44508 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1CFTC regulations referred to herein are found at 

17 CFR Ch. 1 (2010). They are accessible on the 

Commission’s Web site at http://www.cftc.gov. 

2See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. 111–203, 124 

Stat. 1376 (2010). The text of the Dodd-Frank Act 

may be accessed at http://www.cftc.gov/ 

LawRegulation/DoddFrankAct/index.htm. 

3Pursuant to section 701 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

Title VII may be cited as the ‘‘Wall Street 

Transparency and Accountability Act of 2010’’. 

4 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq. 

5 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. 

submissions provided to either Agency 

in any electronic form or on paper will 

be published on the Web site of the 

respective Agency, without review and 

without removal of personally 

identifying information. Please submit 

only information that you wish to make 

publicly available. 

By the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

Dated: July 21, 2011. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary. 

By the Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

Dated: July 21, 2011. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18889 Filed 7–25–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P; 8011–01–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Chapter I 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Chapter II 

[Release No. 34–64926; File No. 4–635] 

Acceptance of Public Submissions for 

a Study on International Swap 

Regulation Mandated by Section 719(c) 

of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

and Consumer Protection Act 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission; Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Request for comment. 

SUMMARY: Section 719(c) of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) 

requires the Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (CFTC) and the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(SEC and, together with the CFTC, the 

Commissions) jointly to study and then 

report to Congress on swap regulation 

and clearinghouse regulation in the 

United States, Asia, and Europe and to 

identify areas of regulation that are 

similar and other areas of regulation that 

could be harmonized. The report also 

must identify major dealers, exchanges, 

clearinghouses, clearing members, and 

regulators in each geographic area and 

describe the major contracts (including 

trading volumes, clearing volumes, and 

notional values), methods for clearing 

swaps, and the systems used for setting 

margin in each geographic area. In 

connection with the study and report, 

the CFTC and SEC are issuing this 

request for information through public 

comment. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

September 26, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

CFTC 

• Agency Web site, via its Comments 

Online process at http:// 

comments.cftc.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

through the Web site. 

• Mail: David A. Stawick, Secretary of 

the Commission, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

mail above. 

Please submit comments using only 

one method. Comments should be 

identified by ‘‘International Swap 

Regulation Study’’ in the subject line of 

responses submitted electronically and 

in paper submissions. 

All comments must be submitted in 

English or, if not, accompanied by an 

English translation. Comments will be 

posted on the CFTC’s Internet Web site 

at http://www.cftc.gov, without review 

and without removal of personally 

identifying information. You should 

submit only information that you wish 

to make available publicly. If you wish 

the CFTC to consider information that 

may be exempt from disclosure under 

the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 

a petition for confidential treatment of 

the exempt information may be 

submitted according to the procedures 

established in § 145.9 of the 

Commission’s regulations.1 The CFTC 

reserves the right, but shall have no 

obligation, to review, pre-screen, filter, 

redact, refuse, or remove any or all of 

your submission from http:// 

www.cftc.gov that it may deem to be 

inappropriate for publication, such as 

obscene language. All submissions that 

have been redacted or removed that 

contain comments will be retained in 

the public comment file and may be 

accessible under FOIA. 

SEC 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the agency’s Internet comment 

form at http://www.sec.gov/rules/ 

other.shtml; or 

• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number 4–635 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number 4–635. This file number should 

be included on the subject line if e-mail 

is used. To help the SEC process and 

review your comments more efficiently, 

please use only one method. Comments 

will be posted on the SEC’s Internet 

Web site at http://www.sec.gov. 

Comments also are available for Web 

site viewing and printing in the SEC’s 

Public Reference Room, Station Place, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549, on official business days 

between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. 

All comments received will be posted 

without change; the SEC does not edit 

personally identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

CFTC: Natalie Markman Radhakrishnan, 

Senior Special Counsel, 202–418–5059, 

nmradhakrishnan@cftc.gov, Office of 

International Affairs, Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission, Three 

Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20581; SEC: Babback 

Sabahi, Senior Counsel, 202–551–5398, 

sabahib@sec.gov, Office of International 

Affairs, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, 

NE., Washington, DC 20549–1004. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Dodd-Frank Act was enacted on 

July 21, 2010.2 Title VII of the 

legislation 3 amends the Commodity 

Exchange Act 4 and the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 5 to establish a 

comprehensive new regulatory 

framework for swaps and security-based 

swaps to reduce risk, increase 

transparency, and promote market 

integrity within the financial system. 

Among other things, Title VII: (1) 

Provides for the registration and 

comprehensive regulation of swap 

dealers, security-based swap dealers, 

major swap participants, and major 

security-based swap participants; (2) 

imposes clearing and trade execution 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 44509 

6Section 719(c)(1) provides: 

(1) IN GENERAL.–The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission shall jointly conduct a 

study– 

(A) relating to– 

(i) swap regulation in the United States, Asia, and 

Europe; and 

(ii) clearing house and clearing agency regulation 

in the United States, Asia, and Europe; and 

(B) that identifies areas of regulation that are 

similar in the United States, Asia and Europe and 

other areas of regulation that could be 

harmonized[.] 

7Section 719(c)(2) provides: 

(2) REPORT.–Not later than 18 months after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission shall submit to the 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 

Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on 

Agriculture and the Committee on Financial 

Services of the House of Representatives a report 

that includes a description of the results of the 

study under subsection (a), including– 

(A) identification of the major exchanges and 

their regulator in each geographic area for the 

trading of swaps and security-based swaps 

including a listing of the major contracts and their 

trading volumes and notional values as well as 

identification of the major swap dealers 

participating in such markets; 

(B) identification of the major clearing houses and 

clearing agencies and their regulator in each 

geographic area for the clearing of swaps and 

security-based swaps, including a listing of the 

major contracts and the clearing volumes and 

notional values as well as identification of the 

major clearing members of such clearing houses and 

clearing agencies in such markets; 

(C) a description of the comparative methods of 

clearing swaps in the United States, Asia, and 

Europe; and 

(D) a description of the various systems used for 

establishing margin on individual swaps, securitybased swaps, and swap portfolios. 

The provision’s reference to ‘‘subsection (a)’’ 

presumably should be replaced with a reference to 

subsection (1) because no such subsection (a) 

applies to this study. Moreover, although Section 

719(c) is entitled ‘‘International Swap Regulation’’ 

and does not consistently refer to both swaps and 

security-based swaps throughout, Congress 

mandated a joint study and, accordingly, the 

Commissions have interpreted the terms ‘‘swap’’ 

and ‘‘swaps’’ to include both swap(s) and securitybased swap(s) in the context of this statutory 

provision. 

8 In addition to the study and report required by 

Section 719(c), Congress directed the Commissions 

(and prudential regulators) in Section 752(a) of the 

Dodd-Frank Act to ‘‘as appropriate * * * consult 

and coordinate with foreign regulatory authorities 

on the establishment of consistent international 

standards with respect to the regulation (including 

fees) of swaps, security-based swaps, swap entities, 

and security-based swap entities’’ in order to 

‘‘promote effective and consistent global regulation 

of swaps and security-based swaps’’. 

9For example, Commission staff will engage in 

ongoing consultation with regulatory authorities 

and others throughout the study. 

10For more information, visit CFTC and SEC Web 

sites on implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

respectively at http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/ 

DoddFrankAct/index.htm and http://www.sec.gov/ 

spotlight/dodd-frank.shtml. 

11On December 8, 2010, the EC also issued a 

public consultation to solicit views on revisions to 

the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive that 

are designed, among other things, to increase 

transparency for OTC derivatives and other 

instruments by setting requirements for trading 

venues and investment firms, and to enhance 

business conduct standards applicable to all 

investment firms. The EC is expected to publish a 

proposal further to this consultation during summer 

2011. 

12See various provisions of the EC’s proposed 

European Markets Infrastructure Regulation, 

available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ 

LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0484:FIN:EN:PDF. 

13The Commissions may, however, in their 

discretion and depending on the significance of the 

developments, decide to address certain legislative 

or regulatory developments that take place after the 

comment period has ended. 

14 In light of the statutory deadline established in 

Section 719(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act, the 

Commissions request comment on how best to 

ensure that the study reflects the latest state of 

regulatory implementation in Asia and Europe. 

Commenters are encouraged to submit information 

regarding significant relevant legislative or 

regulatory developments occurring after the end of 

the comment period and prior to the submission of 

the report to Congress. 

requirements on swaps and securitybased swaps, subject to certain 

exceptions; (3) creates rigorous 

recordkeeping and real-time reporting 

regimes; and (4) enhances the 

Commissions’ rulemaking and 

enforcement authorities with respect to 

certain registered entities and 

intermediaries subject to the 

Commissions’ oversight. 

Section 719(c)(1) of the Dodd-Frank 

Act requires the CFTC and SEC jointly 

to conduct a study on swap regulation 

and clearinghouse regulation in the 

United States, Asia, and Europe and to 

identify areas of regulation that are 

similar and other areas of regulation that 

could be harmonized.6 Pursuant to 

Section 719(c)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

the Commissions must submit a report 

to Congress within 18 months after the 

Dodd-Frank Act’s enactment (i.e., on or 

before Monday, January 23, 2012) that 

describes the results of the study and 

includes: (1) The identification of the 

major dealers, exchanges, 

clearinghouses, and regulators in each 

geographic area; (2) lists of the major 

swap contracts (including trading 

volumes, clearing volumes, and notional 

values) in each geographic area; and (3) 

a description of the methods for clearing 

swaps and the systems used for setting 

margin in each geographic area.7

II. Request for Comments 

In connection with the study and 

report required by Section 719(c) of the 

Dodd-Frank Act, the CFTC and SEC 

have determined to issue this request for 

information through public comment. 

Congress has directed the Commissions 

to conduct an independent joint study 

on specific topics and, in particular, to 

identify areas of regulation that could be 

harmonized.8 The Commissions have 

determined that this request for public 

comment will be an effective and 

transparent means of gathering 

information necessary for the study and 

report from interested parties. This 

public comment process will, as 

needed, be supplemented by other 

means of gathering the comprehensive 

range of information requested by 

Congress.9

The Commissions also are mindful of 

differences in regulatory development 

across jurisdictions. In the United States 

and under the Dodd-Frank Act, many of 

the required regulations with regard to 

swaps already have been proposed and 

made available for public comment.10

Other jurisdictions, however, are 

proceeding under different time frames. 

For example, the Japanese Diet amended 

the Financial Instruments and Exchange 

Act by adopting legislation on over-thecounter (OTC) derivatives on July 10, 

2009, and on May 12, 2010. These 

amendments are expected to be 

implemented by November 2012. The 

European Commission (EC), in turn, 

proposed legislation on clearing and 

trade repositories on September 15, 

2010.11 This proposed legislation calls 

for the European Securities and Markets 

Authority to propose technical 

standards by June 30, 2012.12

In order to strike a balance between 

meeting the statutory deadline for the 

study and report and providing timely 

information to Congress, the 

Commissions have determined to 

publish the request at this time and to 

provide for a 60-day comment period. 

Given the pace of developments in the 

regulation of OTC derivatives here in 

the United States and in other 

jurisdictions, the Commissions plan to 

conduct the study based upon 

information received and collected by 

the last day of the comment period.13

Comments should be submitted during 

the open comment period, but staff may 

consider comments filed after the 

deadline and may consult with 

interested and/or relevant parties after 

the comment period closes in order to 

obtain additional or clarifying 

information. The Commissions welcome 

public comment on all aspects of the 

study.14

The Commissions have developed the 

following requests for comment to 

gather information in support of the 

study mandated by Section 719(c) and 

request that commenters include a 

description, either in English or 

accompanied by an English translation, 

of the underlying source material used 

in composing each submitted response. 

Commenters may also provide any 

additional relevant information beyond 

that specifically requested. Because 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
44510 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

15These terms may include, but may not be 

limited to, OTC derivatives. The Dodd-Frank Act 

includes definitions of the terms ‘‘swap’’ and 

‘‘security-based swap’’. 

16 If applicable, how does the mandatory clearing 

requirement work, e.g., who decides which Swaps 

are required to be cleared, what criteria are applied, 

does the requirement apply to existing Swaps or to 

those entered into at a certain point in time, are any 

entities exempt from the clearing requirement? 

17 In particular, are there any legal or other 

barriers to the collection of information or to the 

sharing of information, e.g., client confidentiality 

protection or data privacy safeguards? 

Section 719(c) requires the 

Commissions to prepare a report 

relating to the swap markets of the 

United States, Asia, and Europe, 

commenters are specifically asked to 

provide information about markets in 

those jurisdictions. Commenters also 

may provide any relevant information 

on other jurisdictions. If regulatory 

requirements in a jurisdiction are under 

consideration but not yet enacted or 

effective, commenters should make note 

of this in their answer and provide as 

much relevant information as possible 

on recent and anticipated 

developments. 

While all commenters are welcome to 

respond to the items below in their 

entirety, in order to provide more focus, 

the requests for comment have been 

divided into three groups. The first 

group, items A–E, inquires about 

information to which foreign regulators 

may have the most efficient access. Item 

F, by contrast, inquires about 

information that may be available to a 

wider range of commenters, while item 

G inquires about information that 

exchanges and clearinghouses might be 

uniquely positioned to provide. 

A. Status of Regulation 

1. For each jurisdiction on which 

comment is being provided, please 

provide the name of the jurisdiction 

being commented upon. 

2. Does the jurisdiction have a legal 

definition of the term ‘‘swap’’, 

‘‘security-based swap’’, or other similar 

term or terms (hereinafter referred to as 

a ‘‘Swap’’ or ‘‘Swaps’’)? If so, please 

provide such definition(s).15

3. Are Swaps included within the 

scope of any statute, regulation, or other 

legal requirement in the jurisdiction? 

a. If not, is the jurisdiction planning 

to or considering whether to regulate, or 

to modify regulation of, Swaps? 

b. Please further describe the present 

status of regulatory efforts and the 

anticipated timeline for such efforts. 

4. What type of counterparty may 

enter into a Swap? Do any limitations 

apply? 

5. Are certain types or classes of 

Swaps prohibited, or are certain entities 

prohibited from entering into certain 

types or classes of Swaps? 

6. If Swaps are regulated: 

a. Who determines which 

instruments, transactions, or agreements 

should be regulated as Swaps? 

b. Which Swaps, if any, are required 

to be executed on an organized market, 

on an electronic execution facility, or on 

any other type of market? 

c. Which Swaps, if any, are required 

to be cleared by a central counterparty 

and, for those required to be cleared, 

how are the trades of non-clearing 

participants cleared? 16

d. Which Swap transactions, if any, 

are required to be reported to a data 

repository or other entity, the public, or 

regulatory authorities? 

e. Is regulatory oversight of the Swap 

market conducted by one single 

regulatory authority or divided among 

different regulatory authorities? If the 

latter, please identify each relevant 

regulatory authority and describe its 

responsibilities and jurisdiction. 

f. How does the regulatory framework 

regulate potential systemic risk created 

by Swaps? Does it, for example, create 

a new oversight body or designate 

certain entities as systemically 

important? 

g. Does the regulatory authority, or 

regulatory authorities if more than one 

regulator has oversight responsibilities 

over the Swap market, have the ability 

to share information related to Swaps 

with domestic and foreign regulatory 

authorities? 17

h. How are cross-border Swap 

transactions regulated? Does the Swap 

regulatory framework apply to persons 

located outside of the jurisdiction doing 

business with persons located within 

the jurisdiction, and, more generally, to 

cross-border Swap activities? 

i. What enforcement authority exists 

over Swaps, and who may exercise such 

authority? 

B. Regulatory Requirements for Market 

Participants 

1. How does the regulatory framework 

address participants in the Swap 

market? What are the registration or 

licensing requirements for Swap-related 

dealers, market participants, 

intermediaries, or others (individually 

and collectively, ‘‘Participants’’)? 

2. Are any types of Participants in the 

Swap market excluded or exempted 

from Swap-related registration or 

licensing requirements? 

3. What is the process for updating, 

withdrawing, or terminating Swaprelated registration or an exemption 

from Swap-related registration? 

4. What are the Swap-related 

prudential regulatory requirements (e.g., 

capital, liquidity, margin, risk 

management, segregation, collateral)? 

5. What are the requirements related 

to insolvency or bankruptcy in regard to 

Participants? 

6. What are the Swap-related business 

conduct requirements (e.g., interaction 

with counterparties, disclosure, 

supervision, reporting, recordkeeping, 

documentation, confirmation, valuation, 

conflicts of interest, avoidance of fraud 

and other abusive practices)? 

7. Do Participants have the ability to 

share information with domestic and/or 

foreign regulatory authorities? 

8. How are foreign Participants treated 

(e.g., a special recognition category, an 

exclusion or an exemption from 

registration)? 

C. Regulatory Requirements for 

Organized Markets, Electronic 

Execution Facilities, and Other Types of 

Markets 

1. Does the regulatory framework 

include requirements for organized 

markets, electronic execution facilities, 

and/or other types of markets for Swaps 

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Markets’’)? 

2. What are the registration or 

licensing requirements for such 

Markets? 

3. Are any Markets excluded or 

exempted from such registration or 

licensing requirements? 

4. What is the process for updating, 

withdrawing, or terminating such 

registration or exempting from such 

registration? 

5. What are the ongoing regulatory 

responsibilities of such Markets (e.g., 

access, surveillance, transparency, 

compliance, recordkeeping)? 

6. Do Markets have the ability to share 

information with domestic and/or 

foreign regulatory authorities? 

7. How are foreign Markets treated 

(e.g., a special recognition category, an 

exclusion or an exemption from 

registration)? 

D. Regulatory Requirements for Central 

Counterparties 

1. Does the regulatory framework 

include requirements for central 

counterparties that provide clearing and 

settlement services for Swaps? 

2. What are the registration or 

licensing requirements for such central 

counterparties? 

3. Who is excluded or exempted from 

such registration or licensing 

requirements? 

4. What is the process for updating, 

withdrawing, or terminating such 

registration or exempting from such 

registration? 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2011 / Proposed Rules 44511 

18The Recommendations for Central 

Counterparties were published in November 2004 

(and currently are being revised) by the Committee 

on Payment & Settlement Systems of the Bank for 

International Settlements and the Technical 

Committee of IOSCO. Links to this standard, as well 

as related standards and the consultative report for 

revising them, are available at http://www.bis.org/ 

publ/cpss94.htm. 

19 If entities other than data repositories can fulfill 

this function, please describe the jurisdiction’s 

requirements for such activity and provide the 

relevant information for each question on this topic. 

20 In particular, please identify any potential 

opportunities for regulatory arbitrage or 

impediments to the achievement of consistent 

regulatory standards across jurisdictions. 

21For CDS, include: corporate single name, 

sovereign single name, multi-name, index; CDS on 

domestic and non-domestic reference assets 

(classified by country, in the latter case); and CDS 

between domestic and non-domestic participants 

(classified by country, in the latter case). 

22For IRS, include: underlying currency, 

structure, and maturity. 

5. What are the ongoing regulatory 

responsibilities of such central 

counterparties (e.g., financial resources, 

risk management, safeguards against 

member or participant default, authority 

in the event of a default, 

recordkeeping)? 18

6. Do such central counterparties have 

the ability to share information with 

domestic and/or foreign regulatory 

authorities? 

7. How are foreign central 

counterparties treated (e.g., a special 

recognition category, an exclusion or an 

exemption from registration)? 

E. Regulatory Requirements for Data 

Repositories 

1. Does the regulatory framework 

include requirements for data 

repositories for Swaps? 19

2. What are the registration or 

licensing requirements for such data 

repositories? 

3. Who is excluded or exempted from 

such registration or licensing 

requirements? 

4. What is the process for updating, 

withdrawing, or terminating such 

registration or exempting from such 

registration? 

5. What are the ongoing regulatory 

responsibilities of such data repositories 

(e.g., timing of reporting to the public, 

recordkeeping)? 

6. Are such data repositories required 

to use a specified data standard when 

they provide data to regulatory 

authorities and, if so, what standard is 

required? 

7. Do such data repositories have the 

ability to share information with 

domestic and/or foreign regulatory 

authorities? 

8. How are foreign data repositories 

treated (e.g., a special recognition 

category, an exclusion or an exemption 

from registration)? 

9. What are the regulatory 

requirements in connection with data 

reporting for entities participating in the 

Swap market, such as counterparties or 

Participants (e.g., maintaining records, 

reporting data to a repository, real-time 

reporting to the public, providing 

information to domestic and foreign 

regulatory authorities)? 

F. Regulatory Comparison 

1. Across jurisdictions, for any or all 

items listed above, which areas of 

regulation are similar and which areas 

are different? 

2. In viewing the existing laws, 

institutions, and enforcement 

mechanisms of each respective 

jurisdiction as a whole, are such 

similarities and differences appropriate 

and desirable for regulatory purposes, or 

do certain aspects of a particular 

jurisdiction’s Swap market warrant a 

different regulatory approach? 

3. What are the potential costs and 

benefits (in terms of investor protection, 

market efficiency, competition, or other 

factors) that may arise from further 

consistency/harmonization of 

regulations across borders? 

4. How should consistency in 

regulation across jurisdictions be 

measured and are there factors other 

than the harmonized text of a regulation 

that should be taken into consideration 

when assessing the degree to which 

cross-border regulatory harmonization 

has been implemented in practice? 

5. Assuming that a theoretically 

‘‘optimal’’ set of regulations for a 

particular jurisdiction might take into 

consideration elements unique to a 

specific market in ways that might make 

cross-border harmonization difficult, to 

what extent do the benefits of greater 

regulatory harmonization across borders 

outweigh the costs associated with 

having regulations that might be less 

tailored to a particular market’s 

circumstances? In what areas do you 

believe the benefits of harmonization 

most outweigh any potential 

downsides? 20 Are there any areas where 

you believe the likely benefits of 

‘‘optimal’’ market-specific regulation 

outweigh the likely benefits of 

harmonization? 

6. In the United States, what steps 

should or could be taken to better 

harmonize statutory requirements under 

the Dodd-Frank Act with statutory 

requirements implemented in other 

jurisdictions? 

7. In the United States, what steps 

could be taken to harmonize CFTC or 

SEC regulations with regulations 

promulgated by authorities in other 

jurisdictions? 

G. Swap Market Information 

1. Please identify major organized 

markets and electronic execution 

facilities (and the Swaps-related 

regulator(s) for each) for the trading of 

Swaps. 

a. For each market or facility, please 

provide a listing and description of the 

major contract classes and subclasses, 

such as credit default swaps (CDS),21

equity swaps, currency swaps, interest 

rate swaps (IRS),22 and commodity 

swaps; 

b. For classes and subclasses of 

contracts identified in paragraph a 

above, please provide: 

i. The trading volumes in 2009, 2010, 

and year-to-date; and 

ii. The outstanding notional values at 

year-end 2008, 2009, 2010, and the most 

recent available. 

2. Please identify major dealers 

participating in Swap markets (and the 

Swap-related regulator(s) for each). 

3. Please identify major central 

counterparties (and the Swap-related 

regulator(s) for each) for the clearing of 

Swaps. 

a. For each central counterparty, 

please provide a listing and description 

of the major classes and subclasses of 

cleared Swap contracts, such as CDS, 

equity swaps, currency swaps, IRS, and 

commodity swaps; 

b. For classes and subclasses of 

contracts identified in paragraph a 

above, please provide: 

i. The clearing volumes for 2009, 

2010, and year-to-date; and 

ii. The outstanding notional values at 

year-end 2008, 2009, 2010, and the most 

recent available; 

c. For each central counterparty, 

please provide: 

i. A description of the method used to 

clear Swaps; 

ii. A description of the systems used 

to establish margin on individual Swaps 

and on Swap portfolios; and 

iii. The name of each major clearing 

member of the central counterparty (and 

the Swap-related regulator(s) for each). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 20, 

2011, by the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 20, 

2011, by the Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18763 Filed 7–25–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P; 6351–01–P 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS