[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67055-67063]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23264]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90207; File No. SR-LCH SA-2020-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change Relating to the Clearing of Single Name Credit Default
Swaps Referencing Monoline Insurance Companies and the Amendment of LCH
SA's Rules in Accordance With Its Risk Policies

October 15, 2020.

I. Introduction

    On August 28, 2020, Banque Centrale de Compensation, which conducts
business under the name LCH SA (``LCH SA''), filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4,\2\
a proposed rule change as described below. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on September 10, 2020.\3\
The Commission did not receive comments on the proposed rule change.
For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Clearing of Single Name Credit
Default Swaps Referencing Monoline Insurance Companies and the
Amendment of LCH SA's Rules in Accordance With its Risk Policies,
Exchange Act Release No. 89760 (Sep. 3, 2020), 85 FR 55908 (Sep. 10,
2020) (SR-LCH SA-2020-004) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    As discussed in more detail below, the proposed rule change would:
(i) Allow LCH to clear credit default swap (``CDS'') contracts on a
monoline insurance company (meaning an insurance company issuing
financial guaranty insurance policies or similar financial guarantees);
(ii) add two new types of margin and make other changes related to
margin; (iii) apply LCH SA's stress testing to margin collateral; (iv)
revise LCH's use of credit scores of Clearing Members; (v) enhance LCH
SA's process for managing Clearing Member defaults; (vi) clarify the
timeframes associated with the end of day price submission process and

enhance the consequences for failing to submit end of day prices; (vii)
clarify certain aspects of the calculation of Clearing Members'
contributions to the CDS Default Fund; and (viii) make other
miscellaneous updates, including correcting typographical errors.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This discussion is excerpted from the Notice, 85 FR at
55908. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the
meanings ascribed to them in the LCH SA CDS Clearing Rule Book, the
LCH SA CDS Clearing Procedures, or the LCH SA CDS Clearing
Supplement, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. CDS Contracts Referencing a Monoline Insurance Company

    Currently, LCH SA clears CDS contracts on indices that contain
monoline insurance companies as constituents, such as the CDX.NA.IG and
CDS.NA.HY. LCH SA would now like to permit clearing of CDS contracts on
a monoline insurance company as a single name, rather than as part of
an index, using the additional legal provisions published by the
International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. on September 15,
2014 (the ``Monoline Supplement''). Thus, as a result of the changes
described below, Clearing Members would be able to clear single name
CDS contracts on monoline insurance companies, and the Monoline
Supplement would apply to any single name CDS contract on a monoline
insurance company.
    To allow clearing of single name CDS contracts on monoline
insurance companies, the proposed rule change would first amend the LCH
SA CDS Clearing Supplement (the ``CDS Supplement''). The CDS Supplement
specifies contractual provisions that apply to transactions among LCH,
Clearing Members, and clients. Part B, Section 2, sets out the terms of
cleared transactions for index CDS and single name CDS that incorporate
the 2014 ISDA Credit Derivatives Definitions. In Part B, Section 2.3 of
the CDS Supplement, the proposed rule change would amend paragraph (g)
to include a reference to the Monoline Supplement. As a result of this
change, the Monoline Supplement would apply to any single name cleared
transaction involving a monoline insurer.
    Similarly, the proposed rule change would amend Section 2.2 of Part
B to include a reference to the Monoline Supplement. Part B, Section 2,
sets out the terms of cleared transactions for index CDS and single
name CDS that incorporate the 2014 ISDA Credit Derivatives Definitions,
and Section 2.2 of Part B applies to index CDS transactions. Although,
as discussed above, LCH currently clears CDS contracts on indices that
contain monoline insurance companies as constituents, LCH believes it
is unclear whether the Monoline Supplement would apply to such index
transactions containing monoline insurance companies. Thus, LCH is
making this change to remove any doubt and to clarify that the Monoline
Supplement would be applicable to each constituent of an index that is
a monoline insurer.
    The proposed rule change also would amend Section 4 of the LCH SA
CDS Clearing Procedures (the ``Procedures''), which specifies the
requirements a transaction must satisfy to be eligible for clearing by
LCH SA. The proposed rule change would modify these requirements to add
two conditions to LCH SA's clearing of single-name CDS contracts on
monoline insurance companies. Pursuant to these conditions, LCH SA
would only clear a single-name CDS contract on a monoline insurance
company where the contract type is Standard North American Corporate
and the Monoline Supplement is specified as applicable.
    Finally, LCH represents that the proposed introduction of clearing
single name CDS contracts on monoline insurers requires no change in
LCH SA's margin methodology or stress testing, and thus no further
changes are needed to begin clearing.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55909, n.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Changes Related to Margin

    Unrelated to the clearing of single name CDS contracts referencing
monoline insurers, the proposed rule change would also make a number of
changes related to LCH SA's margin requirements.
    First, the proposed rule change would add a new type of margin
called Legal Entity Identifier Margin (``LEI Margin''). LCH SA is
proposing this new type of margin to remedy a potential issue in how it
treats Clearing Members and collects margin. Currently, LCH SA may, for
operational or historical reasons, treat a single Clearing Member as
two different Clearing Members, with separate transaction accounts and
margin requirements. LCH SA represents that in most cases, this results
in higher margins than should otherwise be the case, because the
different accounts result in separate margin requirements that are not
netted against each other (as they would be in a single account).\6\
LCH SA also believes, however, that this arrangement could potentially
undercount the liquidation costs that could result from having to
liquidate both accounts simultaneously in the event the single Clearing
Member defaulted, which could result from potential concentration
effects not taken into account when the accounts are considered
separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55909.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To remedy this potential undercounting, the proposed rule change
would introduce LEI Margin. The LEI Margin would calculate an
additional, incremental margin amount based on the open positions
registered in the margin accounts of one or more Clearing Members
identified by the same Legal Entity Identifier (``LEI''). Thus, the LEI
Margin would address the potential undercounting of liquidation costs
by considering the risks posed by the Clearing Member as a whole, in
all accounts with the same LEI.
    Second, the proposed rule change would add another additional
margin, called Stress Test Loss Over Additional Margin/Net Capital
Ratio Margin (``STLOAM''). The purpose of STLOAM would be to ensure
that Clearing Members have enough capital to absorb losses that could
materialize under an extreme but plausible market risk scenario. To
calculate STLOAM, LCH SA would first determine a Clearing Member's
stress risk--how much the cost of a Clearing Member's default in an
extreme but plausible market risk scenario exceeds its margin and CDS
Default Fund contributions already deposited with LCH SA. LCH SA would
then charge the Clearing Member the amount needed to bring this stress
risk to within 30 percent of the Clearing Member's net capital. In
other words, LCH SA has determined that a Clearing Member's stress risk
should not exceed 30 percent of its net capital, and STLOAM would
charge to a Clearing Member the amount needed to ensure that its stress
risk does not exceed 30 percent of its net capital.
    The proposed rule change would implement these new margins by
adding them to the LCH SA Reference Guide: CDS Margin Framework. The
proposed rule change would also amend the definition of ``Margin'' in
the Section 1.1.1 of the LCH SA CDS Clearing Rule Book (the ``Rule
Book'') to include these two new margins. Moreover, as with other
margins, the LEI Margin and STLOAM would be calculated in accordance
with Section 2 of the Procedures. Thus, the proposed rule change would
add to Section 2 new language to describe these margins and how they
are calculated.
    In addition to introducing these two new margins, the proposed rule
change would also distinguish Vega Margin from Spread Margin. Because
Vega Margin is currently calculated as part of Spread Margin, these
changes would not

result in a new or additional margin requirement. Rather, these changes
would separate and distinguish Vega Margin from Spread Margin, with the
goal of providing additional detail and clarity to Clearing Members
regarding their amounts of Vega Margin. The proposed rule change would
make this distinction by: Adding a new definition for Vega Margin in
Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book; amending the definition of Margin in
Section 1.1.1 to include Vega Margin; and adding in Section 2 of the
Procedures references to Vega Margin and new language to describe Vega
Margin.
    Finally, the proposed rule change would make two organizational
changes with respect to defined terms related to margin. First, the
proposed rule change would delete the defined term Margin Account
Uncovered Risk from Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book because this defined
term is no longer used in the Rule Book. Rather, the term is currently
only used in Section 6 of the Procedures when discussing the
calculation of the CDS Default Fund. The proposed rule change would
replace references to Margin Account Uncovered Risk in Section 6 of the
Procedures with references to the defined term Group Member Uncovered
Risk instead. The definition of Group Member Uncovered Risk is the same
as the definition of Margin Account Uncovered Risk, except that the
Group Member Uncovered Risk applies to a Clearing Member and its
affiliates rather than just a Clearing Member. Thus, the Group Member
Uncovered Risk covers the Margin Account Uncovered Risk, and, as such,
there is no need to separately refer to the Margin Account Uncovered
Risk.
    Second, the proposed rule change would rearrange the order in which
the various types of margin are listed in the definition of Margin in
Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book and in paragraph 2.2(a) of Section 2 of
the Procedures to be consistent with the order of description of the
margins in paragraph 2.7 of Section 2 of the Procedures. LCH SA is
making this change to ensure consistency.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Stress Testing

    The proposed rule change also would amend LCH SA's stress testing
to apply it to margin collateral. The proposed rule change would amend
Appendix 4 of the LCH Group Financial Resource Adequacy Policy (the
``FRAP''). Appendix 4 contains a glossary of defined terms related to
stress testing. The proposed rule change would amend the definition of
Stress Test Loss so that the definition includes the profit and loss
amount determined from LCH stress test scenarios to a Clearing Member's
margin collateral. Currently, the definition of Stress Test Loss only
includes the profit and loss amount determined from LCH stress test
scenarios to a Clearing Member's portfolio. By including the profit and
loss amount to a Clearing Member's margin collateral, as well as its
portfolio, this proposed change would assure that LCH SA includes a
Clearing Member's non-cash collateral in a stress test. LCH SA is
making this change to implement a recommendation from a regulator that
LCH SA better monitor the risks associated with Clearing Members
posting non-cash collateral, including sovereign debt.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would make three other changes to further
carry out this change. First, the proposed rule change would amend the
LCH Group Collateral Risk Policy to describe the Stress Test Loss as
the profit and loss amount determined from LCH stress test scenarios to
a Clearing Member's portfolio and margin collateral. Second, the
proposed rule change would amend the definition of ``Group Member
Uncovered Risk'' in Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book to add a reference
to the stress-tested potential loss that would be incurred in relation
to collateral. Third, the proposed rule change would amend the LCH SA
CDSClear Default Fund Methodology to reflect the inclusion of a
Clearing Member's margin collateral in stress tests.
    Finally, the proposed rule change would amend the FRAP to specify
that the Stress Testing Regime must be independently validated and
reviewed at least annually in consultation with the LCH SA Risk
Committee.

D. Credit Scores

    Next, the proposed rule change would make amendments related to the
use of Internal Credit Scores (``ICS'') of Clearing Members. The ICS is
the credit score that LCH SA assigns to a Clearing Member based on its
assessment of the Clearing Member's credit risk. LCH SA uses a Clearing
Member's ICS as an input in determining various margins, such as the
Default Fund Additional Margin. The proposed rule change would amend
Appendix 4 of the FRAP to clarify that where a Clearing Member is part
of a group of affiliated Clearing Members, each having a different ICS,
then LCH SA would consider the ICS of the affiliate having the largest
exposure to LCH SA.
    Moreover, the proposed rule change would amend the LCH Group
Counterparty Credit Risk Policy to clarify that where there is a change
in a Clearing Member's ICS, LCH SA's Executive Risk Committee must
approve the change. Currently, the policy only requires that a changed
ICS be sent to the Executive Risk Committee for notification.

E. CDS Default Management

    In addition to the changes discussed above, LCH SA proposes to make
a number of changes to its Rule Book and Procedures to enhance its
process for managing Clearing Member defaults. These proposed
enhancements are a result of lessons learned from fire drills--
simulated tests of LCH SA's default management process.\9\ These
changes fall into two groups: Changes to Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule
Book and changes to Appendix 1 of the Rule Book. In addition to these
two groups of changes, the proposed rule change would also amend
Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule Book, relating to the default of a client's
Clearing Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Article <IP_ADDRESS> generally identifies certain resources available to
LCH SA for recourse following the default of a Clearing Member.
Paragraph (i)(b) of Article <IP_ADDRESS> identifies the resources that LCH
SA may use to reduce or cover any Damage that it incurs from the
liquidation of non-ported transactions of a Defaulting Clearing Member
in any client account. The proposed rule change would amend paragraph
(i)(b) of Article <IP_ADDRESS> to add to these resources any remaining
collateral posted by a Defaulting Clearing Member as margin in respect
of a proprietary account in connection with another LCH SA clearing
service where (i) LCH SA has declared the Defaulting Clearing Member to
be in default and (ii) to the extent such collateral has not been
applied in such other clearing service.
    Specifically, this new provision would generally mirror current
Article <IP_ADDRESS>(i)(b)(y). Current Article <IP_ADDRESS>(i)(b)(y) provides LCH
SA recourse to any collateral posted by a defaulting Clearing Member
for a CCM Individual Segregated Account Client in connection with
another LCH SA clearing service in certain conditions. The proposed
rule change would add to the existing conditions in Article
<IP_ADDRESS>(i)(b)(y) the additional condition that LCH SA has declared the
Clearing Member to be in default. LCH SA is making this change to
mirror the conditions in the new resource discussed immediately above,
thus

maintaining consistency between these two provisions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change would renumber the sub-paragraphs
of paragraph (i)(b) of Article <IP_ADDRESS>, consistent with these changes
and additions.
    The second group of changes would amend Appendix 1 of the Rule
Book. Appendix 1 contains the provisions that govern LCH SA's default
management process for its CDS service. Clause 4 of Appendix 1
describes the default management process for client clearing. Article
4.3 of Clause 4 sets out the process that LCH SA would use to transfer
a client's open positions to a backup Clearing Member following the
default of the client's primary Clearing Member. The proposed rule
change would amend Article 4.3 to add references to a clearing notice
which would be published by LCH SA. The clearing notice would explain
how a client would inform LCH SA of the identity of its backup Clearing
Member and how the backup Clearing Member would confirm to LCH SA its
willingness to serve as the backup.
    Clause 8 of Appendix 1 sets out the process for closure of LCH SA's
CDS service. Service closure is the last step in the default management
process following a Clearing Member's default. As part of the service
closure process, LCH SA calculates the value of a Clearing Member's
transactions and the value of a Clearing Member's collateral. LCH SA
nets these values together to produce an amount that LCH SA owes to the
Clearing Member or that the Clearing Member owes to LCH SA. The
proposed rule change would reorganize the provisions relating to these
calculations to better reflect how LCH SA makes the calculations in
practice, with LCH SA first calculating the value of transactions and
the value of collateral before netting the two together.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the proposed rule change would amend Clause 8 of Appendix
1 to reflect the value in Euro of collateral. Specifically, where LCH
SA determines the value of a Clearing Member's transactions and this
amount is negative (meaning the Clearing Member owes a payment to LCH
SA), LCH SA would take into consideration, when determining the value
of that Clearing Member's collateral, the value of Euro denominated
cash collateral and any amount resulting from the liquidation in Euro
of the collateral other than cash collateral denominated in Euro. Where
LCH SA determines the value of a Clearing Member's transactions and
this amount is positive (meaning LCH SA owes a payment to the Clearing
Member), LCH SA would take into consideration, when determining the
value of that Clearing Member's collateral, the value of Euro
denominated cash collateral. In this case LCH SA would not take into
consideration the amount resulting from the liquidation in Euro of
collateral other than Euro cash collateral because LCH SA would return
that non-cash collateral to the Clearing Member, rather than
liquidating it.
    Finally, the proposed rule change would make three other
miscellaneous changes to Clause 8. First, Article 8.3 of Clause 8
describes the sources of prices that LCH would use to determine the
value of a Clearing Member's transactions, as discussed above. Article
8.3 lists these sources in order of priority. The proposed rule change
would reorganize this list of sources to reflect the priority in which
LCH SA would access these sources in practice. Second, the proposed
rule change would amend Article 8.6 regarding the time period by which
LCH SA must notify a Clearing Member of the amounts which LCH SA will
pay to the Clearing Member or which the Clearing Member must pay to LCH
SA. Currently, LCH SA must notify a Clearing Member by 15:00 on the
Early Termination Trigger Date or on the first Business Day following
the Early Termination Trigger Date. LCH SA determined that this
deadline was not feasible in practice because the values which it uses
to determine the amount payable to or receivable from a Clearing Member
are based on prices determined as at the end of the first Business Day
following the Early Termination Trigger Date.\12\ Thus, the proposed
rule change would revise Article 8.6 to require instead that LCH SA
notify a Clearing Member by no later than the end of the second
Business Day following the Early Termination Trigger Date. Finally, the
proposed rule change would amend Article 8.7 to specify the deadline by
which LCH SA would repay or redeliver collateral to Clearing Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change also would amend Article <IP_ADDRESS>
of the Rule Book. Article <IP_ADDRESS> sets out the provisions that apply to
a client of a Clearing Member receiving clearing services from that
Clearing Member. Among other things, Article <IP_ADDRESS> provides that LCH
SA will rely on the latest documentation and information received from
the Clearing Member for the purpose of making certain payments to the
client upon the default of the client's Clearing Member. The proposed
rule change would expand this provision to specify that LCH SA may rely
on the latest documentation and information received from the Clearing
Member on the client for that purpose or for any other purpose. LCH SA
is making this change to account for the possibility that it may need
to rely on this documentation for other purposes upon the default of a
client's Clearing Member, such as communicating with the client
regarding the transfer of the client's positions to a backup Clearing
Member.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Price Submissions

    Next, the proposed rule change would amend Section 5 and Section 8
of the Procedures with respect to the submission of end of day prices
by Clearing Members. The proposed rule change would first amend
paragraph 5.18.3 of Section 5. Paragraph 5.18.3 details the procedures
for Clearing Members to submit prices to LCH SA. Currently, paragraph
5.18.3 provides that files listing the open positions for which
Clearing Members are required to submit prices will be available at
certain specified times. Current paragraph 5.18.3 separately lists the
times for CDS and options on index CDS even though the actual times are
the same. Because these times are the same, the proposed rule change
would combine the separately listed times, listing one time for both
CDS and options on index CDS. The proposed rule change would make the
same change to paragraph 5.18.5. Moreover, paragraph 5.18.3 notes that
the files may be available at earlier times, as notified in advance by
LCH SA, preceding certain holidays that are listed in paragraph 5.18.3.
The proposed rule change would replace the list of holidays and instead
specify that the files may be available at earlier times as notified in
advance by LCH SA. LCH SA is making both of these changes to simplify
the drafting of paragraph 5.18.3, and thereby reduce the possibility
for confusion or error.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would next amend paragraphs 5.18.3,
5.18.4, and 5.18.5 to clarify that the existing references in those
paragraphs to options on index CDS are options with a CDS contractual
currency in Euro.
    The proposed rule change would also replace the reference to
``Clearing Day'' in paragraph 5.18.5(d) with a reference to ``Price
Contribution Day''. Paragraph 5.18.5(d) specifies certain deadlines
associated with the price submission

process for transactions with a contractual currency in Euro and for
those with a contractual currency in US dollars. The definition of
Price Contribution Day makes a distinction between transactions with a
contractual currency in Euro and those with a contractual currency in
US dollars, while the definition of Clearing Day does not. Thus, given
the application of paragraph 5.18.5(d) to transactions with a
contractual currency in Euro and those with one in US dollars, using
the term Price Contribution Day is more appropriate and precise.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55913.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, throughout Section 5 of the Procedures, the proposed rule
change would replace reference to the ``Operations department'' with a
reference to the ``CDSClear Operations Department''.
    Section 8 of the Procedures governs LCH SA's discipline of Clearing
Members that breach their obligations. Among other things, these
disciplinary procedures provide the measures that LCH SA will take
where a Clearing Member fails to submit complete end of day prices.
Currently, paragraph 8.3 gives the LCH SA CEO or the CDSClear CEO the
ability to impose a fine on a Clearing Member who is alleged to have
failed to submit complete prices as required. Under paragraph 8.3 as
proposed to be revised, the LCH SA CEO or the CDSClear CEO would still
be able to impose a fine on a Clearing Member who is alleged to have
failed to submit complete prices as required. The proposed rule change
would also, in certain circumstances, give the LCH SA CEO or the
CDSClear CEO the ability to increase a Clearing Member's Contribution
Requirement for the next monthly calculation by an amount equal to the
aggregate amount of fines incurred for such failure to submit complete
prices. With this change, rather than just fining a Clearing Member,
LCH SA would be able to collect the amount of the fine each month as
part of a Clearing Member's Contribution Requirement, which is a
Clearing Member's required contribution to the CDS Default Fund. To
further facilitate this change, the proposed rule change would amend
Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule Book, which deals with the calculation of a
Clearing Member's Contribution Requirement, to reference actions taken
by LCH SA under Section 8 of the Procedures. LCH SA represents that the
failure to submit prices is not an issue among Clearing Members
currently, but it is making the amendment to anticipate potential
failures by Clearing Members admitted as their number grows and to
assure that LCH SA has the authority to discipline a Clearing Member
that repeatedly fails to provide timely and accurate pricing data.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Amendments to Default Fund Contributions

    Currently, LCH SA calculates a Clearing Member's contribution to
the CDS Default Fund based on its initial margins calculated with
respect to the Clearing Member's account over the last sixty clearing
days, as provided in Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule Book. The proposed
rule change would not amend this provision, but it would add additional
language to clarify that if there is less than sixty Clearing Days of
initial margin calculations for a Clearing Member's account, then LCH
SA would base the Clearing Member's contribution on the initial margin
calculations of all of the available clearing days. LCH SA is making
this change to facilitate the possible transfer of positions of
Clearing Members to accounts at LCH SA. In that case LCH SA may not
have sixty clearing days of initial margin calculations on which to
base the calculation of the contribution.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the proposed rule change would amend Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the
Rule Book. Currently, <IP_ADDRESS> provides that LCH SA may recalculate a
Clearing Member's required contribution to the default fund outside of
the normal monthly cycle in certain circumstances, such as a material
change in the Clearing Member's business. Article <IP_ADDRESS> also
provides, however, that nothing shall permit LCH SA to increase the
contribution of a Clearing Member whose aggregate amount of initial
margin has not increased. The proposed rule change would delete this
provision, thus allowing LCH SA to recalculate and increase a Clearing
Member's required contribution to the default fund outside of the
normal monthly cycle in certain circumstances, even where the Clearing
Member's aggregate amount of initial margin has not increased. LCH SA
is making this change because it has found that there may be
circumstances where a change in a Clearing Member's positions has
increased its risk, and thus should increase its required default fund
contribution, even though the Clearing Member's initial margin has not
increased.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change would amend Section 6 of the
Procedures, which concerns calculating the size of, and making
contributions to, the CDS Default Fund. The proposed changes would
clarify that a Clearing Member, if required to make an additional
contribution, must submit the contribution through the TARGET2 payment
system. The proposed rule change also would clarify the deadlines for
submitting the additional contribution, which would depend on when LCH
SA sends out the request for additional contribution.

H. Miscellaneous Amendments

    In addition to the specific amendments discussed above, the
proposed rule change would update references and correct typographical
errors in the Supplement, the Rule Book, and the Procedures. The
proposed rule change would also make a number of miscellaneous updates
to the Supplement, the Rule Book, and the Procedures, as discussed
below.
    With respect to the Supplement, the proposed rule change would
amend Part A and Part B. Sections 4.8 in both Part A and Part B refer
to a Cleared Transaction Portfolio Report. The proposed rule change
would replace the specific references to the Cleared Transaction
Portfolio Report with general references to the reports referred to in
Section 5 of the Procedures. Other parts of the Supplement refer
generally to the reports referred to in Section 5 of the Procedures
rather than specific reports. Thus, LCH SA is making this change to be
consistent with the approach taken in other parts of the Supplement.
This change will also increase flexibility as it would avoid the need
for modifying the Supplement if there is a change in the name of the
reports provided for in Section 5 of the Procedures.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the proposed rule change would remove unnecessary
language from Paragraph (c) of Sections 9.1 of Parts A and B of the
Supplement. Currently, those sections refer to the risks resulting from
a Clearing Member being party to a Self Referencing Transaction where
the Reference Entity is that Clearing Member. Because Section 9.1 only
applies to Self Referencing Transactions where the Reference Entity is
the Clearing Member, LCH SA does not believe this additional language,
specifying that the Self Referencing Transaction is one where the
Reference Entity is that Clearing Member, is necessary.\20\ Thus, the
proposed rule change would delete the phrase ``where the Reference
Entity is that Clearing Member'' from

Paragraph (c) of Sections 9.1 of Parts A and B of the Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Rule Book, the proposed rule change would amend
Section 1.2.2. Section 1.2.2 provides procedures that LCH SA must
follow when modifying the CDS Clearing Documentation (which includes,
among other things, the Rule Book and the Procedures). These procedures
include, among other things, consultation with the appropriate legal,
risk, operational and other forums established by LCH SA. Article
<IP_ADDRESS> of Section 1.2.2 provides that LCH SA may only amend the CDS
Clearing Documentation in accordance with Section 1.2.2. Article
<IP_ADDRESS> further provides that Section 1.2.2 does not apply to LCH SA's
issuance of clearing notices. The proposed rule change would amend this
exception such that it does not apply to Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Article
<IP_ADDRESS>. Thus, while Section 1.2.2 does not generally apply to LCH SA's
issuance of clearing notices, under Article <IP_ADDRESS> as proposed to be
amended, Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Article <IP_ADDRESS> of Section 1.2.2 would
apply to LCH SA's issuance of clearing notices. Both of those articles
set out specific procedures and requirements with respect to LCH SA's
issuance of clearing notices. Thus, both Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Article
<IP_ADDRESS> should apply to the issuance of clearing notices and the
general exception in Article <IP_ADDRESS> should not be read to override
these more specific articles. LCH SA is therefore making this change to
clarify the applicability of Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Article <IP_ADDRESS>.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also would make a number of updates to
defined terms in the Rule Book and rearrange the terms for alphabetical
order. First, the proposed rule change would delete the defined term
``LCH Settlement Price'' from the Rule Book. The proposed rule change
would likewise remove any reference to that defined term from the Rule
Book, including in Section 4.2.7, Article <IP_ADDRESS>, and Article <IP_ADDRESS>.
Currently, Section 4.2.7 of the Rule Book uses two terms to refer to
settlement prices: For options on index CDS there is the LCH Settlement
Price, and for index and single name CDS there is the Markit LCH
Settlement Price. The proposed rule change would amend Section 4.2.7 to
use, instead, only the term Markit LCH Settlement Price for index CDS,
single name CDS, and options on index CDS. Thus, with this change,
there is no need for the term LCH Settlement Price, and, accordingly,
the proposed rule change would delete that term and references to it.
    Next, the proposed rule change would amend the definition of ``CDS
Contractual Currency'' from Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book. CDS
Contractual Currency means the currency required under the terms of any
Cleared Transaction. The proposed rule change would amend this
definition to specify that, for an option on an index CDS, it means the
currency required under the terms of the Underlying Index Transaction.
Relatedly, the proposed rule change would add to Section 1.1.1 of the
Rule Book the defined term Underlying Index Transaction, which will
have the meaning given to it in Part C of the Supplement (where it is
defined as the index CDS subject to the option).
    Moreover, the proposed rule change would delete the terms ``CDS
Intraday Transaction'' and ``Index Swaption Intraday Transaction'' from
Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book and consolidate them together in the
defined term ``Intraday Transaction.'' LCH SA maintains that it
established a distinction between CDS and Index Swaption intraday
transactions because, for a time, the weekly backloading service was
only available to CDS transactions.\22\ Because the weekly backloading
service is now available to Index Swaption transactions as well, LCH SA
believes this distinction is no longer necessary.\23\ The proposed rule
change would accordingly update references to these defined terms in
the Rule Book and the Procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
    \23\ See Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Extension of Weekly Backloading
Cycle to Index Swaptions, Exchange Act Release No. 87296 (Oct. 11,
2019), 84 FR 55992 (Oct. 18, 2019) (SR-LCH-SA-2019-006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also would amend the definitions of ``FCM
Client Margin Requirement'' and ``FCM House Margin Requirement'' to
clarify that the types of margin referred to in those definitions do
not include Variation Margin. Because LCH SA does not calculate
Variation Margin for FCM Clearing Members, neither of those definitions
should include Variation Margin. Thus, LCH SA is making this change to
clarify the scope of these definitions and ensure they are consistent
with current practice.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the proposed rule change would clarify the definition of
``Procedures'' by specifying that such documents are issued by LCH SA
and entitled ``CDS Clearing Procedures.''
    Finally, the proposed rule change would delete a redundant defined
term. The defined term ``Converting Clearing Member'' is currently
defined in both Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Section 1.1.1 of the Rule Book.
The proposed rule change would delete the term from Article <IP_ADDRESS>,
leaving just the definition in Section 1.1.1.
    With respect to the Procedures, the proposed rule change would
remove all of the Appendices from Section 5 of the Procedures. The
Appendices are template forms that are used to transfer client
transactions from one Clearing Member to another. LCH SA is making this
change so it can keep the contact information and other parts of the
forms updated without having to amend Section 5 of the Procedures.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice, 85 FR at 55913.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
organization.\26\ For the reasons given below, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act,\27\ Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act,\28\ and Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(1), (e)(4)(v), (e)(4)(vi)(A), (e)(6)(i), (e)(6)(iv), and (e)(13)
thereunder.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1), (e)(4)(v), (e)(4)(vi)(A),
(e)(6)(i), (e)(6)(iv), and (e)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of LCH SA be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions and to
assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the
custody or control of LCH SA or for which it is responsible.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.A above
should facilitate LCH SA's clearance of single name CDS contracts on
monoline insurance companies by allowing LCH SA to accept such
contracts for clearing. Moreover, LCH is adding these particular
contracts to its existing rules, which the Commission has determined
generally to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement
of

derivatives transactions.\31\ The Commission believes this aspect of
the proposed rule change should promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of derivatives contracts, i.e., single name
CDS contracts on monoline insurance companies, consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Order Granting
Application for Registration as a Clearing Agency and Request for
Exemptive Relief, Exchange Act Release No. 79707 (Dec. 29, 2016), 82
FR 1398, 1408 (Jan. 5, 2017) (finding that ``LCH SA is so organized
and has the capacity to facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement and has rules designed to promote these same goals,
in accordance with Sections 17A(b)(3)(A) and 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act'' and further that ``LCH SA's rules, policies and procedures
meet the requirements of Sections 17A(b)(3)(A) and 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Exchange Act'').
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.B above
should facilitate LCH SA's collection of two additional margins: LEI
Margin and STLOAM. Moreover, the Commission believes the changes
discussed in Part II.B above should clarify the margin that LCH SA
currently collects by distinguishing Vega Margin from Spread Margin,
eliminating the no-longer used defined term Margin Account Uncovered
Risk, and re-organizing the defined term Margin. The Commission
believes all of these changes should improve LCH SA's collection of
margin, thereby improving LCH SA's ability to use margin to protect
against potential losses. Because such potential losses could impede
LCH SA's ability to promptly and accurately clear and settle
transactions and safeguard securities and funds, the Commission
believes that the changes discussed in Part II.B above, in improving
LCH SA's ability to use margin to protect against such potential
losses, should be consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.C above
should improve LCH SA's stress testing by including a Clearing Member's
collateral in stress testing, thereby expanding the coverage of such
testing, and clarifying that stress testing would need to be
independently validated. Because LCH SA uses stress testing to ensure
it has additional financial resources to cover the default of the two
Clearing Member families that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure for LCH SA in extreme but plausible market
conditions (and, therefore, to meet their regulatory requirements under
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii)), the Commission believes that this aspect of
the proposed rule change should help to ensure that LCH SA's financial
resources are adequate and cover the potential losses resulting from
Clearing Member collateral. Because such potential losses could impede
LCH SA's ability to promptly and accurately clear and settle
transactions and safeguard securities and funds, the Commission
believes that the changes discussed in Part II.C above, in improving
LCH SA's stress testing, should be consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.D above
should improve LCH SA's use of credit scores by better describing how
LCH SA would determine credit scores for an affiliated group of
Clearing Members and by explicitly requiring LCH SA's Executive Risk
Committee to approve a change in credit score. The Commission believes
these changes should improve LCH SA's ability to determine accurate
credit scores for Clearing Members and groups of Clearing Members,
thereby improving its ability to determine the financial risk
associated with transacting with such Clearing Members. Moreover,
because, as discussed in Part II.D above, LCH SA uses credit scores as
a component in calculating certain margins, the Commission believes
these changes should improve LCH SA's ability to calculate and collect
those margins. The Commission thus believes these aspects of the
proposed rule change should better enable LCH SA to manage the
potential risks and losses associated with transacting with Clearing
Members. Because such losses could impede LCH SA's ability to promptly
and accurately clear and settle transactions and safeguard securities
and funds, the Commission believes that the changes discussed in Part
II.D above, in improving LCH SA's use of credit scores, should be
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.E above
should improve LCH SA's ability to manage Clearing Member defaults by
providing an additional resource for recourse in certain circumstances.
In giving LCH SA flexibility to specify in a clearing notice how
clients would notify LCH SA of backup Clearing Members to be used in
case of a default of their primary Clearing Members, the Commission
believes the proposed rule change should improve the ability of clients
to continue clearing through backup Clearing Members. Moreover, the
Commission believes the changes discussed above regarding closure of
the CDS clearing service should improve the process for such closure by
better organizing and explaining how LCH SA would calculate payments
owed to Clearing Members or owed by Clearing Members to it; allowing
LCH SA to consider the liquidation value in Euro of non-cash collateral
where Clearing Members owe payments to LCH SA; clarifying the order in
which LCH SA would consider sources or prices; and clarifying timelines
for payment and return of collateral. The proposed rule change should
also allow LCH SA to rely on information provided by a Clearing Member
with respect to its client for purposes of default management,
including for purposes of making certain payments. The Commission
believes that all of these changes should improve LCH SA's ability to
manage the repercussions of a Clearing Member's default, including
possible closure of LCH SA's CDS clearing service. In doing so, the
Commission believes this aspect of the proposed rule change should help
LCH SA avoid potential losses arising from such a default, thereby
helping to maintain LCH SA's ability to promptly and accurately clear
and settle transactions and safeguard securities and funds, consistent
with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.F above
should improve LCH SA's ability to collect end of the day prices from
Clearing Members by clarifying the timelines associated with price
collection and updating references. Moreover, by giving the LCH SA CEO
and the CDSClear CEO the ability to increase a Clearing Member's
Contribution Requirement for the next monthly calculation by an amount
equal to the aggregate amount of fines incurred for such Clearing
Member's failure to submit complete prices, the Commission believes
that the proposed rule change should give LCH SA a tool to incentivize
Clearing Members to submit complete prices. Because LCH SA uses prices
as an input in calculating margin requirements, the Commission believes
that these aspects of the proposed rule change, like the changes
related to margin discussed above, should improve LCH SA's ability to
use margin to protect against potential losses that could impede LCH
SA's ability to promptly and accurately clear and settle transactions
and safeguard securities and funds, consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.G above
should better allow LCH SA to adjust contributions to the CDS Default
Fund

by basing contributions on initial margin for all available clearing
days if less than 60 clearing days are available; allowing LCH SA to
recalculate a Clearing Member's contribution outside of the normal
monthly cycle in certain circumstances even though the Clearing
Member's aggregate amount of initial margin has not increased; and
clarifying the deadlines and method for submitting an additional
contribution to the CDS Default Fund. The Commission believes that
these changes should enable LCH SA to ensure that the CDS Default Fund
remains properly sized in accordance with the potential losses
presented by Clearing Members' portfolios. Because LCH SA uses the CDS
Default Fund to cover the default of the two Clearing Member families
that would potentially cause the largest aggregate credit exposure for
LCH SA in extreme but plausible market conditions, the Commission
believes that this aspect of the proposed rule change should help to
ensure that LCH SA's financial resources are adequate and cover the
potential losses resulting from Clearing Member collateral. Because
such potential losses could impede LCH SA's ability to promptly and
accurately clear and settle transactions and safeguard securities and
funds, the Commission believes that the changes discussed in Part II.G
above, in improving LCH SA's ability to adjust Clearing Member
contributions to the CDS Default Fund, should be consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.H
above should clarify and improve the readability of the Rule Book and
the Procedures by updating references and correcting typographical
errors; clarifying the applicability of Article <IP_ADDRESS> and Article
<IP_ADDRESS>; deleting the unused defined term LCH Settlement Price; making
other updates to defined terms in the Rule Book; and removing the
appendices from Section 5 of the Procedures. In doing so, the
Commission believes that these aspects of the proposed rule change
should help to ensure that the Rule Book and the Procedures are applied
consistently with reduced chances for error or mistakes. For these
reasons, the Commission believes these aspects of the proposed rule
change should be consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taking these reasons together, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of LCH SA provide that its participants shall be
appropriately disciplined for violation of any provision of the rules
of LCH SA by expulsion, suspension, limitation of activities,
functions, and operations, fine, censure, or any other fitting
sanction.\41\ The Commission believes the changes discussed in Part
II.F above, by giving the LCH SA CEO and the CDSClear CEO the ability
to increase a Clearing Member's Contribution Requirement for the next
monthly calculation by an amount equal to the aggregate amount of fines
incurred for such Clearing Member's failure to submit complete prices,
should give LCH SA a tool to collect fines and discipline Clearing
Members for failing to submit complete prices, in violation of LCH SA's
rules. For this reason, the Commission finds this aspect of the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the
Act.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) requires that LCH SA establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to provide for a well-founded, clear, transparent, and
enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its activities in all
relevant jurisdictions.\43\ The Commission believes the changes
discussed in Part II.A above should establish the legal basis for LCH
SA's clearance of single name CDS contracts on monoline insurance
companies by amending the CDS Supplement to establish the legal terms
for such transactions and amending the Procedures to allow LCH SA to
accept such contracts for clearing. Moreover, the Commission believes
the changes discussed in Part II.H above should make the Rule Book and
the Procedures more clear by updating references and correcting
typographical errors; clarifying the applicability of Article <IP_ADDRESS>
and Article <IP_ADDRESS>; deleting the unused defined term LCH Settlement
Price; making other updates to defined terms in the Rule Book; and
removing the appendices from Section 5 of the Procedures. For these
reasons, the Commission finds these aspects of the proposed rule change
are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
    \44\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(v)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(v) requires that LCH SA establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its
credit exposures to participants and those arising from its payment,
clearing, and settlement processes, including by maintaining the
financial resources required under Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) in combined
or separately maintained clearing or guaranty funds.\45\ The Commission
believes the changes discussed in Part II.G above would improve LCH
SA's ability to maintain the CDS Default Fund, which consists of the
financial resources required under Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii), by giving
LCH SA the ability to base contributions on initial margin for all
available Clearing Days; the ability to recalculate a Clearing Member's
contribution outside of the normal monthly cycle in certain
circumstances even though the Clearing Member's aggregate amount of
initial margin has not increased; and clarifying the deadlines and
method for submitting an additional contribution to the CDS Default
Fund. For these reasons, the Commission finds these aspects of the
proposed rule change are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(v).\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(v). Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii)
requires that LCH SA maintain additional financial resources at the
minimum to enable it to cover a wide range of foreseeable stress
scenarios that include, but are not limited to, the default of the
two participant families that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure for LCH SA in extreme but plausible market
conditions.
    \46\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A) requires that LCH SA establish,
implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and
manage its credit exposures to participants and those arising from its
payment, clearing, and settlement processes, including by testing the
sufficiency of its total financial resources available to meet the
minimum financial resource requirements under Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i)
through (e)(4)(iii), as applicable, by conducting stress testing of its
total financial resources once each day using standard predetermined

parameters and assumptions.\47\ The Commission believes the changes
discussed in Part II.C above should improve LCH SA's stress testing by
including margin collateral in stress testing, thereby expanding the
coverage of such testing, and clarifying that stress testing would need
to be independently validated. The Commission therefore believes this
aspect of the proposed rule change should improve the conduct of LCH
SA's daily stress testing required by Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).\48\
Thus, the Commission finds these aspects of the proposed rule change
are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).
    \48\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).
    \49\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) requires that LCH SA establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to cover its credit exposures to its participants by
establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a minimum considers,
and produces margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular
attributes of each relevant product, portfolio, and market.\50\ The
Commission believes the changes discussed in Part II.B above, by
facilitating LCH SA's collection of LEI Margin and STLOAM, should help
to ensure that LCH SA's risk-based margin system considers, and
produces margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular
attributes of each relevant product, portfolio, and market. Moreover,
the Commission believes the other changes discussed in Part II.B above,
by distinguishing Vega Margin from Spread Margin, eliminating the no-
longer used defined term Margin Account Uncovered Risk, and re-
organizing the defined term Margin, should clarify the margin LCH SA
collects and should thereby help ensure the consistent operation of LCH
SA's risk-based margin system. Finally, because, as discussed in Part
II.D above, LCH SA uses credit scores as a component in calculating
certain margins, the Commission believes the changes discussed above
with respect to credit scores should improve LCH SA's ability to
calculate and collect those margins. For these reasons, the Commission
finds these aspects of the proposed rule change are consistent with
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
    \51\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv) requires that LCH SA establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to cover its credit exposures to its participants by
establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a minimum uses
reliable sources of timely price data and uses procedures and sound
valuation models for addressing circumstances in which pricing data are
not readily available or reliable.\52\ The Commission believes the
changes discussed in Part II.F above should improve LCH SA's ability to
obtain end of the day prices from Clearing Members by clarifying the
timelines associated with price collection, updating references, and
improving the ability of LCH SA to hold accountable Clearing Members
that do not make complete price submissions. The Commission believes
these aspects of the proposed rule change should help to ensure that
LCH SA's risk-based margin system, which uses end of day prices
submitted by Clearing Members to calculate margin, uses reliable
sources of timely price data and uses procedures and sound valuation
models for addressing circumstances in which pricing data are not
readily available or reliable. Thus, the Commission finds these aspects
of the proposed rule change are consistent with Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(6)(iv).\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv).
    \53\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13) requires that LCH SA establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to, among other things, ensure LCH SA has the authority and
operational capacity to take timely action to contain losses and
liquidity demands.\54\ The Commission believes the changes discussed in
Part II.E above should improve LCH SA's ability to take timely action
to contain losses and liquidity demands in managing Clearing Member
defaults by providing an additional resource for recourse in certain
circumstances. Moreover, in giving LCH SA flexibility to specify in a
clearing notice how clients would notify LCH SA of backup Clearing
Members to be used in case of a default of their primary Clearing
Members, the Commission believes this change should improve clients'
ability to designate a backup Clearing Member and thereby continue
clearing in case of the default of a primary Clearing Member. The
Commission further believes this should, in turn, reduce the
possibility for losses resulting from the default of the primary
Clearing Member. Finally, the Commission believes the changes discussed
in Part II.E above regarding closure of the CDS clearing service should
improve the process for such closure which should, in turn, help to
ensure that LCH SA has the authority and operational capacity to take
timely action to contain losses and liquidity demands resulting from
such a closure. Thus, the Commission finds these aspects of the
proposed rule change are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13).\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13).
    \55\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act,\56\ Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act,\57\ and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(1),
(e)(4)(v), (e)(4)(vi)(A), (e)(6)(i), (e)(6)(iv), and (e)(13)
thereunder.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \57\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \58\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1), (e)(4)(v), (e)(4)(vi)(A),
(e)(6)(i), (e)(6)(iv), and (e)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\59\ that the proposed rule change (SR-LCH SA-2020-004) be, and hereby
is, approved.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \60\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \61\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\61\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23264 Filed 10-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50431-50433]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23659]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No FDA-2008-D-0610]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Guidance for Industry on Postmarketing Adverse Event
Reporting for Medical Products and Dietary Supplements During an
Influenza Pandemic

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection
of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection in
the guidance on ``Postmarketing Adverse Event Reporting for Medical
Products and Dietary Supplements During an Influenza Pandemic.''

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by January 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January 2, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of January 2, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for

information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if
submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2008-D-0610 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry on
Postmarketing Adverse Event Reporting for Medical Products and Dietary
Supplements During an Influenza Pandemic.'' Received comments, those
filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket
and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Guidance for Industry on Postmarketing Adverse Event Reporting for
Medical Products and Dietary Supplements During an Influenza Pandemic

OMB Control Number 0910-0701--Extension

    This information collection supports the above captioned Agency
guidance. The guidance includes recommendations for planning,
notification, and documentation for firms that report postmarketing
adverse events. The guidance recommends that each firm's pandemic
influenza continuity of operations plan (COOP) include instructions for
reporting adverse events, including a plan for the submission of stored
reports that were not submitted within regulatory timeframes. The
guidance explains that firms that are unable to fulfill normal adverse
event reporting requirements during an influenza pandemic should: (1)
Maintain documentation of the conditions that prevent them from meeting
normal reporting requirements; (2) notify the appropriate FDA
organizational unit responsible for adverse event reporting compliance
when the conditions exist and when the reporting process is restored;
and (3) maintain records to identify what reports have been stored.
    Based on the number of manufacturers that would be covered by the
guidance, we estimate that approximately 5,000 firms will add the
following to their COOP: (1) Instructions for reporting adverse events
and (2) a plan for submitting stored reports that were not submitted
within regulatory timeframes. We estimate that each firm will take
approximately 50 hours to prepare the adverse event reporting plan for
its COOP.
    We estimate that approximately 500 firms will be unable to fulfill
normal adverse event reporting requirements because of conditions
caused by an influenza pandemic and that these firms will notify the
appropriate FDA organizational unit responsible for adverse event
reporting compliance when the conditions exist. Although we do not
anticipate such pandemic influenza conditions to occur every year, for
purposes of the PRA, we estimate that each of these firms will notify
FDA approximately once each year and that each notification will take
approximately 8 hours to prepare and submit.
    Concerning the recommendation in the guidance that firms unable to
fulfill normal adverse event reporting requirements maintain
documentation of the conditions that prevent them from meeting these
requirements and also maintain records to identify what adverse event
reports have been stored and when the reporting process is restored, we
estimate that approximately 500 firms will each need approximately 8
hours to maintain the documentation and that approximately 500 firms
will each need approximately 8 hours to maintain the records.
    We therefore estimate the burden of the collection of information
as follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                         Type of reporting                              Number of      responses per     Total annual    Average burden    Total hours
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses       per response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notify FDA when normal reporting is not feasible...................             500                1              500                8            4,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

                               Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
      Type of recordkeeping          Number of      records per    Total annual      Hours per      Total hours
                                   recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records         record
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add adverse event reporting plan           5,000               1           5,000              50         250,000
 to COOP........................
Maintain documentation of                    500               1             500               8           4,000
 influenza pandemic conditions
 and resultant high absenteeism.
Maintain records to identify                 500               1             500               8           4,000
 what reports have been stored
 and when the reporting process
 was restored...................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         258,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Based on our experience with the information collection we have
retained our current burden estimate of 258,000 hours annually.

    Dated: October 26, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-23659 Filed 10-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12778-12779]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05310]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fourth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (234) Portable Electronic
Devices (PEDs) (Joint With EUROCAE WG-99)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Fourth RTCA Special Committee 234 Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Fourth RTCA Special Committee 234 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held April 13-15, 2016 from 9:00 a.m.-5:00
p.m.

ADDRESS: The meeting will be held at Lufthansa Conference Center
Permanenta Building 234, FAC, 2. Floor, Hugo Echner Ring 234, 60546
Frankfurt/Main, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or
Karan Hofmann, Program Director, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202)
330-0680.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 234. The agenda
will include the following:

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

1. Opening Plenary (9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.)
    a. Welcome and Administrative Remarks
    b. Introductions
    c. Agenda Review
    d. Meeting--Minutes Review
    e. Reports from Task-Group Leaders (TG #1-#5)
    i. TG-1--General Background, Regulations, App, etc.
    ii. TG-2--Front Door Guidance
    iii. TG-3--Back Door Guidance
    iv. TG-4--Sustaining Aircraft PED Tolerance
    v. TG-5--DO-307A/ED-239
    f. Interim Adjournment
2. Task Group Sessions (1:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m.)

Thursday, April 14, 2016

1. Continuation of Task Group Sessions (9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.)

Friday, April 15, 2016

1. Closing Plenary (9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.)
    a. Wrap Up Reports from Task-Group Leaders (TG #1-#5)
    i. TG-1--General Background, Regulations, App, etc.
    ii. TG-2--Front Door Guidance
    iii. TG-3--Back Door Guidance
    iv. TG-4--Sustaining Aircraft PED Tolerance
    v. TG-5--DO-307A/ED-239
    b. Review of program schedule
    c. Any other Business
    d. Date and Place of Next Meeting
    e. Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. WebEx/Audio information will be provided for attendees
who would like to dial-in. With the approval of the chairman, members
of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary
information will be provided upon request. Persons who wish to

present statements or obtain information should contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the
public may present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 3, 2016.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Enterprise Support Services
Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-05310 Filed 3-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Ohio Baseline Closures ( ohioclos. sd2)

Facility closures in the baseline and under the proposed option.

Data Element Definitions SITEID  Facility site identification number SOURCE  Source category of facility BASE  Is the facility open in the baseline ( no = 0, yes = 1) OPT2  Does the facility close under the final option ( no = 0, yes = 1) OPT5  Not used


[Federal Register: June 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 119)]
[Notices]
[Page 34299-34300]
[DOCID:fr21jn07-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0056]

Training Grant Application; Extension of the Office of Management
and Budget's Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend OMB approval of the information collection requirements
contained in its Training Grant Application authorized by Section 21 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the ``OSH Act'') (29
U.S.C. 670).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
August 20, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2007-0056,
U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and
courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and
Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2007-0056). All comments, including any
personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket
without change, and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
 For further information on submitting comments see

the ``Public Participation'' heading in the section of this notice
titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at

the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however,

some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available
to read or download through the Web site. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the
OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Cynthia Bencheck at the
address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Bencheck, Office of Training
and Educational Programs, OSHA Directorate of Training and Education,
2020 S. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. Section 21
of the OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 670) authorizes the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) to conduct education and training courses
directly, or through grants and contracts. These courses must ensure an
adequate number of qualified personnel to fulfill the purposes of the
Act, provide them with short-term training, inform them of the
importance and proper use of safety and health equipment, and train
employers and employees to recognize, avoid, and prevent unsafe and
unhealthful working conditions.
    Under section 21, the Agency awards grants to non-profit
organizations to provide part of the required training. To obtain such
a grant, an organization must complete the training grant application.
OSHA uses the information in this application to evaluate: The
organization's competence to provide the proposed training (including
the qualifications of the personnel who manage and implement the
training); the goals and objectives of the proposed training program;
the work plan that describes in detail the tasks that the organization
will implement to meet these goals and objectives; the appropriateness
of the proposed costs; and compliance with Federal regulations
governing nonprocurement debarment and suspension, maintaining a drug-
free workplace and lobbying activities. Also required is a program
summary that Agency officials use to review and evaluate the highlights
of the overall proposal.
    After awarding a training grant, OSHA uses the work plan and budget
information provided in the application to monitor the organization's
progress in meeting training goals and objectives. An organization must
submit a separate application for the initial award.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden (time
and costs)

of the information collection requirements, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Training Grant Application.
The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of currently approved information
collection requirements.
    Title: Training Grant Application (Susan Harwood Training Grant
Program).
    OMB Number: 1218-0020.
    Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions.
    Number of Respondents: 184.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Total Responses: 184.
    Average Time Per Response: 55.25 hours.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 10,166.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on this Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile; or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for this ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2007-0056).
You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or a facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and docket number so the Agency can attach them to
your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger or courier service, please contact the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov.
 Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about

submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index, some information (e.g., copyrighted

material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit

comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User
Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about
materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in
using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2002 (67 FR
65008).

    Signed at Washington, DC on June 14, 2007.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E7-12021 Filed 6-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P