[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2613-2629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-792]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 12 / Thursday, January 19, 2012 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 2613]]



COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 1, 3, 23, and 170

RIN 3038-AC95


Registration of Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Final rules.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) 
is adopting regulations under the Commodity Exchange Act (Act or CEA) 
that establish the process for the registration of swap dealers (SDs) 
and major swap participants (MSPs, and collectively with SDs, Swaps 
Entities) and that require Swaps Entities to become and remain members 
of a registered futures association (RFA). The Commission is also 
adopting regulations that define an ``associated person'' of an SD or 
MSP as a natural person and that implement the prohibition on a Swaps 
Entity permitting an associated person who is statutorily disqualified 
from registration from effecting or being involved in effecting swaps 
on behalf of the Swaps Entity. The Commission is adopting these 
regulations in accordance with section 4s of the CEA, which was 
recently added to the CEA by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act).

DATES: Effective March 19, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara S. Gold, Associate Director, 
Christopher W. Cummings, Special Counsel, or Elizabeth Miller, 
Attorney-Advisor, Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, 
1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. Telephone number: (202) 
418-6700 and electronic mail: [email protected], [email protected] or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

A. Background

    On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Act.\1\ 
Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act \2\ amended the CEA \3\ to establish a 
comprehensive new regulatory framework for swaps and security-based 
swaps. The goal of this legislation was to reduce risk, increase 
transparency, and promote market integrity within the financial system 
by, among other things: (1) Providing for the registration and 
comprehensive regulation of SDs and MSPs; (2) imposing clearing and 
trade execution requirements on standardized derivatives products; (3) 
creating robust recordkeeping and real-time reporting regimes; and (4) 
enhancing the Commission's rulemaking and enforcement authorities with 
respect to, among others, all registered entities and intermediaries 
subject to the oversight of the Commission. The regulations the 
Commission is adopting today concern the registration of SDs and MSPs, 
as required by CEA section 4s(a). As is discussed below, these final 
regulations are based in large part on the Commission's proposed 
registration regulations for SDs and MSPs (Proposal).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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 through the Commission's Web site, 
http://www.cftc.gov/.
    \2\ Pursuant to Dodd-Frank Act section 701, Title VII may be 
cited as the ``Wall Street Transparency and Accountability Act of 
2010.''
    \3\ 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq. (2006). The CEA and Commission 
regulations issued thereunder similarly can be accessed through the 
Commission's Web site.
    \4\ 75 FR 71379 (Nov. 23, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In furtherance of the foregoing legislative goals, Dodd-Frank Act 
section 721(a) amended the definitions of various existing terms in the 
CEA and added definitions of numerous new terms to the CEA, including 
definitions of the new terms ``swap dealer,'' ``major swap 
participant,'' and ``associated person of a swap dealer or major swap 
participant.'' \5\ Section 712(d)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act directed the 
Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in 
consultation with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 
to further define the terms ``swap dealer'' and ``major swap 
participant'' (Entities Definitional Regulations).\6\ The instant 
rulemaking will apply to SDs and MSPs as defined in the CEA and as 
further defined by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, respectively, CEA sections 1a(49), 1a(33) and 1a(4).
    \6\ See 75 FR 80174 (Dec. 21, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Statutory Registration Requirements for SDs and MSPs

    CEA sections 4s(a) and 4s(b) \7\ provide, in pertinent part, for 
the registration of SDs and MSPs as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Sections 4s(a) and 4s(b) were added to the CEA by Dodd-Frank 
Act section 731.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) REGISTRATION.--
    (1) SWAP DEALERS.--It shall be unlawful for any person to act as a 
swap dealer unless the person is registered as a swap dealer with the 
Commission.
    (2) MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS.--It shall be unlawful for any person 
to act as a major swap participant unless the person is registered as a 
major swap participant with the Commission.
    (b) REQUIREMENTS.--
    (1) IN GENERAL.--A person shall register as a swap dealer or major 
swap participant by filing a registration application with the 
Commission.
    (2) CONTENTS.--
    (A) IN GENERAL.--The application shall be made in such form and 
manner as prescribed by the Commission, and shall contain such 
information, as the Commission considers necessary concerning the 
business in which the applicant is or will be engaged.
    CEA section 4s does not direct the Commission to adopt rules that 
provide for the registration of associated persons of SDs or MSPs. 
However, CEA section 4s(b)(6) makes it unlawful for a Swaps Entity to 
permit a person to associate with it if the person is subject to a 
statutory disqualification, as follows:

    Except to the extent otherwise specifically provided by rule, 
regulation, or order, it shall be unlawful for a swap dealer or 
major swap participant to permit any person associated with a swap 
dealer or major swap participant who is subject to a statutory 
disqualification to effect or be involved in effecting swaps on 
behalf of the swap dealer or major swap participant, if the swap 
dealer or major swap participant knew, or in the exercise of 
reasonable care should have known, of the statutory 
disqualification.

For the purpose of the regulations it is adopting today, and 
specifically Regulation 23.22, the Commission

[[Page 2614]]

intends that, as proposed, a statutory disqualification is a 
disqualification under CEA section 8a(2) or 8a(3).\8\ These CEA 
sections contain an extensive list of matters that constitute grounds 
pursuant to which the Commission may refuse to register a person, 
including, without limitation, felony convictions, commodities or 
securities law violations, and bars or other adverse actions taken by 
financial regulators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 75 FR 71379, 71380. The Commission did not receive any 
comments in response to this aspect of the Proposal. See Part II of 
this Federal Register release, which discusses the comments the 
Commission received on the Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEA section 4s further directs the Commission to provide for the 
regulation of SDs and MSPs with respect to, among others, the following 
areas: Capital and margin, reporting and recordkeeping, daily trading 
records, business conduct standards, documentation standards, duties, 
designation of chief compliance officer,\9\ and, with respect to 
uncleared swaps, segregation \10\ (collectively, Section 4s 
Requirements). The Commission is addressing the Section 4s Requirements 
through other rulemakings (Section 4s Implementing Regulations) 
separate and apart from the instant rulemaking, which concerns the 
registration process for Swaps Entities.\11\ Certain issues relevant to 
the Section 4s Implementing Regulations--i.e., the timing of their 
adoption and the initial demonstration of compliance with them by SDs 
and MSPs--nonetheless have an impact on the registration process for 
Swaps Entities, which is discussed below in Part II of this Federal 
Register release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ CEA sections 4s(e) through (k), respectively, added to the 
CEA by Dodd-Frank Act section 731.
    \10\ CEA section 4s(l), added to the CEA by Dodd-Frank Act 
section 724(c).
    \11\ See 76 FR 23732 (Apr. 28, 2011), 76 FR 27802 (May 12, 2011) 
(section 4s(e)--Capital and Margin); 75 FR 76666 (Dec. 9, 2010) 
(section 4s(f)--Reporting and Recordkeeping, and section 4s(g)--
Daily Trading Records); 75 FR 80638 (Dec. 22, 2010), 75 FR 71391 
(Nov. 23, 2010) (section 4s(h)--Business Conduct Standards); 75 FR 
81519 (Dec. 28, 2010), 76 FR 6708 (Feb. 8, 2011), 76 FR 6715 (Feb. 
8, 2011) (section 4s(i)--Documentation Standards); 75 FR 71397 (Nov. 
23, 2010) (section 4s(j)--Duties); 75 FR 70881 (Nov. 19, 2010) 
(section 4s(k)--Designation of Chief Compliance Officer); 75 FR 
75162 (Dec. 2, 2010), 75 FR 75432 (Dec. 2, 2010), (section 4s(l)--
Segregation Requirements for Uncleared Swaps).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Dodd-Frank Act section 716 prohibits an insured 
depository institution (IDI) from receiving Federal assistance if it is 
also an SD that engages in swaps activities that are not covered by the 
exclusion in section 716(d).\12\ Under Dodd-Frank Act section 716(c), 
an IDI can retain its access to Federal assistance if it transfers 
covered activities to a non-IDI affiliate (a Push-Out Affiliate) that 
is an SD or MSP, if the affiliate complies with the requirements of 
section 716(c), including such requirements as the Commission may 
establish.\13\ The Push-Out Affiliate, however, would not have access 
to Federal assistance. The Commission did not include in the Proposal 
any specific Push-Out Affiliate requirements, and as it stated in the 
Proposal, the Commission intends that any Push-Out Affiliate that comes 
within the statutory definition of an SD or an MSP be subject to 
registration and regulation as an SD or as an MSP, as the case may 
be.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Specifically, the prohibition against Federal assistance to 
Swaps Entities is set forth in Dodd-Frank Act section 716(a), as 
follows:
    (a) PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL ASSISTANCE.--Notwithstanding any 
other provision of law (including regulations), no Federal 
assistance may be provided to any swaps entity with respect to any 
swap, security-based swap, or other activity of the swaps entity.
    Dodd-Frank Act section 716(d) carves out certain swaps 
activities of an IDI that is an SD, and therefore a ``swaps 
entity,'' from the prohibition against ``Federal assistance.'' In 
particular, the prohibition against Federal assistance does not 
apply to the extent the IDI SD engages in: (1) Hedging and other 
risk-mitigating activities of the IDI; or (2) acting as an SD for 
swaps and security-based swaps involving rates (e.g., interest rate 
swaps) or reference assets that are permissible investments. 
Engaging in non-cleared credit default swaps, however, would subject 
an IDI SD to the prohibition against Federal assistance.
    \13\ Section 716(c) provides for the Push-Out Affiliate 
exception as follows:
    (c) AFFILIATES OF INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS.--The 
prohibition on Federal assistance contained in subsection (a) does 
not apply to and shall not prevent an insured depository institution 
from having or establishing an affiliate which is a swaps entity, as 
long as such insured depository institution is part of a bank 
holding company, or savings and loan holding company, that is 
supervised by the Federal Reserve and such swaps entity affiliate 
complies with sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and 
such other requirements as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 
* * * may determine to be necessary and appropriate.
    \14\ See 75 FR 71379, 71380-81. The Commission did not receive 
any comments on its statement in the Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. The Proposal

    To fulfill the statutory mandates contained in CEA sections 4s(a) 
and 4s(b), the Commission proposed amendments to existing Regulations 
3.2, 3.4, 3.10, 3.21, 3.30, 3.31 and 3.33 \15\ and new Regulations 
23.21, 23.22 and 170.16, to, respectively, establish the registration 
process for SDs and MSPs; incorporate the statutory prohibition on SDs 
and MSPs permitting an associated person to effect or be involved in 
effecting swaps on their behalf; and require SDs and MSPs to become and 
remain members of an RFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Part 3 of the Commission's regulations governs the 
registration of intermediaries and certain market participants under 
the CEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the section-by-section analysis of the regulations contained in 
the Proposal, the Commission specifically requested comment on whether 
it should restrict the definition of an associated person of a Swaps 
Entity to a natural person, and how to best implement the statutory 
disqualification prohibition in CEA section 4s(b)(6).\16\ Elsewhere, 
the Commission requested comment on the concept of a provisional 
registration process for SDs and MSPs that would be responsive to a 
phased implementation of the Entities Definitional Regulations and the 
section 4s Implementing Regulations,\17\ and on the allocation of 
responsibilities among the Commission and one or more RFAs attendant to 
the oversight of the activities of Swaps Entities generally.\18\ 
Finally, the Commission requested comment on the application of 
extraterritorial issues to the registration requirements it proposed 
for Swaps Entities.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 75 FR at 71385.
    \17\ See 75 FR at 71381.
    \18\ See 75 FR at 71381-82.
    \19\ See 75 FR at 71382-71383.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Comments \20\ and Responses
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The comments the Commission received on the Proposal are 
currently available on the Commission's Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. In General

    The Commission received numerous comments on the Proposal. 
Commenters include domestic banks, foreign banks, companies engaged in 
various energy businesses, trade and public interest associations 
(energy, international banking, securities, and swaps), the National 
Futures Association (NFA, currently the only RFA), and both United 
States (U.S.) and foreign citizens. The Commission received several 
requests for clarification on and enhancements to its contemplated 
registration process for Swaps Entities, and the final regulations 
adopted today do contain some revisions to the Proposal. In 
consideration of the comments received, the Commission is adopting the 
Proposal mainly in the form as issued, with specific changes as 
discussed below.

B. Restricting Associated Persons to Natural Persons

    As stated in the Proposal:

    The term ``associated person'' in the context of existing 
Commission registrants is not defined in the CEA. That term is 
defined in the Commission's regulations. Specifically, Regulation 
1.3(aa) provides that ``[T]his term [i.e., associated person] means 
any natural person who is associated with'', e.g., [a futures 
commission merchant] * * * in any capacity that involves 
solicitation or the supervision of any person or persons so engaged 
(emphasis added). ``Associated

[[Page 2615]]

person'' has typically referred to a salesperson of a registrant. 
Thus, a corporation, partnership or other legal entity has never 
been considered an associated person. The use of the term ``natural 
person'' in the current associated person definition is intended to 
distinguish between the rights and responsibilities of persons 
acting as associated persons of a registrant and persons acting as 
IBs. However, in the absence of any language in the Dodd-Frank Act 
restricting associated persons of swaps entities to natural persons, 
the Commission is not proposing such a definition. The Commission 
nonetheless requests comment on whether it should by regulation in 
fact restrict associated persons of swaps entities to natural 
persons.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 75 FR at 71385 (footnote omitted).

    The comments the Commission received in response to this request 
were unanimous in their support of such a restriction. The Commission 
is amending Regulation 1.3(aa) to include in the ``associated person'' 
definition provided for thereunder a natural person associated with an 
SD or MSP as a partner, officer, employee or agent (or functionally 
similar role) in a capacity that involves the solicitation or 
acceptance of swaps, or the supervision of persons so engaged. 
Specifically, this definition is now found in new Regulation 
1.3(aa)(6).\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ This action supersedes the prior proposal of the Commission 
to define the term ``associated person of a swap dealer or major 
swap participant'' in a new Regulation 1.3(zz). See 76 FR 33066, 
33067 (June 7, 2011). However, for the purpose of adding the 
``Exemption from fingerprinting requirement in certain cases'' 
provided for in Regulation 3.21(c) with respect to outside directors 
of an applicant for registration as an SD or MSP, the Commission has 
employed the term ``transactions involving `commodity interests,' as 
that term is defined in Sec.  1.3(yy)''--which regulation the 
Commission has proposed to revise to include ``[a]ny swap as defined 
in the Act, the Commission's regulations, a Commission order or 
interpretation, or a joint interpretation or order issued by the 
Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission.'' See 76 FR 
at 33069, 33086.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Effect of Statutory Disqualification

    The Commission proposed the adoption of new Regulation 23.22 to 
implement the statutory prohibition in CEA section 4s(b)(6) against an 
SD or MSP permitting a person associated with it who is subject to a 
statutory disqualification to effect or be involved in effecting swaps 
on behalf of the SD or MSP, if the SD or MSP ``knows, or in the 
exercise of reasonable care should know, of the statutory 
disqualification.'' In the proposed regulation, paragraph (a) defined 
the term ``person'' as a shorthand substitute for the statutory term 
``associated person of a swap dealer or major swap participant,'' and 
paragraph (b) restated the statutory prohibition without exception. The 
Commission proposed that an SD or MSP would be responsible for ensuring 
that its associated persons are not subject to a statutory 
disqualification. The Commission also requested comment on implementing 
the statutory prohibition.
    The Commission in its request focused on how an SD or MSP could 
conduct background checks or otherwise fulfill the requirement to 
ensure that persons subject to a statutory disqualification would not 
effect or be involved in effecting swaps on its behalf. The sole 
comment that the Commission received on this issue expressed the view 
that the Commission allow, but not require, Swaps Entities to use NFA 
for this vetting purpose.\23\ The Commission agrees with this comment. 
It believes that Swaps Entities should be free to work with and through 
the service provider of their choice to obtain information as to 
whether a prospective associated person is subject to a statutory 
disqualification--and NFA could qualify to be such a service provider. 
Accordingly, the Commission has not adopted any requirement that Swaps 
Entities must, and may only, employ NFA to fulfill their obligation 
under CEA section 4s(b)(6). This same commenter suggested that if NFA 
performed the background check, ``then it would constitute a safe 
harbor for the firm if the individual is subject to a statutory 
disqualification but NFA previously notified the firm that the person 
is not subject to one.'' The Commission is not authorizing such a safe 
harbor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Comment letter from the National Futures Association (Jan. 
24, 2011) (NFA Comment Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter on the implementation of the statutory prohibition 
\24\ recommended that, contrary to the Proposal, the Commission adopt 
an exception to the association prohibition in Regulation 23.22(b) for 
any person listed as a principal or registered as an associated person 
of a futures commission merchant (FCM), retail foreign exchange dealer 
(RFED), introducing broker (IB), commodity pool operator (CPO), or 
commodity trading advisor (CTA)--notwithstanding that such person may 
be subject to a statutory disqualification under CEA section 8a(2) or 
8a(3).\25\ This commenter noted that, pursuant to the authority the 
Commission has delegated to NFA to exercise its registration 
responsibilities in the futures markets, NFA has permitted a person to 
be listed as a principal or registered as an associated person where 
NFA, in its discretion, has determined that the incident giving rise to 
a statutory disqualification is insufficiently serious, recent, or 
otherwise relevant to evaluating the person's fitness. Where this has 
occurred and the person now finds himself to be an associated person of 
an SD or MSP, the commenter explained that absent an exception as 
provided for in the introductory text of CEA section 4s(b)(6), an 
anomalous result would ensue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
    \25\ See, e.g., CEA section 4k, which requires the registration 
of associated persons of FCMs, IBs, CPOs, and CTAs, and Regulation 
3.10(a)(2), which requires each natural person who is a principal of 
an applicant for registration to file a fingerprint card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statutory prohibition in CEA section 4s(b)(6) applies ``except 
to the extent otherwise specifically provided by rule, regulation, or 
order.'' The Commission recognizes that if it did not provide an 
exception as suggested, a person could be permitted to direct futures-
related activities or solicit futures-related business with members of 
the retail public--e.g., as, respectively, a principal or associated 
person of an FCM or CPO--but that same person would be barred from 
soliciting, accepting, or otherwise effecting or being involved in 
effecting swaps transactions with significantly more sophisticated 
clients as an associated person of an SD or MSP. On the other hand, 
adopting the requested exception could result in persons to whom the 
Dodd-Frank Act affords heightened protections engaging in transactions 
marketed by associated persons of an SD or MSP subject to a statutory 
disqualification. Even though the Commission did not propose such an 
exception, it believes that the commenter's recommendation has merit. 
The Commission therefore is adopting the commenter's recommendation 
that Regulation 23.22(b) include both the general prohibition against 
an SD or MSP permitting any person associated with it who is subject to 
a statutory disqualification to effect or be involved in effecting 
swaps on behalf of the SD or MSP and an exception to the prohibition 
for any person subject to a statutory disqualification who is already 
listed as a principal, registered as an associated person of another 
registrant (i.e., an FCM, RFED, IB, CPO, CTA, or leverage transaction 
merchant (LTM)), or registered as a floor broker (FB) or floor trader 
(FT).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ In addition to the registration categories included in the 
comment, the Commission has included in this exception any person 
listed as a principal or registered as an associated person of an 
LTM. Although there currently is no registered LTM, the CEA and 
Commission regulations issued thereunder provide for an LTM 
registration category. The Commission also has included in this 
exception any person registered as an FB or FT because, as a natural 
person and like an associated person of a registrant other than an 
SD or MSP, it must submit a Form 8-R in connection with applying for 
registration.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2616]]

    The same commenter also recommended that the Commission expand 
Regulation 3.12(f), or adopt a new regulation, ``to address the 
situations in which an individual conducts swaps-related activity on 
behalf of more than one Swap Entity or conducts swaps activity on 
behalf of a Swap Entity and is also registered as an AP of a different 
firm.'' \27\ Regulation 3.12(f) currently provides for the reporting of 
dual and multiple associations of a person registered as an associated 
person with, and sponsored by, two or more Commission registrants. It 
provides, among other things, that each sponsor registrant is jointly 
and severally liable for the conduct of that associated person in 
specified circumstances. While the Commission agrees with the 
commenter's recommendation, it anticipates promptly addressing this 
issue in a future rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ NFA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Phased Implementation \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See generally 75 FR at 71379, 71381.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission proposed a provisional registration process for SDs 
and MSPs that would take into account, through phased implementation, 
the strong likelihood that the Commission would adopt the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations subsequent to issuing the registration process 
regulations for SDs and MSPs. As the Commission explained in the 
Proposal, phased implementation is aimed at preserving the ``continuity 
of the business operations of existing swaps entities, and to avoid 
undue market disruption,'' by permitting applicants to continue swaps 
activities pending confirmation of initial compliance with the Section 
4s Implementing Regulations and notification of registration. In 
addition, the final regulations make clear that provisional 
registration will be granted upon filing of the application and any 
documentation required under the applicable Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation--and not upon NFA's review and approval of the 
documentation.
    Several commenters stressed the need for phased implementation over 
extended periods of time so that SDs and MSPs can come into compliance 
after evaluating the need, e.g., to restructure operations, re-document 
client agreements as a result of new organizational structures or new 
regulatory requirements, or upgrade systems. One commenter recommended 
that the Commission postpone the effective date of the registration 
process rulemaking until sometime after the Commission had adopted all 
of the Section 4s Implementing Regulations.\29\ Another commenter 
opined that, owing to business continuity concerns, a reasonable 
transition period for a firm not previously subject to regulation would 
be ``a one year period for such firm to (i) determine whether it is [an 
SD or MSP] and (ii) register with the Commission.'' \30\ It suggested a 
``roll off'' period that would enable a putative Swaps Entity to fall 
outside the SD or MSP definition and thus not be subject to the 
requirement to register as an SD or MSP if enough of the Swaps Entity's 
legacy swaps expired. The commenter also estimated ``that it might take 
up to as much as two years in addition to the suggested one year 
registration period for such firms to complete the steps necessary to 
comply with all of the requirements necessary for registration as [an 
SD or MSP].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Comment letter from the International Swaps and Derivatives 
Association, Inc. (Jan. 24, 2011) (ISDA Comment Letter). Another 
commenter advocated delaying effectiveness of the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations until at least 60 days after the 
registration process regulations and the Entities Definitional 
Regulations became effective. Comment letter from the Securities 
Industry and Financial Markets Association (Jan. 18, 2011) (SIFMA 
Comment Letter).
    \30\ Comment letter from Hunton and Williams, LLP, on behalf of 
the Working Group of Commercial Energy Firms (Jan. 24, 2011) (WGCEF 
Comment Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the provisional registration process 
adopted today is consistent with the incremental staging requested by 
commenters. Thus, the Commission is declining to extend the 
effectiveness of any Section 4s Implementing Regulation today. 
Moreover, to provide the maximum amount of processing time, so that 
applicants for SD or MSP registration can be registered at the earliest 
possible date, and in the absence of any comments to the contrary, the 
Commission has adopted, as proposed, Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v), which 
permits applicants to begin the registration process in advance of the 
effective date of the requirement to register as an SD or MSP.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ In response to a comment received, the Commission has 
clarified in Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(C)(1) when a person may apply 
to be registered as an SD or MSP and in Regulations 
3.10(a)(1)(v)(C)(2) and 3.10(a)(1)(v)(C)(3) when a person must apply 
to be registered as an SM or MSP. See NFA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Proposal, the Commission provided for provisional 
registration with reference to the Dodd-Frank Act's general statutory 
effective date of July 16, 2011, and CEA section 4s(b), which requires 
the Commission to issue regulations providing for the registration of 
Swaps Entities not later than one year after the enactment of the Dodd-
Frank Act, or July 21, 2011. After issuing the Proposal, the Commission 
issued effective date clarification of, as well as specific exemptive 
relief from compliance with, numerous provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act 
(Effective Date Release).\32\ The Effective Date Release explained that 
many Dodd-Frank Act provisions require rulemakings to implement them, 
including the registration mandate in CEA section 4s(a) and other 
Section 4s Requirements, and that pursuant to Dodd-Frank Act section 
754, those provisions would not be effective until 60 days after the 
publication of those implementing final regulations (e.g., for the 
registration mandate, this Federal Register release). Dates 
notwithstanding, for the reasons stated in the Proposal and above, the 
Commission continues to believe that provisional registration is 
appropriate and consistent with the Effective Date Release.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 76 FR 42508, 42509 and 42524 (July 19, 2011).
    \33\ So that the text of the registration regulations accurately 
reflects the impact of the Effective Date Release on phased 
implementation and the provisional registration process, the 
Commission is adopting certain definitions, and is incorporating 
those definitions into the registration process regulations it is 
adopting today. Specifically, new Regulation 3.1(f) defines the term 
``Section 4s Implementing Regulation'' to mean ``a regulation the 
Commission issues pursuant to section 4s(e), 4s(f), 4s(h), 4s(i), 
4s(j), 4s(k), or 4s(l) of the Act,'' and new Regulation 3.1(g) 
defines the term ``Swap Definitional Regulation'' to mean ``a 
regulation the Commission issues to further define the term `swap 
dealer,' `major swap participant' or `swap' in section 1a(49), 
1a(33) or 1a(47) of the Act, respectively, pursuant to the Dodd-
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.'' These terms 
are employed in such registration process regulations as Regulation 
3.2(c)(3)(i) (pertaining to provisional registration) and 
3.10(a)(1)(v) (pertaining to applying for registration as an SD or 
MSP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, in response to a commenter requesting clarification on 
provisional registration \34\ and as is reflected in the amended 
heading of Regulation 3.2--which now reads ``Registration processing by 
the National Futures Association; notification and duration of 
registration; provisional registration'' (emphasis supplied)--the 
Commission has adopted in new Regulation 3.2(c)(3) the exact terms 
pursuant to which NFA will notify an applicant for SD or MSP 
registration that it is provisionally registered, the continuing 
obligations of a provisional registrant with respect to providing 
documentation of compliance with each Section 4s Implementing

[[Page 2617]]

Regulation,\35\ and the terms pursuant to which a provisional 
registrant will become registered with the Commission. The Commission 
believes this clarification provides necessary specific details on 
provisional registration and the transition of a provisional registrant 
into a registered SD or MSP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ NFA Comment Letter.
    \35\ See also Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission proposed in Regulation 3.2(c)(3) to require NFA to 
notify the applicant for SD or MSP registration ``that it is 
provisionally registered pending completion of a fitness review by the 
National Futures Association.'' \36\ However, in light of the purpose 
of provisional registration, along with the authority the Commission 
today intends to delegate to NFA by notice and order (Notice and 
Order)--e.g., the authority to conduct proceedings to deny the 
registration of an applicant for registration as an SD or MSP--the 
Commission has determined not to adopt any such delay with respect to 
the notification by NFA to the applicant that it is provisionally 
registered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See 75 FR at 71387.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed and as adopted, Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(i) provides that 
application for registration as an SD or MSP will commence with the 
filing of a Form 7-R with NFA--which is also how, under Regulation 
3.10(a)(1)(i), the registration process commences for applicants for 
registration as an FCM, RFED, IB, CPO, CTA, or LTM.\37\ In this regard, 
the Commission notes that, as proposed, Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(B) 
provides that the commencement of the registration process by an SD or 
MSP authorizes the Commission to conduct on-site inspection of the 
applicant to determine compliance with the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulations applicable to it. The Commission received no comment on the 
inspection authority proposed in Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The process for registration as an FB or FT commences with 
the filing of a Form 8-R, which reflects the fact that FBs and FTs 
are natural persons.
    Further with respect to Regulation 3.10, the Commission notes 
that paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv) were inadvertently 
dropped from the regulation in connection with the adoption of the 
regulatory program of the Commission for RFEDs. See 75 FR 55410, 
55424 (Sep. 10, 2010). By this Federal Register release, the 
Commission is returning paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv) to 
Regulation 3.10 in the form and text identical to that which existed 
prior to this unintentional deletion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also proposed to require applicants for registration 
as an SD or MSP ``to demonstrate compliance'' with such of the Section 
4s Implementing Regulations in effect at the time of their application. 
At the suggestion of a commenter, the Commission has adopted in 
Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(A) the requirement that the Form 7-R must be 
accompanied by ``such documentation as may be required to demonstrate 
compliance'' with each applicable Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation.\38\ The Commission believes that the addition of this 
phrase brings the registration application requirement for SDs and MSPs 
in line with existing requirements for applicants for registration in 
other categories--such as applicants for registration as an FCM or IB, 
who must accompany their Form 7-R with specified documentation that 
demonstrates their compliance with the financial requirements they must 
meet to become registered.\39\ And, as proposed and as adopted, 
Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(A) provides that for the purpose of this 
regulation, ``the term `compliance' includes the term `the ability to 
comply,' to the extent that a particular Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation may require demonstration of the ability to comply with a 
requirement thereunder.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ NFA Comment Letter.
    \39\ See Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(ii), which requires applicants 
for registration as an FCM or IB to accompany their Form 7-R with a 
Form 1-FR-FCM or Form 1-FR-IB, respectively.
    \40\ As the Commission has stated previously, it ``will strive 
to ensure that current practices will not be unduly disrupted during 
the transition to the new regulatory regime.'' Effective Date for 
Swap Regulation, 76 FR 42508, 42513 (July 19, 2011). Further, the 
Commission has determined that ``the interdependencies of the 
various rulemakings will be a consideration in determining the 
implementation date for each final rule,'' and that such 
determinations will be informed by the Commission's further 
consideration of these issues, including public comments. Id.
    Thus, for example, to determine with which Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations an applicant must demonstrate compliance as 
part of the registration process, the applicant should look to the 
Section 4s Implementing Regulations themselves to determine 
precisely when compliance is required for each. For example, the 
Section 4s Implementing Regulations for External Business Conduct 
Standards require compliance on the later of 180 days after the 
effective date of those regulations or the date on which swap 
dealers or major swap participants are required to apply for 
registration pursuant to Regulation 3.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two commenters asked the Commission what documentation is required 
of an applicant for SD or MSP registration.\41\ One of these commenters 
suggested that the documentation required to demonstrate compliance 
with the regulations the Commission adopts to implement the business 
conduct standards required by CEA section 4s(h) might consist of 
written policies and procedures.\42\ Or, as the Commission notes, the 
documentation required to demonstrate compliance with the regulations 
the Commission adopts to implement the capital requirements of CEA 
section 4s(e) might be a financial form specifically designed for this 
purpose. The Commission anticipates that these questions will be 
considered in connection with its adoption of the relevant Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ NFA and WGCEF Comment Letters.
    \42\ NFA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations the Commission proposed and is adopting also 
address, in Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(D)(1), the situation where an 
applicant for registration as an SD or MSP to whom NFA has provided 
notification of provisional registration subsequently fails to 
demonstrate compliance with a Section 4s Implementing Regulation--i.e., 
that NFA ``will notify the applicant that its application is deficient, 
whereupon the applicant must withdraw its registration application, it 
must not engage in any new activity as a swap dealer or major swap 
participant, as the case may be, and the applicant shall cease to be 
provisionally registered.'' \43\ The Commission proposed a 30-day 
period--subject to extension at the discretion of the Commission--
within which the applicant would be required to cure the deficiency. 
Upon further consideration, the Commission has adopted in the final 
regulation a 90-day cure period.\44\ Further, Regulation 
3.10(a)(1)(v)(D)(2) makes clear that the provisions of Regulation 
3.10(a)(1)(v)(D)(1) supplement, and are in addition to, the other 
activities in which NFA engages under the Act and Commission 
regulations in connection with processing an application for 
registration as an SD or MSP.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ This provision was found in proposed Regulation 
3.10(a)(1)(v)(D)(2).
    \44\ New Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(E), formerly proposed 
Regulation 3.10(a)(1)(v)(D)(3), addresses the effect on the 
applicable swap documentation of the SD or MSP. Broadly stated, as 
proposed and as adopted, this regulation provides that ``unless 
specifically reserved in the applicable swap documentation,'' any 
withdrawal, cessation or revocation of registration does not affect 
the terms of any swap transaction to which the applicant is a party 
entered into prior to receiving notice that it is deficient in its 
compliance with the applicable Section 4s Implementing Regulation. 
See CEA section 22(a)(5), added by Dodd-Frank Act section 739, which 
states:
    EFFECT ON SWAPS.--Unless specifically reserved in the applicable 
swap, neither the enactment of the Wall Street Transparency and 
Accountability Act of 2010, nor any requirement under that Act or an 
amendment made by that Act, shall constitute a termination event, 
force majeure, illegality, increased costs, regulatory change, or 
similar event under a swap (including any related credit support 
arrangement) that would permit a party to terminate, renegotiate, 
modify, amend, or supplement 1 or more transactions under the swap.
    \45\ See, e.g., CEA sections 8a(2) and 8a(3) and generally Part 
3 of the Commission's regulations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2618]]

    To address comments requesting clarification of the effect of 
provisional registration on the general registration process for SDs 
and MSPs,\46\ the Commission notes that, as is stated in Part II.E 
below, the Commission intends to issue the Notice and Order that 
delegates to NFA the authority to perform the full range of 
registration functions with respect to applicants for registration, and 
persons registered, as an SD or MSP. Currently, persons who apply for 
registration must file a Form 7-R, and a Form 8-R and fingerprint card 
for each principal of the applicant who is a natural person,\47\ 
accompanied by such documentation as may be required to demonstrate 
compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. NFA subsequently 
reviews these materials in advance of granting registration.\48\ This, 
then, is the course of action the Commission intends that NFA will 
follow upon notification to an applicant for registration as an SD or 
MSP that it is provisionally registered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ NFA Comment Letter.
    \47\ Regulation 3.1 defines the term ``principal'' to mean, when 
referring to an applicant for registration, a registrant or a person 
required to be registered under the CEA or Commission regulations, 
to include officers, directors, and persons who own ten percent or 
more of the outstanding shares of the applicant or registrant.
    \48\ For example, this is the procedure that NFA follows with 
respect to applicants for registration as an FCM or IB, who must 
file a Form 7-R, a Form 8-R for each natural person principal, and 
specified financial documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this regard, the Commission expects that NFA will promptly 
perform these reviews and, as the Commission intends to state in the 
Notice and Order, NFA will be required to perform these registration 
processing functions in accordance with the standards established by 
the CEA and the Commission's regulations and to follow the same 
procedures with respect to recordkeeping, disclosure and tracking of 
fitness investigations and adverse action proceedings concerning SDs 
and MSPs as it must follow in cases involving other registrants. Thus, 
for example, notwithstanding that it has notified an applicant for 
registration as an SD or MSP that it is provisionally registered, NFA 
may subsequently take an action to deny the registration application 
based on the statutory disqualification of one of the applicant's 
principals.\49\ In this regard, the Commission notes that the Form 7-R 
specifies disclosures that must be made concerning an applicant's 
criminal, regulatory and disciplinary histories, and that Form 8-R 
additionally requires these disclosures for each of the applicant's 
principals.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See CEA sections 8a(2) and 8a(3).
    \50\ These forms can be accessed through NFA's Web site, http://www.nfa.futures.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter requested that the Commission consider separate 
sets of regulations for SDs and MSPs.\51\ The Commission has considered 
the reasons set forth in the comment and continues to believe that 
applicants for SD or MSP registration should be subject to the same 
registration requirements for the purpose of commencing the 
registration process--i.e., the filing of the Form 7-R by the 
applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ SIFMA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Allocation of Responsibilities 52 and RFA Membership and 
Oversight 53

    As part of its efforts to bring SDs and MSPs into the existing 
regulatory framework for futures intermediaries, the Commission 
proposed Regulation 170.16, which would require each person registered 
as an SD or MSP to become and remain a member of an RFA. As the 
Commission noted, FCMs are subject to the RFA membership 
requirement.\54\ Currently, NFA is the sole RFA. The Commission 
received general comments in favor of the membership requirement, that 
claimed such a requirement would provide the Commission with 
flexibility in overseeing the operations and activities of Swaps 
Entities.\55\ After consideration of the foregoing, the Commission is 
adopting Regulation 170.16 as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See generally 75 FR 71379 at 71381-82.
    \53\ See generally 75 FR at 71385.
    \54\ Id.
    \55\ Comment letter from the New England Fuel Institute and the 
Petroleum Marketers Association of America (Jan. 18, 2011) (NEFI/
PMAA Comment Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also requested comment on who should be responsible 
for determining initial and ongoing compliance by Swaps Entities with 
respect to the Section 4s Implementing Regulations and all other 
applicable requirements. The Commission suggested three alternatives: 
no delegation to any person, full delegation to NFA (or any association 
that may be subsequently registered as a futures association), and 
partial delegation to NFA (or any subsequent RFA).\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ The Proposal specifically provided:
    Option number one would involve the Commission being directly 
responsible for ensuring compliance by swaps entities with all 
requirements applicable to them under the CEA and Commission 
regulations. Option number two would involve NFA (or any other 
association that may subsequently be registered as a futures 
association) being responsible for ensuring compliance, subject to 
Commission oversight. Option number three would involve certain 
compliance oversight activities being performed by the Commission 
and others being delegated to NFA (or a subsequently registered 
futures association). The Commission requests comment on these 
options. In the case of option number three, commenters should 
specify which oversight activities should be performed by the 
Commission and which should be delegated to, or performed by NFA (or 
another registered futures association).
    75 FR at 71382.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter favored no delegation, arguing that ``[t]he 
fundamental duty to determine initial and continuing compliance to 
qualify for registration is entrusted to and must remain with the 
CFTC.'' \57\ This commenter nevertheless acknowledged that confirmation 
and oversight of compliance with functions involving reporting and 
recordkeeping, daily trading records, swap documentation structure, 
designation of chief compliance officer, and filing of annual 
compliance reports could be delegated to NFA if the Commission 
determined that ``material efficiencies'' could be achieved. But, 
confirmation and oversight of compliance with requirements relating to, 
among other functions, capital and margin requirements, business 
conduct standards and monitoring of trading and risk management were 
viewed by this commenter as requiring ``involvement that is focused, 
decisive and utterly free from even the appearance of influence brought 
to bear by SDs and MSPs''--and therefore, this commenter claimed, 
should be retained by the Commission.\58\ Another commenter observed 
that until the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, NFA had been the self-
regulatory organization (SRO) for the futures industry exclusively, and 
advanced that NFA would need to develop new capabilities to serve as an 
effective SRO for the swaps industry.\59\ Other commenters favored full 
delegation to NFA, based on NFA's historical performance of the 
registration and fitness review functions, as well as confirming its 
members' compliance with regulatory requirements.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Comment letter from Better Markets, Inc. (Jan. 24, 2011) 
(Better Markets Comment Letter).
    \58\ Id. (emphasis in original).
    \59\ ISDA Comment Letter.
    \60\ NFA and WGCEF Comment Letters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter requested that if the Commission adopted the 
partial delegation model, it clearly define the responsibilities 
delegated to NFA, and, in this regard, asked that the Commission 
clarify certain of its registration process proposals.\61\ It 
recommended that ``the Commission delegate to NFA not only the 
authority to process Swap[s] Entity registration applications and 
conduct background checks but also to conduct adverse registration 
proceedings.'' This

[[Page 2619]]

commenter further requested that, in delegating ``to NFA the 
responsibility to maintain records associated with processing Swap 
Entity registration applications * * * the Commission specify whether 
records filed with and maintained by NFA in connection with any 
background check * * * are considered Commission records.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ NFA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to these comments, in recognition of NFA's proven track 
record in performing analogous functions for all other Commission 
registrants, and consistent with past practice,\62\ including with 
respect to the newest registrant category of RFED, the Commission 
intends to delegate its full registration authority under the CEA and 
its regulations to NFA with respect to applicants for registration, and 
registrants, as an SD or MSP. Specifically, by the Notice and Order, 
the Commission intends to delegate to NFA the authority to take the 
following actions: (1) To process and grant applications for 
registration and withdrawals from registration of SDs and MSPs, and to 
notify applicants for registration as an SD or MSP of provisional 
registration; (2) in connection with processing and granting 
applications for registration of SDs and MSPs, to confirm initial 
compliance with applicable Section 4s Implementing Regulations; \63\ 
(3) to conduct proceedings to deny, condition, suspend, restrict or 
revoke the registration of any SD or MSP or of any applicant for 
registration in either category; and (4) to maintain records regarding 
SDs and MSPs, and to serve as the official custodian of those 
Commission records.\64\ The Commission intends that the Notice and 
Order will further provide that nothing contained therein ``shall 
affect the Commission's authority to review the performance by NFA of 
Commission registration functions, to adopt and enforce regulations 
applicable to SDs and MSPs as Commission registrants, and to conduct 
on-site examinations of the operations and activities of SDs and MSPs 
as Commission registrants.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ The Commission previously has authorized NFA to perform the 
full range of registration functions with regard to persons who must 
register under the CEA, including granting applications for 
registration; enabling withdrawals; and conducting proceedings to 
deny, condition, suspend, restrict or revoke the registration of 
existing registrants or applicants for registration in each 
category. See 48 FR 15940 (Apr. 13, 1983); 48 FR 35158 (Aug. 3, 
1983); 48 FR 51809 (Nov. 14, 1983); 49 FR 8226 (Mar. 5, 1984); 49 FR 
39593 (Oct. 9, 1984); 50 FR 34885 (Aug. 28, 1985); and 75 FR 55310 
(Sep. 10, 2010).
    \63\ The Commission intends that applicants for registration may 
seek confidential treatment of documentation submitted to 
demonstrate initial compliance with the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulations in accordance with the procedures set out in Regulation 
145.9. This approach is consistent with that taken in other Dodd-
Frank Act rulemakings. See, e.g., Process for Review of Swaps for 
Mandatory Clearing, 76 FR 44464, 44474 (July 26, 2011) (adopting 
Regulation 39.5(b)(5) which allows a derivatives clearing 
organization to request confidential treatment under Regulation 
145.9 for portions of its submissions to the Commission).
    \64\ The Commission has adopted as proposed an amendment to 
Regulation 3.10(d) that subjects SD and MSP registrants to the 
requirement applicable to all other persons registered in accordance 
with Regulation 3.10 to annually review and update registration 
information with NFA. However, in light of its intent to delegate 
its full registration authority to NFA, the Commission has not 
adopted as proposed a further amendment to Regulation 3.10(d) that 
would have required SD and MSP registrants to also file this 
updating registration information with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission recognizes that the operations, activities and 
transactions engaged in by SDs and MSPs have not previously been 
subject to an extensive regulatory framework. Ideally, and as one 
commenter suggested, the Commission would retain direct responsibility, 
at least initially, for confirming compliance with the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations.\65\ However, in order to best allocate its 
resources, the Commission has determined to delegate to NFA the 
responsibility for the initial determination that an applicant for 
registration as an SD or MSP is in compliance with the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ Better Markets Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Going forward, the Commission expects that NFA, as it has for its 
other members in connection with the discharge of its RFA 
responsibilities under CEA section 17, will adopt rules for its SD and 
MSP members that are the same as, or more stringent than, the Section 
4s Implementing Regulations, and that NFA will engage in active 
oversight of its SD and MSP members to monitor and ensure compliance 
with those rules.\66\ In this regard, the Commission notes that CEA 
section 17(j) requires an RFA--such as NFA--to submit to the Commission 
any new change in or addition to its rules and that the RFA--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See, e.g., NFA Compliance Rule 2-13 for its member CPOs and 
CTAs, wherein NFA has adopted in large part the Part 4 regulations 
of the Commission, which govern the operations and activities of 
these categories of registrant. See also NFA Financial Requirements 
Rules for its member FCMs, RFEDs and IBs, whereby NFA has adopted 
rules that are the same as, or more stringent than, the financial 
requirements the Commission has adopted for these categories of 
registrant.

may make such rules effective ten days after receipt of such 
submission by the Commission unless, within the ten-day period, the 
registered futures association requests review and approval thereof 
by the Commission or the Commission notifies such registered futures 
association in writing of its determination to review such rules for 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
approval.

    As for the standard of review to which RFA rules are subject, 
section 17(j) further provides that:

    The Commission shall approve such rules if such rules are 
determined by the Commission to be consistent with the requirements 
of this section and not otherwise in violation of this Act or the 
regulations issued pursuant to this Act, and the Commission shall 
disapprove, after appropriate notice and opportunity for hearing, 
any such rule which the Commission determines at any time to be 
inconsistent with the requirements of this section or in violation 
of this Act or the regulations issued pursuant to this Act.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ Section 17(j) further provides:
    If the Commission does not approve or institute disapproval 
proceedings with respect to any rule within one hundred and eighty 
days after receipt or within such longer period of time as the [RFA] 
may agree to, or if the Commission does not conclude a disapproval 
proceeding with respect to any rule within one year after receipt or 
within such longer period as the [RFA] may agree to, such rule may 
be made effective by the [RFA] until such time as the Commission 
disapproves such rule * * *.

    However, and consistent with the Notice and Order the Commission 
intends to issue, adoption by the Commission of Regulation 170.16 
requiring membership in an RFA by SD and MSP registrants and adoption 
by NFA of rules for its SD and MSP members does not affect the 
authority of the Commission to adopt and enforce regulations applicable 
to SDs and MSPs as Commission registrants and to conduct on-site 
examinations of the operations and activities of SDs and MSPs as 
Commission registrants.
    The Commission has, in the past, issued written guidance to NFA 
regarding the exercise of delegated authority.\68\ To the extent that a 
Section 4s Implementing Regulation is not specific in this regard, the 
Commission anticipates providing written guidance to NFA on the 
criteria for, and manner of, determining that an applicant for SD or 
MSP registration has demonstrated its initial compliance with the 
regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See Letter to Robert K. Wilmouth, President, NFA, from Jean 
A. Webb, Secretary of the Commission, dated Dec. 4, 1997; Letter to 
Robert K. Wilmouth, President, NFA, from Jean A. Webb, Secretary of 
the Commission, dated Apr. 13, 2000. These letters are included in 
Appendix A to Part 3 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Extraterritoriality

    As is noted above, in the Proposal, the Commission requested 
comment on the extraterritorial application of the SD and MSP 
registration requirements. The Commission has determined to limit this 
final rulemaking to the process of registration. Issues relating to 
which

[[Page 2620]]

entities are SDs or MSPs and the substantive requirements applicable to 
them, including the extraterritorial application of such substantive 
requirements, are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.

III. Related Matters

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (Reg Flex Act) requires federal 
agencies to consider the impact of its rules on ``small entities.'' 
\69\ A regulatory flexibility analysis or certification typically is 
required for ``any rule for which the agency publishes a general notice 
of proposed rulemaking pursuant to'' the notice-and-comment provisions 
of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b).\70\ As the 
Commission stated in the Proposal, it previously has established that 
certain entities subject to its jurisdiction are not small entities for 
purposes of complying with the Reg Flex Act. However, as the Commission 
also noted in the Proposal, SDs and MSPs are new categories of 
registrant for which the Commission had not previously addressed the 
question of whether such persons are small entities.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    \70\ 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 603, 604 and 605.
    \71\ 75 FR 71379, 71385.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this regard, the Commission explained in the Proposal that it 
previously had determined that FCMs should not be considered to be 
small entities for purposes of the Reg Flex Act, based, in part, upon 
FCMs' obligation to meet the minimum financial requirements established 
by the Commission to enhance the protection of customers' segregated 
funds and protect the financial condition of FCMs generally.\72\ Like 
FCMs, SDs will be subject to minimum capital requirements, and are 
expected to be comprised of large firms. The Commission is statutorily 
required to exempt from designation as an SD those entities that engage 
in a de minimis quantity of swap dealing in connection with 
transactions with or on behalf of customers.\73\ Accordingly, for 
purposes of the Reg Flex Act for the Proposal and future rulemakings, 
the Commission proposed that SDs should not be considered small 
entities for essentially the same reasons that it had previously 
determined FCMs not to be small entities.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ 47 FR 18618 (Apr. 30, 1982).
    \73\ See CEA section 1a(49)(D).
    \74\ 75 FR at 71385.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further explained that it had also previously 
determined that large traders are not small entities for Reg Flex Act 
purposes, with the Commission considering the size of a trader's 
position to be the only appropriate test for the purpose of large 
trader reporting.\75\ The Commission then noted that ``MSPs maintain 
substantial positions in swaps, creating substantial counterparty 
exposure that could have serious adverse effects on the financial 
stability of the United States banking system or financial markets.'' 
\76\ Accordingly, for purposes of the Reg Flex Act for the Proposal and 
future rulemakings, the Commission also proposed that MSPs should not 
be considered to be small entities for essentially the same reasons 
that it previously had determined large traders not to be small 
entities.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ Id.
    \76\ Id.
    \77\ Id. at 71385-86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the Proposal, one commenter, representing a number 
of market participants, submitted a comment related to the Reg Flex 
Act, stating that ``[e]ach of the complex and interrelated regulations 
currently being proposed by the Commission has both an individual, and 
a cumulative, effect on [certain] small entities,'' and that ``the vast 
majority of [our] members meet the definition of `small entities' under 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.''.\78\ Thus, 
the commenter concluded that the Commission should conduct a regulatory 
flexibility analysis for each of its rulemakings under the Dodd-Frank 
Act, including this rulemaking applicable to the registration process 
for Swaps Entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ Comment letter from the National Rural Electric Cooperative 
Association, American Public Power Association, Large Public Power 
Council, Edison Electric Institute, and Electric Power Supply 
Association (June 3, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This commenter did not provide any information on how the Proposal 
may have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities. Nonetheless, the Commission has reevaluated this rulemaking 
in light of the statements made to it by this commenter. After further 
consideration of those statements, the Commission has again determined 
that this final rulemaking, which is applicable to SDs and MSPs, will 
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
businesses.
    In terms of affecting a substantial number of small entities, as is 
noted above, the Commission is statutorily required to exempt from 
designation as an SD those entities that engage in a de minimis 
quantity of swaps dealing. Thus, these exempted entities will not be 
required to register as an SD. Moreover, the Commission does not expect 
that the small entities identified by the commenter will be subject to 
registration with the Commission as an MSP.
    In terms of having a significant economic effect, in the experience 
of the Commission, complying with the registration process regulations 
has not had a significant economic effect on a substantial number of 
small entities. Notably, Regulation 3.10, containing the same 
registration requirements as those being issued today for SDs and MSPs, 
has been applicable to IBs and CTAs \79\ without any known significant 
economic effects since 1983.\80\ Most recently, in connection with its 
adoption of substantively similar registration regulations for RFEDs, 
the Commission stated that, in light of Congressionally-mandated 
capital requirements, it would not define RFEDs as small entities for 
Reg Flex Act purposes.\81\ There is no indication, from the 
Commission's experience or the information presented by the commenter, 
that the registration process requirements for Swaps Entities would 
have an effect on small entities that would be subject to those 
requirements, if any, that would be different than the effect the same 
registration process requirements have had historically on other 
Commission registrants that also may be small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ The Commission historically has evaluated on a case-by-case 
basis the economic impact of a particular regulatory proposal on IBs 
and CTAs to determine whether the regulatory proposal will have a 
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities. See, e.g., 76 FR 33066, 33079 (June 7, 2011) (initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis conducted with respect to the 
possible economic effects of a proposal to require IBs, among 
others, to maintain records of certain oral communications).
    \80\ See 48 FR 35248 (Aug. 3, 1983).
    \81\ See 75 FR 55410, 55416 (Sep. 10, 2010). CEA section 2(c)(2) 
generally requires an RFED to maintain adjusted net capital equal to 
or in excess of $20,000.000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Proposal and the 
additional rationale provided above, the Commission continues to 
believe that the SD and MSP registration process rulemaking will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Therefore, the Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, hereby 
certifies, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the regulations being 
published today by this Federal Register release will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 2621]]

B. PaperworkReduction Act

1. Introduction
    The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) \82\ imposes certain requirements 
on federal agencies in connection with their conducting or sponsoring 
any collection of information as defined by the PRA. Certain provisions 
of these regulations will result in new collection of information 
requirements within the meaning of the PRA. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission submitted the Proposal to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5 
CFR 1320.11. The Commission requested that OMB approve and assign a new 
control number for the collection of information covered by the 
Proposal. The title for this collection of information is 
``Registration of Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants.'' OMB has 
assigned OMB control number 3038-0072 to the Information Collection 
Request (ICR) in connection with the Proposal, but OMB has not yet 
approved the ICR. The OMB control number will not appear in the active 
inventory until OMB grants approval.
    Under the regulations that the Commission is adopting today, Swaps 
Entities that must register with the Commission will be obligated to 
file, periodically review and update certain registration forms. 
Responses to the collection of information contained within these final 
regulations are mandatory, and the Commission will protect proprietary 
information according to the Freedom of Information Act \83\ and Part 
145 of the Commission's regulations, ``Commission Records and 
Information.'' In addition, the Commission emphasizes that CEA section 
8(a)(1) strictly prohibits the Commission, unless specifically 
authorized by the CEA, from ``publish[ing] data and information that 
would separately disclose the business transactions or market positions 
of any person and trade secrets or names of customers.'' The Commission 
also is required to protect certain information contained in a 
government system of records pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ 5 U.S.C. 552.
    \84\ 5 U.S.C. 552a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Proposal, the Commission estimated that there would be 300 
``Respondents/Affected Entities'' (respondents) and that the 
``respondent burden for this collection is estimated to average 0.5 
hours per response for the Form 7-R; 0.4 hours per response for the 
Form 8-R; 3 minutes per response for the Form 7-W; 6 minutes per 
response for the Form 8-T; and 3 minutes per response for the Form 3-
R.'' \85\ As is discussed previously in this Federal Register release, 
the Commission has modified from the Proposal certain of the 
regulations it is adopting today. The Commission believes that none of 
these modifications affect the burden estimates associated with the 
information collection that the Commission proposed. In response to 
comments received, the Commission has determined to increase the 
respondent burden hours estimated for Swaps Entities for each of the 
forms referenced above. The Commission is also decreasing the number of 
respondents to 125 from the Proposal's estimate of 300. The following 
sections address and respond to comments received on the proposed 
burden estimates, explain the Commission's reduction of the estimated 
number of respondents to this collection, discuss the registration fees 
included in this rulemaking, and list the revised burden hour estimates 
associated with this information collection and the final regulations 
adopted today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ 75 FR at 71386.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Responses to Comments Received
    The Commission invited the public and other federal agencies to 
comment on any aspect of the reporting and recordkeeping burdens 
discussed above. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B), the Commission 
solicited comments in order to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will 
have practical utility; (2) evaluate the accuracy of the Commission's 
estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) 
determine whether there are ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 
clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) minimize the burden 
of the collection of information on those who are able to respond, 
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other 
forms of information technology.
    OMB commented on the ICR in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.11(c), 
questioning the burden hours estimated, which appeared to OMB to be 
low. OMB stated that the Commission should consider the comments it 
received on the Proposal, if any, to determine if the burden hours 
estimated should be revised.
    The Commission received one other comment on its PRA discussion in 
the Proposal. This commenter stated in its letter that, ``[a]lthough 
the Paperwork Reduction Act section of the release accompanying the 
Proposed Regulations (the `Release') suggests that it will merely take 
a matter of minutes for Swaps Entities to complete the forms required 
by the Proposed Regulations, we are dubious that this is accurate.'' 
\86\ This commenter did not explain why it doubted the accuracy of the 
estimates, nor did it suggest alternative burden estimates. 
Nonetheless, the Commission has reviewed its PRA estimates in light of 
this comment, as well as the comment provided by OMB. For the following 
reasons, the Commission has determined to revise the burden hour 
estimates in the Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \86\ ISDA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, these forms request only the information about an 
applicant and its principals necessary for the Commission to 
appropriately exercise its statutory registration and compliance 
oversight functions with respect to them. This information generally 
includes the names, addresses, location of records, regulatory and 
disciplinary histories, and other similarly straightforward matters--
all of which should be in the possession of the applicant and readily 
available for the applicant to provide. However, some Swaps Entities 
may be unfamiliar with the current registration process and the Forms 
7-R and 8-R that they must complete in order to apply for registration 
as an SD or MSP.
    The PRA estimates provided for these forms are averages that do not 
necessarily reflect the actual time to be expended by each and every 
person to complete the forms. The Commission's estimates do not account 
significantly for the amount of time it would take to complete the 
regulatory and disciplinary history sections of Forms 7-R and 8-R, 
which impose the greatest burden on persons completing the forms where 
the applicant SD or MSP (including a principal thereof) has an 
extensive criminal or disciplinary history. The Commission believes 
such SDs and MSPs will generally not be applying for registration in 
the first place because they will likely be disqualified from 
registration pursuant to CEA section 8a(2) or 8a(3). In addition, these 
forms will be completed in an online, user-friendly process developed 
by NFA, the Commission's delegee pursuant to CEA section 8a(10), which 
process currently is used by all

[[Page 2622]]

other applicants for registration with the Commission.
    Moreover, in proposing and adopting regulations applicable to the 
registration of Swaps Entities, the Commission has made every effort to 
establish a process that is minimally disruptive to the swap markets 
and minimally burdensome to Swaps Entities. In so doing, and as it 
proposed, the Commission is incorporating the registration process for 
Swaps Entities into the existing regulatory scheme for all other 
Commission registrants under Part 3--as opposed to constructing a 
fundamentally new registration structure for Swaps Entities. While 
current registrants may be familiar with this scheme, some Swaps 
Entities will not have previously applied for registration with the 
Commission, and the revised burden estimates take the potential 
unfamiliarity of new applicants for registration into account.
    The forms that Swaps Entities will be required to complete are 
virtually identical to those forms that other Commission registrants 
must currently complete, including RFEDs, who became subject to the 
Commission's registration requirements in 2010. There is, however, an 
additional requirement to which Swaps Entities will be subject in 
connection with completing the Form 7-R. CEA section 4s(b)(6) prohibits 
a Swaps Entity, except to the extent otherwise provided by rule, 
regulation or order,\87\ from permitting a person associated with it 
who is subject to a statutory disqualification to effect or be involved 
in effecting swaps on the Swaps Entity's behalf, if the Swaps Entity 
``knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the 
statutory disqualification.'' \88\ Form 7-R incorporates CEA section 
4s(b)(6) into the application for registration as an SD or MSP by 
explicitly quoting the statutory language and requiring the applicant 
to certify that ``the applicant is and shall remain in compliance with 
section 4s(b)(6) of the Act.'' Because of the additional time required 
to gather such background information on a Swaps Entity's associated 
persons as is necessary to make that certification, the Commission 
believes an increase in the time required for the Swaps Entity to 
complete the Form 7-R is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ See, e.g., infra Regulation 23.22(b).
    \88\ See supra pt. II.C for a detailed discussion of the 
prohibition in CEA section 4s(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the registration process, the regulations being adopted 
today require Swaps Entities to demonstrate initial compliance with the 
Section 4s Implementing Regulations as the Commission adopts these 
regulations in order to obtain registration. However, because the 
Section 4s Implementing Regulations are not yet final, and because they 
will be phased in over time after the Commission adopts the 
registration process regulations today, the Commission is unable to 
estimate burden hours in connection with producing or collecting the 
documentation required to demonstrate compliance with the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations. Consequently, the PRA estimates for this 
registration process rulemaking only include time to be expended by 
applicants' and registrants' personnel to complete the forms, and do 
not include time to be expended to collect, produce or otherwise 
develop the documentation required to demonstrate compliance with the 
Section 4s Implementing Regulations. The Commission has estimated the 
burden hours associated with information collections in connection with 
the Section 4s Implementing Regulations in the rulemakings proposing 
those regulations, and those burden hours need not be replicated here.
3. Reduction of the Estimated Number of Respondents
    In the Proposal, the Commission took ``a conservative approach'' to 
calculating the burden hours of this information collection by 
estimating that as many as 300 persons would come within the SD or MSP 
definition and, thus, would be subject to registration with the 
Commission.\89\ Since the Proposal's publication in November 2010, the 
Commission has met with industry participants and trade groups, 
discussed extensively the universe of potential registrants with NFA, 
and reviewed public information about potential SDs active in the 
market and certain trade groups. Over time, and as the Commission has 
gathered more information on the swap market and its participants, the 
estimate of the number of SDs and MSPs has decreased. In its FY 2012 
budget drafted in February 2011, the Commission estimated that 140 SDs 
might register with the Commission.\90\ After recently receiving 
additional specific information from NFA on the regulatory program it 
is developing for SDs and MSPs,\91\ however, the Commission now 
believes that approximately 125 persons will come within the SD or MSP 
definition and, thus, be subject to registration with the 
Commission.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \89\ 75 FR at 71386.
    \90\ CFTC, President's Budget and Performance Plan Fiscal Year 
2010, p. 13-14 (Feb. 2011), available at http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/cftcbudget2012.pdf. The 
estimated 140 SDs includes ``[a]pproximately 80 global and regional 
banks currently known to offer swaps in the United States;'' 
``[a]pproximately 40 non-bank swap dealers currently offering 
commodity and other swaps;'' and ``[a]pproximately 20 new potential 
market makers that wish to become swap dealers.'' Id.
    \91\ Letter from Thomas W. Sexton, Senior Vice President and 
General Counsel, NFA, to Gary Barnett, Director, Division of Swap 
Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, CFTC (Oct. 20, 2011) (NFA Cost 
Estimates Letter).
    \92\ The number of MSPs is estimated to be quite small, at six 
or fewer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Registration Fees
    The Commission is permitted to collect registration fees under CEA 
section 8a(1). These registration fees are established by NFA as the 
Commission's delegee under CEA section 8a(10). NFA has not yet adopted, 
and the Commission has not yet approved, an NFA rule setting forth 
registration fees for SDs and MSPs, although NFA currently estimates 
that such Swaps Entity registration fee will be $15,000.\93\ At such 
time as the Section 4s Implementing Regulations are finalized and the 
NFA registration fees established under CEA section 8a(1) are approved, 
the Commission will revise the information collection for which it has 
sought approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ See infra pt. III.C (discussing the costs and benefits of 
this rulemaking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Revised Burden Hour Estimates for the Information Collection
    For the reasons outlined above, the Commission has determined to 
revise the burden hour estimates for this information collection as 
follows. The burden associated with the new regulations implementing 
the registration process for SDs and MSPs is estimated to be 629 hours, 
assuming 125 respondents, which will result from: (1) Application for 
registration by SDs and MSPs and submission of required information on 
behalf of their respective principals; (2) initially, no withdrawals 
from registration by SDs or MSPs and a relatively small decrease in the 
number of their respective principals; and (3) initially, no reported 
corrections. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial 
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose 
or provide information to or for a federal agency.
    The respondent burden for this collection is estimated to average 1 
hour per response for the Form 7-R; 0.8 hours per response for the Form 
8-R; 0.1 hours per response for the Form 7-W; 0.2 hours per response 
for the Form 8-T; and 0.1 hours per response for the Form 3-R. These 
estimates include the time needed: To review instructions; to

[[Page 2623]]

develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the 
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, 
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 
information; to adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously 
applicable instructions and requirements; to train personnel to be able 
to respond to a collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise 
disclose the information.
Form 7-R
    Respondents/Affected Entities: 125.
    Estimated number of responses: 125.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 1 hour.
    Frequency of collection: On occasion and annually.
    Burden statement: 125 respondents x 1 hour = 125 Burden Hours.
Form 8-R
    Respondents/Affected Entities: 5 principals per each of 125 SDs and 
MSPs.
    Estimated number of responses: 625.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 0.8 hours.
    Frequency of collection: On occasion.
    Burden statement: 625 respondents x 0.8 hours = 500 Burden Hours.
Form 8-T
    Respondents/Affected Entities: 1 principal per each of 20 SDs and 
MSPs.
    Estimated number of responses: 20.
    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 0.2 hours.
    Frequency of collection: On occasion.
    Burden statement: 20 respondents x 0.2 hours = 4 Burden Hours.

C. Considerations of Costs and Benefits of the Rulemaking

    This final rulemaking implements provisions of the CEA, as amended 
by the Dodd-Frank Act, mandating the registration of Swaps Entities. 
CEA section 4s(a) makes it unlawful for a person to act as an SD or MSP 
unless it is registered with the Commission. CEA section 4s(b) requires 
an SD or MSP to apply for registration in accordance with such form and 
manner as the Commission may prescribe. To effectuate the Congressional 
directive, this final rulemaking: Details the registration process for 
SDs and MSPs; requires Swaps Entities to become and remain members of 
an RFA; and implements the prohibition against a Swaps Entity 
permitting a statutorily disqualified associated person from effecting 
or being involved in effecting swaps on behalf of the Swaps Entity.
    CEA section 15(a) requires the Commission to consider the costs and 
benefits of its actions before promulgating regulations. The Commission 
must evaluate costs and benefits in light of five broad areas of market 
and public concern: (1) Protection of market participants and the 
public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of 
futures markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk management 
practices; and (5) other public interest considerations.
    Before adopting these registration process regulations for Swaps 
Entities, the Commission sought public comment on the Proposal, 
including comment on the costs and benefits of the Proposal.\94\ The 
Commission has considered all comments, and, in particular, reasonable 
alternatives suggested by commenters. In some instances, for the 
reasons discussed above, the Commission has adopted such alternatives 
or modifications to the proposed regulations where, in the Commission's 
judgment, the alternative or modification accomplishes the same 
regulatory objective in a more effective manner. The Commission also 
specifically invited commenters to submit ``any data or other 
information that they may have quantifying or qualifying the costs and 
benefits of the proposal with their comment letters.'' \95\ Other than 
estimates of registration fees and annual membership dues from NFA 
(currently the only RFA),\96\ the Commission did not receive any 
information quantifying or qualifying the costs or benefits of the 
proposed regulations relating to the registration process for Swaps 
Entities. The Commission did, however, receive general comments on the 
cost-benefit considerations of the rulemaking. These are addressed in 
the discussion below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ See 75 FR 71379 at 71386-87.
    \95\ Id.
    \96\ NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Benefits of SD and MSP Registration Regulations
    The Commission believes that the benefits of this final rulemaking 
are considerable even if not quantifiable. Registration, as mandated by 
Congress in the Dodd-Frank Act, will enable the Commission to increase 
market integrity and protect market participants and the public by 
identifying the universe of SDs and MSPs subject to heightened 
regulatory requirements and oversight in connection with their swaps 
activities. This rulemaking identifies the process to commence 
registration by an SD or MSP, specifies the applicable registration 
forms, and explains how SDs and MSPs should apply for registration. The 
Commission believes that this final rulemaking's specification of a 
registration process for SDs and MSPs administered by an RFA leverages 
the RFA's existing expertise and economies of scale and scope.
    Further, and as is discussed above,\97\ the Commission is 
exercising its discretion under the Dodd-Frank Act to provide for an 
exception in Regulation 23.22 from the prohibition against an SD or MSP 
permitting a person associated with it who is subject to a statutory 
disqualification to effect or be involved in effecting swaps on its 
behalf. In taking this action, the Commission is limiting the burden on 
SDs and MSPs with respect to their vetting of potential associated 
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ See supra pt. II.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Costs of SD and MSP Registration Regulations
    The Commission has identified and considered several costs 
associated with this rulemaking. First, an SD or MSP must pay fees to 
register with the Commission through NFA. Second, because this 
rulemaking requires a registrant to become and remain a member of an 
RFA--and NFA is currently the only RFA--Swaps Entities will incur the 
costs of annual NFA membership dues. Third, NFA is expected to incur 
expenses for executing the anticipated delegated registration process 
function on the Commission's behalf and for monitoring compliance by 
its SD and MSP members with NFA rules.\98\ Fourth, Swaps Entities will 
incur costs when completing various CFTC registration forms that must 
be filed with NFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ The NFA Cost Estimates Letter explains that NFA will incur 
direct and indirect costs associated with employing staff to perform 
this review and confirmation, and that the registration fee estimate 
of $15,000 has been designed to offset a portion of the costs that 
NFA will incur in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is obligated to estimate the burden of and provide 
supporting statements for any collection of information it seeks to 
establish under considerations contained in the PRA, and seek approval 
of those requirements from OMB. Therefore, the estimated burden and 
support of the collection of information in this rulemaking, as well as 
consideration of the comments thereto, are discussed in the PRA section 
of this rulemaking as required by that statute.\99\ Registrants are 
required to update these forms when the information provided therein 
changes and to confirm these changes annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ See supra pt. III.B.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2624]]

a. Fees and Dues
    Based on current estimates from NFA, the Commission believes that 
SDs and MSPs will incur the following registration fees: (a) $15,000 
per SD or MSP registration application, which will include the initial 
determination by NFA of compliance with the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulations; \100\ and (b) $85 per person for processing fingerprints 
and background information for principals.\101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \100\ The Commission estimated $500 for the SD/MSP registration 
application fee in the Proposal, based on information NFA provided 
to staff upon request in connection with the development of the 
Proposal. See 75 FR at 71387. Since then, NFA significantly altered 
the registration fees it estimates it will be charging SD and MSP 
applicants, due to NFA's expected review and confirmation of an SD 
or MSP's initial compliance with each Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation prior to the SD or MSP becoming registered. NFA Cost 
Estimates Letter.
    \101\ This amount is unchanged from the Proposal. See 75 FR at 
71387.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on current estimates from NFA, the Commission believes that 
SDs and MSPs will incur annual NFA membership dues ranging from 
$125,000 to $1,000,000 per member, based upon the size and complexity 
of the firm's swap business.\102\ The increase in the estimate of NFA 
membership dues is driven by two factors: First, the decision by NFA to 
recover costs for oversight of its SD and MSP members primarily through 
a membership dues structure, rather than assessing a fee on swap 
transactions similar to the fee NFA imposes on futures transactions; 
and second, NFA's estimate of the annual cost of its regulatory program 
for Swaps Entities when that program is fully staffed and operational. 
It is possible that NFA's estimates will change over time. 
Additionally, rules relating to membership dues must be approved by 
various NFA authorities, and, in accordance with CEA section 17(j), 
must be approved by the Commission. The Commission expects that NFA 
will submit these rules for full review and approval.\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
    \103\ Id. (stating that NFA will submit these proposed initial 
registration fees, and membership dues to the Commission for full 
review and approval).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. NFA Expenses
    Concurrently with the adoption of these regulations, the Commission 
intends to issue the Notice and Order, whereby it will delegate to an 
RFA--i.e., NFA--its authority to register SDs and MSPs. Included in 
this delegation will be the authority to determine an applicant's 
fitness for registration and initial compliance with the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations as they relate to the applicant. Also, the 
Commission is adopting proposed Regulation 170.16 to require that SDs 
and MSPs become and remain members of an RFA. As is stated above, NFA 
currently is the sole RFA.
    Consistent with the current regulatory practice for Commission 
registrants who are NFA members, NFA will be responsible for monitoring 
compliance with NFA rules applicable to its members who are SDs and 
MSPs.\104\ NFA therefore will incur overhead and direct costs on a 
continuing basis attributable to oversight activities to confirm SD and 
MSP compliance with applicable NFA rules in addition to performing 
registration processing functions.\105\ NFA's currently estimated 
$15,000 application fee for registering SDs and MSPs does not include 
charges related to ongoing NFA oversight of its SD and MSP members for 
compliance with NFA rules--which, as is stated above, NFA expects to 
recover through the dues it will charge its SD and MSP members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \104\ These NFA requirements will be as strict as or stricter 
than the Section 4s Implementing Regulations, and like registration 
fees and membership dues, will be subject to Commission review and 
approval pursuant to CEA section 17(j). See supra pt. II.E.
    \105\ For futures transactions, NFA collects a fee per 
transaction. Initially, NFA expected to collect a fee per 
transaction from its SD and MSP members to defray the costs of 
overseeing their operations and activities, an approach it is no 
longer pursuing. NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NFA's regulatory program for the oversight of Swaps Entities will 
entail significant costs. Based on an assumption of 125 SD and MSP 
members, NFA estimates that the annual cost of this regulatory program 
when it is fully staffed and operational in approximately three years 
will be approximately $35-$45 million.\106\ NFA has stated that ``[i]n 
order to generate at least $35 million in revenue, [NFA has] 
preliminarily calculated that membership dues for SDs and MSPs could 
range between $125,000-$1 million per Member firm based upon the size 
and complexity of the firm's swaps business.''\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ NFA Cost Estimates Letter. In the Proposal, the Commission 
estimated for PRA purposes that as many as 250 SDs and 50 MSPs may 
register. See 75 FR at 71386. Should there be more than 125 Swaps 
Entities, NFA's total annual costs for the regulatory program may 
exceed this estimate. NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
    \107\ NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By delegating the authority to perform the registration functions 
for SDs and MSPs to an RFA, the Commission will avoid the expense of 
establishing a new registration program within the agency and will 
provide a familiar and efficient means of implementing the statutory 
requirements for the registration of SDs and MSPs.\108\ Some SDs and 
MSPs will have previous experience with the registration process for 
futures intermediaries. The Commission believes that by delegating the 
registration process to an established RFA that already has similar 
oversight responsibilities for other persons registered with the 
Commission, the regulatory objectives of the Dodd-Frank Act can be 
achieved in a more cost-effective manner. The Commission anticipates 
that delegating the authority to perform registration functions for SDs 
and MSPs to an RFA will avoid the costs associated with duplicating the 
systems, processes, and personnel of the RFA.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ One commenter wrote that ``given the budgetary uncertainty 
faced by the Commission'' the delegation to RFA-registration model 
provides the Commission with ``flexibility'' in its oversight of SDs 
and MSPs. NEFI/PMAA Comment Letter.
    \109\ One commenter stated that SROs reduce the costs of 
regulation to the government and the taxpayer. ISDA Comment Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, the Commission believes that it will be more cost-effective 
for NFA to augment its current systems and processes to accommodate the 
new SD and MSP registrants than it would be for the Commission to build 
the same capabilities. The Commission further believes that the 
delegation of the authority to process SD and MSP registration 
applications to an RFA, with the imposition of fees on those persons 
who must register, is a prudent and effective approach. This model, 
currently employed in the futures context, has worked successfully for 
Commission registrants and the Commission for many years. While one of 
the commenters on the Proposal expressed concern about NFA's current 
lack of swaps expertise, the Commission notes NFA's recent efforts to 
develop expertise in this area (e.g., forming a Swap Dealer Advisory 
Committee in May 2010 \110\) and, accordingly, does not believe this 
concern merits a different conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ NFA Cost Estimates Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Registration of Foreign Swaps Entities
    The Commission received many comments on the Proposal from entities 
such as foreign banks and derivatives dealers arguing that several of 
the Commission's proposed regulations, taken together, would require 
massive and potentially expensive internal reorganizations to comply 
with the new swaps regulatory regime. Some commenters predicted adverse 
consequences to the U.S. swaps markets if foreign entities were 
required to register as SDs or MSPs, such as

[[Page 2625]]

decreased competition, reduced liquidity, an exodus of foreign-based 
market participants from the U.S. markets, rising costs for their U.S. 
customers, and increased systemic risk. Some argued that the Commission 
should defer to regulators in the home jurisdiction lest participants 
be subject to multiple and inconsistent regulatory burdens.\111\ Most 
of these comments address the question of which entities are SDs or 
MSPs, and the consequences of being required to register as such, 
rather than the costs of the registration process per se.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \111\ These commenters did not quantify these costs. Further, 
the Commission is unable to estimate these costs, which it views as 
not directly related to the costs of the registration process 
regulations for SDs and MSPs. These costs are more costs of 
compliance with the Section 4s Implementing Regulations, which the 
Commission intends to address as it finalizes those regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission generally does not believe that foreign-based Swaps 
Entities will bear higher costs associated with the registration 
process than U.S.-based Swaps Entities. The identified costs are fees 
to become registered under the CEA with the Commission and annual NFA 
membership dues. Many of these foreign-based commenters are already 
familiar with navigating various U.S. federal and state regulatory 
regimes in connection with their other lines of business, such as 
banking and insurance. Moreover, many of the commenters already have 
operations and capable personnel physically located in the U.S. To the 
extent that an SD or MSP has neither familiarity with other U.S. 
regulatory regimes nor personnel physically located in the U.S., the 
Commission believes that any potentially higher costs that may be 
incurred in connection with the registration process regulations by a 
foreign-based Swaps Entity are a necessary consequence of adequately 
regulating the U.S. swaps markets and ensuring a level playing field 
for all intermediaries involved in the U.S. swaps markets.
3. Evaluation of Market and Public Interest Considerations in Light of 
CEA Section 15(a)
(1) Protection of Market Participants and the Public
    The registration of Swaps Entities is a critical component of the 
comprehensive regulation of these persons. It is a statutory 
requirement that SDs and MSPs be registered. Notably, the registration 
process will serve to confirm initial compliance by an SD or MSP with 
the Section 4s Implementing Regulations. Moreover, attendant to 
applying for registration, SDs and MSPs, along with their principals, 
will be vetted, and those deemed unfit will be barred from 
registration. As a result, registration and the related requirements 
\112\ of this final rulemaking will help protect the public by 
preventing those unfit to intermediate and participate in the swaps 
markets from registering in the first instance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ E.g., as a prerequisite to granting registration, NFA will 
confirm initial compliance by an applicant for registration as an SD 
or MSP with each Section 4s Implementing Regulation, and a Swaps 
Entity may not, subject to certain limited exceptions, permit a 
statutorily disqualified associated person to effect or be involved 
in effecting swaps on its behalf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, NFA provides an on-line, public database, the Background 
Affiliation Status Information Center (BASIC), with information on each 
registrant's status and the status of the registrant's principals. 
BASIC also provides additional information, such as regulatory actions 
taken by NFA or the Commission, with respect to a registrant or its 
principals. Access to this database provides all persons with important 
information about Commission registrants with whom they may seek to 
transact business.
(2) Efficiency, Competitiveness, and the Financial Integrity of the 
Market
    Utilizing NFA's existing registration expertise and resources 
promotes efficiency in that it employs NFA's existing capabilities 
rather than requiring Commission investment (e.g., hiring staff and 
building a technological infrastructure to process applications) to 
build a new registration system. Similarly, because NFA is building 
upon its existing oversight infrastructure, it should incur fewer costs 
to oversee compliance relative to direct Commission oversight. While 
the Commission will continue to oversee the registration process, 
delegation of the performance of registration functions to an RFA will 
avoid the unnecessary diversion of limited agency resources from the 
Commission's other responsibilities to protect the public.
(3) Price Discovery
    The Commission has not identified any impact on price discovery 
through the registration provisions of this rulemaking.
(4) Sound Risk Management Practices
    As is explained above, registration is a critical component within 
the Dodd-Frank Act regulatory regime to ensure the fitness of SDs and 
MSPs. In addition to disqualifying ineligible persons, it enhances 
market participants' ability to make more informed counterparty 
selection decisions. In this way, it is consistent with sound risk 
management practices.
(5) Other Public Interest Considerations
    CEA section 15 directs the Commission to consider in its cost-
benefit evaluation ``other public interest considerations.'' One such 
consideration is public confidence. As an element of a regulatory 
regime that establishes minimum participation standards, the Commission 
believes that the registration process will promote public confidence 
in swaps market integrity.

List of Subjects

17 CFR Part 1

    Brokers, Commodity futures, Definitions, Major swap participants, 
Swap dealers.

17 CFR Part 3

    Customer protection, Licensing, Major swap participants, 
Registration, Swap dealers.

17 CFR Part 23

    Associated persons, Major swap participants, Registration, Swap 
dealers.

17 CFR Part 170

    Membership, Registered futures associations.

    For the reasons presented above, the Commission hereby amends 
Chapter I of Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 1--GENERAL REGULATIONS UNDER THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT

0
1. The authority citation for part 1 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 2a, 5, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, 6e, 6f, 6g, 
6h, 6i, 6k, 6l, 6m, 6n, 6o, 6p, 6r, 6s, 7, 7a-1, 7a-2, 7b, 7b-3, 8, 
9, 10a, 12, 12a, 12c, 13a, 13a-1, 16, 16a, 19, 21, 23, and 24, as 
amended by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (July 21, 
2010).


0
2. In Sec.  1.3, paragraph (aa)(6) is added to read as follows:


Sec.  1.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (aa) * * *
    (6) A swap dealer or major swap participant as a partner, officer, 
employee, agent (or any natural person occupying a similar status or 
performing similar functions), in any capacity that involves:
    (i) The solicitation or acceptance of swaps (other than in a 
clerical or ministerial capacity); or

[[Page 2626]]

    (ii) The supervision of any person or persons so engaged.
* * * * *

PART 3--REGISTRATION

0
3. The authority citation for part 3 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 522, 522b; 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 
6d, 6e, 6f, 6g, 6h, 6i, 6k, 6m, 6n, 6o, 6p, 6s, 8, 9, 9a, 12, 12a, 
13b, 13c, 16a, 18, 19, 21, and 23, as amended by Title VII of the 
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. 
111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (July 21, 2010).


0
4. Section 3.1 is amended by adding paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3.1  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (f) Section 4s Implementing Regulation. Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation means a regulation the Commission issues pursuant to section 
4s(e), 4s(f), 4s(h), 4s(i), 4s(j), 4s(k), or 4s(l) of the Act.
    (g) Swap Definitional Regulation. Swap Definitional Regulation 
means a regulation the Commission issues to further define the term 
``swap dealer,'' ``major swap participant'' or ``swap'' in section 
1a(49), 1a(33) or 1a(47) of the Act, respectively, pursuant to the 
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

0
5. Section 3.2 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the section heading; and
0
b. Adding paragraph (c)(3).
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  3.2  Registration processing by the National Futures Association; 
notification and duration of registration; provisional registration.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3)(i) If an applicant for registration as a swap dealer or major 
swap participant pursuant to Sec.  3.10(a)(1)(v) files a Form 7-R and a 
Form 8-R and fingerprint card for each natural person who is a 
principal of the applicant, accompanied by such documentation as may be 
required to demonstrate compliance with each of the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations, as defined in Sec.  3.1(f), as are applicable 
to it, in accordance with the terms of the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulations, the National Futures Association shall notify the swap 
dealer or major swap participant, as the case may be, that it is 
provisionally registered.
    (ii) Subsequent to providing notice of provisional registration to 
an applicant for registration as a swap dealer or major swap 
participant, the National Futures Association shall determine whether 
the documentation submitted pursuant to Sec.  3.10(a)(1)(v) by the 
applicant demonstrates compliance with the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation to which it pertains; Provided, that where the National 
Futures Association has notified the applicant that it is provisionally 
registered, the applicant must supplement its registration application 
by providing such documentation as may be required to demonstrate 
compliance with each Section 4s Implementing Regulation that the 
Commission issues subsequent to the date the National Futures 
Association notifies the applicant that it is provisionally registered.
    (iii) On and after the date on which the National Futures 
Association confirms that the applicant for registration as a swap 
dealer or major swap participant has demonstrated its initial 
compliance with the applicable requirements of each of the Section 4s 
Implementing Regulations and all other applicable registration 
requirements under the Act and Commission regulations, the provisional 
registration of the applicant shall cease and it shall be registered as 
a swap dealer or major swap participant, as the case may be.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 3.4 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  3.4  Registration in one capacity not included in registration in 
any other capacity.

    (a) Except as may be otherwise provided in the Act or in any rule, 
regulation, or order of the Commission, each futures commission 
merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap 
participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity 
trading advisor, leverage transaction merchant, floor broker, floor 
trader, and associated person (other than an associated person of a 
swap dealer or major swap participant) must register as such under the 
Act. Registration in one capacity under the Act shall not include 
registration in any other capacity; Provided, however, That a 
registered floor broker need not also register as a floor trader in 
order to engage in activity as a floor trader.
* * * * *

0
7. Section 3.10 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Revising paragraph (a)(1)(i);
0
c. Adding paragraphs (a)(1)(iii), (iv), and (v); and
0
d. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (d).
    The additions and revisons read as follows:


Sec.  3.10  Registration of futures commission merchants, retail 
foreign exchange dealers, introducing brokers, commodity trading 
advisors, commodity pool operators, swap dealers, major swap 
participants and leverage transaction merchants.

    (a) Application for registration. (1)(i) Except as provided in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section, application for registration as a 
futures commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap 
dealer, major swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool 
operator, commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant 
must be on Form 7-R, completed and filed with the National Futures 
Association in accordance with the instructions thereto.
* * * * *
    (iii) Applicants for registration as a commodity pool operator must 
accompany their Form 7-R with the financial statements described in 
Sec.  4.13(c) of this chapter.
    (iv) Applicants for registration as a leverage transaction merchant 
must accompany their Form 7-R with a Form 2-FR in accordance with the 
provisions of Sec.  31.13 of this chapter.
    (v)(A) Applicants for registration as a swap dealer or major swap 
participant must accompany their Form 7-R with such documentation as 
may be required to demonstrate compliance with each Section 4s 
Implementing Regulation, as defined in Sec.  3.1(f), applicable to 
them, in accordance with the terms of the Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation; Provided, however, that for the purposes of this paragraph 
(a)(1)(v) the term ``compliance'' includes the term ``the ability to 
comply,'' to the extent that a particular Section 4s Implementing 
Regulation may require demonstration of the ability to comply with a 
requirement thereunder.
    (B) The filing of the Form 7-R and accompanying documentation by 
the applicant swap dealer or major swap participant authorizes the 
Commission to conduct on-site inspection of the applicant to determine 
compliance with the Section 4s Implementing Regulations applicable to 
it.
    (C)(1) At any time prior to the latest effective date of the Swap 
Definitional Regulations, defined in Sec.  3.1(g), any person may apply 
to be registered as a swap dealer or major swap participant.
    (2) By no later than the latest effective date of the Swap 
Definitional Regulations, each person who is a swap dealer or major 
swap participant on that date must apply to be registered as a swap 
dealer or major swap participant, as the case may be.
    (3) From and after the latest effective date of the Swap 
Definitional

[[Page 2627]]

Regulations, each person who intends to engage in business as a swap 
dealer or major swap participant must apply to be registered as a swap 
dealer or major swap participant, as the case may be.
    (D)(1) Where an applicant for registration as a swap dealer or 
major swap participant to whom the National Futures Association has 
provided notice of provisional registration under Sec.  3.2(c)(3) fails 
to demonstrate compliance with a Section 4s Implementing Regulation, 
the National Futures Association will notify the applicant that its 
application is deficient, whereupon the applicant must withdraw its 
registration application, it must not engage in any new activity as a 
swap dealer or major swap participant, as the case may be, and the 
applicant shall cease to be provisionally registered; Provided, that in 
the event the applicant fails to withdraw its registration application 
or cure the deficiency within 90 days following receipt of notice from 
the National Futures Association that its application is deficient, the 
application will be deemed withdrawn and thereupon its provisional 
registration shall cease; Provided further, that upon written request 
by the applicant submitted to the Commission, the Commission may in its 
discretion extend the time by which the applicant must cure the 
deficiency.
    (2) The provisions of the foregoing paragraph (a)(1)(v)(D)(1) of 
this section shall supplement and be in addition to any other 
activities in which the National Futures Association engages under the 
Act and Commission regulations in connection with processing an 
application for registration as a swap dealer or major swap 
participant.
    (E) Unless specifically reserved in the applicable swap 
documentation, no withdrawal, deemed withdrawal, cessation or 
revocation of registration as a swap dealer or major swap participant 
pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)(v), (b), or (d) of this section shall 
constitute a termination event, force majeure, an illegality, increased 
costs, a regulatory change, or a similar event under a swap (including 
any related credit support arrangement) that would permit a party to 
terminate, renegotiate, modify, amend or supplement one or more 
transactions under the swap.
* * * * *
    (b) Duration of registration. (1) A person registered as a futures 
commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major 
swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, 
commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant in 
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section will continue to be so 
registered until the effective date of any revocation or withdrawal of 
such registration. Upon effectiveness of any revocation or withdrawal 
of registration, such person will immediately be prohibited from 
engaging in new activities requiring registration under the Act or from 
representing himself to be a registrant under the Act or the 
representative or agent of any registrant during the pendency of any 
suspension of such registration.
* * * * *
    (d) On a date to be established by the National Futures 
Association, and in accordance with procedures established by the 
National Futures Association, each registrant as a futures commission 
merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap 
participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity 
trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant shall, on an annual 
basis, review and update registration information maintained with the 
National Futures Association. The failure to complete the review and 
update within thirty days following the date established by the 
National Futures Association shall be deemed to be a request for 
withdrawal from registration, which shall be processed in accordance 
with the provisions of Sec.  3.33(f).
* * * * *

0
8. Section 3.21 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text and paragraph (c)(1)(iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (c)(1)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(2)(i); and
0
d. Revising paragraph (c)(4)(i).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  3.21  Exemption from fingerprinting requirement in certain cases.

* * * * *
    (c) Outside directors. Any futures commission merchant, retail 
foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap participant, 
introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity trading advisor, 
or leverage transaction merchant that has a principal who is a director 
but is not also an officer or employee of the firm may, in lieu of 
submitting a fingerprint card in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec. Sec.  3.10(a)(2) and 3.31(a)(3), file a ``Notice Pursuant to Rule 
3.21(c)'' with the National Futures Association. Such notice shall 
state, if true, that such outside director:
    (1) * * *
    (iv) The solicitation of leverage customers' orders for leverage 
transactions,
    (v) The solicitation or acceptance of a swap agreement;
    (2) * * *
    (i) Transactions involving ``commodity interests,'' as that term is 
defined in Sec.  1.3(yy);
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) The name of the futures commission merchant, retail foreign 
exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap participant, introducing 
broker, commodity pool operator, commodity trading advisor, leverage 
transaction merchant, or applicant for registration in any of these 
capacities of which the person is an outside director;
* * * * *

0
9. Section 3.30 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  3.30  Current address for purpose of delivery of communications 
from the Commission or the National Futures Association.

    (a) The address of each registrant, applicant for registration, and 
principal, as submitted on the application for registration (Form 7-R 
or Form 8-R) or as submitted on the biographical supplement (Form 8-R) 
shall be deemed to be the address for delivery to the registrant, 
applicant or principal for any communications from the Commission or 
the National Futures Association, including any summons, complaint, 
reparation claim, order, subpoena, special call, request for 
information, notice, and other written documents or correspondence, 
unless the registrant, applicant or principal specifies another address 
for this purpose: Provided, that the Commission or the National Futures 
Association may address any correspondence relating to a biographical 
supplement submitted for or on behalf of a principal to the futures 
commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major 
swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, 
commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant with which 
the principal is affiliated and may address any correspondence relating 
to an associated person to the futures commission merchant, retail 
foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap participant, 
introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity trading advisor, 
or leverage transaction merchant with which the associated person or 
the applicant for registration is or will be associated as an 
associated person.
* * * * *

[[Page 2628]]


0
10. Section 3.31 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (b), and 
(c)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  3.31  Deficiencies, inaccuracies, and changes, to be reported.

    (a)(1) Each applicant or registrant as a futures commission 
merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major swap 
participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity 
trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant shall, in accordance 
with the instructions thereto, promptly correct any deficiency or 
inaccuracy in Form 7-R or Form 8-R which no longer renders accurate and 
current the information contained therein. Each such correction shall 
be made on Form 3-R and shall be prepared and filed in accordance with 
the instructions thereto. Provided, however, that where a registrant is 
reporting a change in the form of organization from or to a sole 
proprietorship, the registrant must file a Form 7-W regarding the pre-
existing organization and a Form 7-R regarding the newly formed 
organization.
* * * * *
    (b)(1) Each applicant for registration or registrant as a floor 
broker, floor trader or associated person, and each principal of a 
futures commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, 
introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity trading advisor, 
or leverage transaction merchant must, in accordance with the 
instructions thereto, promptly correct any deficiency or inaccuracy in 
the Form 8-R or supplemental statement thereto which renders no longer 
accurate and current the information contained in the Form 8-R or 
supplemental statement. Each such correction must be made on Form 3-R 
and must be prepared and filed in accordance with the instructions 
thereto.
    (2) Each applicant for registration or registrant as a swap dealer 
or major swap participant and each principal of a swap dealer or major 
swap participant, must, in accordance with the instructions thereto, 
promptly correct any deficiency or inaccuracy in the Form 8-R or 
supplemental statement thereto which renders no longer accurate and 
current the information contained in the Form 8-R or supplemental 
statement. Each such correction must be made on Form 3-R and must be 
prepared and filed in accordance with the instructions thereto.
    (c) * * *
    (2) Each person registered as, or applying for registration as, a 
futures commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap 
dealer, major swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool 
operator, commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant 
must, within thirty days after the termination of the affiliation of a 
principal with the registrant or applicant, file a notice thereof with 
the National Futures Association.
* * * * *

0
11. Section 3.33 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text and paragraphs (b)(6)(vi) 
and (vii);
0
c. Adding paragraphs (b)(6)(viii) and (ix); and
0
d. Revising paragraph (e).
    The revisions and additions to read as follows:


Sec.  3.33  Withdrawal from registration.

    (a) A futures commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, 
swap dealer, major swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool 
operator, commodity trading advisor, leverage transaction merchant, 
floor broker or floor trader may request that its registration be 
withdrawn in accordance with the requirements of this section if:
* * * * *
    (b) A request for withdrawal from registration as a futures 
commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major 
swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, 
commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant must be 
made on Form 7-W, and a request for withdrawal from registration as a 
floor broker or floor trader must be made on Form 8-W, completed and 
filed with the National Futures Association in accordance with the 
instructions thereto. The request for withdrawal must be made by a 
person duly authorized by the registrant and must specify:
* * * * *
    (6) * * *
    (vi) The nature and extent of any pending customer, retail forex 
customer, option customer, leverage customer, swap counterparty or 
commodity pool participant claims against the registrant, and, to the 
best of the registrant's knowledge and belief, the nature and extent of 
any anticipated or threatened customer, option customer, leverage 
customer, swap counterparty or commodity pool participant claims 
against the registrant;
    (vii) In the case of a futures commission merchant or a retail 
foreign exchange dealer which is a party to a guarantee agreement, that 
all such agreements have been or will be terminated in accordance with 
the provisions of Sec.  1.10(j) of this chapter not more than thirty 
days after the filing of the request for withdrawal from registration;
    (viii) In the case of a swap dealer, that the person will not 
engage in any new activity described in the definition of the term 
``swap dealer'' in section 1a(49) of the Act, as such term may be 
further defined by the Commission; and
    (ix) In the case of a major swap participant, that the person will 
not engage in any new activity described in the definition of the term 
``major swap participant'' in section 1a(33) of the Act, as such term 
may be further defined by the Commission.
* * * * *
    (e) A request for withdrawal from registration as a futures 
commission merchant, retail foreign exchange dealer, swap dealer, major 
swap participant, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, 
commodity trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant on Form 7-
W, and a request for withdrawal from registration as a floor broker or 
floor trader on Form 8-W, must be filed with the National Futures 
Association and a copy of such request must be sent by the National 
Futures Association within three business days of the receipt of such 
withdrawal request to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 
Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, Three Lafayette 
Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. In addition, any 
floor broker or floor trader requesting withdrawal from registration 
must file a copy of his Form 8-W with each contract market that has 
granted him trading privileges. Within three business days of any 
determination by the National Futures Association under Sec.  3.10(d) 
to treat the failure by a registrant to file an annual Form 7-R as a 
request for withdrawal, the National Futures Association shall send the 
Commission notice of that determination.
* * * * *

0
12. Part 23 is added to read as follows:

PART 23--SWAP DEALERS AND MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS

Subpart A--[Reserved]
Sec.
23.1-23.20 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Registration
23.21 Registration of swap dealers and major swap participants.
23.22 Associated persons of swap dealers and major swap 
participants.

[[Page 2629]]

23.23-23.40 [Reserved]

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 6p, 6s, 9, 9a, 13b, 
13c, 16a, 18, 19, 21 as amended by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall 
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. 111-203, 124 
Stat. 1376 (July 21, 2010).

Subpart A--Definitions


Sec. Sec.  23.1-23.20  [Reserved]

Subpart B--Registration


Sec.  23.21  Registration of swap dealers and major swap participants.

    (a) Each person who comes within the definition of the term ``swap 
dealer'' in section 1a(49) of the Act, as such term may be further 
defined by the Commission, is subject to the registration provisions 
under the Act and to part 3 of this chapter.
    (b) Each person who comes within the definition of the term ``major 
swap participant'' in section 1a(33) of the Act, as such term may be 
further defined by the Commission, is subject to the registration 
provisions under the Act and to part 3 of this chapter.
    (c) Each affiliate of an insured depository institution described 
in section 716(c) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act (Pub. L. 111-203 section 716(c), 124 Stat. 1376 (2010)) 
is required to be registered as a swap dealer if the affiliate is a 
swap dealer or as a major swap participant if the affiliate is a major 
swap participant.


Sec.  23.22  Associated persons of swap dealers and major swap 
participants.

    (a) Definition. For the purpose of this section, the term 
``person'' means an ``associated person of a swap dealer or major swap 
participant'' as defined in section 1a(4) of the Act and Sec.  
1.3(aa)(6).
    (b) Fitness. No swap dealer or major swap participant may permit a 
person who is subject to a statutory disqualification under section 
8a(2) or 8a(3) of the Act to effect or be involved in effecting swaps 
on behalf of the swap dealer or major swap participant, if the swap 
dealer or major swap participant knows, or in the exercise of 
reasonable care should know, of the statutory disqualification; 
Provided, however, that the prohibition set forth in this paragraph (b) 
shall not apply to any person listed as a principal or registered as an 
associated person of a futures commission merchant, retail foreign 
exchange dealer, introducing broker, commodity pool operator, commodity 
trading advisor, or leverage transaction merchant, or any person 
registered as a floor broker or floor trader, notwithstanding that the 
person is subject to a disqualification from registration under section 
8a(2) or 8a(3) of the Act.


Sec. Sec.  23.23-23.40  [Reserved]

PART 170--REGISTERED FUTURES ASSOCIATIONS

0
13. The authority citation for part 170 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6p, 12a and 21.


0
14. Section 170.16 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  170.16  Swap dealers and major swap participants.

    Each person registered as a swap dealer or major swap participant 
must become and remain a member of at least one futures association 
that is registered under section 17 of the Act and that provides for 
the membership therein of such swap dealer or major swap participant, 
as the case may be, unless no such futures association is so 
registered.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 11, 2012, by the 
Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.

    Note: The following appendices will not appear in the Code of 
Federal Regulations.

Appendices to Registration of Swap Dealers and Major Swap 
Participants--Commission Voting Summary and Statements of Commissioners

Appendix 1--Commission Voting Summary

    On this matter, Chairman Gensler and Commissioners Sommers, 
Chilton, O'Malia and Wetjen voted in the affirmative; no 
Commissioner voted in the negative.

Appendix 2--Statement of Chairman Gary Gensler

    I support the final rule to establish a process for the 
registration of swap dealers and major swap participants. The rule 
implements the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 
Act (Dodd-Frank Act) mandate that these entities be subject to 
registration and regulation for their swaps business. Registration 
will enable the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to monitor swap 
dealers and major swap participants for compliance with the Dodd-
Frank Act and Commission rulemakings. Through regulation of dealers, 
the Commission will be able to protect market participants and the 
public, as well as promote sound risk management practices. The 
final rule includes a requirement that swap dealers and major swap 
participants become members of a registered futures association, 
such as the National Futures Association (NFA).
    In addition, I support the order delegating to the NFA the 
authority to register swap dealers and major swap participants. This 
will help efficiently allocate resources and provide the Commission 
with flexibility.
[FR Doc. 2012-792 Filed 1-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P