[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 24467]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10508]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1992-003]

Fire Mountain Lodge; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing,
Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Ready for Environmental
Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms and
Conditions, and Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Existing Minor License.
    b. Project No.: 1992-003.
    c. Date filed: April 25, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Mr. Ken Willis.
    e. Name of Project: Fire Mountain Lodge.
    f. Location: On Fern Spring in Tehama County, California. The
project is located primarily on privately owned land except for 1.07
acres of the dam and reservoir which is located on U.S. Forest Service
land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Ken Willis, Fire Mountain Lodge, 43500
Highway 36, Mill Creek, CA 96060,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Matt Buhyoff,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments,
recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from
the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from
the issuance date of this notice.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted, and is ready for
environmental analysis at this time.
    l. The existing Fire Mountain Lodge project consists of: (1) A 265-
foot-long earth and concrete filled dam; (2) a 0.24-acre reservoir; (3)
a 38 inch intake tower; (4) a 1540-foot-long penstock; (5) a powerhouse
with an installed capacity of 60-kilowatts; a (6) a 4000 foot-long
transmission line and; (7) appurtenant facilities. The power generated
by the project is utilized for commercial and residential purposes,
solely for the owners of Fire Mountain Lodge, a self-provider of
electricity.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item h above.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``REPLY COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND
CONDITIONS,'' or ``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person submitting the filing; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be
accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service
list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with
18 CFR 4.34(b), and 385.2010.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following
the date of issuance of this notice: (1) A copy of the water quality
certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including
proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request;
or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.

    Dated: April 25, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-10508 Filed 4-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 165 (Friday, August 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42961-42962]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18365]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549-2736

Extension for Generic ICR:
    Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on
Agency Service Delivery, SEC File No. 270-789, OMB Control No. 3235-
0731

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    The information collection activity will garner qualitative
customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in
accordance with the

Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. By
qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights
on perceptions and opinions, but are not statistical surveys that yield
quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of
study. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder
perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of
issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication,
training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or
services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and
actionable communications between the SEC and its customers and
stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the
improvement of program management.
    Feedback collected under this generic clearance will provide useful
information, but it will not yield data that can be generalized to the
overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative
information will not be used for quantitative information collections
that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as
monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance.
Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have,
such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic
mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.
    Below is the projected average estimates for the next three years:
    Expected Annual Number of activities: [10].
    Respondents: [20,000].
    Annual responses: [20,000].
    Frequency of Response: Once per request.
    Average minutes per response: [10].
    Burden hours: [3,500].
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 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 OMB control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
[email protected]; and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace
Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected]. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days
of this notice.

    Dated: August 21, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-18365 Filed 8-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 31)]
[Notices]
[Page 8721-8722]
[DOCID:fr14fe08-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57301]

Order Granting Temporary Exemption of LACE Financial Corp. From
the Conflict of Interest Prohibition in Rule 17a-5(c)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

February 11, 2008.

I. Introduction

    The Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 2006 (``Rating Agency
Act''),\1\ enacted on September 29, 2006, defined the term ``nationally
recognized statistical rating organization'' (``NRSRO''), added Section
15E to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), and
provided authority for the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') to implement registration, recordkeeping, financial
reporting, and oversight rules with respect to registered credit rating
agencies. Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO
(17 CFR 249b.300), prescribe the process for a credit rating agency to
apply for registration. Rule 17g-1 and Form NRSRO were effective on
June 18, 2007, and the other rules, Rules 17g-2 through 17g-6 (17 CFR
240.17g-2 through 17g-6), became effective on June 26, 2007.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 109-291 (2006).
    \2\ Release No. 34-55857 (June 5, 2007), 72 FR 33564, 33564-65
(June 18, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, Rule 17g-5(c)(1) prohibits an NRSRO from issuing or
maintaining a credit rating solicited by a person that, in the most
recently ended fiscal year, provided the NRSRO with net revenue
equaling or exceeding 10% of the total net revenue of the NRSRO for the
fiscal year. In adopting this rule, the Commission stated that such a
person would be in a position to exercise substantial influence on the
NRSRO, which in turn would make it difficult for the NRSRO to remain
impartial.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Id. at 33598.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Application and Exemption Request of LACE Financial Corporation

    LACE Financial Corp. (``LACE''), a credit rating agency, furnished
to the Commission an application for registration as an NRSRO under
Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings
described in clauses (i) through (v) of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the
Exchange Act. Based on the information provided in the application,
LACE has a conflict of interest relating to the fourth class \4\ that
would cause the firm to be in violation of Rule 17g-5(c)(1) if LACE
became registered. Specifically, for the fiscal year ending December
31, 2007, LACE maintained credit ratings on asset-backed securities
solicited by a person that provided LACE with 10% or more of its total
revenues for that year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The fourth class of credit ratings is for ``issuers of
asset-backed securities (as that term is defined in section 1101(c)
of part 229 of title 17, Code of Federal Regulations* * *) (``asset-
backed securities''). Section 3(a)(62)(B)(iv) of the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LACE has requested that the Commission exempt it from Rule 17g-
5(c)(1) on the grounds that the prohibition hinders its ability as a
small entity to grow its business issuing credit ratings on asset-
backed securities. LACE indicated in its application that it expects
the percentage of revenue attributable to the relevant client to
decrease based on LACE's revenue trend, continued growth, and the
problems in the asset-backed securities market.

III. Discussion

    The Commission, when adopting Rule 17g-5(c)(1), noted that it
intended to monitor how the prohibition operates in practice,
particularly with respect to asset-backed securities, and whether
exemptions may be appropriate.\5\ The Commission notes that the revenue
in question was earned by LACE before it submitted its application for
registration and in the year before Rule 17g-5 was adopted, which
limited the time for LACE to adjust its activities to conform to the
requirements of the Rule. In addition, the Commission recognizes that,
given LACE's size, it is more likely that the firm would be affected by
Rule 17g-5(c)(1) than a larger credit rating agency with a more
diversified client base. Further, the Commission notes that LACE has
stated that it expects that the percentage of total revenue provided by
the client will decrease. Finally, the Commission notes that the
threshold in Rule 17g-5(c)(1) is, of necessity, a bright line, but
activities that exceed that threshold may or may not necessarily raise
the concerns that are the basis for the rule. Hence, the Commission
believes that it is important for the Commission to consider for each
application the specific facts and circumstances of the applicant and
whether to grant an exemption from Rule 17g-5(c)(1). Moreover, in this
instance, the Commission recognizes that granting this exemption
furthers the primary purpose of the Rating Agency Act, which is to
enhance competition in the highly concentrated ratings industry.
Granting LACE registration in the asset-backed security class will
increase the number of NRSROs registered in this class, which could
increase competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Release No. 34-55857 (June 5, 2007), 72 FR 33564, 33598
(June 18, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the Commission finds that granting LACE an
exemption from Rule 17g-5(c)(1) for calendar year 2008 is necessary and
appropriate in the public interest and is consistent with the
protection of investors.\6\ The

exemption will expire on January 1, 2009 (LACE's fiscal year ends on
December 31, 2008). The Commission believes that providing LACE with
the opportunity to be registered in the asset-backed security class
during this time frame is an appropriate approach to addressing the
unique circumstances of a small credit rating agency, while balancing
this against the goal of Rule 17g-5(c)(1)--to prohibit a conflict that
has the potential to influence a credit rating agency's impartiality.
Consequently, this exemption is conditioned on LACE disclosing in
Exhibit 6 to Form NRSRO that the firm received more than 10% of its net
revenue in fiscal year 2007 from a client that paid it to rate asset-
backed securities. This disclosure is designed to alert users of credit
ratings to the existence of this specific conflict.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Section 36 of the Exchange Act authorizes the Commission, by
rule, regulation, or order, to conditionally or unconditionally
exempt any person from any rule under the Exchange Act, to the
extent that the exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest and is consistent with the protection of investors. 15
U.S.C. 78mm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Simultaneously with this Order, the Commission is issuing an Order
granting the registration of LACE with the Commission as an NRSRO under
Section 15E of the Exchange Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Release No. 34-57300 (February 11, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 36 of the Exchange Act,
    It is hereby ordered that LACE Financial Corp. is exempt from the
conflict of interest prohibition in Exchange Act Rule 17g-5(c)(1) until
January 1, 2009, provided that LACE Financial Corp. discloses in
Exhibit 6 to Form NRSRO that the firm received more than 10% of its net
revenue in fiscal year 2007 from a client that paid it to rate asset-
backed securities.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-2771 Filed 2-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 219)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66754]
[DOCID:fr12no08-11]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 101

[Docket No. FDA-2004-P-0205 (formerly Docket No. 2004P-0464)]

Food Labeling: Health Claims; Calcium and Osteoporosis, and
Calcium, Vitamin D, and Osteoporosis

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a final
rule that appeared in the Federal Register of Monday, September 29,
2008 (73 FR 56477). The final rule was published with an inadvertent
error in the ``Analysis of Economic Impacts'' section. This document
corrects that error.

DATES: This correction is effective: November 12, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jillonne Kevala, Office of Nutrition,
Labeling, and Dietary Supplements (HFS-830), Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch
Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. E8-22730, appearing on page 56477
in the Federal Register of September 29, 2008, the following correction
is made:
    1. On page 56481, in the second column, starting in the forth line,
the sentence ``Therefore, because of the limited use of the current
calcium and osteoporosis health claim, the agency certifies that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.'' is corrected to read ``Therefore, because
of the limited use of the current calcium and osteoporosis health
claim, the agency believes that the final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.''

    Dated: November 5, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-26868 Filed 11-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14932-14934]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05744]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80274; File No. SR-ISE-2017-27]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to ``Tick-Worse'' Functionality

March 17, 2017.
    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 March 15, 2017, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``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 Exchange. 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to (i) request the decommission of ``Tick-
Worse'' functionality and (ii) amend Rule 713 (Priority of Quotes and
Orders) relating to the priority of split price transactions.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to (i) decommission the
``Tick-Worse'' functionality and (ii) amend Rule 713 (Priority of
Quotes and Orders) as it relates to the priority of split price
transactions. The proposed changes are discussed below.
``Tick-Worse'' Functionality
    The Exchange currently provides market makers \3\ with Tick-Worse
functionality, which allows market makers to pre-define the prices and
sizes at which the system will automatically move their quotation
following an execution that exhausts the size of their existing
quotation.\4\ As such, when a market maker's quote is traded out, it
can be automatically reinstated into the Exchange's order book at the
next best price.\5\ This optional feature is intended to help market
makers meet their continuous quoting obligations under the Exchange's
rules \6\ when their displayed

quotations are exhausted. When a market maker's quote is traded out and
automatically reinstated into the Exchange's order book using the Tick-
Worse functionality, the reinstated quote will be given priority
pursuant to the Exchange's split price priority rule as discussed
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``market makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Rule
100(a)(25).
    \4\ Tick-Worse functionality is not currently memorialized in
the Exchange's rulebook. In addition, the Exchange will not offer
Tick-Worse on the new Nasdaq INET system going forward. On September
30, 2004, International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'') filed
with the Commission a proposal to codify this functionality in its
rulebook, but inadvertently deleted the rule as obsolete rule text
in a subsequent proposal filed on December 21, 2012. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 51050 (January 18, 2005), 70 FR 3758
(January 26, 2005) (SR-ISE-2004-31); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 68570 (January 3, 2013), 78 FR 1901 (January 9, 2013) (SR-ISE-
2012-82).
    \5\ Market makers may choose to set Tick-Worse parameters by
specifying how many price ticks back, and for what size, the quote
is to be reinstated.
    \6\ Specifically, Primary Market Makers (``PMMs'') are required
under Rule 804(e)(1) to enter quotations in all of the series listed
on the Exchange of the options classes to which they are appointed
on a daily basis. Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 804 further
requires PMMs to quote 90% of the time their assigned options class
is open for trading on the Exchange. As provided in Rule 804(e)(2),
Competitive Market Makers (``CMMs'') are not required to enter
quotations in the options class to which they are appointed, but in
the event a CMM does initiate quoting, such CMM is generally
required to quote 60% of the time its assigned options class is open
for trading on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due to the lack of demand for the Tick-Worse feature, the Exchange
proposes to decommission the use of this functionality as it migrates
symbols to INET no later than in July 31, 2017.\7\ As discussed above,
the Exchange offers the Tick-Worse feature as a voluntary tool for
market makers to assist them in meeting their continuous quoting
obligations under the Exchange's rules. As such, market makers are not
required to use the Exchange-provided functionality and can program
their own systems to perform the same functions if they prefer. The
Exchange has found that almost all market makers use their own systems
rather than the Exchange's Tick-Worse feature to send refreshed
quotations when their displayed quotations are exhausted, and therefore
members have discontinued use of this functionality. Because the Tick-
Worse functionality is currently not memorialized in the Exchange's
rules as noted above, there is no text of the proposed rule change. The
Exchange will provide advance notice to its Members through an Options
Trader Alert of the intent to decommission the Tick-Worse
functionality.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Currently, this functionality is being used by one market
maker on the Exchange.
    \8\ The Exchange notes that it similarly decommission Tick-Worse
on ISE Gemini on February 21, 2017. See Market Information Circular
2017-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Split Price Priority
    The Exchange is proposing to delete ISE Rule 713(f), which relates
to the priority of split price transactions, because this priority rule
currently only applies in the context of the Tick-Worse functionality,
as described above, which the Exchange proposes to decommission. The
Exchange proposes to delete this rule no later than July 31, 2017,
along with the decommissioning of the Tick-Worse functionality.
    ISE Rule 713(f) provides that if a Member purchases (sells) one (1)
or more options contracts of a particular series at a particular price,
it shall at the next lower (higher) price at which there are
Professional Orders or market maker quotes, have priority over such
Professional Orders and market maker quotes in purchasing (selling) up
to the equivalent number of options contracts of the same series that
it purchased (sold) at the higher (lower) price, but only if the
purchase (sale) so effected represents the opposite side of a
transaction with the same offer (bid) as the earlier purchase (sale).
Although the language of Rule 713(f) is more general, the Exchange's
intent was to apply split price priority solely to the Tick-Worse
functionality.
    Example:

--Primary Market Maker has opted into tick worse functionality and
selected to tick worse and post 10 contracts at a penny worse than
their original quote.
--Primary Market Maker quote for 10 contracts bid at $1.00 and 10
contracts offered at $1.02
--Additionally, there is a Priority Customer order to buy 5 contracts
at $0.99, and a Competitive Market Maker quote for 10 contracts bid at
$0.99 and 10 contracts offered at $1.02
--A member enters a sell order for 20 contracts at $0.99
--This order will trade as follows:
     10 contracts trade at $1.00 with the Primary Market Maker
bid quote, and Primary Market Maker is ticked worse to 10 contracts bid
at $0.99
     5 contracts trade at $0.99 with the Priority Customer
order due to customer priority
     5 contracts trade at $0.99 with the Primary Market Maker's
ticked worse quote due to the split price priority rule; 0 contracts
trade with the Competitive Market Maker bid quote

    The Exchange represents that Tick-Worse has historically only ever
applied in the context of the split price priority rule in ISE Rule
713(f). Furthermore, the Exchange has historically only ever awarded
priority pursuant to ISE Rule 713(f) for split price transactions that
occur in the Tick-Worse functionality, and the existing rule should
have been clarified to more accurately reflect its current application.
Nonetheless, the Exchange is now proposing to delete the rule text in
its entirety along with decommissioning the Tick-Worse functionality,
as proposed above.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

``Tick-Worse'' Functionality
    As noted above, the Exchange originally offered Tick-Worse as an
optional feature to help market makers meet their continuous quoting
obligations under the Exchange's rules. The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with the Act because it has found that the Tick-
Worse feature is rarely used today \11\ as almost all market makers use
their own systems to send refreshed quotations when their displayed
quotations are exhausted. The Exchange therefore believes that it is
consistent with the Act to propose to discontinue use of this
functionality prior to the migration to INET. Because one member
continues to utilize the functionality, the Exchange believes that
providing advance notice of the intent to decommission of this
functionality will serve to prepare Members as to the upcoming change
with INET.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ It is only being used by one market maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Exchange originally offered Tick-Worse as
an optional feature to help market makers meet their continuous quoting
obligations under the Exchange's rules. The Exchange has found,
however, that the Tick-Worse feature is rarely used today as almost all
market makers use their own systems to send refreshed quotations when
their displayed quotations are exhausted. The Exchange therefore
believes that decommissioning Tick-Worse and providing advance notice
to its members, is consistent with the Act because it eliminates any
investor uncertainty related to the status of this functionality.
Split Price Priority
    The Exchange also believes that its proposal to delete the split
price priority rule in Rule 713(f) protects investors and the public
interest because it removes rule text that became obsolete with the
decommission of the Tick-Worse functionality. As described above, the
split price priority rule only applies to the Tick-Worse functionality.
Because the Rule is more general than its current, specific
application, however, the Exchange believes that the continued presence
of Rule 713(f) in its rules even after retiring the Tick-Worse
functionality will be confusing to its members and investors. By
removing obsolete rule text that only applies in the context of Tick-
Worse, the Exchange is eliminating any potential for confusion about
how its systems operate.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not
designed to have any competitive impact but rather request the
decommission of a rarely-used functionality on the Exchange and
relatedly, to remove the rule text that this functionality supports
from the Exchange's rulebook, thereby reducing investor confusion and
making the Exchange's rules easier to understand and navigate.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \12\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or 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-ISE-2017-27 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-27. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-27 and should be
submitted on or before April 13, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05744 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60637-60639]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27464]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82335; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings
To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change,
as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Allow Participants To Designate When
an Order With a RTFY or SCAN Routing Order Attribute Will Be Activated
During Pre-Market Hours

December 15, 2017

I. Introduction

    On August 30, 2017, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Exchange'' or
``Nasdaq'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) to allow participants
to designate when an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute
will be activated during Pre-Market Hours. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on September 18, 2017.\3\
On October 31, 2017, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the
Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.\5\ The Commission has received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change. On December 13, 2017, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\6\ The Commission is
publishing this notice and order to solicit comments on the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, from interested persons
and to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act
\7\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81579 (September 12,
2017), 82 FR 43584.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81986, 82 FR 51453
(November 6, 2017). The Commission designated December 17, 2017 as
the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove,
the proposed rule change.
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1) Modified the proposal
to allow participants entering an order with the RTFY or SCAN
routing order attribute to designate the order to activate at a
specific time during Pre-Market Hours (rather than System Hours) on
the same day; (2) specified that the proposed functionality would be
offered on a port level basis; (3) stated that all of the times-in-
force in Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) currently apply to orders with the RTFY
or SCAN routing order attribute and made corresponding
clarifications and corrections throughout the proposal; (4) provided
additional information regarding why participants might use the
proposed functionality; and (5) provided additional discussion
regarding members' best execution obligations and the application of
the Exchange's regulatory checks associated with the proposed
functionality, and reminded members of their regulatory obligations
(e.g., Market Access Rule, Regulation SHO) when using the proposed
functionality. Amendment No. 1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nasdaq-2017-088/nasdaq2017088-2798107-161689.pdf.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) to allow
participants to designate a specific time during Pre-Market Hours \8\
when an order with a RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute will be
activated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Pre-Market Hours'' means the period of time beginning at
4:00 a.m. ET and ending immediately prior to the commencement of
Market Hours. See Nasdaq Rule 4701(g). ``Market Hours'' means the
period of time beginning at 9:30 a.m. ET and ending at 4:00 p.m. ET
(or such earlier time as may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when
Nasdaq closes early). See id. ``System Hours'' means the period of
time beginning at 4:00 a.m. ET and ending at 8:00 p.m. ET (or such
earlier time as may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when Nasdaq
closes early). See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RTFY is a routing option available for an order that qualifies as a
designated retail order under which orders check the system for
available shares only if so instructed by the entering firm and are
thereafter routed to destinations on the system routing table.\9\ If
shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are posted to the Nasdaq
book.\10\ Once on the book, should the order subsequently be locked or
crossed by another market center, the system will not route the order
to the locking or crossing market center.\11\ RTFY is designed to allow
orders to participate in the opening, reopening, and closing process of
the primary listing market for a security.\12\ SCAN is a routing option
under which orders check the system for available shares and
simultaneously route the remaining shares to destinations on the system
routing table.\13\ If shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are
posted on the Nasdaq book.\14\ Once on the book, should the order
subsequently be locked or crossed by another market center, the system
will not route the

order to the locking or crossing market center.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Nasdaq Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(v)b.
    \10\ See id.
    \11\ See id.
    \12\ See id.
    \13\ See Nasdaq Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(iv).
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) provides the times-in-force that may be
assigned to orders entered into the system. According to Nasdaq Rule
4703(a), participants specify an order's time-in-force by designating a
time at which the order will become active and a time at which the
order will cease to be active. All of the times-in-force currently
described in Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) are applicable to orders with RTFY or
SCAN routing order attributes.\16\ According to the Exchange, during
Pre-Market Hours, participants usually designate orders with RTFY or
SCAN routing order attributes to activate upon entry or at 8:00 a.m.
ET.\17\ The Exchange now proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 4703(a) to
provide that a participant entering an order with the RTFY or SCAN
routing order attribute may designate the order to activate at a
specific time during Pre-Market Hours on the same day.\18\ The Exchange
proposes to offer this functionality on a port level basis.\19\ As a
result, if, for example, a participant cancels an order entered through
a port set for 8:00 a.m. ET activation and wishes the order to instead
activate at 8:20 a.m. ET, it must either have another port set for
activation at 8:20 a.m. ET or, alternatively, enter the order at that
time for immediate activation.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Amendment No. 1.
    \17\ See id.
    \18\ Participants may cancel their inactive orders with RTFY or
SCAN routing order attributes at any time before they are activated.
See id.
    \19\ See id.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, as of the time that an order with a RTFY
or SCAN routing order attribute is activated, the Exchange would
subject orders that are eligible for display or execution to all of the
Exchange's standard regulatory checks (including compliance with
Regulation NMS, Regulation SHO, and relevant Exchange rules), as it
currently does with all orders upon entry.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-
NASDAQ-2017-088, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, and Grounds for
Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \22\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of proceedings is appropriate at this time in
view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposal, as
discussed below. Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the
Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to any of the
issues involved. Rather, as described below, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to provide additional comment on the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\23\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. As
noted above, during Pre-Market Hours, Exchange participants usually
designate orders with the RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute to
activate upon entry or at 8:00 a.m. ET. The Exchange now proposes to
permit participants to designate orders with the RTFY or SCAN routing
order attribute to activate at any time during Pre-Market Hours on the
same day (i.e., at any specified time during the period beginning at
4:00 a.m. ET and ending immediately prior to the commencement of Market
Hours). As a result, participants could designate any time during Pre-
Market Hours (rather than only 8:00 a.m. ET) to activate orders with
the RTFY or SCAN routing order attribute, and the time between order
entry and order activation could be much longer than is currently the
case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
analysis of, and input from commenters with respect to, the consistency
of the proposal with Section 6(b)(5) \24\ of the Act. Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act requires that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable principles
of trade, 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, and not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their data, views, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act, or rules and regulations
thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to
approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral
presentation of data, views, and arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\25\ any request for an
opportunity to make an oral presentation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \26\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants to
the Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--
either oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is
appropriate for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-
regulatory organization. See Securities Acts Amendments of 1975,
Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75,
94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by January 11, 2018.
Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's
submission must file that rebuttal by January 25, 2018. The Commission
asks that commenters address the sufficiency of the Exchange's
statements in support of the proposal, which are set forth in Amendment
No. 1,\27\ in addition to any other comments they may wish to submit
about the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 protected]. Please include
File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088. The 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 website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088 and should be submitted by
January 11, 2018. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by January 25,
2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-27464 Filed 12-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P