[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 248 (Thursday, December 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78451-78457]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30768]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71147; File No. SR-FINRA-2013-053]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Update
the Rules Governing the Alternative Display Facility

December 19, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 9, 2013, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    FINRA is proposing to update the rules governing the Alternative
Display Facility (``ADF'') to, among other things, reflect regulatory
requirements that have been put into place since the last comprehensive
revision of the ADF rules, and to conform the ADF trade reporting
rules, to the extent practicable, to current FINRA rules relating to
trade reporting to the FINRA Trade Reporting Facilities (``TRFs'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The ADF is a quotation collection and trade reporting facility that
provides ADF Market Participants (i.e., ADF-registered market makers or
electronic communications networks (``ECNs'')) \3\ the ability to post
quotations, display orders and report transactions in NMS stocks for
submission to the Securities Information Processors for consolidation
and dissemination to vendors and other market participants. In
addition, the ADF delivers real-time data to FINRA for regulatory
purposes, including enforcement of requirements imposed by Regulation
NMS.\4\ A broker-dealer that wishes to become an ADF Trading Center and
display its quotations on the ADF must satisfy certain requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Rule 6220(a)(3).
    \4\ See 17 CFR 242.600.
    \5\ For example, Rules 6220 and 6250(a)(7) require that a
broker-dealer must execute and comply with the ADF Certification
Record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the migration of the ADF to the Multi-Product
Platform (``MPP''), FINRA has undertaken a complete review of the ADF
rules and has identified a number of rules to be updated. Some of those
updates reflect the changes to the ADF's functionality resulting from
the migration to MPP; other changes reflect regulatory requirements
that have been put into place since the last comprehensive revision of
the ADF rules, or are designed to enhance ADF operational efficiency.
Other changes conform the ADF trade reporting rules, to the extent
practicable, to current FINRA rules relating to trade reporting to the
FINRA TRFs.\6\ FINRA is also proposing a variety of non-substantive
changes to conform or otherwise streamline the ADF rules. These
proposed changes are set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FINRA notes that it has submitted proposed rule change SR-
FINRA-2013-050, which would, among other things, amend Rules 6282,
7130 and 7140. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70924
(November 15, 2013) (sic), 78 FR 71695 (November 29, 2013). FINRA
will amend this filing and/or SR-FINRA-2013-050, as necessary, to
reflect Commission approval of any of the proposed rule changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to Reflect Regulatory Changes
    Rule 6272 of the ADF rules addresses requirements regarding
quotations posted on the ADF. FINRA proposes to revise Rule 6272(a)(2)
to modify the quotation pricing obligations for Registered Reporting
ADF Market Makers in response to the National Market System Plan to
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (``Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan'').\7\ As amended, the rule will specify that the suspension of
pricing obligations for ADF Market Makers shall apply during a trading
halt except as permitted under the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (SEC File No. 4-631).
    \8\ For example, the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan provides that
``[n]o trades in an NMS Stock shall occur during a Trading Pause,
but all bids and offers may be displayed.'' Id. at 77 FR 33514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Rule 6272(b), FINRA proposes to update the minimum quotation
increment for ADF-eligible securities to account for quotations under
$1.\9\ As revised, the rule will provide that the minimum quotation
increment for quotations below $1.00 in all ADF-eligible securities
shall be $0.0001. This provision will enable ADF Participants to submit
quotations for issues under $1 in an increment that is consistent with
Rule 612 of Regulation NMS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Rule 6220 defines an ``ADF-eligible security'' as an NMS
stock as defined in Rule 600(b)(47) of SEC Regulation NMS.
    \10\ Rule 612 permits, among other things, quotations in NMS
stocks that are less than $1.00 per share to be priced in increments
of $0.0001. See 17 CFR 242.612(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Voluntary Terminations
    FINRA proposes to amend the definition of ``Registered Reporting
ADF ECN'' in Rule 6220(a) to provide additional detail as to how a
Registered Reporting ADF ECN may voluntarily terminate its
registration.\11\ As proposed, the rule will state that a Registered
Reporting ADF ECN may voluntarily withdraw from participation on the
ADF upon providing, through electronic delivery, written notice to
FINRA Market Operations of its intention to withdraw as a Registered
Reporting ADF ECN, with such withdrawal to be effective upon the first
trading day following the issuance of the written notice announcing the
Registered Reporting ADF ECN's intent to withdraw, or such other date
as specified in the written notice. This change will provide greater
clarity as to how a Registered Reporting ADF ECN may voluntarily
terminate its registration, and an efficient means by which this may be
accomplished.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Rule 6220 defines a Registered Reporting ADF ECN as ``a
member of FINRA that is an electronic communications network
(``ECN'') that elects to display orders in the ADF. A member shall
cease being a Registered Reporting ADF ECN when it has withdrawn or
voluntarily terminated its quotations on the ADF or when its
quotations have been suspended or terminated by action of FINRA.
This term also shall include a FINRA member that is an alternative
trading system (``ATS'') that displays orders in the ADF.'' As such,
this provision would apply to both ECNs and ATSs that display orders
in the ADF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to ADF Order Reporting
    FINRA also proposes to modify the order reporting requirements set
forth in Rule 6250 so that FINRA can more efficiently monitor quoting
activity on the ADF on an automated basis. FINRA requires ADF Trading
Centers to report order information so that FINRA can have detailed
information regarding the origination of orders underlying an ADF
Trading Center's quotation and use that information to enhance its
ability to monitor quotation activity on the ADF. Currently, Rule
6250(b) provides that all ADF Trading Centers that display quotations
on the ADF must record the information described in paragraphs (b)(1)
and (2) for all orders they receive from another broker-dealer via
direct or indirect electronic access. Rule 6250(d)(1) defines direct
electronic access as the ability to deliver an order for execution
directly against an individual ADF Trading Center's best bid or offer
and Rule 6250(d)(2) defines indirect electronic access as the ability
to route an order through a FINRA member, subscriber broker-dealer, or
customer broker-dealer of an ADF Trading Center for execution against
the ADF Trading Center's best bid or offer. Accordingly, current Rule
6250 is intended to only apply where the order is being sent to access
a displayed quotation. FINRA proposes to amend this provision to
clarify the scope of these requirements to require an ADF Trading
Center to record the information pursuant to Rule 6250(b)(1) and (2)
only if such order results in an execution, a cancellation, a
correction or a rejection by the ADF Trading Center. As such, an
incoming order that fully posts to the book of that ADF Trading Center
will not trigger the reporting requirements under this provision.\12\
FINRA is proposing to revise this provision to better reflect the order
information necessary for its surveillance programs related to the Firm
Quote Rule,\13\ and reduce the

reporting of excess information that may over-burden its systems and
lead to false alerts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Similarly, if an incoming order is posted to the book of
that ADF Trading Center, and is subsequently cancelled, corrected,
etc., the order reporting requirements of Rule 6250(b) would not be
triggered.
    \13\ The Firm Quote Rule provides that ``each responsible broker
or dealer shall be obligated to execute any order to buy or sell a
subject security, other than an odd-lot order, presented to it by
another broker or dealer, or any other person belonging to a
category of persons with whom such responsible broker or dealer
customarily deals, at a price at least as favorable to such buyer or
seller as the responsible broker's or dealer's published bid or
published offer (exclusive of any commission, commission equivalent
or differential customarily charged by such responsible broker or
dealer in connection with execution of any such order) in any amount
up to its published quotation size.'' 17 CFR 242.602(b)(2). See also
FINRA Rule 5220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also proposes to make a grammatical change to Rule 6250(a) to
better reflect the fact that Registered Reporting ADF ECNs are not
obligated to submit two-sided quotes (e.g., the bid and the offer).
FINRA also proposes to amend the order information required to be
provided to FINRA pursuant to Rule 6250(b) to update the terminology
used in the Order Reporting Specifications.\14\ As part of these
changes, FINRA proposes to update the reporting requirements for Order
Time and Order Response Time, which are currently required to be
reported in hours, minutes and seconds, so that ADF Trading Centers
will report this information in hours, minutes, seconds and
milliseconds, if the ADF Trading Center's system captures such
information in milliseconds. This change will make these order
reporting provisions consistent with the reporting standards being
proposed for both the Order Audit Trail System and the Trade Reporting
Facilities.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Specifically, FINRA proposes to delete the parentheticals
corresponding to the Order Entry Firm and Order Side data elements.
FINRA also proposes to replace the reference to Issue Identifier
with Symbol, delete the requirement to provide the Order Negotiable
Flag and the Trade-or-Move Flag, and delete the reference to ANY.
FINRA also proposes to replace the reference to the identifier for
the Market Making Firm to the ADF Trading Center; change the
reference to ``any other modifier'' language in Rule 6250(b)(1)(N)
(renumbered herein as Rule 6250(b)(1)(L)) to ``any other
information,'' and to use Customer Order Handling Instructions as
one example of such information; and amend the Order Response
requirement of Rule 6250(b)(2)(B) to consist of execute, cancel,
correct, or reject.
    \15\ See FINRA-2013-050, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also proposes to add new order reporting requirements in Rule
6250 for orders that are part of an ADF Trading Center's quotation (bid
or offer) that is displayed on the ADF. Specifically, FINRA proposes
that, for each order that is part of a bid or offer displayed by an ADF
Trading Center on the ADF, that ADF Trading Center must record and
report to FINRA (1) symbol; (2) side; (3) price; (4) quantity
(including displayed quantity); (5) order date and time of receipt; (6)
order instructions (including order type); (7) internal order
identifiers; (8) firm identifiers (including broker order identifier)
and capacity information; (9) quote identifier; (10) quote price; (11)
quote time; (12) short sale exemption reason, as applicable; and (13)
clearing member. In addition, all ADF Trading Centers must also record
and report the execution details, if any, of each order that is part of
a displayed bid or offer, including (1) date and time of receipt; (2)
side; (3) price; (4) quantity (including executed quantity); (5)
execution price; (6) order instructions (including order type); (7)
internal order identifiers; (8) firm identifiers (including broker
order identifier); (9) execution identifier; (10) quote price; (11)
quote identifier; and (12) quote time. For purposes of information
related to time, an ADF Trading Center must report such information in
the finest increment (e.g., milliseconds) that is captured in the ADF
Trading Center's system.
    This information shall be reported to FINRA in ``next day'' file
submission, with such information reported to FINRA no later than 8:00
a.m. Eastern Time on the day following receipt of the order; provided,
however, that an ADF Trading Center must report any of this information
to FINRA immediately upon request. These requirements will enable FINRA
to ascertain the market participant that is responsible for the order
generating a quotation that is displayed on the ADF, which will enhance
FINRA's ability to conduct quotation-based surveillance.
    Finally, FINRA proposes a technical change to amend the provision
in Rule 6250 governing the procedures for reviewing system outages.
Currently, the rule requires that a member initiate a review of a
system outage by submitting a written request via facsimile or
otherwise; as revised, the rule will specify that an ADF Trading Center
that seeks review of a system outage shall submit a written request via
facsimile, email, personal delivery, courier or overnight mail to FINRA
Product Management. This change will make the ADF rules more internally
consistent by conforming the procedures for requesting a review under
Rule 6250 to the procedures set forth in Rule 6260(a), which governs
the filing of direct or indirect access complaints.
Proposed Conforming Amendments to ADF Trade Reporting Rules
    FINRA is proposing to amend Rules 6281 and 6282 and the Rule 7100
Series relating to trade reporting to the ADF to conform those rules,
to the extent practicable, to current FINRA rules relating to trade
reporting to the TRFs.
    First, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 6281 to (1) expressly
provide that members must also comply with the Rule 7100 Series when
reporting to the ADF and (2) delete the requirements relating to
execution of a Participant Application Agreement and maintenance of the
physical security of the equipment as conditions for participation in
the ADF, as they are redundant with requirements contained in Rule
7120.
    Second, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 6282(a)(4) to expressly
provide that in the event that the rules require multiple modifiers on
any given trade report, members are to report in accordance with
guidance published by FINRA regarding priorities among modifiers.
Members that report in accordance with such guidance will not be in
violation of the trade reporting rules for failing to use a particular
modifier. This provision conforms to paragraphs (a)(5) of Rules 6380A
and 6380B relating to the TRFs. FINRA also is proposing new paragraphs
(a)(5) and (6) of Rule 6282 to clarify that the ADF will append or
convert, as applicable, the modifiers identified in the rules (i.e., to
indicate that a trade was executed outside normal market hours or that
a trade was reported late). The proposed paragraphs are identical to
paragraphs (a)(6) and (7) of Rules 6380A and 6380B relating to the
TRFs.
    Third, the ADF will no longer support three party trade reports
\16\ and therefore, FINRA is proposing to delete paragraphs (c) and (d)
of Rule 6282 relating to that function. FINRA is proposing to adopt new
paragraph (c), which is identical to paragraph (c) of Rules 6380A and
6380B relating to the TRFs and sets forth the information that must be
included in trade reports submitted to the ADF. Proposed paragraph (d)
of Rule 7130 sets forth additional information that must be included in
trade and clearing reports submitted to the ADF and is identical to
paragraph (d) of Rules 7230A and 7230B relating to the TRFs. Proposed
Rules 6282(c) and 7130(d) require the same trade information that is
currently required under Rule 6282(c) and (d), and do not impose any
additional reporting requirements on members. FINRA notes that as part
of this proposed change, subparagraph (3) of Rules 6282(c) and (d),
which requires that members submit a trade report addendum within 15
minutes of submission of the original trade report to correct or
provide some or all of the identified information (e.g., the capacity
or short sale indicator), would be deleted. This provision is not
included in Rules 6380A and 6380B relating to the TRFs. Consistent with
the TRF rules, members will be required to provide all

information at the time of submission of the original trade report to
the ADF and they will not have additional time to provide information
such as the capacity or short sale indicator. Additionally, members
already have a continuing obligation to provide full and accurate trade
information to FINRA and to correct trade reports, as necessary.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ A three party trade report is a single trade report that
denotes one Reporting Member (i.e., the member with the obligation
to report the trade under FINRA's rules) and two contra parties.
This functionality had never been used by previous ADF Market
Participants.
    \17\ See, e.g., Rule 7160.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, FINRA is proposing to delete the following from Rule 6282:
(1) Paragraph (e)(1)(E) (the requirements relating to prior reference
price transactions are already included in Rule 6282(a)(4)(G)); and (2)
paragraph (g) (there is no designated symbol in the ADF for reversals
and ``as/of'' trades, and FINRA is proposing to relocate the
requirement relating to use of the special trade and step-out
indicators to Rule 7130(d)(13)). FINRA is also proposing to relocate
paragraph (h) to Rule 7130(d)(16), which is a more appropriate location
for the requirements relating to the clearing functionality of the ADF,
and to amend that provision to clarify that members must indicate
whether a trade is submitted for comparison or is locked-in via an
Automatic Give Up Agreement (``AGU'') or Qualified Special
Representative agreement (``QSR''). FINRA notes that these provisions
do not appear in Rules 6380A and 6380B relating to the TRFs.
    Fifth, FINRA is proposing to adopt new paragraph (h) of Rule 6282
to expressly provide that participants may enter into ``give up''
arrangements whereby one member reports to the ADF on behalf of another
member, provided that participants submit to the ADF the appropriate
documentation reflecting the arrangement. Proposed paragraph (h) is
identical to Rules 6380A(h) and 6380B(g) relating to the TRFs, and
provides that the member with the reporting obligation remains
responsible for the transaction submitted on its behalf. Further, both
the member with the reporting obligation and the member submitting the
trade to the ADF are responsible for ensuring that the information
submitted is in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations.
    The provisions of Rule 6282 will be renumbered and cross-references
will be updated, as necessary.
    FINRA is also proposing amendments to the Rule 7100 Series, which
addresses trade reporting and clearing through the ADF. First, FINRA is
proposing to delete the definition of ``Browse'' in Rule 7110 and the
references to this term in the Rule 7100 Series, as there is not a
specific ``Browse'' functionality offered for the ADF.
    In addition, FINRA believes that it is no longer necessary to
distinguish among types of ADF participants for purposes of the trade
reporting rules and therefore is proposing to delete the definitions of
``TRACS ECN,'' ``TRACS Market Maker'' and ``TRACS Order Entry Firm'' in
Rule 7110. FINRA is proposing to use the more general term
``Participant'' and apply the trade reporting and clearing requirements
uniformly to all ADF participants. FINRA notes that this approach
conforms to the Rule 7200A and 7200B Series relating to the TRFs.
Proposed amendments throughout the Rule 7100 Series (for example, Rule
7120(a) and (b)) would delete the references to these terms and
incorporate the more general term ``Participant.'' FINRA notes that the
requirements for a ``TRACS ECN,'' ``TRACS Market Maker'' and ``TRACS
Order Entry Firm'' in Rule 7120 are largely duplicative, with the
exception of the provision in Rule 7120(b)(2)(D) that states that if
FINRA finds that a TRACS Market Maker's failure to maintain a clearing
arrangement is voluntary, the withdrawal of quotations will be
considered voluntary and unexcused pursuant to Rule 6275. FINRA is
proposing to relocate this provision to new Rule 6275.01.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ FINRA also is proposing non-substantive amendments to the
definitions in Rule 7110 to conform to the definitions in Rules
7210A and 7210B relating to the TRFs. The provisions of Rule 7110
will be renumbered as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 7120 to conform, to the
extent practicable, the participation requirements for members that
report and clear transactions through the ADF to the participation
requirements for the TRFs under Rules 7220A and 7220B, including
amending paragraph (a)(1) and adding proposed new paragraph (b)(3)(B).
The proposed amendments are not substantive and impose neither more nor
less stringent requirements on FINRA members that participate in the
ADF than the current provisions of Rule 7120. FINRA is also proposing
to amend Rule 7120(b)(2)(D) to clarify that the rule (which provides
that if a Participant fails to maintain a clearing relationship, it
will be removed from the ADF) applies to Participants that are the
reporting party or the contra party.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ This incorporates Rule 7120(b)(3)(D) (which refers to TRACS
Order Entry Firms), which will be deleted pursuant to the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, FINRA is proposing to amend paragraph (b) and adopt new
paragraph (c) of Rule 7130 regarding when and how trade reports are
submitted and which party reports, to conform to paragraphs (b) and (c)
of Rules 7230A and 7230B relating to the TRFs. The proposed amendments
are non-substantive and will not change the reporting requirements for
members reporting and clearing trades through the ADF.
    Fourth, FINRA is proposing new paragraph (e) of Rule 7130 to cross-
reference the requirements for reporting cancelled trades in Rule 6282.
This provision is identical to Rules 7230A(f) and 7230B(e) relating to
the TRFs. The provisions of Rule 7130 will be renumbered and cross-
references will be updated, as necessary.
    Fifth, new paragraph (h) of Rule 7130 would provide members the
option of including a transaction fee as part of a clearing report
submitted to the ADF and is substantively identical to Rule 7230A(h)
relating to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and Rule 7230B(i) relating to the
FINRA/NYSE TRF.\20\ Pursuant to the proposed rule, members would be
required to provide in reports submitted to the ADF, in addition to all
other information required to be submitted by any other rule, pricing
information to indicate a total per share or contract price amount,
inclusive of the transaction fee. As a result, members would submit as
part of their report to the ADF: pricing information to indicate a
total price inclusive of the transaction fee, which would be submitted
by the ADF to NSCC for clearance and settlement; and the price
exclusive of the transaction fee, which would be publicly disseminated.
The parties to the trade would know both prices--the price reported for
public dissemination and the clearance/settlement price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ FINRA notes that Rule 7230B(i) was adopted pursuant to a
proposed rule change that was filed for immediate effectiveness on
October 9, 2013. The operative date of the proposed rule change will
be announced in a notice and will be at least 30 days following the
date of filing. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70702
(October 17, 2013), 78 FR 63268 (October 23, 2013) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness; File No. SR-FINRA-2013-044).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sixth, the ADF will offer match functionality, whereby both parties
to the trade submit transaction data and the System performs an on-line
match. Proposed Rule 7140(a) addresses such functionality and is
identical to Rule 7240A(a) relating to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF. FINRA
proposes to renumber the remaining provisions of Rule 7140 accordingly.
    Finally, proposed Rule 7170 provides that failure to comply with
any of the trade reporting rules may be considered conduct inconsistent
with high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable
principles of trade, in

violation of Rule 2010. The proposed rule is identical to Rules 7270A
and 7270B relating to the TRFs. FINRA proposes to re-number current
Rule 7170 as Rule 7180.
    In addition to the amendments outlined above, FINRA is proposing to
make other non-substantive technical amendments to a number of ADF
rules to conform, to the extent practicable, to the text of the TRF
rules. The chart below identifies the ADF rules for which conforming
changes to the rule text are being proposed and the corresponding TRF
rules:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 ADF Rule                             TRF Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 6282(a)(5) (renumbered herein as       Rules 6380A(a)(8) and
 6282(a)(7)).                                6380b(a)(8).
Rule 6282(e) (renumbered herein as          Rules 6380A(d) and 6380B(d).
 6282(d)).
Rule 7130(a)..............................  Rules 7230A(a) and 7230B(a).
Rule 7160.................................  Rules 7260A and 7260B.
Rule 7170 (renumbered herein as Rule 7180)  Rules 7280A and 7280B.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By conforming the trade reporting requirements for the ADF and
TRFs, to the extent practicable, the proposed rule change will promote
more consistent trade reporting by members and a more complete and
accurate audit trail. FINRA notes that most of the proposed conforming
changes to Rules 6281 and 6282 and the Rule 7100 Series are technical
and non-substantive in nature, and FINRA does not believe that any of
the proposed changes would require members to make systems changes in
order to comply. Furthermore, FINRA members that currently report to
one of the TRFs would already be familiar with the rule amendments that
are proposed herein.
Changes to ADF and TRAQS Fees
    FINRA proposes to amend Rule 7510(a) to assess a new fee for
certain corrective transaction charges. Currently, each party to a
trade will be assessed a $0.25 charge for transactions to break,
decline, or reverse a trade. To this category of corrective transaction
fees, FINRA proposes to add a $0.25 charge that will be assessed upon
each party that cancels or corrects a trade. The purpose of adding this
new change is to defray the administrative costs incurred by FINRA in
processing corrective transaction charges, including cancel and correct
requests.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ FINRA notes that, because the submission of a corrective
request imposes an administrative cost on FINRA, a party will still
be assessed a cancel or correct charge, even if the trade ultimately
stands. For example, assume that ABCD submits a trade with counter-
party WXYZ, and that the trade is accepted by WXYZ. ABCD then
cancels the trade, incurring a $0.25 cancellation fee. WXYZ takes no
further action, such as submitting its own cancellation, so the
trade is matched, and the trade goes to the tape and to clearing.
Since WXYZ did not submit its own cancellation request, the trade
was ultimately not broken; however, FINRA incurred a cost in
processing the cancellation request from ABCD regardless of the
ultimate outcome of the trade. FINRA thus believes it is appropriate
to assess the cancel fee on ADF Market Participants in this
scenario.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also proposes to delete Rule 7530, which assesses a minimum
charge of $5,000 for installation costs associated with connecting to
the ADF. This rule also provides that, upon installation, removal,
relocation or maintenance of terminal and related equipment, the
subscriber shall pay charges incurred by FINRA or its subsidiaries
above the $5,000 minimum. FINRA proposes to delete this provision
because it is no longer applicable, since the ADF is software-based and
there is no hardware to install, remove or relocate. FINRA also
proposes to re-number the remaining provisions in the Rule 7500 Series
accordingly.
Technical Changes To Conform or Otherwise Streamline ADF Rules
    FINRA is proposing a number of technical changes throughout the ADF
rules. For example, FINRA is replacing references to ``TRACS,'' the
``TRACS Trade Comparison Service,'' and the ``TRACS trade comparison
feature'' with ``ADF'' or ``the System'' \22\ and in several
provisions, deleting such references altogether.\23\ Similarly, FINRA
is replacing references to the ``TRACS trade comparison Participant
Application Agreement'' with ``Participant Application Agreement.''
\24\ FINRA also proposes to update the definition of a ``CQS security''
in Rule 6220(a)(6) to include the current national securities exchanges
on which the relevant securities are listed or trade pursuant to
unlisted trading privileges, and to make a grammatical change. FINRA
proposes to change the definition of the ADF in Rule 6210 to remove
unnecessary language from that provision, and to make a grammatical
change. FINRA proposes to change certain references throughout the
rules from ``ADF Operations,'' ``FINRA ADF Operations,'' or ``TRACS
Operations Center'' to ``FINRA Market Operations'' or ``FINRA Product
Management.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ FINRA is proposing to use the term ``the System'' to apply
to the ADF, including the trade comparison feature specifically
referred to in the current Rule 7100 Series. The proposed change and
the proposed definition of ``System'' in Rule 7110 conforms to the
Rule 7200A and 7200B Series relating to the TRFs.
    \23\ TRACS (now re-named TRAQS) was a component of the ADF, and
this change simplifies the rule text without substantively changing
the process by which trades are reported or the ADF otherwise
operates.
    \24\ This change simply reflects the global deletion of
references to TRACS; the actual agreement remains the same.
    \25\ These changes will reflect the official title of the FINRA
group that is responsible for the issues that are addressed in these
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Rule 6220(a)(10), FINRA proposes to revise the definition of
``Normal unit of trading'' to delete the reference to a ``special
identifier'' appended to the issuer's symbol if a normal unit of
trading is other than 100 shares. This identifier will not be used
following migration of the ADF to MPP. FINRA also proposes to delete,
in Rule 6272(a)(3), the provision that the National Best Bid and Offer
(``NBBO'') is established ``by FINRA in accordance with its procedures
for determining protected quotations under Rule 600'' of Regulation
NMS. The ADF will not generate an NBBO upon migration to the MPP;
rather, FINRA will use the NBBO as defined in Regulation NMS and as
calculated by the Securities Information Processors. Finally, FINRA
proposes to modify the time cut-off set forth in Rule 6250(b)(1) and
(b)(2) so that the order information that is required to be provided
pursuant to this rule shall be provided ``no later'' than 6:30 p.m.
Eastern Time.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ FINRA is making this change to clarify that, to the extent
that such information is available prior to 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time,
the ADF Trading Center need not wait until 6:30 p.m. to report that
information to FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change shall be effective upon Commission
approval.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\27\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, and Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\28\ which requires,
among other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system that FINRA
operates or controls, and Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act,\29\ which
requires that FINRA rules not impose any burden on competition that is
not necessary or appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act where

it makes non-substantive changes that simply update the rules to
reflect changes in FINRA departments or systems, or to correct other
outdated references. Examples of such changes include (1) changing the
reference from TRACS (Trade Comparison Service) to ``ADF'' or ``the
System''; (2) replacing the reference from the TRACS trade reporting
Participant Application Agreement to the Participant Application
Agreement; (3) updating the reference of a ``CQS Security''; and (4)
changing the references from ``FINRA ADF Operations'' to ``FINRA Market
Operations'' or ``FINRA Product Management,'' as applicable. These
changes update the relevant rule without affecting the substance of
that rule.
    FINRA believes that the changes to the rules governing the ADF to
reflect recent regulatory changes are also consistent with the Act.
These changes, which consist of updating the rules to reference the
Limit Up-Limit Down Plan and allowing a minimum quoting increment of
less than $0.01 for quotations below $1, modify the ADF rules to
reflect regulatory initiatives that were previously approved or
promulgated by the Commission.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (SEC File No. 4-631) (Limit up-
Limit Down adopting release); 17 CFR 242.612(b) (permitting
quotations in NMS stocks that are less than $1.00 per share to be
priced in increments of $0.0001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the changes to the rules to delete
functionalities that will no longer be available following the
migration of the ADF to MPP are also consistent with the Act;
specifically, the deletion of the use of a special identifier if the
normal unit of trading is other than 100 shares, and the deletion of
the provision for calculating the NBBO. Since the functionalities to be
deleted are not being currently utilized, and will not be offered on
the ADF upon its migration to MPP, FINRA believes that these changes
will help ensure that the rules accurately reflect the operation of the
ADF upon its migration to the new platform.
    FINRA believes that the provision allowing a Registered Reporting
ADF ECN to voluntarily terminate its status as an ADF Market
Participant is consistent with the Act because it provides a Registered
Reporting ADF ECN with the ability to terminate its status, and for
FINRA to make any corresponding changes to the operation of the ADF, on
an expedited basis, thus providing for the more efficient operation of
the ADF. FINRA also notes that this provision is comparable to what is
already provided to Registered Reporting ADF Market Makers under the
rules.
    FINRA believes that the change in Rule 6250 to require order
information for only those incoming orders that result in an execution,
cancellation, correction or rejection is consistent with the Act
because it will result in greater operational and regulatory
efficiency. Specifically, this change will allow FINRA to continue to
obtain the information necessary to perform the relevant surveillance,
while reducing the receipt of excess order information, which over-
burdens FINRA systems, imposes unnecessary reporting obligations on ADF
participants, and contributes to false surveillance alerts. FINRA
believes that conforming the order reporting requirements in Rule 6250
to the Order Reporting Specifications, and requiring that certain of
this information be reported in milliseconds if the ADF Trading
Center's system captures such information in milliseconds, updates the
Rule to reflect the actual information that is required to be reported,
and further aligns the reporting requirements for the ADF with the
reporting requirements for OATS and the TRFs. FINRA also believes that
the change in Rule 6250 to require order information for orders that
form part of displayed bids or offers is also consistent with the Act.
Specifically, this provision will enable FINRA to ascertain the market
participant that is responsible for the order generating a quotation
displayed on the ADF, which will enhance FINRA's ability to conduct
certain quotation-based surveillance.
    FINRA believes that the changes to the ADF trade reporting
requirements to better align to the TRF trade reporting requirements
are also consistent with the Act. The proposed rule will promote more
consistent trade reporting by members and a more complete and accurate
audit trail. Given that most of these changes are technical and non-
substantive in nature, FINRA does not believe that any of the proposed
changes would require members to make systems changes in order to
comply. FINRA also notes that members that currently report to one of
the TRFs would already be familiar with the rule amendments that are
proposed herein.
    FINRA believes that the proposed changes to the ADF fees are
consistent with the Act, as they provide for the equitable allocation
of reasonable fees. FINRA notes that these fees will only apply to ADF
Market Participants, and that the methodology for assessing these fees
will apply equally to all ADF Market Participants. FINRA believes that
the proposed $0.25 charge to be assessed upon a party that cancels or
corrects a trade is reasonable because this charge will defray the
administrative costs incurred by FINRA in processing corrective
transaction charges, including cancel and correct requests, which are
incurred by FINRA regardless of whether the trade is ultimately broken.
FINRA believes this charge is equitable because the methodology for
assessing this fee will apply equally to all ADF Market Participants.
    FINRA also believes that the deletion of the fees associated with
connecting to the ADF is reasonable and equitably allocated because
these fees are no longer applicable to any market participant.
    FINRA does not believe that any of these changes will impose a
significant or unnecessary burden on its members. FINRA notes that the
proposed changes are either (1) non-substantive; (2) delete
functionalities that will not be available following the migration to
the MPP; (3) reflect regulatory changes; (4) conform the ADF rules to
other FINRA rules; or (5) otherwise increase the operational and
regulatory efficiency of the ADF. To the extent that a number of the
changes are non-substantive or, in the case of conforming the ADF trade
reporting requirements to the TRF trade reporting requirements, mirror
requirements currently applicable to FINRA members, FINRA does not
believe that members will be significantly or adversely affected by
these changes. To the extent that FINRA is proposing certain changes to
reflect regulatory developments, FINRA believes that these changes are
narrowly tailored to comply with the applicable regulation or rule.
FINRA also believes that certain of the proposed changes, such as the
provision to allow for the voluntary termination of registration by a
Registered Reporting ADF ECN, may increase operational and regulatory
efficiency for FINRA and ADF Market Participants alike.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Participation in the ADF is
voluntary, and the proposed changes will apply equally to all ADF
Market Participants. As discussed above, FINRA does not believe that
such changes will significantly impact either ADF Market Participants
or other market participants. FINRA also notes that the proposed rule
change is designed to assist FINRA in meeting its regulatory

obligations by enhancing its ability to efficiently operate the
quotation collection and trade reporting aspects of the ADF and to
conduct the relevant surveillance.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2013-053 on the subject line.

Paper Comments:

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2013-053. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2013-053, and should
be submitted on or before January 16, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin O. Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-30768 Filed 12-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 67 (Tuesday, April 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19327-19328]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07790]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2822-005; ER11-2462-004; ER11-2463-004;

ER11-2464-004; ER11-2465-004; ER10-2994-009; ER11-2466-004; ER11-2467-
004; ER11-2468-004; ER11-2469-004; ER11-2470-004; ER11-2471-004; ER11-
2472-004; ER11-2473-004; ER11-2196-005; ER11-2474-006; ER11-2475-004.
    Applicants: Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, Atlantic Renewable Projects
II LLC, Big Horn Wind Project LLC, Big Horn II Wind Project LLC,
Colorado Green Holdings LLC, Hay Canyon Wind LLC, Juniper Canyon Wind
Power LLC, Klamath Energy LLC, Klamath Generation LLC, Klondike Wind
Power LLC, Klondike Wind Power II LLC, Klondike Wind Power III LLC,
Leaning Juniper Wind Power II LLC, Pebble Springs Wind LLC, San Luis
Solar LLC, Star Point Wind Project LLC, Twin Buttes Wind LLC.
    Description: Supplement to December 20, 2013 Updated Market Power
Analysis for the Northwest Region of the Iberdrola MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 3/28/14.
    Accession Number: 20140328-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/18/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-700-003.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: EES LBA Agreement Refile--Oxy 3-31-2014 to be
effective 12/31/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5444.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-702-003.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: EAI LBA Agmt Refile--Calpine PB 3-31-2014 to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5274.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1135-002.
    Applicants: Renewable Power Direct, LLC.
    Description: Original Volume No. 1 to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5341.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1621-000.
    Applicants: Verso Androscoggin LLC.
    Description: Androscoggin--Notice of Change in Seller Category
Status and Amendments to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5321.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1622-000.
    Applicants: Verso Bucksport LLC.
    Description: Bucksport--Notice of Change in Seller Category Status
and Amendments to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5323.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1623-000.
    Applicants: Verso Maine Energy LLC.
    Description: Maine--Notice of Change in Seller Category Status and
Amendments to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5325.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1624-000.
    Applicants: Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Mississippi Power Company submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(1): MRA 25 Rate Case Filing to be effective 5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5412.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1625-000.
    Applicants: Exelon Generation Company, LLC.
    Description: Exelon Generation Company, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 3/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/31/14.
    Accession Number: 20140331-5429.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/21/14.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 31, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07790 Filed 4-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 203)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 59491-59494]
[DOCID:fr22oc07-11]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket No. CGD07-122]
RIN 1625-AA01

Anchorage Regulation; Port Everglades, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the anchorage regulations
for Port Everglades, Florida. The amendment would modify the current
anchorage area by eliminating that portion of the anchorage closest to
sensitive coral reef areas, expand that portion of the anchorage area
that poses less risk to these areas, and limit the amount of time a
vessel may remain in the anchorage area. These changes would ensure all
vessels have fair access to the anchorage area, and provide a higher
degree of vessel and environmental safety by reducing the possibility
of vessels grounding in sensitive coral reef areas.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before November 21, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard
Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division, 100 MacArthur Causeway,
Miami Beach, Florida, 33139. Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways
Management Division maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division
between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Junior Grade Chris Svencer,
Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division at (305) 535-
4550.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-
122], indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways
Management Division at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one
would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    During the last ten years, nine known groundings and six known
anchor mishaps have occurred while vessels were attempting to anchor
inside the current anchorage described in 33 CFR 110.186, or after a
vessel anchored inside the anchorage dragged her anchor outside of the
anchorage area. Anchoring mishaps include both misplacement of the
anchor itself upon coral reefs as well as contact between the anchor
cable and coral reefs. Adverse weather conditions, proximity to the
reef, anchorage congestion, and poor seamanship were contributing
factors to the groundings and anchoring mishaps.
    This proposed rule is necessary to modify existing anchoring
requirements and guidelines in order to provide a higher degree of
protection to the coastal area and sensitive benthic coral reef
ecosystems, and to provide a safer anchorage for mariners. This
amendment is intended to re-designate the anchorage areas to account
for anchor position and cable lay and limit the amount of time vessels
may remain at anchorage. Placing a limitation on the amount of time a
vessel can spend at the anchorage area will reduce the number of
vessels routinely utilizing the anchorage area for purposes other than
awaiting berth inside Port Everglades.
    The Coast Guard has also researched alternative solutions for
restructuring the anchorage. These alternatives have included: Change
nothing and continue to use the current anchorage; create anchorage
circles to control the location of vessels in the anchorage area; and
remove the anchorage completely. The dramatic impact of recent vessel
groundings on the sensitive coral reefs in the vicinity of the current
anchorage area necessitates modification of the current anchorage area
to provide a greater distance between the anchorage and shore. Creating
anchorage circles for precision anchorage does not eliminate the threat
to the local reefs due to ever changing weather conditions that may
drag properly anchored vessels over the coral reefs to the west.
Finally, removing the anchorage altogether is not feasible due to
commercial traffic in need of a location to anchor while awaiting a
berth in Port Everglades.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This adjustment of the anchorage area off Port Everglades is
necessary to protect life, minimize injury to the marine environment,
and provide a greater margin of safety for vessels and property from
the associated hazards resulting from vessel groundings. This proposal
will close anchorage area ``A'' and expand anchorage area ``B''. The
new anchorage area will be farther away from sensitive coral reef
species.
    The Coast Guard has completed an environmental assessment and has
confirmed that the relocated anchorage will greatly reduce the impact
on the delicate coral structures currently located near anchorage
``A''. The time period a vessel may remain at anchor in the anchorage
will be limited to 72 hours to provide all vessels calling on the port
equal and fair access to the anchorage grounds. These amendments will
improve navigation, provide a safer anchorage area, and minimize
negative impacts on the environment by giving the vessels one specified
anchorage location.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The existing
commercial anchorage is used by container vessels, tank vessels, and
other general cargo vessels awaiting a berth in Port Everglades, Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, and the new anchorage is expected to be used by
the same type and number of vessels for the same purpose. The new
proposed commercial anchorage will allow for enough anchorage space to
sufficiently support operations in Port Everglades, and is expected to
have little, if any, economic impact. This proposed regulation is
expected to have little or no economic impact because all of the
vessels previously using the anchorage will be able to continue using
the new anchorage.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to utilize the anchorage area outside Port Everglades, Florida. This
proposed rule would not have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the same reasons given above
in the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' section of this preamble.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Junior Grade Chris
Svencer, Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways Management Division at
(305) 535-4550. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the

aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one
year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
although this action may have qualified for a categorical exclusion
under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f) of the Instruction, the Coast Guard
found good reason to further investigate the effects the anchorage area
modification would have on the environment. A preliminary
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. Furthermore, as part of section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (50 CFR part 402, 16 U.S.C. 1536), the U.S.
Coast Guard opened consultation with a number of stakeholders. The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) have reviewed all restructuring plans and believe the proposed
action would not likely affect the West Indian Manatee, Johnson's
Seagrass, Smalltooth Sawfish, and all local turtle species because the
project does not have any elements with the potential to affect these
listed species. NOAA also found that the restructuring into deeper
waters, farther away from the easternmost reef, is likely to have an
indirect beneficial effect on Elkhorn and Staghorn coral by potentially
reducing vessel groundings and anchor damage that have adversely
affected corals and other important near shore benthic resources in the
project area. Comments on this section will be considered before we
make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically
excluded from further environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071;
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.

    2. Amend Sec.  110.186 by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(3) through
(6), and adding paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) to read as follows:

Sec.  110.186  Port Everglades, Florida.

    (a) The anchorage grounds. The anchorage grounds, the center of
which is located approximately two and one half miles northeast of the
entrance to Port Everglades, is an area bounded by a line connecting
points with the following North American Datum 83 coordinates:

26-08'26.934'' N 080-04'28.240'' W
26-08'08.560'' N 080-04'16.158'' W
26-07'56.000'' N 080-04'17.486'' W
26-07'56.000'' N 080-02'42.623'' W
26-07'19.500'' N 080-02'53.153'' W
26-07'19.500'' N 080-04'28.800'' W
26-06'35.160'' N 080-04'28.800'' W
26-06'35.160'' N 080-04'38.694'' W
    (b) The regulations.
* * * * *
    (3) All vessels within the designated anchorage area shall maintain
a 24-hour bridge watch by a licensed deck officer proficient in
English, monitoring VHF-FM channel 16. This individual shall confirm
that the ship's crew performs frequent checks of the vessel's position
to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor.
    (4) Vessels may anchor anywhere within the designated anchorage
area provided that: such anchoring does not interfere with the
operations of any other vessels currently at anchorage; and all anchor
and chain or cable is positioned in such a manner to preclude dragging
over reefs.
    (5) No vessel may anchor in a ``dead ship'' status (i.e. propulsion
or control unavailable for normal operations) without the prior
approval of the Captain of the Port. Vessels experiencing casualties
such as a main propulsion, main steering or anchoring equipment
malfunction or which are planning to perform main propulsion

engine repairs or maintenance, shall immediately notify the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port via Coast Guard Sector Miami on VHF-FM Channel 16.
    (6) No vessel may anchor within the designated anchorage for more
than 72 hours without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. To
obtain this approval, contact the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, via
the Port Everglades Harbor Master, on VHF-FM Channel 14.
    (7) The Coast Guard Captain of the Port may close the anchorage
area and direct vessels to depart the anchorage during periods of
adverse weather or at other times as deemed necessary in the interest
of port safety or security.
    (8) Commercial vessels anchoring under emergency circumstances
outside the anchorage area shall shift to new positions within the
anchorage area immediately after the emergency ceases.
    (9) Whenever the maritime or commercial interests of the United
States so require, the Captain of the Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami,
Florida, may direct relocation of any vessel anchored within the
anchorage area. Once directed, such vessel must get underway at once or
signal for a tug, and must change position as directed.

    Dated: October 4, 2007.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-20608 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: May 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 29694-29695]
[DOCID:fr23my06-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53806; File No. SR-ISE-2006-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change to Extend Until June 5, 2007, a Pilot Program for Listing
Options on Selected Stocks Trading Below $20 at One-Point Intervals

May 15, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 18, 2006, the International Securities Exchange, Inc. (``ISE''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the ISE. The ISE filed
the proposal pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The ISE proposes to amend Supplementary Material .01 to ISE Rule
504, ``Series of Options Contracts Open for Trading,'' to extend until
June 5, 2007, its pilot program for listing options series on selected
stocks trading below $20 at one-point intervals (``Pilot Program'').
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the ISE's Web site
(http://www.iseoptions.com), at the ISE's principal office, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the ISE included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    On June 16, 2003, the Commission approved the ISE's Pilot Program,
which allows the ISE to list series with $1 strike price intervals on
equity option classes that overlie up to five individual stocks,
provided that the strike prices are $20 or less, but not less than $3,
subject to the terms of the Pilot Program.\5\ The Pilot Program, after
being extended on three prior occasions,\6\ is set to expire on June 5,
2006.\7\ The Exchange may currently select up to five individual stocks
to be included in the Pilot Program. The Exchange, however, is also
permitted to list options on other individual stocks at $1 strike price
intervals if other options exchanges listed those series pursuant to
their respective rules. The Exchange has selected the following five
options classes to participate in the Pilot Program: AMR Corp. [AMR],
Clapine Corp. [CPN], EMC Corp. [EMC], El Paso Corp. [EP], and Sun
Microsystems Inc. [SUNW]. The ISE believes the Pilot Program has been
successful and well received by its members and the investing public.
Thus, the ISE proposes to extend the Pilot Program until June 5, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48033 (June 13,
2003), 68 FR 37036 (June 20, 2003) (order approving File No. SR-ISE-
2003-17) (``Pilot Program Approval Order'').
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 49827 (June 8,
2004), 69 FR 33966 (June 17, 2004) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of File No. SR-ISE-2004-21) (extending the $1 Strike
Pilot Program until August 5, 2004); 50060 (July 22, 2004), 69 FR
45864 (July 30, 2004) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
of File No. SR-ISE-2004-26) (extending the $1 Strike Pilot Program
until June 5, 2005); and 51769 (May 31, 2005), 70 FR 33232 (June 07,
2005) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of File No. SR-
ISE-2005-22) (extending the $1 Strike Pilot Program until June 5,
2006) (collectively, ``Pilot Extension Notices'').
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51769, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of this proposed rule change, and as required by the
Pilot Program Approval Order and the Pilot Extension Notices, the
Exchange is submitting to the Commission a report (``Pilot Program
Report''), attached as Exhibit 3 to the proposal, that details the
Exchange's experience with the Pilot Program. Specifically, the Pilot
Program Repot contains data and written analysis regarding the five
options classes included in the Pilot Program for the period between
May 2, 2005, and February 28, 2006.
    The Exchange believes there is sufficient investor interest and
demand to extend the Pilot Program for another year. The Exchange
continues to believe that the Pilot Program has provided investors with
greater trading opportunities and flexibility and the ability to more
closely tailor their investment strategies and decisions to the
movement of the underlying security. Furthermore, the Exchange has not
detected any material proliferation of illiquid options series
resulting from the narrower strike price intervals.
2. Statutory Basis
    The ISE believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder and, in particular, the
requirements of section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the ISE
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements
under section 6(b)(5) of the Act \9\ that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The ISE believes that extension of
the Pilot Program until June 5, 2007 will result in a continuing
benefit to investors by allowing them to more closely tailor their
investment decisions, and will allow the ISE to further study investor
interest in $1 strike price intervals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The ISE believes that the proposed rule change does not impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or

appropriate in the furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received from Members, Participants, or Others

    The ISE has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments
on this proposed rule change. The ISE has not received any unsolicited
written comments from members or other interested persons.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The ISE has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\11\ Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does
not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. As
required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the ISE provided the Commission
with written notice of its intention to file the proposed rule change
at least five business days prior to filing the proposal with the
Commission or such shorter period as designated by the Commission.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ As set forth in the Commission's initial approval of the
Pilot Program, if the ISE proposes to: (1) Extend the Pilot Program;
(2) expand the number of options eligible for inclusion in the Pilot
Program; or (3) seek permanent approval of the Pilot Program, it
must submit a Pilot Program report to the Commission along with the
filing of its proposal to extend, expand, or seek permanent approval
of the Pilot Program. The ISE must file any such proposal and the
Pilot Program report with the Commission at least 60 days prior to
the expiration of the Pilot Program. The Pilot Program report must
cover the entire time the Pilot Program was in effect and must
include: (1) Data and written analysis on the open interest and
trading volume for options (at all strike price intervals) selected
for the Pilot Program; (2) delisted options series (for all strike
price intervals) for all options selected for the Pilot Program; (3)
an assessment of the appropriateness of $1 strike price intervals
for the options the ISE selected for the Pilot Program; (4) an
assessment of the impact of the Pilot Program on the capacity of the
ISE's, the Options Price Reporting Authority's, and vendors'
automated systems; (5) any capacity problems or other problems that
arose during the operation of the Pilot Program and how the ISE
addressed them; (6) any complaints that the ISE received during the
operation of the Pilot Program and how the ISE addressed them; and
(7) any additional information that would help to assess the
operation of the Pilot Program. See Pilot Program Approval Order,
supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-ISE-2006-20 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2006-20. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the ISE. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File No. SR-ISE-2006-20 and should be submitted on or before June 13,
2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7797 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P