Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 227/Monday, November 26 .

2y ago
12 Views
2 Downloads
243.54 KB
7 Pages
Last View : 1y ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Joanna Keil
Transcription

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 227 / Monday, November 26, 2018 / Rules and br-locations.html.FAA Order 7400.11, AirspaceDesignations and Reporting Points, ispublished yearly and effective onSeptember 15.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Walter Tweedy, Federal AviationAdministration, Operations SupportGroup, Central Service Center, 10101Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX76177; telephone (817) 222–5900.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Authority for This RulemakingThe FAA’s authority to issue rulesregarding aviation safety is found inTitle 49 of the United States Code.Subtitle I, Section 106 describes theauthority of the FAA Administrator.Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,describes in more detail the scope of theagency’s authority. This rulemaking ispromulgated under the authoritydescribed in Subtitle VII, Part A,Subpart I, Section 40103. Under thatsection, the FAA is charged withprescribing regulations to assign the useof airspace necessary to ensure thesafety of aircraft and the efficient use ofairspace. This regulation is within thescope of that authority as it wouldamend controlled airspace in Class Eairspace, at Lac Qui Parle CountyAirport, Madison, MN, to supportinstrument flight rules (IFR) operationsat the airport.HistoryThe FAA published a notice ofproposed rulemaking in the FederalRegister (83 FR 44248; August 30, 2018)for Docket No. FAA–2018–0194 toamend Class E airspace extendingupward from 700 feet above the surfaceat Lac Qui Parle County Airport,Madison, MN. Interested parties wereinvited to participate in this rulemakingeffort by submitting written commentson the proposal to the FAA. Nocomments were received.Class E airspace designations arepublished in paragraph 6005 of FAAOrder 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018,and effective September 15, 2018, whichis incorporated by reference in 14 CFR71.1. The Class E airspace designationslisted in this document will bepublished subsequently in the Order.Availability and Summary ofDocuments for Incorporation byReferenceThis document amends FAA Order7400.11C, Airspace Designations andReporting Points, dated August 13,2018, and effective September 15, 2018.FAA Order 7400.11C is publiclyavailable as listed in the ADDRESSESVerDate Sep 11 201416:13 Nov 23, 2018Jkt 247001section of this document. FAA Order7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and Eairspace areas, air traffic service routes,and reporting points.The RuleThis amendment to Title 14 Code ofFederal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71modifies Class E airspace extendingupward from 700 feet above the surfacewithin a 6.4-mile radius (increased froma 6.3-mile radius) at Lac Qui ParleCounty Airport, Madison, MN. Thesegment 7.4 miles southeast of theairport will be removed due to thedecommissioning of the Madison NDBand cancellation of the associatedapproach. This action enhances thesafety and management of the standardinstrument approach procedures for IFRoperations at the airport.Regulatory Notices and AnalysesThe FAA has determined that thisregulation only involves an establishedbody of technical regulations for whichfrequent and routine amendments arenecessary to keep them operationallycurrent, is non-controversial andunlikely to result in adverse or negativecomments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a‘‘significant regulatory action’’ underExecutive Order 12866; (2) is not a‘‘significant rule’’ under DOTRegulatory Policies and Procedures (44FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)does not warrant preparation of aregulatory evaluation as the anticipatedimpact is so minimal. Since this is aroutine matter that only affects air trafficprocedures and air navigation, it iscertified that this rule, whenpromulgated, does not have a significanteconomic impact on a substantialnumber of small entities under thecriteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.Environmental ReviewThe FAA has determined that thisaction qualifies for categorical exclusionunder the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act in accordance with FAAOrder 1050.1F, ‘‘EnvironmentalImpacts: Policies and Procedures,’’paragraph 5–6.5.a. This airspace actionis not expected to cause any potentiallysignificant environmental impacts, andno extraordinary circumstances existthat warrant preparation of anenvironmental assessment.Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71Airspace, Incorporation by reference,Navigation (air).Adoption of the AmendmentIn consideration of the foregoing, theFederal Aviation Administrationamends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:PO 00000Frm 00009Fmt 4700Sfmt 470060341PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRTRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; ANDREPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for part 71continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.§ 71.1[Amended]2. The incorporation by reference in14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C,Airspace Designations and ReportingPoints, dated August 13, 2018, andeffective September 15, 2018, isamended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace AreasExtending Upward From 700 Feet or MoreAbove the Surface of the Earth.*****AGL MN E5 Madison, MN [Amended]Madison-Lac Qui Parle Airport, MN(Lat. 44 59′11″ N, long. 96 10′40″ W)That airspace extending upward from 700feet above the surface within a 6.4-mileradius of the Madison-Lac Qui Parle Airport,MN.Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November14, 2018.Anthony Schneider,Manager, Operations Support Group, ATOCentral Service Center.[FR Doc. 2018–25576 Filed 11–23–18; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–13–PCOMMODITY FUTURES TRADINGCOMMISSION17 CFR Part 23RIN 3038–AE71Margin Requirements for UnclearedSwaps for Swap Dealers and MajorSwap ParticipantsCommodity Futures TradingCommission.ACTION: Final rule.AGENCY:The Commodity FuturesTrading Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or‘‘CFTC’’) is adopting amendments(‘‘Final Rule’’) to its marginrequirements for uncleared swaps forswap dealers (‘‘SD’’) and major swapparticipants (‘‘MSP’’) for which there isno prudential regulator (‘‘CFTC MarginRule’’). The Commission is adoptingthese amendments in light of the rulesrecently adopted by the Board ofGovernors of the Federal ReserveSystem (‘‘Board’’), the Federal DepositInsurance Corporation (‘‘FDIC’’), and theOffice of the Comptroller of theCurrency (‘‘OCC’’) (collectively, theSUMMARY:E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM26NOR1

60342Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 227 / Monday, November 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulations‘‘QFC Rules’’) that impose restrictionson certain uncleared swaps anduncleared security-based swaps andother financial contracts. Specifically,the Commission is amending thedefinition of ‘‘eligible master nettingagreement’’ in the CFTC Margin Rule toensure that master netting agreements offirms subject to the CFTC Margin Ruleare not excluded from the definition of‘‘eligible master netting agreement’’based solely on such agreements’compliance with the QFC Rules. TheCommission also is amending the CFTCMargin Rule such that any legacyuncleared swap (i.e., an uncleared swapentered into before the applicablecompliance date of the CFTC MarginRule) that is not now subject to themargin requirements of the CFTCMargin Rule will not become so subjectif it is amended solely to comply withthe QFC Rules. These amendments areconsistent with amendments that theBoard, FDIC, OCC, the Farm CreditAdministration (‘‘FCA’’), and theFederal Housing Finance Agency(‘‘FHFA’’ and, together with the Board,FDIC, OCC, and FCA, the ‘‘PrudentialRegulators’’), jointly published in theFederal Register on October 10, 2018.DATES: This final rule is effectiveDecember 26, 2018.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Matthew Kulkin, Director, (202) 418–5213, mkulkin@cftc.gov; Frank Fisanich,Chief Counsel, (202) 418–5949,ffisanich@cftc.gov; or Jacob Chachkin,Special Counsel, (202) 418–5496,jchachkin@cftc.gov, Division of SwapDealer and Intermediary Oversight,Commodity Futures TradingCommission, Three Lafayette Centre,1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC20581.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:I. BackgroundA. The CFTC Margin RuleSection 731 of the Wall Street Reformand Consumer Protection Act (‘‘DoddFrank Act’’) 1 added a new section 4s tothe Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) 2setting forth various requirements forSDs and MSPs. Section 4s(e) of the CEAdirects the Commission to adopt rulesestablishing minimum initial andvariation margin requirements on allswaps 3 that are (i) entered into by an SD1 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and ConsumerProtection Act, Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376(2010).2 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.3 For the definition of swap, see section 1a(47) ofthe CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7 U.S.C.1a(47) and 17 CFR 1.3. It includes, among otherthings, an interest rate swap, commodity swap,credit default swap, and currency swap.VerDate Sep 11 201416:13 Nov 23, 2018Jkt 247001or MSP for which there is no PrudentialRegulator 4 (collectively, ‘‘covered swapentities’’ or ‘‘CSEs’’) and (ii) not clearedby a registered derivatives clearingorganization (‘‘uncleared swaps’’).5 Tooffset the greater risk to the SD or MSP 6and the financial system arising fromthe use of uncleared swaps, theserequirements must (i) help ensure thesafety and soundness of the SD or MSPand (ii) be appropriate for the riskassociated with the uncleared swapsheld as an SD or MSP.7To this end, the Commissionpromulgated the CFTC Margin Rule inJanuary 2016,8 establishingrequirements for a CSE to collect andpost initial margin 9 and variationmargin 10 for uncleared swaps. Theserequirements vary based on the type ofcounterparty to such swaps.11 These4 See 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(1)(B). SDs and MSPs forwhich there is a Prudential Regulator must meet themargin requirements for uncleared swapsestablished by the applicable Prudential Regulator.7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(1)(A). See also 7 U.S.C. 1a(39)(defining the term ‘‘Prudential Regulator’’ toinclude the Board; the OCC; the FDIC; the FCA; andthe FHFA). The definition further specifies theentities for which these agencies act as PrudentialRegulators. The Prudential Regulators publishedfinal margin requirements in November 2015. SeeMargin and Capital Requirements for Covered SwapEntities, 80 FR 74840 (Nov. 30, 2015) (‘‘PrudentialMargin Rule’’).5 See 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(2)(B)(ii). In Commissionregulation 23.151, the Commission further definedthis statutory language to mean all swaps that arenot cleared by a registered derivatives clearingorganization or a derivatives clearing organizationthat the Commission has exempted fromregistration as provided under the CEA. 17 CFR23.151.6 For the definitions of SD and MSP, see section1a of the CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7U.S.C. 1a and 17 CFR 1.3.7 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(3)(A).8 Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps forSwap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 81 FR636 (Jan. 6, 2016). The CFTC Margin Rule, whichbecame effective April 1, 2016, is codified in part23 of the Commission’s regulations. 17 CFR 23.150–23.159, 23.161.9 Initial margin, as defined in Commissionregulation 23.151 (17 CFR 23.151), is the collateral(calculated as provided by § 23.154 of theCommission’s regulations) that is collected orposted in connection with one or more unclearedswaps. Initial margin is intended to secure potentialfuture exposure following default of a counterparty(i.e., adverse changes in the value of an unclearedswap that may arise during the period of time whenit is being closed out), while variation margin isprovided from one counterparty to the other inconsideration of changes that have occurred in themark-to-market value of the uncleared swap. SeeCFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 664 and 683.10 Variation margin, as defined in Commissionregulation 23.151 (17 CFR 23.151), is the collateralprovided by a party to its counterparty to meet theperformance of its obligation under one or moreuncleared swaps between the parties as a result ofa change in the value of such obligations since thetrade was executed or the last time such collateralwas provided.11 See Commission regulations 23.152 and 23.153,17 CFR 23.152 and 23.153. For example, the CFTCMargin Rule does not require a CSE to collectPO 00000Frm 00010Fmt 4700Sfmt 4700requirements generally apply only touncleared swaps entered into on or afterthe compliance date applicable to aparticular CSE and its counterparty(‘‘covered swap’’).12 An uncleared swapentered into prior to a CSE’s applicablecompliance date for a particularcounterparty (‘‘legacy swap’’) isgenerally not subject to the marginrequirements in the CFTC MarginRule.13To the extent that more than oneuncleared swap is executed between aCSE and its covered counterparty, theCFTC Margin Rule permits the nettingof required margin amounts of eachswap under certain circumstances.14 Inparticular, the CFTC Margin Rule,subject to certain limitations, permits aCSE to calculate initial margin andvariation margin, respectively, on anaggregate net basis across unclearedswaps that are executed under the sameeligible master netting agreement(‘‘EMNA’’).15 Moreover, the CFTCMargin Rule permits swapcounterparties to identify one or moreseparate netting portfolios (i.e., aspecified group of uncleared swaps themargin obligations of which will benetted only against each other) underthe same EMNA, including havingseparate netting portfolios for coveredswaps and legacy swaps.16 A nettingmargin from, or post margin to, a counterparty thatis neither a swap entity nor a financial end user(each as defined in 17 CFR 23.151). Pursuant tosection 2(e) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 2(e), eachcounterparty to an uncleared swap must be aneligible contract participant (‘‘ECP’’), as defined insection 1a(18) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 1a(18).12 Pursuant to Commission regulation 23.161,compliance dates for the CFTC Margin Rule arestaggered such that SDs must come into compliancein a series of phases over four years. The first phaseaffected SDs and their counterparties, each with thelargest aggregate outstanding notional amounts ofuncleared swaps and certain other financialproducts. These SDs began complying with both theinitial and variation margin requirements of theCFTC Margin Rule on September 1, 2016. Thesecond phase began March 1, 2017, and requiredSDs to comply with the variation marginrequirements of Commission regulation 23.153 withall relevant counterparties not covered in the firstphase. See 17 CFR 23.161. On each September 1thereafter ending with September 1, 2020, SDs willbegin to comply with the initial marginrequirements with counterparties with successivelylesser outstanding notional amounts.13 See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 andCommission regulation 23.161. 17 CFR 23.161.14 See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 andCommission regulations 23.152(c) and 23.153(d). 17CFR 23.152(c) and 23.153(d).15 Id. The term EMNA is defined in Commissionregulation 23.151. 17 CFR 23.151. Generally, anEMNA creates a single legal obligation for allindividual transactions covered by the agreementupon an event of default following certain specifiedpermitted stays. For example, an InternationalSwaps and Derivatives Association (‘‘ISDA’’) formMaster Agreement may be an EMNA, if it meets thespecified requirements in the EMNA definition.16 See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 andCommission regulations 23.152(c)(2)(ii) andE:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM26NOR1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 227 / Monday, November 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulationsportfolio that contains only legacyswaps is not subject to the initial andvariation margin requirements set out inthe CFTC Margin Rule.17 However, if anetting portfolio contains any coveredswaps, the entire netting portfolio(including all legacy swaps) is subject tosuch requirements.18A legacy swap may lose its legacytreatment under the CFTC Margin Rule,causing it to become a covered swapand causing any netting portfolio inwhich it is included to be subject to therequirements of the CFTC Margin Rule.For reasons discussed in the CFTCMargin Rule, the Commission electednot to extend the meaning of legacyswaps to include (1) legacy swaps thatare amended in a material ornonmaterial manner; (2) novations oflegacy swaps; and (3) new swaps thatresult from portfolio compression oflegacy swaps.19 Therefore, and asrelevant here, a legacy swap that isamended after the applicablecompliance date may become a coveredswap subject to the initial and variationmargin requirements in the CFTCMargin Rule. In that case, nettingportfolios that were intended to containonly legacy swaps and, thus, not besubject to the CFTC Margin Rule maybecome so subject.B. The QFC RulesIn late 2017, as part of the broaderregulatory reform effort following thefinancial crisis to promote U.S. financialstability and increase the resolvabilityand resiliency of U.S. globalsystemically important bankinginstitutions (‘‘U.S. GSIBs’’) 20 and theU.S. operations of foreign globalsystemically important bankinginstitutions (together with U.S. GSIBS,‘‘GSIBs’’), the Board, FDIC, and OCCadopted the QFC Rules. The QFC Rulesestablish restrictions on andrequirements for uncleared qualifiedfinancial contracts 21 (collectively,‘‘Covered QFCs’’) of GSIBs, the23.153(d)(2)(ii). 17 CFR 23.152(c)(2)(ii) and23.153(d)(2)(ii).17 Id.18 Id.19 See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 675. TheCommission notes that certain limited relief hasbeen given from this standard. See CFTC StaffLetter No. 17–52 (Oct. 27. 2017), available at eral/documents/letter/17-52.pdf.20 See 12 CFR 217.402 (defining globalsystemically important banking institution).21 Qualified financial contract (‘‘QFC’’) is definedin section 210(c)(8)(D) of the Dodd-Frank Act tomean any securities contract, commodity contract,forward contract, repurchase agreement, swapagreement, and any similar agreement that the FDICdetermines by regulation, resolution, or order to bea qualified financial contract. 12 U.S.C.5390(c)(8)(D).VerDate Sep 11 201416:13 Nov 23, 2018Jkt 247001subsidiaries of U.S. GSIBs, and certainother very large OCC-supervisednational banks and Federal savingsassociations (collectively, ‘‘CoveredQFC Entities’’).22 They are designed tohelp ensure that a failed company’spassage through a resolutionproceeding—such as bankruptcy or thespecial resolution process created by theDodd-Frank Act—would be moreorderly, thereby helping to mitigatedestabilizing effects on the rest of thefinancial system.23 Two aspects of theQFC Rules help achieve this goal.24First, the QFC Rules generally requirethe Covered QFCs of Covered QFCEntities to contain contractualprovisions explicitly providing that anydefault rights or restrictions on thetransfer of the Covered QFC are limitedto the same extent as they would bepursuant to the Federal DepositInsurance Act (‘‘FDI Act’’)25 and Title IIof the Dodd-Frank Act. Requiring thesepoints to be stated as explicitcontractual provisions in the CoveredQFCs is expected to reduce the risk thatthe relevant limitations on default rightsor transfer restrictions would bechallenged by a court in a foreignjurisdiction.26Second, the QFC Rules generallyprohibit Covered QFCs from allowingcounterparties to Covered QFC Entitiesto exercise default rights related,directly or indirectly, to the entry intoresolution of an affiliate of the CoveredQFC Entity (‘‘cross-default rights’’).2722 See, e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(c) (defining CoveredQFC). See also 82 FR 42882 (Sep. 12, 2017) (for theBoard’s QFC Rule). See also 82 FR 50228 (Oct. 30,2017) (for FDIC’s QFC Rule). See also 82 FR 56630(Nov. 29, 2017) (for the OCC’s QFC Rule). Theeffective date of the Board’s QFC Rule is November13, 2017, and the effective date for the OCC’s QFCRule and the substance of the FDIC’s QFC Rule isJanuary 1, 2018. The QFC Rules include a phasedin conformance period for a Covered QFC Entity,beginning on January 1, 2019 and ending onJanuary 1, 2020, that varies depending upon thecounterparty type of the Covered QFC Entity. See,e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(f).23 See, e.g., Board’s QFC Rule at 42883. Inparticular, the QFC Rules seek to facilitate theorderly resolution of a failed GSIB by limiting theability of the firm’s Covered QFC counterparties toterminate such contracts immediately upon entry ofthe GSIB or one of its affiliates into resolution.Given the large volume of QFCs to which coveredentities are a party, the exercise of default rights enmasse as a result of the failure or significant distressof a covered entity could lead to failure and adisorderly resolution if the failed firm were forcedto sell off assets, which could spread contagion byincreasing volatility and lowering the value ofsimilar assets held by other firms, or to withdrawliquidity that it had provided to other firms.24 Id.25 12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.26 See, e.g., Board’s QFC Rule at 42883 and 42890and 12 CFR 252.83(b).27 See, e.g., Board’s QFC Rule at 42883 and 12CFR 252.84(b). Covered QFC Entities are similarlygenerally prohibited from entering into CoveredPO 00000Frm 00011Fmt 4700Sfmt 470060343This is to ensure that if an affiliate of asolvent Covered QFC Entity fails, thecounterparties of that solvent CoveredQFC Entity cannot terminate theircontracts with it based solely on thefailure of its affiliate.28Covered QFC Entities are required toenter into amendments to certain preexisting Covered QFCs to explicitlyprovide for these requirements and toensure that Covered QFCs entered intoafter the applicable compliance date forthe rule explicitly provide for thesame.29C. Interaction of CFTC Margin Rule andQFC RulesAs noted above, the current definitionof EMNA in Commission regulation23.151 allows for certain specifiedpermissible stays of default rights of theCSE. Specifically, consistent with theQFC Rules, the current definitionprovides that such rights may be stayedpursuant to a special resolution regimesuch as Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act,the FDI Act, and substantially similarforeign resolution regimes.30 However,the current EMNA definition does notexplicitly recognize certain restrictionson the exercise of a CSE’s cross-defaultrights required under the QFC Rules.31Therefore, a pre-existing EMNA that isamended in order to become compliantwith the QFC Rules or a new masternetting agreement that conforms to theQFC Rules will not meet the currentdefinition of EMNA, and a CSE that isa counterparty under such a masternetting agreement—one that does notmeet the definition of EMNA—would berequired to measure its exposures fromcovered swaps on a gross basis, ratherthan aggregate net basis, for purposes ofthe CFTC Margin Rule.32 Further, if alegacy swap were amended to complyQFCs that would restrict the transfer of a creditenhancement supporting the Covered QFC from theCovered QFC Entity’s affiliate to a transferee uponthe entry into resolution of the affiliate. See, e.g.,Board’s QFC Rule at 42890 and 12 CFR 252.84(b)(2).28 Id.29 See, e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(a) and (c). The QFCRules require a Covered QFC Entity to conformCovered QFCs (i) entered into, executed, or towhich it otherwise becomes a party on or afterJanuary 1, 2019 or (ii) entered into, executed, or towhich it otherwise became a party before January1, 2019, if the Covered QFC Entity or any affiliatethat is a Covered QFC Entity also enters, executes,or otherwise becomes a party to a new Covered QFCwith the counterparty to the pre-existing CoveredQFC or a consolidated affiliate of the counterpartyon or after January 1, 2019.30 17 CFR 23.151.31 Id.32 See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 andCommission regulations 23.152(c) and 23.153(d). 17CFR 23.152(c) and 23.153(d).E:\FR\FM\26NOR1.SGM26NOR1

60344Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 227 / Monday, November 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulationswith the QFC Rules,33 it would becomea covered swap subject to initial andvariation margin requirements under theCFTC Margin Rule.34II. ProposalOn May 23, 2018, the Commissionpublished a Notice of ProposedRulemaking (‘‘Proposal’’) 35 to amendCommission regulations 23.151 and23.161 to protect CSEs and theircounterparties from beingdisadvantaged because their masternetting agreements do not satisfy thedefinition of an EMNA, solely becausesuch agreements’ comply with the QFCRules or because such agreementswould have to be amended to achievecompliance. Specifically, theCommission proposed to (i) revise thedefinition of EMNA in Commissionregulation 23.151 such that a masternetting agreement that meets therequirements of the QFC Rules may bean EMNA and (ii) amend Commissionregulation 23.161 such that a legacyswap will not be a covered swap underthe CFTC Margin Rule if it is amendedsolely to conform to the QFC Rules.The Commission requested commentson the Proposal and also solicitedcomments on the impact of the Proposalon small entities, the Commission’s costbenefit considerations, and any anticompetitive effects of the Proposal. Thecomment period for the Proposal endedon July 23, 2018.III. Summary of CommentsThe Commission received fourrelevant comments in response to theProposal—from the Institute ofInternational Bankers (‘‘IIB’’), ISDA,Navient Corporation (‘‘Navient’’), andNEX Group plc (‘‘NEX’’), respectively.36Though these comments raised issuesunrelated to the Proposal or suggestedadditions that would go beyond thescope of the Proposal,37 the comments33 Covered QFC Entities must conform to therequirements of the QFC Rules for Covered QFCsentered into on or after January 1, 2019 and, insome instances, Covered QFCs entered into beforethat date.33 To do so, a Covered QFC Entity mayneed to amend the contractual provisions of its preexisting Covered QFCs.34 Note, therefore, that such amendment wouldaffect all parties to the legacy swap, not only theCovered QFC Entity subject to the QFC Rules.35 83 FR 23842 (May 23, 2018).36 The Commission also received one commentthat was not relevant to the Proposal. All of thecomments are available at st.aspx?id 2878.37 Navient requested relief from covered swapstatus arising from certain amendments to legacyswaps involving special purpose vehicles createdfor securitization purposes (‘‘Securitization SPVs’’)and more generally requested an exemption fromthe CFTC Margin Rule for certain SecuritizationSPVs. NEX requested relief from covered swapVerDate Sep 11 201416:13 Nov 23, 2018Jkt 247001were generally supportive of the aims ofthe Proposal.Navient and NEX were supportive ofthe Commission’s Proposal in full. ISDAwas supportive of the Commission’sproposal to revise the definition ofEMNA. IIB did not comment on thisaspect of the Proposal. ISDA and IIBwere appreciative of the proposal on thetreatment of legacy swaps impacted bythe QFC Rules, but, on balance, thoughtbroad guidance on the treatment ofamendments to legacy swaps moregenerally was a better alternative to theproposed limited amendment of theCFTC Margin Rule relating to the QFCRules. Such broad guidance requestedby ISDA and IIB is outside of the scopeof the Proposal.IV. Final RuleAfter consideration of relevantcomments, the Commission is adoptingthis Final Rule as proposed.Accordingly, the Commission isadding a new paragraph (2)(ii) to thedefinition of ‘‘eligible master nettingagreement’’ in Commission regulation23.151 and making other minor relatedchanges to that definition such that amaster netting agreement may be anEMNA even though the agreementlimits the right to accelerate, terminate,and close-out on a net basis alltransactions under the agreement and toliquidate or set-off collateral promptlyupon an event of default of thecounterparty to the extent necessary forthe counterparty to comply with therequirements of any of the followingparts of Title 12 of the Code of FederalRegulations: Part 47, subpart I of part252, or part 382, as applicable. Theseenumerated provisions contain therelevant requirements that have beenadded by the QFC Rules.Further, so that a legacy swap will notbe a covered swap under the CFTCMargin Rule if it is amended solely toconform to the QFC Rules, theCommission is adding a new paragraph(d) to the end of Commission regulationstatus for legacy swaps which are compressed in amultilateral portfolio compression exercise. ISDAand IIB requested the Commission, in conjunctionwith the Prudential Regulators, more generallyprovide broad guidance on amendments to legacyswaps, including that amendments required bydomestic or foreign regulatory or legislativedevelopments (e.g., reforms of benchmark interestrates) will not cause them to become coveredswaps. These requests for additional changes andexemptions to the CFTC Margin Rule are outside ofthe scope of the Proposal, as the Proposal relatessolely to changes to the CFTC Margin Rule inrelation to the requirements of the QFC Rules.However, as the Commission continues to assessindustry developments such as interest ratebenchmark reform, it will take into account anyassociated implementation ramificationssurrounding the treatment of legacy swaps underthe CFTC Margin Rule.PO 00000Frm 00012Fmt 4700Sfmt 470023.161, as shown in the rule text in thisdocument. This addition will providecertainty to a CSE and its counterpartiesabout the treatment of legacy swaps andany applicable netting arrangements inlight of the QFC Rules. However, if, inaddition to amendments required tocomply with the QFC Rules, the partiesenter into any other amendments, theamended legacy swap will be a coveredswap in accordance with the applicationof the CFTC Margin Rule.This Final Rule is consistent withamendments to the Prudential MarginRule that the Prudential Regulatorsjointly published in the FederalRegister on October 10, 2018.38 Makingamendments to the CFTC Margin Rulethat are consistent with those of thePrudential Regulators furthers theCommission’s efforts to harmonize itsmargin regime with the PrudentialRegulators’ margin regime and isresponsive to suggestions received aspart of the Commission’s Project KISSinitiative.39V. Related MattersA. Regulatory Flexibility ActThe Regulatory Flexibility Act(‘‘RFA’’) requires Federal agencies, inpromulgating regulations, to considerwhether the rules they propose willhave a signifi

Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222–5900. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Sect

Related Documents:

Menschen Pagina 20 Schritte international Neu Pagina 22 Motive Pagina 24 Akademie Deutsch Pagina 25 Starten wir! Pagina 26 Themen aktuell Pagina 28 em neu Pagina 29 Sicher! Pagina 30 Vol A1 1 Vol A1 Vol 1 Vol 1 2 Vol unico Vol 1 Volume 1 Volume 1 Vol 1 Vol 1 1 Vol A1 2 Vol 2 Vol 1 2 Vol A2 1 Vol A2 Vol 3 Vol

Akenson, Donald Harman Vol 8: 10 Alan, Radous, at Agincourt Vol 12: 1 Albert, King Vol 7: 45, 47 Albert, Prince Vol 12: 17; Vol 14: 1 Alden, John Vol 5: 34; Vol 9: 18 Alexander III Vol 13: 24 Aleyn, John, at Agincourt Vol 12: 1 Allen, Pat Vol 10: 44 Alling Vol 4: 26 Amore, Shirley Vol 12: 3 Anderson, Robert Vol 10: 46 Anderson, Virginia DeJohn .

II Federal Register/Vol. 83, No. 232/Monday, December 3, 2018 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097-6326) is published daily, Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15)

4 A Brief History Commemorating the 70th Anniversary of the Publication of the First Issue of the Federal Register March 14, 1936 the printing processes of the Federal Register always have played a central role in the policies and procedures of the Federal Register system. At times those needs and capabilities have been the driving force for .

Accreditation Programme for Nursing and Midwifery . Date of submission of report to Bangladesh Nursing and Midwifery Council_ 2) The Review Team During the site visit, the review team members validate the self-assessment for each of the criteria. . as per DGNM guideline. Yes ⃝No

Ali Akbar Salehi Iran 01/30/20 Active Vol. 85, No. 44, March 5, 2020 Federal Register Executive Order 13382 Iran Space Agency Iran 09/03/2019 Active Vol. 84, No. 231, December 2, 2019, Federal Register Executive Order 13382 Iran Space Research Center Iran 09/03/2019 Active Vol. 84, No.

6742 Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 13/Friday, January 22, 2021/Rules and Regulations 1 12 U.S.C. 1831f (also referred to herein as ''Section 29''). 2 See Public Law 101-73, August 9, 1989, 103 Stat. 183. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Parts 303 and 337 RIN 3064-AE94; 3064-AF02 Unsafe and Unsound Banking

Canadian Journal of Mathematics, Vol.2 (1950) to Vcl.19 Canadian J. (1967) (Canada) Makh. Comptes Rendus, Des Seances de l'Acaddmie des Sciences. Comptes Paris, Vol.230 (1950) to Vol.265 (1967) (France) Rendus Crod Science, Vol.1 (1961) to Vol.7 (1967) (U.S.) Crop Sci. Current Science, Vol.19 (1950) to Vol.36 (1967) (India) Current Scd. Der .