23.2.2013 Official Journal of the European Union L 52/11 COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) No 149/2013 of 19 December 2012 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on indirect clearing arrangements, the clearing obligation, the public register, access to a trading venue, non-financial counterparties, and risk mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives contracts not cleared by a CCP (Text with EEA relevance) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank (!), Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC deriva- tives, central counterparties and trade repositories (%), and in particular Articles 4(4), 5(1), 6(4), 8(5), 10(4) and 11(14) thereof, Whereas: 1 G) A framework should be provided to encompass rules applicable to the clearing obligation, its application, possible exemptions and risk mitigation techniques to be established when clearing with a central counterparty (CCP) cannot take place. To ensure coherence between those provisions, which should enter into force at the same time, and to facilitate a comprehensive view and efficient access for stakeholders and in particular those subject to the obligations, it is desirable to include most of the regulatory technical standards required under Title II of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 in a single Regu- lation. In view of the global nature of the over the counter (OTC) derivatives market, this Regulation should take into account the relevant internationally —agreed guidelines and recommendations on OTC derivatives market reforms and mandatory clearing as well as the related rules developed in other jurisdictions. In particular the framework for the determination of a clearing obligation takes into account the Mandatory Clearing requirements published by the International Organization of Securities Commissions. This will support, as much as possible, convergence with the approach in other juris- dictions. In order to clearly identify a limited number of concepts stemming from Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, as well as () Not yet published in the Official Journal. () 0] L'201, 27.7.2012, p. 1. to specify technical terms necessary for developing this technical standard, a number of terms should be defined. An indirect clearing arrangement should not expose a CCP, clearing member, client or indirect client to additional ~counterparty risk and the assets and positions of the indirect client should benefit from an appropriate level of protection. It is therefore essential that any type of indirect clearing arrangements comply with minimum conditions for ensuring their safety. To that end, the parties involved in indirect clearing arrangements shall be subject to specific obligations. Such arrangements extend beyond the contractual rela- tionship between indirect clients and the client of a clearing member that provides indirect clearing services. Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 requires a CCP to be a designated system under Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 1998 on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement  systems (}). This implies that clearing members of CCPs should qualify as participants within the meaning of that Directive. Therefore to ensure an equivalent level of protection to indirect clients as granted to clients under Regulation (EU) No 6482012, it is necessary to ensure that clients providing indirect clearing services are credit institutions, investment firms, or equivalent third country credit institutions or investment firms. Indirect clearing arrangements should be established so as to ensure that indirect clients can obtain an equivalent level of protection as direct clients in a default scenario. Following the failure of a clearing member that facilitates an indirect clearing arrangement, indirect clients should be included in the transfer of client positions to an alter- native  clearing member under the portability requirements established by Articles 39 and 48 of Regu- lation (EU) No 648/2012. Appropriate safeguards against client failure should also exist within indirect clearing arrangements and should support transferring indirect client positions to an alternative provider of clearing services. () O] L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45.