2016-17208
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47362-47365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17208]
[[Page 47362]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection Activities: Revised Collection,
Comment Request: Amendments To Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Final Rule
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``Commission'' or
``CFTC'') is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the
proposed amendment to an existing collection of certain information by
the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''), Federal
agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of information, including any
renewal or revision of such collection, and to allow 60 days for public
comment. The Commission recently adopted a final rule regarding the
reporting of cleared swap transactions (the ``Cleared Swap Reporting
Release''), which will require entities reporting swaps to report
certain additional data elements. This Cleared Swap Reporting Release
will also require registered derivatives clearing organizations
(``DCOs'') to terminate ``original swaps'' (as defined in that final
rule), which may require DCOs to connect to multiple registered swap
data repositories (``SDRs''). This notice solicits comments on the
proposed revisions to existing PRA collections implicated by the
requirements of the Cleared Swap Reporting Release.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 19, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, regarding the burden estimated or
any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions
for reducing the burden. Please refer to ``Cleared Swap Reporting
Release'' in any correspondence. Comments, identified by ``OMB
Collection Number 3038-0096,'' may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
The Agency's Web site, at http://comments.cftc.gov/.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.
Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, 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.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Please submit your comments using only one method.
All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied
by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to
http://www.cftc.gov. If you wish the Commission to consider information
that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt
information may be submitted according to the procedures established in
Sec. 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 17 CFR 145.9.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Ridenour, Special Counsel,
(202) 418-5438, [email protected], or Owen Kopon, Attorney-Advisor,
(202) 418-5360, [email protected], Division of Market Oversight,
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Street NW., Washington, DC 20581
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA, Federal agencies must obtain
approval from the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for each
collection of information they conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of
Information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3 and
includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public
submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party.
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires
Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting
the collection to OMB for approval. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. To
comply with this requirement, the CFTC is publishing the notice of the
proposed collection of information listed below.
1. Background
a. Statutory and Regulatory History
To enhance transparency, promote standardization, and reduce
systemic risk, section 727 of the Dodd-Frank Act \2\ added to the
Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') section 2(a)(13)(G),\3\ which requires
all swaps, whether cleared or uncleared, to be reported to SDRs.\4\
SDRs are registered entities created by section 728 of the Dodd-Frank
Act to collect and maintain data related to swap transactions as
prescribed by the Commission, and to make such data available to the
Commission and other regulators. Section 21(b) of the CEA,\5\ added by
section 728 of the Dodd-Frank Act, directs the Commission to prescribe
standards for swap data recordkeeping and reporting, which are to apply
to both registered entities and counterparties involved with swaps,\6\
and which are to be comparable to standards for clearing organizations
in connection with their clearing of swaps.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act, Public Law 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.
\3\ 7 U.S.C. 2(a)(13)(G).
\4\ See also 7 U.S.C. 1a(40)(E), 1a(48).
\5\ 7 U.S.C. 24a(b).
\6\ 7 U.S.C. 24a(b)(1)(A).
\7\ 7 U.S.C. 24a(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 20, 2011, the Commission adopted part 45 of the
Commission's regulations (``Final Part 45 Rulemaking'').\8\ Part 45
implements the requirements of section 21 of the CEA by setting forth
the manner and content of reporting to SDRs, and requires electronic
reporting both when a swap is initially executed, referred to as
``creation'' data,\9\ and over the course of the swap's existence,
referred to as ``continuation'' data.\10\ Additionally, part 45 sets
forth varying reporting timeframes depending on the type of reporting,
counterparty, execution, or product.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements,
Final Rule, 77 FR 2136 (Jan. 13, 2012).
\9\ See 17 CFR 45.1 (defining ``required swap creation data'' as
all primary economic terms data for a swap in the swap asset class
in question, and all confirmation data for the swap.). ``Primary
economic terms data'' is defined as all of the data elements
necessary to fully report all of the primary economic terms of a
swap in the swap asset class of the swap in question, while
``confirmation data'' is defined as all of the terms of a swap
matched and agreed upon by the counterparties in confirming the
swap. Id. For cleared swaps, confirmation data also includes the
internal identifiers assigned by the automated systems of the DCO to
the two transactions resulting from novation to the clearing house.
Id. See also 17 CFR 45.3.
\10\ See 17 CFR 45.1 (defining ``required swap continuation
data'' as all of the data elements that must be reported during the
existence of a swap to ensure that all data concerning the swap in
the swap data repository remains current and accurate, and includes
all changes to the primary economic terms of the swap occurring
during the existence of the swap''). See also 17 CFR 45.4.
\11\ See 17 CFR 45.3(a), 45.3(b), 45.3(c), and 45.3(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the Commission's ongoing efforts to improve swap
transaction data quality and to improve the Commission's ability to
utilize the data for regulatory purposes, Commission staff has
continued to evaluate issues in connection with reporting under part
[[Page 47363]]
45, including those related to cleared swaps in particular. To this
end, the Commission published a request for comment on a variety of
swap data reporting and recordkeeping provisions to help determine how
such provisions were being applied, and to determine whether or what
clarifications or enhancements to these provisions may be appropriate
(the ``IDWG Request for Comment'').\12\ One of the subjects of the IDWG
Request for Comment was the reporting of cleared swaps, and, in
particular, the manner in which the swap data reporting rules should
address cleared swaps.\13\ After considering the comments submitted in
response to the IDWG Request for Comment relating to the reporting of
cleared swaps,\14\ the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (the ``NPRM'') in which it proposed changes to part 45 as
they relate to the reporting of cleared swaps transactions.\15\ In
response to the NPRM, the Commission received 17 comments letters
addressing its proposed revisions to part 45.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Review of Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements, Request for Comment, 79 FR 16689 (Mar. 26, 2014). The
IDWG Request for Comment was referred to simply as the ``Request for
Comment'' in the NPRM.
\13\ 79 FR 16689, 16694.
\14\ The comment file for responses to the IDWG Request for
Comment is available at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1484. Commenters responding to the IDWG Request
for Comment included: The American Gas Association, May 27, 2014;
American Petroleum Institute, May 27, 2014; Americans for Financial
Reform, May 27, 2014 (``AFR''); Australian Bankers' Association, May
27, 2014 (``ABA''); Better Markets, Inc., May 27, 2014, (``Better
Markets''); B&F Capital Markets, Inc., May 27, 2014; CME Group, May
27, 2014 (``CME''); Coalition for Derivatives End-Users, May 27,
2014 (``CDEU''); Coalition of Physical Energy Companies, May 27,
2014; Commercial Energy Working Group, May 27, 2014 (``CEWG'');
Commodity Markets Council, May 27, 2014 (``CMC''); The Depository
Trust & Clearing Corporation, May 27, 2014 (``DTCC''); EDF Trading
North America, LLC, May 27, 2014; Edison Electric Institute, May 27,
2014 (``EEI''); Financial InterGroup Holdings Ltd, May 27, 2014;
Financial Services Roundtable (``FSR''), May 27, 2014; Fix Trading
Community, May 27, 2014; The Global Foreign Exchange Division of the
Global Financial Markets Association, May 27, 2014 (``GFMA''); HSBC,
May 27, 2014; Interactive Data Corporation, May 27, 2014; ICE Trade
Vault, LLC, May 27, 2014 (``ITV''); International Energy Credit
Association, May 27, 2014; International Swaps and Derivatives
Association, Inc., May 23, 2014 (``ISDA''); Japanese Bankers
Association, May 27, 2014 (``JBA''); Just Energy Group Inc., May 27,
2014; LCH.Clearnet Group Limited, May 29, 2014 (``LCH''); Managed
Funds Association, May 27, 2014 (``MFA''); Markit, May 27, 2014;
Natural Gas Supply Association, May 27, 2014 (``NGSA''); NFP
Electric Associations (National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association, American Public Power Association, and Large Public
Power Council), May 27, 2014 (``NFPEA''); OTC Clearing Hong Kong
Limited, May 27, 2014 (``OTC Hong Kong''); Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association Asset Management Group, May 27, 2014
(``SIFMA''); SWIFT, May 27, 2014; Swiss Re, May 27, 2014; Thomson
Reuters (SEF) LLC, May 27, 2014 (``TR SEF''); and TriOptima, May 27,
2014. Discussions of comments on reporting of cleared swaps received
in response to the IDWG Request for Comment are included in the
preamble to the NPRM.
\15\ See Amendments to Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 80 FR
52544 (Aug. 31, 2015).
\16\ The comment file for responses to the NPRM is available at
http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1614.
Commenters to the NPRM included: Better Markets, October 30, 2015;
CME, October 30, 2015; COPE, October 30, 2015; CEWG, October 30,
2015; CMC, October 30, 2015; DTCC, October 30, 2015; EEI/EPSA,
October 30, 2015; Eurex Clearing AG (``Eurex''); FSR, October 30,
2015; ITV, October 30, 2015; ISDA, October 30, 2015; JBA, October
30, 2015; LCH, October 30, 2015; MFA and Alternative Investment
Management Association (``AIMA''), October 30, 2015; Markit, October
30, 2015; and North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc., October 30,
2015 (``Nadex'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 27, 2016, the Commission adopted the Cleared Swap Reporting
Release,\17\ which amended certain provisions of existing part 45 as
they relate to the reporting of cleared swap transactions. In the
Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission noted that the changes
being adopted would require some revisions to the existing information
collection covering obligations on reporting entities and SDRs found in
part 45.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Amendments to Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for Cleared Swaps, Final Rule, 81 FR 41736 (June 27,
2016).
\18\ See Cleared Swap Reporting Release, 81 FR, at 41758.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Existing PRA Collection Relating to Part 45 Reporting
The OMB control number for the information collection associated
with part 45 swaps reporting is 3038-0096. The Commission proposes to
amend existing collection 3038-0096 to account for adjustments to
reporting entities' swaps data reporting systems necessitated by the
Cleared Swap Reporting Release. Information collection 3038-0096 \19\
includes an estimate of burden hours and costs associated with various
requirements of part 45 swaps reporting and recordkeeping,\20\
including the reporting of creation data under Sec. 45.3 and
continuation data under Sec. 45.4,\21\ the maintenance of an internal
order management system (``OMS''), and personnel needed to maintain a
compliance program in support of an OMS system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The Commission issued a notice of intent to renew
information collection 3038-0096 on August 7, 2015. See Notice of
Intent to Renew Collection 3038-0096, 80 FR 47477 (Aug. 7, 2015).
The Commission received no comments on this notice of intent to
renew. The comment file is available at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1608. The Office of Management
and Budget approved without change the renewal of this information
collection on December 21, 2015.
\20\ Supporting documentation for the renewal of information
collection 3038-0096 is available at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201508-3038-002.
\21\ ``Creation data'' under Sec. 45.3 includes all primary
economic terms (``PET'') data fields listed in appendix 1 to part
45, as well as all ``confirmation data,'' which includes all terms
of the swap matched and agreed upon by the parties. ``Continuation
data'' reporting under Sec. 45.4 requires a reporting entity to
ensure that all data on a swap is kept current and accurate,
including any changes to primary economic terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of changes to Sec. Sec. 45.3 and 45.4 and to the PET
fields identified in appendix A to part 45 in the Cleared Swap
Reporting Release, the Commission proposes to revise collection 3038-
0096. The proposed revision to the collection will add an estimate for
the burden associated (a) with changing reporting systems to comply
with changes to the required data to be reported under Sec. 45.3 and
Sec. 45.4, and (b) with requirements that DCOs potentially connect to
all registered SDRs. In response to the NPRM,\22\ the Commission
received several comments on the costs associated with part 45 swaps
reporting that could implicate PRA burdens, summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See NPRM, 80 FR 52544 (Aug. 31, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. PRA Burden and Benefits Associated With Cleared Swap Reporting
Release \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ While not connected to the Cleared Swap Reporting Release,
the Commission also proposes to reduce the number of SDRs in
collection 3038-0096 from 15 to 4. When submitting the original OMB
information collection for part 45 reporting, the Commission had
assumed that up to 15 entities would register as SDRs. Currently,
there are four SDRs provisionally registered with the Commission.
Three other entities had submitted SDR applications. Two withdrew
applications in 2012 and 2014. One (GTR) withdrew its application
and resubmitted under the corporate entity DTCC Data Repository (US)
LLC, which currently operates as a provisionally registered SDR. As
the Commission has not received any SDR applications since 2012, the
Commission believes that four is a reasonable number of SDRs for
calculating PRA burdens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Additional and Amended PET fields
Regarding the addition of PET fields applicable to all swaps, ISDA
commented that the PET field for ``clearing exception or exemption
type'' would be ``very challenging and costly'' to implement.\24\
However, neither ISDA nor any other commenter provided information
quantifying the cost to update reporting systems to account for the
modified and additional PET fields. As discussed more extensively in
Section III.C.9 of the NPRM,\25\ the information required to be
reported in the modified ``clearing exception or exemption type'' is
also already in the
[[Page 47364]]
possession of the reporting entity; changes to reporting systems
required to report this field would involve adding a known piece of
information to the message reported to an SDR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ ISDA Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 9.
\25\ See Cleared Swap Reporting Release, 81 FR, at 41767.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding new PET fields for clearing swaps, Eurex commented that
DCOs would need to collect data from the original swap counterparties
or trading venue to be able to report these fields.\26\ However, as the
Commission noted in the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the information
required to report these PET fields is either generated by the DCO
itself (such as clearing swap unique swap identifier (``USI''),
clearing member LEI, clearing member internal identifier, house/
customer account flag, and receipt and clearing timestamps) or should
be included in the clearing member's submission of a swap to the DCO
for clearing (such as the original swap USI and original swap SDR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Commission believes that reporting entities already
possess information required to report the added and amended PET
fields, the Commission proposes to amend collection 3038-0096 to
account for changes that reporting entities must make to their
reporting systems to comply with these new and amended fields. The
Commission estimates that each reporting entity--including DCOs, swap
execution facilities (``SEFs''), designated contract markets
(``DCMs''), swap dealers (``SDs''), major swap participants (``MSPs''),
and non-SD/MSPs with reporting obligations--would incur a burden of 200
hours to bring reporting systems in compliance with the added and
amendment PET fields. The Commission also believes that SDRs would
incur a burden of 200 hours to update their swap data acceptance
systems to account for the added and amended PET fields. However, the
Commission also anticipates that reporting entities and SDRs will need
to make periodic changes to reporting systems to account for future
changes to reporting obligations under part 45 and changes to reporting
brought about by the evolution of products offered in the swaps market.
Therefore, the Commission proposes revising collection 3038-0096 to
include a recurring burden of 200 hours to cover such periodic changes.
The recurring 200 burden hours would cover changes to PET fields under
the Cleared Swap Reporting Release and any future changes described
above. The Commission does not believe that reporting entities or SDRs
would need to incur additional costs aside from these burden hours to
bring reporting systems into compliance.
b. DCO Termination of Original Swaps
Regarding the requirement that DCOs terminate original swaps once
the DCO has accepted them for clearing, some commenters raised concerns
that requiring DCOs to report continuation data for original swaps to
the SDR to which the original swap was reported could increase costs
for DCOs as they may need to connect to SDRs to which they do not
currently have a connection.\27\ The Commission understands that DCOs
already may report terminations to the original SDR, and to the extent
these reporting systems are already implemented the new rules will not
introduce additional costs for these DCOs. However, the Commission
recognizes that requiring DCOs to potentially connect to more than one
SDR in order to report continuation data for original swaps may require
an update to the existing information collection 3038-0096.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See e.g., Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 5, 9; LedgerX Oct.
30, 2015 Letter, at 2; LCH Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 3. The
Commission notes that another commenter stated that ``DCOs have
already made connections with the major CFTC-registered SDRs.''
(DTCC Oct. 30, 2015, Letter at 5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the NPRM, the Commission received three comments
concerning the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments to Sec.
45.4 in two different contexts. LCH and Eurex expressed concerns with
the infrastructure required to have the DCO connected to every SDR
chosen by the SD/MSP for which the DCO clears and report terminations
according to the technical requirements of each SDR.\28\ Eurex
specifically indicated that the cost of implementing the required
infrastructure would have significant time and financial costs. In
commenting on the IDWG Request for Comment, one foreign central
counterparty now acting pursuant to a DCO Exemptive Order cited a
specific cost for connecting to a new SDR as involving at least 150
working days.\29\ Assuming an 8-hour work day, this would be the
equivalent of 1,200 hours for a connection to an SDR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Eurex Oct. 30, 2015 Letter, at 4-5; LCH Oct. 30, 2015
Letter, at 3.
\29\ See OTC Hong Kong May 27, 2014 Letter, at 2-3 (contending
that setup, application development, and testing to interface with
each SDR is likely to require at least 150 man-days, and that a more
cost-effective framework would be to require the original
counterparty to report termination of the alpha once it receives
confirmation that the alpha has been accepted for clearing, and that
the original counterparty would already have in place technical and
operational interfaces with the SDR of its choice. The commenter
also contended that the burden on DCOs of additional reporting
outweighs the benefits to the CFTC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission estimates the cost and hours burden associated with
connecting DCOs to all SDRs according to the OTC Hong Kong comment
letter. Considering that there are only four registered SDRs, each DCO
could at most be required to connect to four SDRs. However, the number
of connections likely would be less than four as not every DCO clears
swaps for every asset class, and not every SDR accepts data for every
asset class. Further, the number of connections could be limited to the
extent that the DCO clears swaps for clearing members that choose to
report original swaps to a limited number of SDRs. Additionally, the
Commission assumes economies of scale when DCOs connect to more than
one SDR. While connections to different SDRs could present different
technological challenges, the DCO would be able to use the same
programmers, analysts, and other personnel when implementing
connections to all required SDRs. Therefore, the Commission estimates a
one-time hours burden of 3,000 hours per DCO to comply with the Cleared
Swap Reporting Release, beyond the existing burden in collection 3038-
0096.
The Commission also intends to amend collection 3038-0096 to
include recurring costs for DCOs associated with SDR connections.
Existing collection 3038-0070 (relating to real-time reporting)
estimates an annual cost of $100,000 to maintain an SDR connection for
SEFs, DCMs, SDs, MSPs, and non-SD/MSP reporting entities, but does not
specifically cover DCOs. The Commission proposes to include the same
recurring SDR connectivity burdens for DCOs within collection 3038-
0096, scaled to account for connections to multiple SDRs and resulting
economies of scale. The Commission estimates that DCOs would incur
annual costs of $250,000 to maintain connections to multiple SDRs, to
allow the DCO to terminate all original swaps accepted for clearing.
3. Burden Statement
The Commission estimates the average increase in the burden of this
collection of information as follows:
Additional and amended PET fields:
[[Page 47365]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected entities SDRs, SEFs, DCMs, DCOs, SD/MSPs, non-SD/MSP reporting entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden per Number of
Burden type respondent respondents Total burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One-time hours burden............. 0 hours............. 449 0 hours.
One-time costs.................... $0.................. 449 $0.
Recurring hours burden............ 200 hours........... 449 89,900 hours.
Recurring costs................... $0.................. 449 $0.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Termination of original swaps:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected entities DCOs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden per Number of
Burden type respondent respondents Total burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One-time hours burden............. 3,000 hours......... 12 36,000 hours.
One-time costs.................... $0.................. 12 $0.
Recurring hours burden............ 0 hours............. 12 0 hours.
Recurring costs................... $250,000............ 12 $3,000,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Request for Comment
The NPRM on cleared swap reporting requested comments on the burden
associated with the added and amended PET fields, and on DCOs reporting
original swap terminations.\30\ Those comments may be found on the
Commission's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov, at http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=1614. All comments
received in response to the NPRM will be considered, along with the
comments received in response to this notice, in determining the
Commission's submission to OMB regarding revisions to existing
information collections to account for changes adopted in the Cleared
Swap Reporting Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See 77 FR 25320 at 25328.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission invites comments on:
Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the information will have a practical
use;
The accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of
the information to be collected; and
Ways to minimize the burden of collection of information
on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate
automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
Specifically, the Commission invites comments on the following
questions:
1. The Commission has proposed including a 200 hour recurring
burden in the collection to account for periodic changes to reporting
systems brought about by changes to PET terms (such as those under the
Cleared Swap Reporting Release) as well as other periodic changes. Does
this estimate accurately estimate the burden associated with the
periodic updating of reporting systems to ensure continued compliance
with part 45 reporting obligations?
2. Given that not every DCO clears swaps in every asset class, and
that not every SDR accepts data for every asset class, to how many SDRs
must DCOs typically connect to properly report original swap
terminations?
3. Can DCOs take advantage of economies of scale in terms of
personnel and/or equipment when connecting to more than one SDR?
4. Given that original swap termination messages under revised
Sec. 45.4 would need to be submitted daily--not, as with creation
data, as soon as technologically practicable--are DCOs able to submit
original swap terminations through methods less expensive than full
connections to SDRs that are used for reporting creation data and real-
time reporting? If so, what are the costs associated with such
connections?
5. In the Cleared Swap Reporting Release, the Commission encouraged
DCOs and SDRs to standardize original swap termination messages. Are
DCOs and SDRs working towards such a standardized message? What cost
savings could be associated with such standardized messages?
6. Would a standardized termination message allow DCOs to use
connection methods less expensive than full connections to SDRs that
are used for reporting creation data and real-time reporting?
7. As noted in footnote 23, the Commission is proposing to reduce
the number of SDRs used for PRA burden calculations from 15 to four.
Would this change accurately reflect the current state of the data
reporting industry?
8. The Commission received comments on the hours burden associated
with establishing a DCO connection to an SDR, but not a cost estimate.
Do the proposed revisions to the PRA, which include an hours burden for
establishing a connection, and a cost burden for maintaining a
connection, accurately reflect the PRA burden on DCOs?
(Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
Dated: July 15, 2016.
Robert N. Sidman,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-17208 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Last Updated: July 21, 2016