Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 76635 

37 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1The Commission has based this statement, in 

part, on its experience regulating EU CCPs for 

security-based swaps, and therefore this release 

primarily discusses the Commission’s processes for 

registration as a clearing agency and for requesting 

exemptions with respect to such CCPs. However, 

the Commission notes that the policy and guidance 

set forth in this statement, by its terms and as set 

forth below, also applies to an EU CCP that clears 

securities other than security-based swaps. 

2See 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(a)(2); see also Report of the 

Senate Committee on Banking, Housing & Urban 

Affairs, S. Rep. No. 94–75, at 4 (1975) (stating that 

‘‘[t]he Committee believes the banking and security 

industries must move quickly toward the 

establishment of a fully integrated national system 

for the prompt and accurate processing and 

settlement of securities transactions’’). 

3See Release No. 34–11904 (Dec. 5, 1975), 40 FR 

57872 (Dec. 12, 1975) (considering requests for 

exemptions from non-U.S. clearing agencies). 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–PEARL–2020–26. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549 on official 

business days between the hours of 

10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change. 

Persons submitting comments are 

cautioned that we do not redact or edit 

personal identifying information from 

comment submissions. You should 

submit only information that you wish 

to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–PEARL–2020–26, and 

should be submitted on or before 

December 21, 2020. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.37

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26281 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–90492] 

Statement on Central Counterparties 

Authorized Under the European 

Markets Infrastructure Regulation 

Seeking To Register as a Clearing 

Agency or To Request Exemptions 

From Certain Requirements Under the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Policy statement; guidance. 

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘SEC’’) is issuing a policy 

statement and guidance regarding future 

applications from a central counterparty 

(‘‘CCP’’) authorized under the European 

Market Infrastructure Regulation 

(‘‘EMIR’’) and based in the European 

Union (an ‘‘EU CCP’’) that is seeking to 

register as a clearing agency with the 

SEC under the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) and future 

requests by EU CCPs for exemptions 

from certain SEC requirements. 

DATES: The Commission’s policy 

statement is effective November 30, 

2020. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Lee, Assistant Director; 

Stephanie Park, Senior Special Counsel; 

or Claire Noakes, Special Counsel; at 

202–551–7000 in the Division of 

Trading and Markets, U.S. Securities 

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street 

NE, Washington, DC 20549. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SEC 

regulates as clearing agencies two EU 

CCPs authorized under EMIR that 

provide CCP services for security-based 

swaps.1 Where an EU CCP has been 

authorized under EMIR, it is subject to 

requirements that are generally 

consistent with the same international 

standards for CCPs as are the SEC’s 

requirements for CCPs. Based on these 

factors, the SEC is issuing this policy 

statement and guidance to describe the 

processes for EU CCPs seeking to 

register as clearing agencies or to 

request exemptions from SEC 

requirements. To provide transparency 

into SEC processes and to highlight 

efficient ways that EU CCPs can comply 

with SEC rules, this policy statement 

and guidance identifies the information 

that an EU CCP can provide in its 

registration application and provides a 

summary of the factors that the SEC will 

consider, as applicable, with respect to 

future requests for exemptions. 

Specifically, with respect to the 

registration process, EU CCPs can use 

preexisting materials, including selfassessments, in their applications to 

demonstrate compliance with EMIR and 

consistency with SEC requirements for 

CCPs. Such materials and selfassessments could facilitate both the EU 

CCP’s efficient preparation of the 

application and the SEC’s review of 

applications for registration. With 

respect to requests for exemptions, the 

SEC identifies below specific factors 

that it will consider if relevant to a 

particular future request for an 

exemption by an EU CCP. As an 

example of one such factor, an EU CCP 

may request an exemption because it 

has determined that the application of 

SEC requirements would impose 

unnecessary, duplicative, or 

inconsistent requirements in light of 

EMIR requirements to which it is 

subject. Issuing this policy statement 

and guidance is relevant to the SEC’s 

ongoing dialogue with the European 

Commission (‘‘EC’’) regarding the EC’s 

consideration of whether to find the 

SEC’s regulatory framework for CCPs 

equivalent to EMIR. 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Background 

A. SEC Requirements for CCPs 

B. EMIR Requirements for CCPs 

C. SEC-Registered Clearing Agencies Based 

in the EU 

III. SEC Process for Review of Applications 

for Registration as a Clearing Agency and 

Requests for Exemptions by EU CCPS 

A. Applications for Registration as a 

Clearing Agency 

B. Requests for Exemptions 

IV. Conclusion 

I. Introduction 

The SEC regulates centralized 

clearance and settlement systems for 

securities, including those provided by 

CCPs and central securities depositories 

(‘‘CSDs’’). As part of the Securities Acts 

Amendments of 1975 (‘‘1975 

Amendments’’), Congress directed the 

SEC to facilitate the establishment of a 

national system for the prompt and 

accurate clearance and settlement of 

securities transactions.2 Since the 

enactment of the 1975 Amendments, the 

SEC has given regular consideration to 

how non-U.S. clearing agencies fit 

within the SEC’s regulatory framework 

under the Exchange Act.3 The SEC also 

acted to facilitate the central clearing of 

credit default swaps by permitting 

certain entities that performed CCP 

services to clear and settle credit default 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES
76636 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 

4The SEC authorized five entities to clear credit 

default swaps, three of which were based in the EU. 

See Exchange Act Release Nos. 60372 (July 23, 

2009), 74 FR 37748 (July 29, 2009), 61973 (Apr. 23, 

2010), 75 FR 22656 (Apr. 29, 2010) and 63389 (Nov. 

29, 2010), 75 FR 75520 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing 

by ICE Clear Europe Limited (‘‘ICEEU’’); 60373 (July 

23, 2009), 74 FR 37740 (July 29, 2009), 61975 (Apr. 

23, 2010), 75 FR 22641 (Apr. 29, 2010) and 63390 

(Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR 75518 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS 

clearing by Eurex Clearing AG); 59578 (Mar. 13, 

2009), 74 FR 11781 (Mar. 19, 2009), 61164 (Dec. 14, 

2009), 74 FR 67258 (Dec. 18, 2009), 61803 (Mar. 30, 

2010), 75 FR 17181 (Apr. 5, 2010) and 63388 (Nov. 

29, 2010), 75 FR 75522 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing 

by Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc.); 59527 (Mar. 

6, 2009), 74 FR 10791 (Mar. 12, 2009), 61119 (Dec. 

4, 2009), 74 FR 65554 (Dec. 10, 2009), 61662 (Mar. 

5, 2010), 75 FR 11589 (Mar. 11, 2010) and 63387 

(Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR 75502 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS 

clearing by ICE Trust US LLC); 59164 (Dec. 24, 

2008), 74 FR 139 (Jan. 2, 2009) (temporary CDS 

clearing by LIFFE A&M and LCH.Clearnet Ltd.). 

5See Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). 

6 In addition to EU CCPs discussed in this 

document, the SEC regulates clearing agencies that 

provide CSD services. See Release Nos. 34–38328 

(Feb. 24, 1997), 62 FR 9225 (Feb. 28, 1997) (order 

approving application for exemption from clearing 

agency registration for Cedel Bank, now 

Clearstream); 34–39643 (Feb. 11, 1998), 63 FR 8232 

(Feb. 18, 1998) (order approving application for 

exemption from clearing agency registration by 

Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York, 

Brussels Office, as operator of the Euroclear System, 

now Euroclear Bank). 

7As discussed in more detail in Part II.C, the SEC 

granted ICEEU an exemption from clearing agency 

registration on July 23, 2009 to clear and settle 

credit default swaps on a temporary, conditional 

basis. ICEEU was subsequently deemed a clearing 

agency registered with the SEC on July 16, 2011. On 

December 16, 2016, the Commission registered 

Banque Centrale de Compensation, which conducts 

business under the name LCH SA (‘‘LCH SA’’) as 

a clearing agency, so that it may provide CCP 

services for security-based swaps to U.S. persons 

and LCH SA. 

8An SRO must submit proposed rule changes to 

the SEC for review and approval pursuant to 17 

CFR 240.19b–4 (‘‘Rule 19b–4’’). A stated policy, 

practice, or interpretation of an SRO would 

generally be deemed to be a proposed rule change. 

See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1); 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

9See Committee on Payment and Settlement 

Systems and Technical Committee of the 

International Organization of Securities 

Commissions (‘‘CPSS–IOSCO’’), Principles for 

financial market infrastructures (Apr. 16, 2012), 

http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf. In 2014, the 

CPSS became the Committee on Payments and 

Market Infrastructures (‘‘CPMI’’). 

10Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act directs the 

SEC, when prescribing risk management standards 

for systemically important CCPs, to take into 

consideration relevant international standards and 

existing prudential requirements. See 12 U.S.C. 

5464(a)(2). 

11Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, the 

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has 

designated this statement as not a ‘‘major rule,’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). See 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. 

12See 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22; see also Clearing 

Agency Standards, Release No. 34–68080 (Oct. 22, 

2012), 77 FR 66220, 66225–26 (Nov. 2, 2012) 

(‘‘Clearing Agency Standards adopting release’’). 

13See Clearing Agency Standards adopting 

release, supra note 13, at 66224–25. 

14See 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e); Release No. 34– 

78961 (Sept. 28, 2016), 81 FR 70786 (Oct. 13, 2016) 

(‘‘CCA Standards adopting release’’). While Rule 

17Ad–22(e) originally applied to systemically 

important clearing agencies and clearing agencies 

for security-based swaps, the Commission amended 

the approach in 2020 so that Rule 17Ad–22(e) 

applies to any clearing agency that provides the 

services of a CCP or CSD. See Release No. 34–88616 

(Apr. 9, 2020), 85 FR 28853 (May 14, 2020). 

15See CCA Standards adopting release, supra 

note 14. 

16See CCA Standards adopting release, supra 

note 14, at 70789 (stating that ‘‘the PFMI is the 

relevant international standard for systemically 

important financial market infrastructures, such as 

[clearing agencies]. . . . Commission staff cochaired the working group within CPSS–IOSCO 

that drafted both the consultative and final versions 

of the PFMI, and the Commission believes that the 

requirements applicable to clearing agencies set 

forth in the Exchange Act and the rules thereunder, 

including [Rule 17Ad–22(e)], are consistent with 

the standards set forth in the PFMI. Regulatory 

authorities around the world are in various stages 

of updating their regulatory regimes to adopt 

measures consistent with the PFMI. [Rule 17Ad–22 

is] a continuation of the Commission’s active effort 

to foster the development of the national clearance 

and settlement system, consistent with the 

swaps on a temporary, conditional 

basis.4

In 2010, Title VII of the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’) 

amended the Exchange Act to provide 

for the comprehensive regulation of 

security-based swaps by the SEC.5 In 

2012, the EU adopted the EMIR 

framework to accomplish many of the 

same objectives in the EU. The oversight 

and regulation of security-based swap 

activity that is centrally cleared by both 

the SEC and under EMIR occurs through 

the registration and supervision of 

clearing agencies, among other things. 

Under its regulatory framework for 

clearing agencies, the SEC supervises 

clearing agencies that are subject to EU 

regulatory frameworks,6 including 

EMIR. 

With regard to EU CCPs currently 

registered with the SEC as clearing 

agencies,7 the SEC has applied 

requirements commensurate and 

appropriate to the risks posed by the 

clearing agency functions and activities. 

The SEC believes that its supervisory 

approach to these EU CCPs has 

benefited from the SEC’s familiarity 

with EMIR, including through the rule 

filing process for self-regulatory 

organizations (‘‘SROs’’),8 and from 

ongoing communication and 

coordination between SEC staff and staff 

at the relevant national competent 

authorities (‘‘NCAs’’) for EU CCPs. The 

SEC also recognizes that both EMIR and 

the SEC’s regulatory frameworks are 

designed to be generally consistent with 

the Principles for Financial Market 

Infrastructures (‘‘PFMI’’),9 which are the 

relevant international standards for 

CCPs.10

Based on these factors, the SEC is 

issuing this policy statement and 

guidance to provide transparency into 

the processes for a new EU CCP 

applicant to (i) register with the SEC as 

a clearing agency to provide CCP 

services, and (ii) request exemptions 

from certain SEC requirements under 

the Exchange Act using preexisting 

materials in their applications that 

demonstrate compliance with EMIR and 

also consistency with SEC requirements 

for CCPs.11 The SEC is also highlighting 

efficient ways that EU CCPs can comply 

with SEC rules. 

Part II briefly describes EMIR and the 

SEC’s regulatory framework for CCPs, 

both of which are generally consistent 

with common international standards 

for CCPs, and summarizes the SEC’s 

experience with supervising or 

otherwise engaging with EU CCPs that 

the SEC has registered as clearing 

agencies. Part III describes and provides 

guidance regarding the process for 

seeking registration and requesting 

exemptions from SEC requirements. In 

particular, Part III.A provides guidance 

regarding the types of documentation 

that can be provided to facilitate both 

the efficient preparation of an 

application and the SEC’s review of the 

application. Part III.B describes and 

provides guidance regarding the types of 

exemptions the SEC has generally 

provided to EU CCPs in the past and 

identifies the factors that the SEC will 

consider, if relevant to a particular 

request for an exemption, when 

reviewing future requests for 

exemptions. 

II. Background 

A. SEC Requirements for CCPs 

SEC requirements for CCPs are 

codified in 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22 (‘‘Rule 

17Ad–22’’) and designed to ensure that 

CCPs operate consistent with the 

requirements of Section 17A of the 

Exchange Act, which establishes the 

national system for clearance and 

settlement of securities transactions in 

the United States.12 As a general matter, 

Rule 17Ad–22 includes policies and 

procedures requirements designed to 

promote the safe and reliable operation 

of registered clearing agencies, and to 

improve efficiency, transparency, and 

access to registered clearing agencies.13

Rule 17Ad–22(e) establishes an 

enhanced regulatory framework for 

clearing agencies that provide the 

services of CCPs and CSDs.14 It includes 

requirements for policies and 

procedures related to, among other 

things, financial risk management, 

governance, recovery planning, 

operations, and general business risk.15

In adopting Rule 17Ad–22(e), the SEC 

noted that it was consistent with the 

PFMI.16 In addition, CCPs registered 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 76637 

requirements of the Exchange Act, and enhance the 

regulation and supervision of [clearing agencies], 

consistent with the Clearing Supervision Act.’’). 

Similar to the subparts of Rule 17Ad–22(e), the 

PFMI includes 23 principles intended to address 

different potential sources of risk to CCPs and 

CSDs, including, among other things, legal risk, 

financial risk management, operational risk, and 

governance. See supra note 9. 

17See supra note 8. 

18See 17 CFR 242.1000 et seq.; Release No. 34– 

73639 (Nov. 19, 2014), 79 FR 72251 (Dec. 5, 2014). 

19See id. at 70800. 

20See, e.g., id. at 70854–55 (noting that certain 

requirements in Rule 17Ad–22(e) are applied 

specifically to CCPs for security-based swaps to 

protect against the risks associated with the jumpto-default risk and nonlinear payoffs associated 

with security-based swaps). 

21See supra notes 8, 17, and accompanying text 

(discussing the SRO rule filing process in further 

detail). 

22See CCA Standards adopting release, supra 

note 14, at 70875. 

23Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European 

Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on 

OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade 

repositories, as amended, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ 

legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02012R0648- 

20200101. The Commission notes that it would take 

substantially the same approach set out in this 

document for other jurisdictions that have adopted 

a regulatory framework that is substantially similar 

to EMIR. 

24See EC, ‘‘Derivatives/EMIR,’’ https://

ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/bankingand-finance/financial-markets/post-trade-services/ 

derivatives-emir_en#eu-rules-on-derivativescontracts. 

25See ESMA, Guidelines and Recommendations 

regarding the implementation of the CPSS–IOSCO 

Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures in 

respect of Central Counterparties (Apr. 9, 2014), 

https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ 

library/2015/11/2014-1133_en.pdf. 

26The Commission granted the exemption in 

connection with its efforts to facilitate the central 

clearing of credit default swaps prior to the 

enactment of the Dodd Frank Act. See Release Nos. 

34–60373 (July 23, 2009), 74 FR 37740 (July 29, 

2009), 61975 (Apr. 23, 2010), 75 FR 22641 (Apr. 29, 

2010) and 63390 (Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR 75518 (Dec. 

3, 2010). 

27Section 763(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act amended 

Section 17A of the Exchange Act by adding new 

paragraph (l), 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(l), which provides 

that (i) a depository institution registered with the 

CFTC that cleared swaps as a multilateral clearing 

organization prior to the date of enactment of the 

Dodd-Frank Act and (ii) a derivatives clearing 

organization registered with the CFTC that cleared 

swaps pursuant to an exemption from registration 

as a clearing agency prior to the date of enactment 

of the Dodd-Frank Act will be deemed registered 

with the Commission as a clearing agency solely for 

the purpose of clearing security-based swaps. 

28See Release No. 34–79707 (Dec. 29, 2016), 82 

FR 1398 (Jan. 5, 2017) (‘‘LCH SA registration 

order’’). 

29Both ICEEU and LCH SA are subject to Section 

19(b) of the Exchange Act, which requires a 

registered clearing agency to submit proposed rule 

changes to the SEC for public comment and SEC 

review and approval. See supra notes 8 and 17 

(further discussing the requirements of the rule 

filing process under Rule 19b–4). 

30See supra note 16 and accompanying text. 

31See supra note 25 and accompanying text. 

with the SEC as clearing agencies are 

also SROs under the Exchange Act and 

subject to the SRO rule filing process for 

proposed rule changes,17 and registered 

clearing agencies are subject to the 

requirements of Regulation Systems 

Compliance and Integrity.18

With respect to CCPs for securitybased swaps, Congress has charged the 

SEC with oversight of security-based 

swaps and the obligation to ensure that 

risk in the U.S. securities markets is 

appropriately managed, consistent with 

the purposes of the Exchange Act and 

Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act.19

Security-based swaps, and the CCPs that 

clear them, present unique risks to the 

U.S. securities markets, necessitating 

appropriate risk management by the 

CCPs and supervision by the SEC.20 As 

it does more generally with respect to 

clearing agencies, the SEC has sought to 

apply requirements to such CCPs 

commensurate and appropriate to these 

risks while recognizing that each CCP 

has different organizational and 

operating structures and clears distinct 

products that warrant a tailored 

approach to governance and risk 

management. Accordingly, the SEC’s 

regulatory framework for CCPs is 

designed to balance imposing 

appropriate regulatory requirements on 

CCPs and allowing each CCP, subject to 

its obligations and responsibilities as an 

SRO,21 to implement its own policies 

and procedures consistent with Rule 

17Ad–22.22

B. EMIR Requirements for CCPs 

EMIR was enacted in 2012 and, 

among other things, sets out 

requirements for the clearing of OTC 

derivatives through authorized CCPs.23

More specifically, EMIR introduces 

rules to reduce the counterparty credit 

risk of derivatives contracts by requiring 

that: All standardized OTC derivatives 

contracts must be centrally cleared 

through CCPs; if a contract is not 

cleared by a CCP, risk mitigation 

techniques must be applied; and CCPs 

must comply with stringent prudential, 

organizational, and conduct of business 

requirements. The regulation also 

requires market participants to monitor 

and mitigate the operational risks 

associated with transactions in 

derivatives, such as fraud and human 

error, by, for example, using electronic 

means to promptly confirm the terms of 

OTC derivatives contracts.24 Recital 90 

of EMIR also notes that EMIR is 

designed to be generally consistent with 

the PFMI: 

It is important to ensure international 

convergence of requirements for CCPs and 

trade repositories. This Regulation follows 

the existing recommendations developed by 

the Committee on Payment and Settlement 

Systems (CPSS) and International 

Organization of Securities Commissions 

(IOSCO) noting that the CPSS–IOSCO 

principles for financial market infrastructure, 

including CCPs, were established on 16 April 

2012. It creates a Union framework in which 

CCPs can operate safely. ESMA should 

consider these existing standards and their 

future developments when drawing up or 

proposing to revise the regulatory technical 

standards as well as the guidelines and 

recommendations foreseen in this 

Regulation. 

In addition, the European Securities 

Markets Authority (‘‘ESMA’’) issued 

guidance confirming that EMIR and the 

relevant Regulatory Technical Standards 

are ‘‘intended for the EU regulatory 

framework for CCPs to consistently 

implement the PFMI, and NCAs have 

already been applying the PFMI in their 

supervision of CCPs.’’ 25

C. SEC-Registered Clearing Agencies 

Based in the EU 

The SEC regulates two registered 

clearing agencies based in the EU that 

provide CCP services for security-based 

swaps pursuant to EU regulatory 

requirements, and the SEC has sought to 

avoid the application of unnecessary, 

duplicative, or inconsistent regulatory 

requirements with respect to these 

clearing agencies. ICEEU is based in the 

United Kingdom and was an authorized 

CCP under EMIR until the UK left the 

EU on January 31, 2020. The 

Commission granted ICEEU an 

exemption from clearing agency 

registration on July 23, 2009, to clear 

and settle credit default swaps on a 

temporary, conditional basis.26 Congress 

deemed ICEEU a clearing agency 

registered with the SEC on July 16, 

2011, so that ICEEU could provide CCP 

services for security-based swaps.27

LCH SA is based in France and is an 

authorized CCP under EMIR. LCH SA 

applied for registration as a clearing 

agency to provide CCP services for 

security-based swaps to U.S. persons in 

2016, and the SEC registered LCH SA on 

December 16, 2016.28

The SEC’s regulatory approach to 

ICEEU and LCH SA avoids the 

application of unnecessary, duplicative, 

or inconsistent regulatory requirements 

in several ways. First, SEC requirements 

for clearing agencies generally, and in 

Rule 17Ad–22 specifically, are 

principles-based rather than 

prescriptive, enabling ICEEU and LCH 

SA to achieve compliance with SEC 

requirements, through the SRO rule 

filing process, in a manner that is also 

consistent with EMIR.29 Second, the 

SEC requirements for CCPs, codified in 

Rule 17Ad–22, are generally consistent 

with the PFMI,30 as are the requirements 

under the EMIR framework.31 Third, as 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES
76638 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 

32See infra notes 40–42, 55–57, and 

accompanying text. 

33See Release Nos. 34–73075 (Sept. 11, 2014), 79 

FR 55848 (Sept. 17, 2014); 34–72756 (Aug. 4, 2014), 

79 FR 46479 (Aug. 8, 2014); 34–72755 (Aug. 4, 

2014), 79 FR 46481 (Aug. 8, 2014); 34–72754 (Aug. 

4, 2014), 79 FR 46477 (Aug. 8, 2014). 

34See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii). 

35See, e.g., ICEEU Notice of Filing Amendment 

Nos. 1 and 2 and Order Granting Accelerated 

Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by 

Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, to Revise the ICE Clear 

Europe Clearing Rules Relating to the Application 

of Default Provisions in the Event of a Resolution 

Proceeding, Release No. 34–80304 (Mar. 24, 2017) 

https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34- 

80304.pdf; ICEEU Notice of Filing and Order 

Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear 

Europe CDS Risk Policy, Release No. 34–81680 

(Sep. 22, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ 

iceeu/2017/34-81680.pdf; ICEEU Notice of Filing 

and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of 

Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to 

the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules and Procedures 

for Indirect Clearing, Release No. 34–82422 (Dec. 

29, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/ 

2017/34-82422.pdf; ICEEU Notice of Filing and 

Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed 

Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, 

Relating to Intraday Margining, Release No. 34– 

84375 (Oct. 5, 2018), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ 

iceeu/2018/34-84375.pdf. 

36See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

Accounts Categories for Positions of Clearing 

Member Affiliates, Release No. 34–77809 (May 11, 

2016), available at: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/ 

iceeu/2016/34-77809.pdf; ICEEU Notice of Filing 

and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Certain Default Management 

Requirements under Applicable Law, Release No. 

34–78762 (Sep. 2, 2016), available at: https://

www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2016/34-78762.pdf. 

37See, e.g., ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

Amendments to the Clearing Rules to Implement 

the European Union General Data Protection 

Regulation, Release No. 34–83311 (May 23, 2018), 

https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2018/34- 

83311.pdf; ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

Amendments to the Clearing Rules, Release No. 34– 

85247 (Mar. 5, 2019), https://www.sec.gov/rules/ 

sro/iceeu/2019/34-85247.pdf. 

38See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules and 

Procedures, Release No. 34–86753 (Aug. 23, 2019), 

https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2019/34- 

86753.pdf. 

39See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Order Granting 

Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change 

Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe 

Clearing Rules and Procedures for Indirect Clearing, 

Release No. 34–82422 (Dec. 29, 2017), https://

www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34-82422.pdf. 

40See LCH SA registration order, supra note 28, 

at 1398. 

41See supra notes 8, 17, and 29 (further 

discussing the requirements of the rule filing 

process under Rule 19b–4 for registered clearing 

agencies). 

42See LCH SA registration order, supra note 28, 

at 1414–15; see also Release No. 34–64795 (July 1, 

2011), 76 FR 39927, 39934–35 (July 7, 2011) (further 

describing exemptions from Sections 5 and 6 of the 

Exchange Act for clearing agencies for securitybased swaps). 

43See LCH SA Order Granting Accelerated 

Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the 

Implementation of the Markets in Financial 

Instruments Regulation, Release No. 34–82421 (Dec. 

29, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/ 

2017/34-82421.pdf; LCH SA Order Granting 

Approval on an Accelerated Basis of Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Self-Referencing Transactions, 

Release No. 34–82883 (Mar. 15, 2018), https://

www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/2018/34-82883.pdf; 

see also LCH SA Order Granting Accelerated 

Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the 

Implementation of the Markets in Financial 

Instruments Regulation, Release No. 34–82421 (Dec. 

29, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/ 

2017/34-82421.pdf. 

44 15 U.S.C. 78q–1; 17 CFR 240.17Ab2–1. Rule 

17Ab2–1 directs applicants for registration as a 

clearing agency or applicants for an exemption from 

registration to apply on Form CA–1. 

discussed further below and in Part 

III.B, the SEC has exempted both 

clearing agencies from certain SEC 

requirements that may be unnecessary, 

duplicative, or inconsistent in light of 

EMIR requirements to which the EU 

CCPs are subject.32 Fourth, the SEC 

remains engaged in a collaborative 

regulatory dialogue with the NCAs for 

each CCP, including the Bank of 

England for ICEEU and the Autorite ́ des 

Marche ́s Financiers, Autorite ́ de 

Controˆle Prudentiel et de Re ́solution, 

and Banque de France for LCH SA. The 

following sections provide a brief 

overview of the SEC’s experience with 

each clearing agency, including 

examples of how the SEC has used its 

supervisory authority to avoid imposing 

unnecessary, duplicative, or 

inconsistent requirements on each 

clearing agency. 

1. ICEEU 

Pursuant to the Exchange Act and 

Rule 19b–4 thereunder, the SEC has 

published, reviewed, and approved a 

number of proposed rule changes 

submitted by ICEEU that, based on the 

information and representations made 

by ICEEU, were intended to facilitate its 

efforts to comply with EMIR, in addition 

to the Exchange Act. These proposed 

rule changes addressed topics 

including: (i) Segregation and 

portability of customer positions and 

margin; (ii) risk modeling; (iii) back 

testing; (iv) stress testing; (v) default 

management; and (vi) liquidity risk 

management.33 In a number of 

instances, the SEC found good cause to 

provide accelerated approval 34 for 

proposed rule changes derived from 

EMIR requirements.35 The SEC has also 

published notice of certain other 

immediately effective ICEEU rule 

filings 36 that were submitted in 

connection with other EU-based 

regulatory requirements for EU CCPs, 

including the General Data Protection 

Regulation,37 the revised Markets in 

Financial Instruments Directive (‘‘MiFID 

II’’),38 and the Markets in Financial 

Instruments Regulation (‘‘MiFIR’’).39

2. LCH SA 

When the SEC approved LCH SA’s 

registration as a clearing agency, LCH 

petitioned for, and the SEC granted, 

exemptions from certain requirements 

in the Exchange Act for aspects of LCH 

SA’s U.S. operations, referencing the 

fact that LCH SA is subject to oversight 

by regulators in other jurisdictions.40

Specifically, the SEC granted 

exemptions from requirements in Rule 

17a–22 (concerning the filing by 

clearing agencies of certain 

supplemental material provided to 

participants), Rule 17Ad–22(c)(2) and 

(c)(2)(iii) (relating to annual audited 

financial statements), Section 19(b) of 

the Exchange Act and Rule 19b–4 

thereunder (relating to SRO rule 

filings),41 and Sections 5 and 6 of the 

Exchange Act (relating to registration as 

an exchange).42 In addition, as part of its 

oversight of LCH SA, the SEC routinely 

evaluates representations made in 

proposed rule changes submitted by 

LCH SA that state as their purpose a 

need to comply with EMIR regulatory 

requirements, and the SEC has been able 

to approve multiple rule filings after 

finding that they were consistent with 

the Exchange Act, enabling LCH SA to 

achieve compliance with both the 

Exchange Act and EMIR.43

III. SEC Process for Review of 

Applications for Registration as a 

Clearing Agency and Requests for 

Exemptions by EU CCPs 

For the reasons discussed above, the 

SEC is describing, and providing 

transparency into, its processes to assist 

EU CCPs seeking registration or 

requesting exemptions. The guidance 

includes information that an EU CCP 

can provide in its application and a 

summary of the factors that the SEC will 

consider, if applicable to a particular 

request, with respect to future 

exemption requests. 

A. Applications for Registration as a 

Clearing Agency 

To register as a clearing agency, an EU 

CCP must submit an application for 

registration on Form CA–1 in 

accordance with Section 17A of the 

Exchange Act and Rule 17Ab2–1 

thereunder.44 Form CA–1 requires an 

applicant to complete the elements of 

the form itself and submit nineteen 

exhibits. Specifically, the form itself, 

and Schedule A thereto, contain 

questions that are designed to elicit 

general information about the types of 

activities in which the applicant 

proposes to engage and the identity of 

the applicant’s direct and indirect 

owners and other control persons, as 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 76639 

45As discussed further in Part III.A, Exhibit S is 

required for requests for an exemption from 

registration as a clearing agency. In addition to 

completing the Exhibit S, an EU CCP may also 

submit a petition to request an exemption from 

certain SEC requirements outside of the registration 

process. See supra note 40, infra note 55, and 

accompanying text. 

46To register a clearing agency, the SEC must find 

that the clearing agency meets each of the 

requirements in Section 17A(b)(3) of the Exchange 

Act. See 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(A)–(I). 

47Any such cooperative arrangements entered as 

a precondition to this process could be useful for 

ongoing coordinated or joint supervisory matters 

between the SEC and the NCA. 

48For example, an EU CCP could include any 

preexisting documents prepared for use by its NCA 

as an attachment to its Form CA–1 application and 

reference said attachment in response to the 

requested exhibit. Such an approach would be 

consistent with the requirements of the Form CA– 

1. 

49See supra note 46. 

50See supra notes 12–15 (describing the 

requirements in Rule 17Ad–22 applicable to CCPs), 

18 (citing to the requirements of Regulation SCI), 

and accompanying text. 

51See supra note 6 (noting exemptions from 

registration as a clearing agency provided to 

Clearstream and Euroclear Bank). 

52See supra notes 40–42 and accompanying text; 

infra notes 55–57 and accompanying text. 

53CCA Standards adopting release, supra note 14, 

at 70791. 

well as all affiliates engaged in the 

clearing agency activity. Exhibits A 

through R request specific information 

related to the applicant’s business 

organization, financial information, 

operational capacity and access to 

services.45

The SEC is providing guidance to 

reference the types of documents that 

could be submitted in preparing 

responses to the exhibits required by 

Form CA–1. For example, an EU CCP 

may submit to the SEC preexisting 

documentation or a self-assessment 

demonstrating that (i) the EU CCP is in 

compliance with EMIR and (ii) the EU 

CCP’s compliance with EMIR also 

satisfies the Exchange Act requirements 

for registration.46 The use of existing 

documentation or a self-assessment 

could help facilitate the efficient 

preparation of an EU CCP’s application 

to the SEC, as well as the SEC’s efficient 

review of the application, potentially 

resulting in shorter application 

preparation and review periods. The use 

of self-assessments may help facilitate 

the SEC’s review process by 

substantiating and supplementing any 

preexisting documentation provided in 

response to the Form CA–1. 

Accordingly, the SEC is providing 

guidance to articulate methods that 

future EU CCPs can use to facilitate an 

efficient process for clearing agency 

registration. First, the SEC encourages 

future EU CCP applicants to engage with 

SEC staff and submit drafts of the 

application for SEC staff to review while 

an EU CCP prepares the Form CA–1 and 

accompanying exhibits. SEC staff can 

provide technical advice regarding how 

to answer the questions on the form 

itself and to prepare the required 

exhibits, which could help facilitate the 

efficient preparation of a Form CA–1 

application. The SEC will also look to 

coordinate with the EU CCP’s NCA for 

the purposes of analyzing and 

evaluating any documentation 

submitted by the EU CCP.47

Second, the SEC believes that much of 

the material requested by the Form CA– 

1 and its exhibits has likely been 

memorialized in preexisting documents 

that an EU CCP already provides or has 

provided to NCAs or other regulatory 

authorities in the EU. In particular, an 

EU CCP may use materials generated in 

the course of its oversight by its NCA to 

prepare its application on Form CA–1, 

so long as those materials are accurate 

and current in all material respects.48 In 

addition, these documents could be 

attached to a Form CA–1 application as 

responsive to particular exhibits, which 

can facilitate the efficient preparation of 

the form. 

Third, future EU CCP applicants 

could prepare self-assessments to 

facilitate the efficient preparation of 

Form CA–1 and the SEC’s review of the 

application to determine that the 

applicant meets each of the 

requirements set forth in Section 

17A(b)(3) of the Exchange Act to register 

a clearing agency.49 In a self-assessment, 

an EU CCP can describe how 

satisfaction of regulatory requirements 

under EMIR supports an SEC finding 

that the applicant has met the 

requirements for registration as a 

clearing agency in Section 17A(b)(3). In 

the SEC’s view, based on its experience 

supervising EMIR-authorized EU CCPs 

registered as clearing agencies and its 

familiarity with the PFMI, such selfassessment could significantly facilitate 

the SEC’s review in order to make the 

determinations required in the 

Exchange Act. As an example, a selfassessment could explain how the EU 

CCP’s compliance with EMIR 

corresponds to the requirements in the 

Exchange Act and applicable SEC rules 

thereunder, such as Rule 17Ad–22 and 

Regulation SCI.50

B. Requests for Exemptions 

An EU CCP may submit a request for 

an exemption to the SEC in one of two 

ways: through the Form CA–1 

application or through a separate 

petition to the SEC. First, an EU CCP 

may submit a request for an exemption 

from registration as part of Exhibit S to 

its Form CA–1 application, either when 

it seeks to register as a clearing agency 

or at any time following registration by 

submitting an amendment to its 

application including such request. 

Exhibit S requires an applicant to 

provide a statement demonstrating why 

the approval of the requested exemption 

would be consistent with the public 

interest, the protection of investors, and 

the purposes of Section 17A of the 

Exchange Act.51

Second, for other exemption requests, 

an EU CCP may submit a petition to the 

SEC requesting exemptions from certain 

SEC requirements for clearing agencies 

under the Exchange Act pursuant to the 

SEC’s authority in Section 17A(b)(1) or 

Section 36 of the Exchange Act, as 

applicable. For example, an EU CCP 

may request an exemption because it 

has determined that the application of 

certain SEC requirements would impose 

unnecessary, duplicative, or 

inconsistent requirements in light of 

EMIR requirements to which the EU 

CCP is already subject. As outlined 

above, the SEC previously has made 

determinations related to such issues.52

As discussed in the CCA Standards 

adopting release, whether the SEC 

approves an exemption is dependent on 

several factors, many of which were 

identified as relevant to a potential 

request for an exemption by an EU 

CCP.53 Based on the SEC’s supervision 

of EU CCPs to date, and to provide 

certainty to EU CCPs that request 

exemptions, the SEC believes it is 

appropriate to make clear that it will 

consider the following factors—as 

applicable to a particular request—in 

assessing whether to grant an exemption 

to an EU CCP: (i) The nature of the EU 

CCP’s activities as a clearing agency; (ii) 

the anticipated level or volume of 

activity that the applicant seeks to effect 

within the United States; (iii) the 

structure of, scope of, and requirements 

under EMIR to which the applicant is 

subject in its home jurisdiction; (iv) the 

extent to which the application of EMIR 

is relevant to the findings the SEC must 

make in considering an exemption 

under Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange 

Act; and (v) the extent to which the SEC 

and the relevant EU authority or 

authorities have appropriate cooperative 

arrangements in place to communicate 

and cooperate to fulfill their respective 

regulatory mandates. In addition, as 

noted in the CCA Standards adopting 

release, the Commission will also 

consider the extent to which the EU 

CCP is subject to appropriate 

supervision and enforcement by the 

NCA or other relevant authorities in the 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES
76640 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 

54See id. (discussing as a relevant factor the 

particular system of supervision and oversight in a 

non-U.S. jurisdiction for purposes of evaluating any 

non-U.S. framework). 

55See supra note 40 and accompanying text. 

56See supra note 41 and accompanying text. 

57See supra note 42 and accompanying text. 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90203 

(October 15, 2020), 85 FR 67018 (October 21, 2020) 

(SR–DTC–2020–012) (‘‘Notice’’). 

4Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined 

in the Rules, By-Laws and Organization Certificate 

of DTC (‘‘Rules’’) available at http://www.dtcc.com/ 

∼/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/dtc_rules.pdf, 

or in the hereby proposed ClaimConnect Service 

Guide, included as Exhibit 5 to this proposed rule 

change filing. 

5Available at http://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/ 

Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/ 

Settlement.pdf. 

6A covered clearing agency is defined as a 

registered clearing agency that provides the services 

of a central counterparty (‘‘CCP’’) or CSD. See 17 

CFR 240.17Ad–22(a)(5). CSD services means 

services of a clearing agency that is a securities 

depository as described in Section 3(a)(23)(A) of the 

Exchange Act. See 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(a)(3). 

Specifically, the definition of a clearing agency 

includes, in part, ‘‘any person, such as a securities 

depository that (i) acts as a custodian of securities 

in connection with a system for the central 

handling of securities whereby all securities of a 

particular class or series of any issuer deposited 

within the system are treated as fungible and may 

be transferred, loaned, or pledged by bookkeeping 

entry without physical delivery of securities 

certificates, or (ii) otherwise permits or facilitates 

the settlement of securities transactions or the 

hypothecation or lending of securities without 

physical delivery of securities certificates.’’ 15 

U.S.C. 78c(a)(23)(A). 

7Trading exceptions include, but are not limited 

to, trades outside of the markets’ agreed upon 

settlement cycle, lack of due bill fail tracking, stock 

loan or repo transaction discrepancy, or tax treaty 

differences. See Notice, supra note 3, 85 FR at 

67019. 

8See Notice, supra note 3, 85 FR at 67019. Based 

on discussions with its Participants, DTC estimates 

that ClaimConnect may process approximately 

212,000 claims its first year, increasing to 

approximately 425,000 claims by its fifth year. See 

id. 

9 DTC stated that a fee associated with 

Participants’ use of the ClaimConnect service will 

be the subject of a separate, subsequent rule filing 

with the Commission. See Notice, supra note 3, 85 

FR at 67019. 

10To join ClaimConnect, a Participant needs to 

request to be a ‘‘Claim Participant,’’ and DTC will 

then indicate that the Participant is now a member 

of the service (i.e., a User). See Notice, supra note 

3, 85 FR at 67019. 

context of comparable EMIR 

requirements.54

As discussed in Part II.C.2, LCH SA 

petitioned the SEC to request 

exemptions under the Exchange Act 

from the application of Rule 17a–22 and 

Rules 17Ad–22(c)(2) and (c)(2)(iii), and 

the SEC approved this request based on 

factors similar to those discussed 

above.55 The SEC has also provided 

exemptions to LCH SA with respect to 

application of Section 19(b) of the 

Exchange Act and Rule 19b–4 

thereunder,56 and to LCH SA and ICEEU 

with respect to the application of 

Sections 5 and 6 of the Exchange Act.57

IV. Conclusion 

The SEC has structured its regulatory 

framework for clearing agencies that are 

EU CCPs to achieve an appropriate 

balance between (i) applying the levels 

of oversight and supervision for clearing 

agencies that ensure consistency with 

the Exchange Act and, at the same time, 

(ii) avoiding the application of certain 

SEC requirements that are unnecessary, 

duplicative, or inconsistent relative to 

EMIR requirements that have already 

been applied to the EU CCP in the EU. 

Accordingly, this policy statement and 

guidance is designed to provide 

transparency into the SEC’s processes 

and to describe the processes available 

to EU CCPs that seek to register as 

clearing agencies or request exemptions 

from certain SEC requirements. This 

policy statement and guidance also 

highlight efficient ways that EU CCPs 

can comply with SEC rules and describe 

how an EU CCP can facilitate the 

efficient preparation of its application 

and the SEC’s review of such 

application, potentially resulting in 

shorter application preparation and 

review periods. It also identifies the 

factors that the SEC will consider with 

respect to future requests for 

exemptions, as applicable to a particular 

request. The SEC looks forward to 

continuing its dialogue with the EC 

regarding its consideration of whether to 

find the SEC’s regulatory framework for 

CCPs equivalent to EMIR. 

By the Commission. 

Dated: November 23, 2020. 

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26285 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–90481; File No. SR–DTC– 

2020–012] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Depository Trust Company; Order 

Approving a Proposed Rule Change To 

Establish the ClaimConnectTM Service 

and Update the Settlement Service 

Guide 

November 23, 2020. 

I. Introduction 

On October 8, 2020, The Depository 

Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’) 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 

thereunder,2 proposed rule change SR– 

DTC–2020–012. The proposed rule 

change was published for comment in 

the Federal Register on October 21, 

2020.3 The Commission did not receive 

any comment letters on the proposed 

rule change. For the reasons discussed 

below, the Commission is approving the 

proposed rule change. 

II. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Change 

The proposed rule change 4 will (i) 

adopt a new DTC service guide to 

establish the ClaimConnect service at 

DTC (‘‘ClaimConnect Service Guide’’), 

and (ii) update the existing DTC 

Settlement Service Guide 5 (‘‘Settlement 

Guide’’) to (A) make conforming 

changes to the Settlement Guide to 

reflect the ClaimConnect service, and 

(B) update certain address and contact 

information in the Copyright section of 

the Settlement Guide. 

A. Background 

DTC is the central securities 

depository (‘‘CSD’’) for substantially all 

corporate and municipal debt and 

equity securities available for trading in 

the United States. As a covered clearing 

agency that provides CSD services,6

DTC provides a central location in 

which securities may be immobilized, 

and interests in those securities are 

reflected in accounts maintained for its 

Participants, which are financial 

institutions such as brokers or banks. 

DTC’s CSD services include cash 

claims or cash claim transactions, which 

are cash entitlements (i.e., a request for 

cash) from one Participant to another 

Participant. Currently, cash claims arise 

as a result of trading exceptions from a 

Corporate Action event,7 where a cash 

entitlement needs to be delivered from 

one holder to another. Today, such 

claims are settled away from DTC, 

except for some stock loan and 

repurchase (‘‘repo’’) substitution 

payments, which can be settled via 

DTC’s Adjustment Payment Orders 

(‘‘APOs’’). DTC stated that it developed 

the ClaimConnect service so 

Participants can settle cash claims in 

one centralized location, using the DTC 

system.8

B. Proposed ClaimConnect Service 

The proposed ClaimConnect service 

will be an optional service available to 

all DTC Participants.9 The service will 

enable DTC Participants to bilaterally 

match and settle cash claim transactions 

at DTC.10

ClaimConnect will be a validation and 

matching engine that continually 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES