82 FR 51892 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes To Adopt the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 215 (November 8, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 215 (November 8, 2017)
| Page Range | 51892-51894 | |
| FR Document | 2017-24257 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 8, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 51892-51894] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-24257] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-82006; File Nos. SR-DTC-2017-016; SR-NSCC-2017-016; SR- FICC-2017-020] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes To Adopt the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework November 2, 2017. I. Introduction On September 8, 2017, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC''), National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC''), and Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC,'' each a ``Clearing Agency,'' and together with DTC and NSCC, the ``Clearing Agencies''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed rule changes SR-DTC-2017-016, SR-NSCC-2017-016, and SR-FICC-2017-020, respectively, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule changes were published for comment in the Federal Register on September 27, 2017.\3\ The Commission did not receive any comment letters on the proposed rule changes. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission approves the proposed rule changes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4. \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81667 (September 21, 2017), 82 FR 45106 (September 27, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-016; SR-NSCC- 2017-016; SR-FICC-2017-020) (``Notice''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Description of the Proposed Rule Changes The Clearing Agencies propose to adopt the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework (``Framework'') of the Clearing Agencies, as described below. A. Overview of the Framework The Framework would address the manner in which the Clearing Agencies select and review ``Pricing Vendors'' and value securities that the Clearing Agencies process or otherwise hold. The proposed rule changes would set forth the securities valuation practices adopted by the Clearing Agencies for securities eligible for clearance and settlement processing by the applicable Clearing Agency; and in the case of FICC and NSCC, as central counterparties (``CCPs''), securities eligible to be held in their respective clearing funds.\4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Selection of Pricing Vendors Each Clearing Agency would price securities for both end-of-day and intraday value primarily through pricing data supplied by third-party pricing vendors (``Pricing Vendors'').\5\ For most securities, Pricing Vendors would supply the Clearing Agencies with intraday pricing data on at least an hourly basis.\6\ Pricing Vendors would be selected by each Clearing Agency based on a review of their service, including, at a minimum, a review of Pricing Vendors' securities coverage and a price quality check.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ Id. at 45107. \6\ Certain securities may not be priced daily, and others may only be priced once each business day. Id. \7\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Framework would provide that each security be assigned a primary source Pricing Vendor (``Primary Pricing Vendor'') and a secondary source Pricing Vendor (``Secondary Pricing Vendor'').\8\ In the event that the Primary Pricing Vendor becomes unavailable, unreliable, or otherwise unusable with respect to a security, the Secondary Pricing Vendor would be designated as the replacement for the Primary Pricing Vendor with respect to such security.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Id. \9\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Each Clearing Agency would perform due diligence on each Pricing Vendor prior to engagement, and at least annually thereafter, to assess the [[Page 51893]] reliability of such Pricing Vendor.\10\ Reliability of a Pricing Vendor would be determined by each Clearing Agency based on a range of factors, including whether such Pricing Vendor can provide accurate and timely pricing data with respect to each security.\11\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ Id. \11\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Monitoring and Pricing Each Clearing Agency would monitor and review each applicable Pricing Vendor's pricing at least once each business day to determine (i) whether any security's price has remained unchanged for an extended period; (ii) whether a security has been dropped from the Pricing Vendor's file; and (iii) whether any other circumstances exist that may call into question the reliability of any security's price.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Each security's end-of-day price would be date stamped, and each intraday price would be time and date stamped. Both end-of-day and intraday prices would be identified with a Pricing Vendor source.\13\ In the event that both a Primary Pricing Vendor and a Secondary Pricing Vendor become unavailable, unreliable, or otherwise unusable with respect to a security, the applicable Clearing Agency would assign such security its last available price.\14\ If pricing data for a security is unavailable from a Pricing Vendor, or if the last available price is deemed to be unreliable or unusable, the applicable Clearing Agency would establish a price for the security based on valuation models, where applicable, and in accordance with the policies and procedures that support the Framework.\15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Id. \14\ Id. \15\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Discussion and 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 such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization.\16\ After carefully considering the proposed rule changes, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Clearing Agencies. Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \17\ as well as Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) \18\ and (e)(6)(iv) \19\ under the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C). \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i). \19\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules of a registered clearing agency be designed to promote prompt and accurate clearance and settlement, and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of the Clearing Agencies or for which they are responsible.\20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As described above, the Framework would describe the manner in which the Clearing Agencies select and review their Pricing Vendors, and how the Clearing Agencies value securities that the Clearing Agencies process or otherwise hold. By describing the Clearing Agencies' Pricing Vendors selection process and securities valuation practices in a clear and comprehensive manner, the Framework is designed to provide (i) reliable sources of timely price data, and (ii) a sound valuation practice when pricing data is not readily available. In doing so, the Framework would help the Clearing Agencies to promptly and accurately value (i) the securities that the Clearing Agencies process for clearance and settlement purposes; (ii) for DTC, the available collateral for a participant's net settlement obligation, which DTC monitors to help mitigate the credit risk that participants \21\ present to DTC; \22\ and (iii) for NSCC and FICC, the securities held in their respective clearing funds, which are maintained to help mitigate the credit risk that participants present to NSCC and FICC, as applicable.\23\ By establishing a framework for accurately valuing securities that the Clearing Agencies process and hold for risk management purposes, the Framework would better position the Clearing Agencies to continue their critical operations and services, promptly and accurately, and mitigate the risk of financial loss to the Clearing Agencies and their non-defaulting participants due to a participant default. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ DTC refers to its participants as ``Participants,'' while NSCC and FICC refer to their participants as ``Members.'' These terms are defined in the rules of each of the Clearing Agencies. In this order, ``participant'' or ``participants'' refers to both the Participants of DTC and the Members of FICC and NSCC. \22\ DTC: Disclosure under the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures, available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/policy-and-compliance. \23\ NSCC: Disclosure under the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures, and FICC: Disclosure under the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures, available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/policy-and-compliance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are designed to help promote prompt and accurate clearance and settlement, and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of the Clearing Agencies or for which they are responsible, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Act requires that each covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and settlement processes by maintaining sufficient financial resources to cover its credit exposure to each participant fully with a high degree of confidence.\25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As described above, the Framework would describe how the Clearing Agencies select and review their Pricing Vendors, and how the Clearing Agencies price securities that the Clearing Agencies process or otherwise hold, even when pricing data becomes unavailable or unreliable. In doing so, the Framework would help ensure that each Clearing Agency uses (i) reliable sources of timely price data when pricing securities processed or otherwise held by the Clearing Agency and (ii) clear valuation procedures when pricing data is not readily available or reliable. The Framework would further provide that the prices provided by each Pricing Vendor would be reviewed at least daily, which would help ensure that prices are accurate and reliable. By codifying these aforementioned practices in the Framework, the Framework is designed to help ensure that securities are priced appropriately. By appropriately pricing securities, the Clearing Agencies can more accurately calculate the value of the securities that the Clearing Agencies monitor or held for risk management purposes, as described above. Based on the value of the securities, a Clearing Agency may require a participant to provide more financial resources or limit the participants' activities pursuant to the Clearing Agency's rules, in order to better manage the credit risk presented [[Page 51894]] by the participant.\26\ Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are designed to help ensure that the Clearing Agencies maintain sufficient financial resources to cover their credit exposure to each participant with a high degree of confidence, consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Act.\27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ See the GSD Rulebook of FICC, Rule 4--Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation; the MBSD Clearing Rules of FICC, Rule 4--Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation; Rules and Procedures of NSCC, Procedure XV--Clearing Fund Formula and Other Matters; By-Laws and Organizational Certificate of DTC, Rule 4--Participants Fund and Participants Investment, available at http://dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures. \27\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv) Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv) under the Act requires that each covered clearing agency that is a CCP to 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.\28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As described above, the Framework provides that NSCC and FICC, each a CCP, would perform due diligence on each Pricing Vendor prior to engagement, and at least annually thereafter, to assess the reliability of such Pricing Vendor. The Framework also describes how NSCC and FICC would select two Pricing Vendors for each security in case one becomes unavailable, unreliable, or otherwise unusable. In the event that both Primary and Secondary Pricing Vendors become unavailable, unreliable, or unusable, the Framework provides that NSCC and FICC would assign each affected security its last available price. The Framework would further provide that, if the last available price is unavailable, unreliable, or otherwise unusable for a security, NSCC and FICC would establish a price for that security based on valuation models (where applicable) and in accordance with the policies and procedures that support the Framework. By setting forth how NSCC and FICC would select Pricing Vendors that can provide timely and reliable pricing data, and how NSCC and FICC would price securities when pricing data is not readily available or reliable, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv) under the Act.\29\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Act and in particular with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \30\ of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that proposed rule changes SR-DTC-2017-016, SR-NSCC-2017-016, or SR- FICC-2017-020 be, and hereby are, APPROVED.\31\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ In approving the Proposed Rule Changes, the Commission considered the proposals' impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\32\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2017-24257 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![51892 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 8, 2017 / Notices
At any time within 60 days of the Washington, DC 20549 on official rule changes. For the reasons discussed
filing of the proposed rule change, the business days between the hours of below, the Commission approves the
Commission summarily may 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the proposed rule changes.
temporarily suspend such rule change if filing also will be available for
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
it appears to the Commission that such inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments Changes
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of received will be posted without change. The Clearing Agencies propose to
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Persons submitting comments are adopt the Clearing Agency Securities
the purposes of the Act. If the cautioned that we do not redact or edit Valuation Framework (‘‘Framework’’) of
Commission takes such action, the personal identifying information from the Clearing Agencies, as described
Commission shall institute proceedings comment submissions. You should below.
to determine whether the proposed rule submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All A. Overview of the Framework
change should be approved or
disapproved. submissions should refer to File The Framework would address the
Number SR–NYSEArca–2017–126 and manner in which the Clearing Agencies
IV. Solicitation of Comments should be submitted on or before select and review ‘‘Pricing Vendors’’
Interested persons are invited to November 29, 2017. and value securities that the Clearing
submit written data, views, and For the Commission, by the Division of Agencies process or otherwise hold. The
arguments concerning the foregoing, Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated proposed rule changes would set forth
including whether the proposed rule authority.12 the securities valuation practices
change is consistent with the Act. Eduardo A. Aleman, adopted by the Clearing Agencies for
Comments may be submitted by any of Assistant Secretary. securities eligible for clearance and
the following methods: [FR Doc. 2017–24255 Filed 11–7–17; 8:45 am] settlement processing by the applicable
Electronic Comments BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Clearing Agency; and in the case of
FICC and NSCC, as central
• Use the Commission’s Internet counterparties (‘‘CCPs’’), securities
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE eligible to be held in their respective
rules/sro.shtml); or COMMISSION clearing funds.4
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– [Release No. 34–82006; File Nos. SR–DTC– B. Selection of Pricing Vendors
NYSEArca–2017–126 on the subject 2017–016; SR–NSCC–2017–016; SR–FICC–
2017–020] Each Clearing Agency would price
line. securities for both end-of-day and
Paper Comments Self-Regulatory Organizations; The intraday value primarily through pricing
• Send paper comments in triplicate Depository Trust Company; National data supplied by third-party pricing
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Securities Clearing Corporation; Fixed vendors (‘‘Pricing Vendors’’).5 For most
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Income Clearing Corporation; Order securities, Pricing Vendors would
Washington, DC 20549–1090. Approving Proposed Rule Changes To supply the Clearing Agencies with
Adopt the Clearing Agency Securities intraday pricing data on at least an
All submissions should refer to File hourly basis.6 Pricing Vendors would be
Valuation Framework
Number SR–NYSEArca-2017–126. This selected by each Clearing Agency based
file number should be included on the November 2, 2017. on a review of their service, including,
subject line if email is used. To help the at a minimum, a review of Pricing
Commission process and review your I. Introduction
On September 8, 2017, The Vendors’ securities coverage and a price
comments more efficiently, please use quality check.7
only one method. The Commission will Depository Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’),
National Securities Clearing Corporation The Framework would provide that
post all comments on the Commission’s
(‘‘NSCC’’), and Fixed Income Clearing each security be assigned a primary
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
Corporation (‘‘FICC,’’ each a ‘‘Clearing source Pricing Vendor (‘‘Primary Pricing
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
Agency,’’ and together with DTC and Vendor’’) and a secondary source
submission, all subsequent
NSCC, the ‘‘Clearing Agencies’’), filed Pricing Vendor (‘‘Secondary Pricing
amendments, all written statements
with the Securities and Exchange Vendor’’).8 In the event that the Primary
with respect to the proposed rule
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) proposed Pricing Vendor becomes unavailable,
change that are filed with the
rule changes SR–DTC–2017–016, SR– unreliable, or otherwise unusable with
Commission, and all written
NSCC–2017–016, and SR–FICC–2017– respect to a security, the Secondary
communications relating to the
020, respectively, pursuant to Section Pricing Vendor would be designated as
proposed rule change between the
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act the replacement for the Primary Pricing
Commission and any person, other than
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 Vendor with respect to such security.9
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the thereunder.2 The proposed rule changes Each Clearing Agency would perform
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be were published for comment in the due diligence on each Pricing Vendor
available for Web site viewing and Federal Register on September 27, prior to engagement, and at least
printing in the Commission’s Public 2017.3 The Commission did not receive annually thereafter, to assess the
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., any comment letters on the proposed
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
4 Id.
12 17 5 Id. at 45107.
give the Commission written notice of its intent to CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 6 Certain securities may not be priced daily, and
file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and the text of the proposed rule 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. others may only be priced once each business day.
change, at least five business days prior to the date 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81667 Id.
7 Id.
of filing of the proposed rule change, or such (September 21, 2017), 82 FR 45106 (September 27,
8 Id.
shorter time as designated by the Commission. The 2017) (SR–DTC–2017–016; SR–NSCC–2017–016;
Exchange has satisfied this requirement. SR–FICC–2017–020) (‘‘Notice’’). 9 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:26 Nov 07, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52107/page/1.svg)
![51894 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 8, 2017 / Notices
by the participant.26 Therefore, the rule changes are consistent with Rule purchaser of either QView or the
Commission finds that the proposed 17Ad–22(e)(6)(iv) under the Act.29 Latency Optics add-on service; and (ii)
rule changes are designed to help ensure remove language offering a subscription
III. Conclusion
that the Clearing Agencies maintain to TradeInfo for up to five users at no
sufficient financial resources to cover On the basis of the foregoing, the additional cost to subscribers of the
their credit exposure to each participant Commission finds that the proposed Latency Optics add-on service.
with a high degree of confidence, rule changes are consistent with the The text of the proposed rule change
consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(4)(i) requirements of the Act and in is available on the Exchange’s Web site
under the Act.27 particular with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) 30 at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at
of the Act and the rules and regulations the principal office of the Exchange, and
C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad– thereunder. at the Commission’s Public Reference
22(e)(6)(iv) It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Room.
Rule 17Ad–22(e)(6)(iv) under the Act Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that
proposed rule changes SR–DTC–2017– II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
requires that each covered clearing
016, SR–NSCC–2017–016, or SR–FICC– Statement of the Purpose of, and
agency that is a CCP to establish,
2017–020 be, and hereby are, Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
implement, maintain and enforce
APPROVED.31 Change
written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to cover its credit For the Commission, by the Division of In its filing with the Commission, the
exposures to its participants by Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Exchange included statements
establishing a risk-based margin system authority.32 concerning the purpose of and basis for
that, at a minimum, uses reliable Eduardo A. Aleman, the proposed rule change and discussed
sources of timely price data and uses Assistant Secretary. any comments it received on the
procedures and sound valuation models [FR Doc. 2017–24257 Filed 11–7–17; 8:45 am] proposed rule change. The text of these
for addressing circumstances in which BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
statements may be examined at the
pricing data are not readily available or places specified in Item IV below. The
reliable.28 Exchange has prepared summaries, set
As described above, the Framework SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
provides that NSCC and FICC, each a COMMISSION the most significant aspects of such
CCP, would perform due diligence on statements.
[Release No. 34–82003; File No. SR–
each Pricing Vendor prior to NASDAQ–2017–113] A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
engagement, and at least annually Statement of the Purpose of, and
thereafter, to assess the reliability of Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
such Pricing Vendor. The Framework Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Change
also describes how NSCC and FICC Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
would select two Pricing Vendors for Proposed Rule Change To Amend the 1. Purpose
each security in case one becomes Exchange’s Fees at Rule 7058 The Exchange proposes to amend its
unavailable, unreliable, or otherwise fees at Rule 7058 to: (i) Offer to waive
unusable. In the event that both Primary November 2, 2017.
fees under this Rule for 30 days for any
and Secondary Pricing Vendors become Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the new, prospective, or returning
unavailable, unreliable, or unusable, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 purchaser of either QView or the
Framework provides that NSCC and (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Latency Optics add-on service; and (ii)
FICC would assign each affected notice is hereby given that on October remove language offering a subscription
security its last available price. The 20, 2017, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC to TradeInfo for up to five users at no
Framework would further provide that, (‘‘Nasdaq’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the additional cost to subscribers of the
if the last available price is unavailable, Securities and Exchange Commission Latency Optics add-on service, along
unreliable, or otherwise unusable for a (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed with conforming changes. The purposes
security, NSCC and FICC would rule change as described in Items I, II, of the proposed changes are to: (i)
establish a price for that security based and III, below, which Items have been Encourage new, prospective, and
on valuation models (where applicable) prepared by the Exchange. The returning purchasers of either QView or
and in accordance with the policies and Commission is publishing this notice to the Latency Optics add-on service to
procedures that support the Framework. solicit comments on the proposed rule examine these products more closely
By setting forth how NSCC and FICC change from interested persons. and thereby increase the number of
would select Pricing Vendors that can I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s customers for this product; and (ii)
provide timely and reliable pricing data, Statement of the Terms of Substance of remove a rarely used fee provision in
and how NSCC and FICC would price the Proposed Rule Change order to render the Latency Optics
securities when pricing data is not subscription easier to administer.
The Exchange proposes to amend the
readily available or reliable, the
Exchange’s fees at Rule 7058 to: (i) Offer Current Products
Commission finds that the proposed
to waive fees under this Rule for 30 days
QView
for any new, prospective, or returning
26 See the GSD Rulebook of FICC, Rule 4— QView is a web-based tool designed
Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation; the MBSD 29 Id. to provide a subscribing member with
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Clearing Rules of FICC, Rule 4—Clearing Fund and
Loss Allocation; Rules and Procedures of NSCC,
30 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). the ability to track its trading activity on
Procedure XV—Clearing Fund Formula and Other 31 In approving the Proposed Rule Changes, the the Exchange through both real-time
Matters; By-Laws and Organizational Certificate of Commission considered the proposals’ impact on and historical order and execution
DTC, Rule 4—Participants Fund and Participants efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15
Investment, available at http://dtcc.com/legal/rules- U.S.C. 78c(f). summaries, available on a daily or a
and-procedures. 32 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). monthly basis. The QView dashboard
27 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(4)(i). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). allows the member to view a summary
28 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(iv). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. of its executions and open orders,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:26 Nov 07, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52107/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2017-11-08 01:20:41
Document Modified: 2017-11-08 01:20:41
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 51892 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR