11246 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 

approving SR–PHLX–92–39 eliminating the PHLX’s 

signature guarantee program in light of Rule 17Ad– 

15). 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

14See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34188 

(June 9, 1994), 59 FR 30820 (June 15, 1994) (SR– 

MSTC–93–13) (order approving the elimination of 

MSTC’s signature guarantee program stating that 

Rule 17Ad–15 rendered it obsolete); Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 32590 (July 7, 1993), 58 

FR 37978 (July 14, 1993) (SR–PHLX–92–39) (order 

approving SR–PHLX–92–39 eliminating the PHLX’s 

signature guarantee program in light of Rule 17Ad– 

15). 

15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

16 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

offered, and does not now intend to 

offer, a signature guarantee service. 

Also, the move towards Medallion 

Signature Guarantee Programs has 

rendered traditional card programs as 

provided for under Exchange Rule 13.4 

obsolete. Therefore, the Exchange 

believes eliminating Rule 13.4 would 

clarify the Exchange’s rules by 

eliminating rules that account for 

services the Exchange does not provide. 

The Exchange also believes the 

elimination of unnecessary and obsolete 

rules removes impediments to the 

perfection of the mechanisms for a free 

and open market system consistent with 

the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of 

the Act.13

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The proposed rule change does not 

impose any burden on competition. 

Rule 17Ad–15 encouraged a movement 

away from the traditional signature card 

programs administered by the 

exchanges towards certain Medallion 

Signature Guarantee Programs. In 

response, certain exchanges have 

decommissioned or amended their rules 

to no longer provide for a traditional 

signature card program.14 An investor 

may still obtain a signature guarantee 

from a financial institution that 

participates in one of the Medallion 

Signature Guarantee Programs. The 

Exchange has never offered, and does 

not intend to offer, a signature guarantee 

service. Also, the move towards 

Medallion Signature Guarantee 

Programs has rendered traditional card 

programs as provided for under 

Exchange Rule 13.4 obsolete. Therefore, 

the Exchange believes eliminating Rule 

13.4 would not impose any burden on 

competition. 

(C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants or Others 

The Exchange has neither solicited 

nor received written comments on the 

proposed rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Because the foregoing proposed rule 

change does not: (i) Significantly affect 

the protection of investors or the public 

interest; (ii) impose any significant 

burden on competition; and (iii) become 

operative for 30 days from the date on 

which it was filed, or such shorter time 

as the Commission may designate, it has 

become effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 15 and paragraph 

of Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.16

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of the proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rules 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File No. SR– 

BYX–2015–11 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities 

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street 

NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File No. 

SR–BYX–2015–11. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 the 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File No. SR–BYX–2015– 

11 and should be submitted on or before 

March 23, 2015. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.17

Jill M. Peterson, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04183 Filed 2–27–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74362; File No. SR–ICEEU– 

2015–005] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE 

Clear Europe Limited; Notice of Filing 

of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

CDS Procedures for CDX North 

America Index CDS Contracts 

February 24, 2015. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder 2

notice is hereby given that on February 

12, 2015, ICE Clear Europe Limited 

(‘‘ICE Clear Europe’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I, II, and 

III below, which Items have been 

prepared primarily by ICE Clear Europe. 

The Commission is publishing this 

notice to solicit comments on the 

proposed rule change from interested 

persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The principal purpose of the 

proposed rule change is to amend the 

ICE Clear Europe CDS Procedures (the 

‘‘CDS Procedures’’) to incorporate 

contract terms for the CDX North 

America index CDS contracts (the 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 11247 

‘‘CDX.NA Contracts’’) to be cleared by 

ICE Clear Europe. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, ICE 

Clear Europe included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change. The text of 

these statements may be examined at 

the places specified in Item IV below. 

ICE Clear Europe has prepared 

summaries, set forth in sections A, B 

and C below, of the most significant 

aspects of such statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

ICE Clear Europe submits proposed 

amendments to its CDS Procedures to (i) 

revise the CDS Procedures to add a new 

section containing contract terms 

applicable to the CDX.NA Contracts that 

ICE Clear Europe proposes to accept for 

clearing; (ii) make conforming changes 

throughout the CDS Procedures to 

reference the CDX.NA Contracts; and 

(iii) make certain other clarifications, 

corrections and updates to the CDS 

Procedures (including for iTraxx 

Contracts and Single Name Contracts), 

as discussed in more detail herein. ICE 

Clear Europe also proposes to make 

certain modifications to its CDS Risk 

Model Description and CDS End-of-Day 

Price Discovery Policy (the ‘‘CDS 

Pricing Policy’’) to accommodate 

clearing of CDX.NA Contracts, as 

described herein. 

ICE Clear Europe proposes to amend 

Paragraphs 1, 4, 6, 9, 10 and 11 of the 

CDS Procedures. Each of these changes 

is described in detail as follows. All 

capitalized terms not defined herein are 

defined in the ICE Clear Europe Clearing 

Rules (the ‘‘Rules’’). 

In paragraph 1 of the CDS Procedures, 

references have been added to the 

defined terms ‘‘iTraxx Contract’’ and 

‘‘CDX.NA Contract,’’ as such terms are 

set out in revised paragraphs 9 and 10 

of the CDS Procedures, respectively. 

The definition of ‘‘Original Annex Date’’ 

has been modified to apply to CDX.NA 

Contracts in substantially the same 

manner it applies to iTraxx Contracts. In 

addition, the definition of ‘‘Protocol 

Excluded Reference Entity’’ in former 

paragraph 10.3 has been changed to 

‘‘Protocol Excluded Corporate Reference 

Entity’’ and moved to paragraph 1, to 

reflect that such term is only used in the 

context of corporate reference entities. 

Accordingly, the definition has been 

revised to mean an Eligible Single Name 

Reference Entity that is a Standard 

European Corporate (as specified in the 

List of Eligible Single Name Reference 

Entities) and is an Excluded Reference 

Entity (as defined in the 2014 CDD 

Protocol). (Conforming changes have 

been made to references to that 

definition throughout the CDS 

Procedures.) In addition, a correction 

has been made to the cross-reference in 

definition of ‘‘New Trade’’ to properly 

refer to the definition set out in the 

applicable Contract Terms for the 

relevant contract. 

In addition, amendments were also 

made to use the defined terms 

‘‘Component Transaction’’ and 

‘‘Clearing’’ (each as defined in the ICE 

Clear Europe Rules) throughout the 

Procedures in lieu of the undefined 

terms. Finally, various conforming 

references to the new or revised defined 

terms have been made throughout the 

CDS Procedures, various provisions of 

the CDS Procedures have been 

renumbered, and certain crossreferences to prior paragraph 1.71 have 

been corrected. 

Various clarifications have been made 

in Paragraph 9 of the CDS Procedures, 

which sets out the contract terms for 

iTraxx Contracts. Specifically, 

paragraph 9.1 was modified to clarify 

that it specifies the additional Contract 

Terms applicable to all iTraxx Contracts 

cleared by the Clearing House. 

Paragraph 9.2(c)(i), which applies to 

iTraxx Contracts which are governed by 

the Standard iTraxx 2014 CDS 

Supplement, has been modified to make 

certain additional clarifications relating 

to initial payments and spun-out trades. 

Paragraph 9.2(c)(i)(B) has been added to 

reflect current clearing house (and 

market) practice that initial payments 

under cleared iTraxx Contracts (other 

than those for which a bilateral 

transaction is already recorded in Deriv/ 

SERV) are made on the business day 

following the trade date (or, if later, the 

business day following the date of 

acceptance for clearing). New paragraph 

9.2(c)(i)(D), which addresses the 

reference obligation for a spun-out trade 

following a restructuring credit event, is 

substantially the same as the 

corresponding language in paragraph 

9.3(c)(i)(D) for contracts subject to the 

Standard iTraxx Legacy CDS 

Supplement and was inadvertently 

omitted from prior amendments. A 

cross-reference in paragraph 9.2(c)(i)(E) 

has been updated. New paragraph 

9.2(c)(i)(F) provides that paragraph 5.7 

of the Standard iTraxx 2014 CDS 

Supplement, which contains restrictions 

on delivery of Credit Event Notices and 

Successor Notices, does not apply to 

iTraxx Contracts (as the appropriate 

restrictions in the context of a cleared 

transaction are already addressed in the 

Rules and CDS Procedures, including 

Rule 1505). 

As set forth in paragraph 9.2(c)(ii), 

changes have also been made to the 

terms of the iTraxx 2014 Confirmation 

with respect to iTraxx Contracts that are 

governed by the Standard iTraxx 2014 

CDS Supplement. These amendments 

include a clarification that references to 

the 2014 Credit Derivatives Definitions 

in the standard supplement and 

confirmation will be interpreted for 

cleared contracts as though they have 

the meaning ascribed to that term in the 

Rules and Procedures. In addition, a 

provision that there are no ‘‘Omitted 

Reference Entities’’ for purposes of the 

standard confirmation has been 

removed as that term is not used in the 

standard supplement and confirmation 

and is therefore unnecessary. 

Similar clarifications have been made 

in paragraph 9.3, which relates to iTraxx 

Contracts which are governed by the 

Standard iTraxx Legacy CDS 

Supplement. Specifically, new 

paragraph 9.3(c)(i)(B) contains the same 

clarification discussed above with 

respect to the initial payment date for a 

contract. Paragraph 9.3(c)(i)(D) contains 

a correction that the treatment therein of 

reference obligations for spun-out trades 

applies for reference entities subject to 

both Sections A and B of the Standard 

iTraxx Legacy CDS Supplement (that is, 

both protocol-excluded and nonexcluded entities). Subparagraph (F) 

provides that restrictions under the 

standard supplement as to delivery of 

Credit Event Notices and Succession 

Event Notices do not apply, as the issue 

is otherwise addressed under the Rules 

and CDS Procedures, as discussed 

above. In paragraph 9.3(c)(ii)(E), a 

reference to there being no ‘‘Omitted 

Reference Entities’’ has also been 

removed for the reasons noted above. 

New paragraph 10 of the CDS 

Procedures has been added to set out 

the contract terms for CDX.NA 

Contracts. Paragraph 10.1 provides that 

different sub-provisions of paragraph 10 

will apply to CDX.NA Contracts 

depending on whether the Original 

Annex Date for the relevant index series 

falls before or after the Protocol 

Effective Date. 

New paragraph 10.2 applies to 

CDX.NA Contracts with an Original 

Annex Date on or after the Protocol 

Effective Date (i.e., for transactions in 

the September 2014 or later versions of 

the index). New definitions have been 

added to subparagraph (a), including 

definitions for ‘‘CDX.NA Contract’’, 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
11248 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 

3 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. 

4 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22. 

5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 

6 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22. 

‘‘CDX.NA Publisher’’, ‘‘CDX.NA Terms 

Supplement’’, ‘‘Eligible CDX.NA 

Index’’, ‘‘List of Eligible CDX.NA 

Indices’’, and ‘‘Relevant CDX.NA Terms 

Supplement’’, which largely track the 

analogous definitions in paragraph 9 

with respect to iTraxx Europe Contracts. 

Paragraph 10.2(b) incorporates defined 

terms from the Relevant CDX.NA Terms 

Supplement and also contains an 

inconsistency provision which provides 

that paragraph 10.2 governs over the 

CDX.NA 2014 CDS Supplement and 

CDX.NA 2014 Confirmation. Paragraph 

10.2(c) contains certain amendments to 

the Standard CDX.NA 2014 CDS 

Supplement and CDX.NA 2014 

Confirmation, which are generally 

consistent with the amendments to the 

iTraxx 2014 Terms Supplement and 

iTraxx 2014 Confirmation in paragraph 

9.2(c) and are generally designed to 

accommodate the requirements of 

clearing and make the standard contract 

terms consistent with the Rules and 

Procedures. In addition, paragraph 

10.2(c)(i)(E) addresses the application of 

the defined term ‘‘Index Party’’ in the 

standard supplement in the context of a 

cleared transaction, and paragraphs 

10.2(c)(ii)(E)–(F) have been added to 

refer to certain transaction terms 

specified in the List of Eligible CDX.NA 

Indices for the relevant index and tenor. 

Paragraph 10.2(c)(i)(G) clarifies that as 

with iTraxx Contracts, de minimis cash 

settlement under the standard 

supplement does not apply. Paragraph 

10.2(c) also indicates the transaction 

terms that must be specified in the 

submission of a trade for clearing. 

New paragraph 10.3 applies to 

CDX.NA Contracts with an Original 

Annex Date before the Protocol Effective 

Date (i.e., for transactions in older 

versions of the index). Paragraph 10.3 

contains definitions and provisions 

generally similar to those in paragraph 

10.2, and makes comparable 

amendments to the Standard CDX.NA 

Legacy CDS Supplement and the 

CDX.NA Legacy Confirmation. 

New paragraph 10.4 contains 

procedures for updating the CDX.NA 

index version following a Credit Event 

or Succession Event. These provisions 

are generally consistent with the 

comparable provisions for iTraxx 

contracts in paragraph 9.8. New 

paragraph 10.4(b) adds a similar 

procedure for implementing a new 

version of the CDX.NA standard terms 

supplement, if and when published, 

where contracts referencing the old and 

new versions of the supplement are 

determined by the Clearing House to be 

fungible. 

Existing paragraph 10, which contains 

contract terms for Single Name 

Contracts, has been renumbered as 

paragraph 11 and cross references have 

been updated accordingly. In addition, 

various clarifying amendments have 

been made to this paragraph. The 

definitions of ‘‘STEC Contract’’ and 

‘‘Non-STEC Single Name Contract’’ have 

been amended to clarify that the 

relevant Reference Entity type will be 

specified in the List of Eligible Single 

Name Reference Entities. The definition 

of ‘‘Single Name Contract Reference 

Obligations’’ has been amended to 

clarify that the applicable reference 

obligation will be specified in the List 

of Eligible Single Name Reference 

Entities and may differ between 2003- 

type CDS Contracts and 2014-type CDS 

Contracts. For 2014-type CDS Contracts, 

the reference obligation may be 

designated as the Senior Level Standard 

Reference Obligation that is specified 

from time to time on the SRO List 

published under the 2014 ISDA 

Definitions. 

Paragraph 11.6(a)(i)(C) is amended by 

adding a subsection (2) that makes a 

clarification as to the initial payment 

date for Single Name Contracts that 

corresponds to the change in payment 

date discussed above for iTraxx 

Contracts. A change is made in 

paragraph 11.6(a)(ii) to conform to the 

changes made to the definition of Single 

Name Contract Reference Obligation 

discussed above. 

In general, the Clearing House’s 

existing risk methodology applicable to 

index CDS will also apply to the 

CDX.NA Contracts. However, ICE Clear 

Europe proposes to make certain 

amendments to its CDS Risk Model 

Description and CDS Pricing Policy to 

address CDX.NA Contracts. 

In the CDS Risk Model Description, 

the index decomposition offset 

methodology, which is used to 

determine portfolio margin benefits 

from correlated long and short 

positions, is proposed to be modified to 

address multi-region risk factors. Under 

the revised methodology, portfolio 

margin benefits are provided first for 

risk factors within the same region. 

After the same-region risk analysis is 

completed, any cross-region benefits for 

index risk factors are determined. Crossregion benefits apply only to index risk 

factors. The revised description thus 

addresses scenarios in which margin 

offsets may be provided between 

appropriately correlated positions in 

iTraxx Contracts and positions in 

CDX.NA Contracts. The revisions also 

provide that where risk factor profits 

and losses are calculated in different 

currencies, they will be converted into 

the same base currency (Euro) for 

purposes of calculation of portfolio 

margin benefits. 

ICE Clear Europe also proposes to 

amend its CDS Pricing Policy to cover 

the CDX.NA Contracts. The 

amendments include submission 

requirements with respect to CDX.NA 

Contracts and changes to reflect that 

certain determinations with respect to 

firm trades for CDX.NA Contracts are 

made as of the North American end-ofday. 

2. Statutory Basis 

ICE Clear Europe believes that the 

proposed rule change, and in particular 

the proposed clearing of the proposed 

CDX.NA Contracts, is consistent with 

the requirements of Section 17A of the 

Act 3 and regulations thereunder 

applicable to it, including the standards 

under Rule 17Ad–22.4 The proposed 

change is principally designed to permit 

the clearing of CDX.NA index CDS 

Contracts, as well as make certain 

clarifications and other amendments to 

the CDS Procedures applicable to other 

CDS Contracts. The CDX.NA Contract is 

a broad-based index CDS contract 

generally similar to the iTraxx Contract 

currently cleared by the Clearing House, 

with similar terms and conditions. The 

new index CDS contracts will be cleared 

in the same manner as the iTraxx 

Contracts, consistent with ICE Clear 

Europe’s existing clearing arrangements 

and related financial safeguards and 

protections. In ICE Clear Europe’s view, 

clearing of the CDX.NA Contracts, under 

such terms and arrangements, is 

consistent with the prompt and accurate 

clearance and settlement of securities 

transactions and derivative agreements, 

contracts and transactions cleared by 

ICE Clear Europe, the safeguarding of 

securities and funds in the custody or 

control of ICE Clear Europe and the 

protection of investors and the public 

interest, within the meaning of Section 

17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.5 The additional 

changes set forth in the proposed 

amendments, which generally make 

clarifications and corrections to the CDS 

Procedures for existing iTraxx and 

Single Name Contracts, are also 

consistent with this standard. 

The proposed amendments to the CDS 

Procedures, including clearing of the 

CDX.NA Contracts, will also satisfy the 

relevant requirements of Rule 17Ad– 

22,6 as discussed below. 

Financial Resources. ICE Clear Europe 

will apply its existing margin 

methodology for index CDS contracts to 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 11249 

7 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(2), (d)(14). 

8 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(3). 

9 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(4). 

10 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(5), (12) and (15). 

11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(11). 

the CDX.NA Contracts, with the 

modifications described herein to the 

CDS Risk Model Description. In ICE 

Clear Europe’s view, the Clearing 

House’s margin requirements, as 

revised, will provide sufficient margin 

to cover its credit exposure to its 

clearing members from clearing such 

contracts, consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(b)(2) and 

Rule 17Ad–22(d)(14).7 In addition, ICE 

Clear Europe believes the CDS Guaranty 

Fund, under its existing methodology, 

will, together with the required margin, 

provide sufficient financial resources to 

support the clearing of CDX.NA 

Contracts, consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(b)(3).8

Operational Resources. ICE Clear 

Europe will have the operational and 

managerial capacity to clear the 

CDX.NA Contracts as of the 

commencement of clearing, consistent 

with the requirements of Rule 17Ad– 

22(d)(4).9 ICE Clear Europe believes that 

its existing systems used for index CDS 

contracts are appropriately scalable to 

handle the clearing of the CDX.NA 

Contracts. 

Settlement. ICE Clear Europe will use 

its existing settlement procedures 

(including for physical settlements), 

account structures and approved 

financial institutions as used in other 

index CDS for the CDX.NA Contracts. 

Although CDX.NA Contracts will be 

denominated in US dollars, ICE Clear 

Europe’s existing settlement systems are 

sufficient to handle such settlements in 

such currency. ICE Clear Europe 

believes that clearing of such contracts 

will therefore be consistent with the 

requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(d)(5), 

(12) and (15).10

Default Procedures. ICE Clear 

Europe’s existing Rules and default 

management policies and procedures for 

CDS will apply to the CDX.NA 

Contracts. ICE Clear Europe believes 

that the Rules and procedures allow for 

it to take timely action to contain losses 

and liquidity pressures and to continue 

meeting its obligations in the event of 

clearing member insolvencies or 

defaults, including in respect of 

CDX.NA Contracts, in accordance with 

Rule 17Ad–22(d)(11).11

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

ICE Clear Europe does not believe the 

proposed rule change, including the 

clearing of the CDX.NA Contracts, 

would have any impact, or impose any 

burden, on competition not necessary or 

appropriate in furtherance of the 

purpose of the Act. ICE Clear Europe 

does not anticipate that its 

commencement of clearing for the 

CDX.NA Contracts, or the other 

amendments with respect to its other 

CDS contracts, will adversely affect the 

trading market for those contracts or for 

CDS more generally. Specifically, 

allowing clearing of the CDX.NA 

Contracts will provide market 

participants with the additional choice 

to have their transactions in these types 

of contracts cleared, and should 

generally promote the further 

development of the market for these 

contracts. ICE Clear Europe does not 

believe that the other amendments will 

materially affect the cost of clearing for 

the relevant contracts or adversely affect 

access to clearing in those contracts for 

Clearing Members or their customers. 

Moreover, ICE Clear Europe will apply 

its existing fair and objective criteria for 

eligibility to clear CDS to clearing of the 

CDX.NA Contracts. Accordingly ICE 

Clear Europe does not believe that the 

amendments will impose any burden on 

competition not necessary or 

appropriate in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants or Others 

Written comments relating to the rule 

change have not been solicited or 

received. ICE Clear Europe will notify 

the Commission of any written 

comments received by ICE Clear Europe. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Within 45 days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register or within such longer period 

up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may 

designate if it finds such longer period 

to be appropriate and publishes its 

reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which 

the self-regulatory organization 

consents, the Commission will: 

(A) by order approve or disapprove 

the proposed rule change or 

(B) institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule change 

should be disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml) or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

SR–ICEEU–2015–005 on the subject 

line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–ICEEU–2015–005. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 

filings will also be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE 

Clear Europe’s Web site at https://

www.theice.com/clear-europe/

regulation. 

All comments received will be posted 

without change; the Commission does 

not edit personal identifying 

information from submissions. You 

should submit only information that 

you wish to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–ICEEU–2015–005 and 

should be submitted on or before March 

23, 2015. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
11250 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 

12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

5See 17 CFR 240.17Ad–15; Securities Exchange 

Act Release No. 30146 (January 10, 1992), 57 FR 

1082 (February 24, 1992) (adopting Rule 17Ad–15). 

6See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

33669 (February 23, 1994), 59 FR 10189 (March 3, 

1994) (SR–MSTC–93–13) (‘‘[t]his newly adopted 

Rule 17Ad-15 rule rendered [Midwest Securities 

Trust Company’s (‘‘MSTC’’)] Signature Distribution 

Program and Signature Guarantee Program obsolete. 

Therefore, to avoid costs that produce no benefits, 

MSTC eliminated its Signature Distribution and 

Signature Guarantee Programs and deleted MSTC 

Rule 5, Sections 1 and 2 which govern these 

programs’’). 

7See ‘‘Signature Guarantees: Preventing the 

Unauthorized Transfer of Securities,’’ http://

www.sec.gov/answers/sigguar.htm. 

8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34188 

(June 9, 1994), 59 FR 30820 (June 15, 1994) (SR– 

MSTC–93–13) (order approving the elimination of 

MSTC’s signature guarantee program stating that 

Rule 17Ad-15 rendered it obsolete); Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 32590 (July 7, 1993), 58 

FR 37978 (July 14, 1993) (order approving SR– 

PHLX–92–39 eliminating the PHLX’s signature 

guarantee program in light of Rule 17Ad-15) (noting 

that ‘‘[b]y eliminating its signature guarantee 

program, PHLX will streamline the signature 

guarantee process. In place of the cumbersome 

signature card system, PHLX will require 

participation in a Rule 17Ad-15 Signature 

Guarantee Program’’). In 2006, the Philadelphia 

Stock Exchange, Inc. (currently Nasdaq OMX PHLX 

LLC) (‘‘PHLX’’) eliminated Rules 327—340 

regarding signature guarantees in their entirety from 

its rulebook, noting that they are ‘‘being deleted as 

obsolete because they refer to the delivery and 

settlement of securities, which is not done by the 

Exchange, but by registered clearing agencies.’’ 

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54329 (August 

17, 2006), 71 FR 504538 (August 25, 2006) (SR– 

PHLX–2006–43); Securities Exchange Act Release 

No. 54538 (September 28, 2006), 71 FR 59184 

(October 6, 2006 (order approving SR–PHLX–2006– 

43). 

9See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58375 

(August 18, 2008), 73 FR 49498 (August 21, 2008) 

(File No. 10–182) (In the Matter of the Application 

of the BATS Exchange, Inc. for Registration as a 

National Securities Exchange, Findings, Opinion, 

and Order of the Commission); 62716 (August 13, 

2010), 75 FR 51295 (August 19, 2010) (File No. 10– 

198) (In the Matter of the Application of the BATS 

Y-Exchange, Inc. for Registration as a National 

Securities Exchange, Findings, Opinion, and Order 

of the Commission). 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.12

Jill M. Peterson, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04188 Filed 2–27–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74359; File No. SR–BATS– 

2015–14] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS 

Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change to Eliminate Rule 13.4, 

‘‘Assigning of Registered Securities in 

the Name of a Member or Member 

Organization’’ 

February 24, 2015. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on February 

12, 2015, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘BATS’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I and II 

below, which Items have been prepared 

by the Exchange. The Exchange has 

designated this proposal as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ proposed rule change 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the 

Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder,4

which renders it effective upon filing 

with the Commission. The Commission 

is publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change 

from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange filed a proposal to 

eliminate Rule 13.4, ‘‘Assigning of 

Registered Securities in the Name of a 

Member or Member Organization.’’ 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available at the Exchange’s Web site 

at www.batstrading.com, at the 

principal office of the Exchange, and at 

the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

Exchange included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change and discussed 

any comments it received on the 

proposed rule change. The text of these 

statements may be examined at the 

places specified in Item IV below. The 

Exchange has prepared summaries, set 

forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of 

the most significant parts of such 

statements. 

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to eliminate 

Rule 13.4, ‘‘Assigning of Registered 

Securities in the Name of a Member or 

Member Organization,’’ which permits 

the Exchange to establish a signature 

guarantee program. In sum, a signature 

guarantee program allows an investor 

who seeks to transfer or sell securities 

held in physical certificate form to have 

their signature on the certificate 

‘‘guaranteed.’’ Rule 13.4 permits 

Members to guarantee their signatures 

by authorizing one or more of their 

employees to assign registered securities 

in the Member’s name and to guarantee 

assignments of registered securities on 

behalf of the Member where the security 

had been signed by one of the partners 

of the Member or by one of the 

authorized officers of the Member by 

executing and filing with the Exchange 

a separate Power of Attorney, also 

known as a traditional signature card 

program. Transfer agents often insist 

that a signature be guaranteed before 

they accept the transaction because it 

limits their liability and losses if a 

signature turns out to be forged. 

Rule 17Ad–15 under the Act permits 

transfer agents to reject signature 

guarantees from eligible guarantor 

institutions that are not part of a 

signature guarantee program.5 The rule 

encouraged a movement away from the 

traditional signature card programs 

administered by the exchanges towards 

signature guarantee programs that use a 

medallion imprint or stamp which 

evidences their participation in the 

program and is an acceptable signature 

guarantee (‘‘Medallion Signature 

Guarantee Program’’).6 The Commission 

has also noted that: 

[a]n investor can obtain a signature 

guarantee from a financial institution—such 

as a commercial bank, savings bank, credit 

union, or broker dealer—that participates in 

one of the Medallion signature guarantee 

programs. . . . If a financial institution is not 

a member of a recognized Medallion 

Signature Guarantee Program, it would not be 

able to provide signature guarantees. Also, if 

[an investor is] not a customer of a 

participating financial institution, it is likely 

the financial institution will not guarantee 

[the investor’s] signature. Therefore, the best 

source of a Medallion Guarantee would be a 

bank, savings and loan association, brokerage 

firm, or credit union with which [the investor 

does] business.7

In response to Rule 17Ad-15, certain 

exchanges have decommissioned or 

amended their rules to no longer 

provide for traditional signature card 

program.8 While the Exchange adopted 

Rule 13.4 as part of its Form 1 exchange 

application,9 it has never offered, and 

does not now intend to offer, a signature 

guarantee service. The move towards 

Medallion Signature Guarantee 

Programs has also rendered traditional 

card programs as provided for under 

Exchange Rule 13.4 obsolete. Therefore, 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES