity Facility would allow OCC to avoid liquidating margin
or clearing fund assets in what would likely be volatile market
conditions, which would preserve funds available to cover any losses
resulting from the failure of a clearing member, bank or other clearing
organization.
    Because the proposed change preserves substantially the same terms
and conditions as the MRA and the Existing Confirmation, OCC believes
that the proposed change would not otherwise affect or alter the
management of risk at OCC.
Consistency With the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act
    OCC believes the proposed change is consistent with section
805(b)(1) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act.\13\
The objectives and principles of section 805(b)(1) of the Payment,
Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act specify the promotion of robust
risk management, promotion of safety and soundness, reduction of
systemic risks, and support of the stability of the broader financial
system.\14\ OCC believes that the proposed change would promote these
objectives because the proposed Confirmations would provide OCC with an
additional source of committed liquidity to meet its settlement
obligations while at the same time being structured to mitigate certain
operational risks, as described above, that arise in connection with
this committed liquidity source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b)(1).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Advance Notice, and Timing for
Commission Action

    The proposed change may be implemented if the Commission does not
object to the proposed change within 60 days of the later of (i) the
date that the proposed change was filed with the Commission or (ii) the
date that any additional information requested by the Commission is
received. OCC shall not implement the proposed change if the Commission
has any objection to the proposed change.
    The Commission may extend the period for review by an additional 60
days if the proposed change raises novel or complex issues, subject to
the Commission providing OCC with prompt written notice of the
extension. The proposed change may be implemented in less than 60 days
from the date the advance notice is filed, or the date further
information requested by the Commission is received, if the Commission
notifies OCC in writing that it does not object to the proposed change
and authorizes OCC to implement the proposed change on an earlier date,
subject to any conditions imposed by the Commission.
    OCC shall post notice on its Web site of proposed changes that are
implemented.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2015-805 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-OCC-2015-805. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the advance notice that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
advance notice 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 Web site 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 OCC and on OCC's Web site
(http://www.theocc.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_15_805.pdf). All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-OCC-2015-805 and should be submitted on or before January 4, 2016.

    By the Commission.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31818 Filed 12-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P