[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 222 (Friday, November 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57774-57778]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24981]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84559; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2018-085]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Various Rules To Reflect Changes to The Nasdaq Options Market LLC
(``NOM'') Protocols

November 9, 2018.
    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 October 29, 2018, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II 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 amend various rules to reflect changes to
The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOM'') protocols.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.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
    Nasdaq recently filed a rule change \3\ which adopted a new
protocol ``Ouch to Trade Options'' or ``OTTO'' \4\ and renamed the
current OTTO protocol as ``Quote Using Orders'' or ``QUO''.\5\ The
Exchange proposes to reflect the changes made in the Prior Rule Change
within various NOM Rules which refer to protocols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83888 (August 20,
2018), 83 FR 42954 (August 24, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-069) (``Prior
Rule Change''). This rule change is immediately effective but will
not be operative until such time as the Exchange issues an Options
Trader Alert announcing the implementation date. This notification
will be issued in Q4 2018. The Exchange notes that this filing
renamed the current OTTO protocol as ``QUO'' and also proposed the
adoption of a new OTTO protocol.
    \4\ OTTO is an interface that allows Participants and their
Sponsored Customers to connect, send, and receive messages related
to orders to and from the Exchange. Features include the following:
(1) Options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying); (2) system
event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and start of
opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4)
execution messages; (5) order messages; and (6) risk protection
triggers and cancel notifications. See NOM Rules at Chapter VI,
Section 21(a)(i)(C).
    \5\ QUO is an interface that allows NOM Market Makers to
connect, send, and receive messages related to single-sided orders
to and from the Exchange. Order Features include the following: (1)
Options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying); (2) system
event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and start of
opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4)
execution messages; (5) order messages; and (6) risk protection
triggers and cancel notifications. Orders submitted by NOM Market
Makers over this interface are treated as quotes. See NOM Rules at
Chapter VI, Section 21(a)(i)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Prior Rule Change, which is effective but not yet operative,
renamed the current OTTO to ``QUO.'' The proposed changes herein seek
to rename that protocol accordingly within the

rules where OTTO is specified in the Rulebook. The Prior Rule Change
also adopted a new OTTO protocol, which is the same OTTO protocol
currently utilized by market participants on Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'')
today.\6\ The proposal introduces the new OTTO protocol within NOM
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Supplementary Material .03(b) to Rule 715.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detection of Loss of Communication
    Chapter VI, Section 6(e), ``Detection of Loss of Communication''
describes the impact to NOM protocols in the event of a loss of a
communication. The Exchange identifies the various protocols available
on NOM within this rule. The Exchange proposes several amendments.
    First, the Exchange proposes to replace references to the term
``Participant'' with ``NOM Market Maker'' within the current rule text
where the protocol is only available to NOM Market Makers.\7\ This new
text will add greater specificity to the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange is proposing these changes within Chapter VI,
Section 6(e)(i), Section 6(e)(i)(B), current Section 6(e)(iv),
Section 6(e)(iv)(A) and Section 6(e)(iv)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange proposes to add the term ``QUO'' to Chapter
VI, Section 6(e)(i)(A) which defines a ``Heartbeat'' to account for the
renamed current OTTO protocol within the list. The existing reference
to current OTTO would remain and such reference would now refer to the
new OTTO protocol. No changes are necessary to the text because the
operation of the two protocols are the same for purposes of this
specific rule text.
    Third, the Exchange notes that current OTTO is accounted for within
NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 6(e). Specifically, Section 6(e)(iii)
and current Section 6(e)(vi), which is proposed to be renumbered as
Section 6(e)(viii), currently describe the current OTTO protocol. The
Exchange is not amending this language because this language would be
the same for the new OTTO protocol. To avoid confusion in marking the
text, the Exchange proposes to allow this text to remain and simply
replicate the text for the renamed QUO protocol. No changes are
necessary to the existing OTTO text because the operation of the two
protocols, as it relates to this specific text, is the same. The
standards for disconnecting current OTTO, renamed ``QUO'' and new OTTO
are identical. The Exchange therefore proposes a new Chapter VI,
Section 6(e)(i)(D) to define QUO as the Exchange's System component
through which NOM Market Makers communicate orders from the Client
Application. Because the renamed QUO interface accepts orders submitted
by NOM Market Makers, which are treated as quotes for purposes of
quoting obligations, this interface is identified as an order entry
interface. Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(D), defining Client Application,
is being re-lettered to Section 6(e)(i)(E). Also, the Exchange proposes
a new Section 6(e)(iv) which provides,

    When the QUO Port detects the loss of communication with a NOM
Market Maker's Client Application because the Exchange's server does
not receive a Heartbeat message for a certain time period (``nn''
seconds), the Exchange will automatically logoff the NOM Market
Maker's affected Client Application and if the NOM Market Maker has
elected to have its orders cancelled pursuant to Chapter VI, Section
6(e)(viii) automatically cancel all open orders posted.

    The Exchange also proposes to renumber subsequent sections and add
a corresponding new section for QUO within Section 6(e)(viii) which
provides,

    The default time period (``nn'' seconds) for QUO Ports shall be
fifteen (15) seconds for the disconnect and, if elected, the removal
of orders. If the NOM Market Maker elects to have its orders
removed, in addition to the disconnect, the NOM Market Maker may
determine another time period of ``nn'' seconds of no technical
connectivity, as required in paragraph (iii) above, to trigger the
disconnect and removal of orders and communicate that time to the
Exchange. The period of ``nn'' seconds may be modified to a number
between one hundred (100) milliseconds and 99,999 milliseconds for
QUO Ports prior to each session of connectivity to the Exchange.
This feature may be disabled for the removal of orders, however the
NOM Market Maker will be disconnected.
    (A) If the NOM Market Maker systemically changes the default
number of ``nn'' seconds, that new setting shall be in effect
throughout the current session of connectivity and will then default
back to fifteen seconds. The NOM Market Maker may change the default
setting systemically prior to each session of connectivity.
    (B) If a time period is communicated to the Exchange by calling
Exchange operations, the number of ``nn'' seconds selected by the
NOM Market Maker shall persist for each subsequent session of
connectivity until the NOM Market Maker either contacts Exchange
operations and changes the setting or the NOM Market Maker
systemically selects another time period prior to the next session
of connectivity.

    These sections will refer to the renamed QUO protocol separately
from the new OTTO protocol. As noted above, the existing OTTO rule text
would refer to the new OTTO and would have the same 15 second default
time period as current OTTO, renamed ``QUO.'' The new section for QUO
will represent that protocol going forward so that all NOM protocols
are represented within the rule.
    Fifth, the Exchange proposes to renumber Section 6(e)(vii) to
Section 6(e)(ix) and add references to the renamed QUO protocol in this
paragraph. The trigger for all protocols is described in this section.
The current OTTO reference shall now refer to the new OTTO and renamed
QUO is being added so all protocols are accounted for within the text.
Opening and Halt Cross
    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 8, ``Nasdaq
Opening and Halt Cross,'' at Section 8(a)(4), ``Eligible Interest,'' to
reflect the addition of an order entry protocol. As explained above,
the current OTTO was renamed ``QUO'' and a new ``OTTO'' protocol will
be added to NOM. The Exchange proposes to add ``OTTO'' to the list of
protocols that may submit orders, prior to the Nasdaq Opening Cross
designated with a time-in-force of IOC will be rejected and shall not
be considered eligible interest. The Exchange proposes to add ``QUO''
to the list of protocols that may submit orders that may be submitted
as quotes prior to the Nasdaq Opening Cross, designated with a time-in-
force of IOC that will remain in-force through the opening and would be
cancelled immediately after the opening. The Exchange also proposes to
add the words ``quotes received via'' before SQF to make clear that
quotes are submitted into the SQF protocol.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section
8(a)(6), ``Valid Width National Best Bid or Offer'' or ``Valid Width
NBBO'' to add QUO and remove OTTO to the list of protocols that may
submit orders or quotes to account for the renaming of the current
protocol. Today, the SQF protocol is a quoting protocol used by NOM
Market Makers. QUO will permit orders to be entered, which would be
treated as quotes for purposes of quoting obligations, which orders
would be eligible for the Opening Process provided they are within a
specified bid/ask differential as established and published by the
Exchange. The new OTTO would be an order entry protocol only and
therefore not eligible to be utilized to submit a Valid Width National
Best Bid or Offer during the Opening Process.
Data Feeds
    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 19, ``Data Feeds
and Trade Information'' to amend ``OTTO DROP'' to ``QUO DROP.'' The
same description would apply as this data

feed is simply being renamed. The Exchange notes that the Exchange is
not offering a similar data feed for the new OTTO.
Definitions
    The Exchange proposes to add three new definitions to Chapter I,
Section 1. These definitions are utilized in technical documents issued
by the Exchange and will provide an ease of reference for understanding
these terms. The Exchange proposes to define account number at Chapter
I, Section 1(a)(69) as a number assigned to a Participant. Participants
may have more than one account number. The Exchange proposes to define
``badge'' at Chapter I, Section 1(a)(70) as an account number, which
may contain letters and/or numbers, assigned to NOM Market Makers. A
NOM Market Maker account may be associated with multiple badges.
Finally, the Exchange proposes to defined ``mnemonic'' at Chapter I,
Section 1(a)(71) as an acronym comprised of letters and/or numbers
assigned to Participants. A Participant account may be associated with
multiple mnemonics.
Risk Protections
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 18 to
make various amendments as detailed below.
Order Price Protection
    The Exchange proposes to amend the current rule text at Chapter VI,
Section 18(a)(1) related to the Order Price Protection rule or ``OPP.''
First the Exchange proposes to add punctuation and OPP at the beginning
of that sentence to conform the text to the remainder of the rule.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to remove the example within Chapter
VI, Section 18(a)(1)(B)(i) which states, ``For example, if the
Reference BBO on the offer side is $1.10, an order to buy options for
more than $1.65 would be rejected. Similarly, if the Reference BBO on
the bid side is $1.10, an order to sell options for less than $0.55
will be rejected.'' The Exchange also proposes to remove the example
within Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(1)(B)(ii) which states, ``For example,
if the Reference BBO on the offer side is $1.00, an order to buy
options for more than $2.00 would be rejected. However, if the
Reference BBO of the bid side of an incoming order to sell is less than
or equal to $1.00, the OPP limits set forth above will result in all
incoming sell orders being accepted regardless of their limit.'' The
Exchange notes that while the examples remain accurate, the Exchange
proposes to remove the text to conform the rule text to other risk
protections. The Exchange does not believe it is necessary to have
these examples within the rule text.
    Third, the Exchange proposes to state, with the introduction of
``QUO'' that OPP shall not apply to orders entered through QUO. Today,
the Exchange does not offer OPP via current OTTO, which is being
renamed ``QUO.'' \8\ The Exchange proposes to memorialize its current
practice within the rule. The Exchange does not offer OPP on current
OTTO, renamed ``QUO'' because unlike other market participants, Market
Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as compared to other market
participants and are able to manage their risk, particularly with
respect to quoting, using tools that are not available to other market
participants.\9\ This would not be a change from the current practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64312 (April 20,
2011), 76 FR 23351 (April 26, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-053). The
Exchange noted in the filing that, ``Like the PHLX's OPP, NOM's will
be available for Participants' orders, but not for market making.''
    \9\ QUO, similar to SQF, is subject to the quote protections
listed in Chapter VI, Section 18(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Order Spread Protection
    The Exchange proposes two changes to the Market Order Spread
Protection rule at Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(2). First, NOM proposes to
add the word ``trading'' before the word ``halt'' Section 18(a)(2) for
consistency. In the OPP rule text halts are referred to as ``trading
halts.'' This will avoid confusion as to the use of this term.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend the Market Order Spread
Protection Rule in Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(2) to permit NOM to
establish different thresholds for one or more series or classes of
options, which is the same as Phlx.\10\ The Exchange desires, the same
as Phlx, to be permitted the flexibility to allow it to determine a
threshold suitable for each series or class of option. The Exchange's
current rule provides no discretion to permit different thresholds for
one or more series or classes of options. By adding this rule text, the
Exchange proposes to permit one or more series or classes of options to
set a different threshold, which the Exchange would announce via an
Options Trader Alert, similar to Phlx. The Exchange desires to conform
this protection to Phlx so that it could set the same threshold across
affiliated markets. The Phlx Rule Change provided that the $5 threshold
is appropriate because it seeks to ensure that the displayed bid and
offer are within reasonable ranges and do not represent erroneous
prices. Further the Exchange noted that this protection will bolster
the normal resilience and market behavior that persistently produces
robust reference prices. This feature should create a level of
protection that prevents Market Orders from entering the Order Book
outside of an acceptable range for the Market Order to execute. The
Exchange notes that those goals remain consistent with the Exchange's
goals today for this risk feature. The Exchange would establish
different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options if it
believed that the threshold should differ to retain these goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83141 (May 1, 2018), 83
FR 20123 (May 7, 2018) (SR-Phlx-2018-32) (``Phlx Rule Change'').
Footnote 11 of this filing provides that Exchange may establish
differences other than the referenced threshold for one or more
series or classes of options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anti-Internalization
    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 18(c)(1) to make
minor changes to capitalize the term ``market maker'' and remove the
word ``participant,'' make plural the word ``identifier,'' and change
the word ``member'' to ``Participant.'' These changes are intended to
conform the language to the remainder of the risk protection rules.
Further, the Exchange proposes to replace the phrase ``Exchange account
identifier or member firm identifier'' with ``account number or
Participant identifier.'' The Exchange defined ``account number''
herein and proposes that definition in place of ``Exchange account
identifier.'' Also, for consistency, ``member'' is being replaced with
``Participant'' in this sentence as well.
Automated Removal of Quotes
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend the title of Chapter VI,
Section 18(c)(2) from ``Automated Removal of Quotes'' to ``Quotation
Adjustments'' to conform the title across Nasdaq markets.
Implementation
    The Exchange proposes to implement the rule changes for QUO and
OTTO at the same time that the Exchange announces SR-NASDAQ-2018-069
will be operative.\11\ The Exchange proposes to implement the changes
for OPP in Q4 of 2018. The Exchange will announce the date of
implementation via an Options Traders Alert.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See note 3 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the

objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ 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 by adopting new definitions and
amending the rule text for Anti-Internalization to conform the rule
text to other risk protection rules and utilize a proposed new
definition. The Exchange believes that these proposed amendments will
add greater transparency to the Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Detection of Loss of Communication
    With respect to the new OTTO protocol which was introduced with the
Prior Rule Change, all NOM Participants will be able to utilize this
protocol. The Exchange believes that applying the removal functionality
specified within NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 6(e) for the new OTTO
protocol is consistent with the Act because it prevents disruption in
the marketplace by protecting market participants. Market participants
utilizing new OTTO will have the option to either enable or disable the
cancellation feature, thereby offering the same risk protections
throughout the market to participants utilizing other protocols.
Further, it is appropriate to offer this removal feature as optional to
all market participants utilizing new OTTO, because unlike NOM Market
Makers who are required to provide quotes in all products in which they
are registered, market participants utilizing new OTTO do not bear the
same magnitude of risk of potential erroneous or unintended executions.
In addition, market participants utilizing new OTTO may desire their
orders to remain on the order book despite a technical disconnect, so
as not to miss any opportunities for execution of such orders while the
OTTO port is disconnected. The Exchange believes that it is consistent
with the Act to require other market participants to be disconnected
because the Participant is otherwise not connected to the Exchange's
System and the Participant simply needs to reconnect to commence
submitting and cancelling orders.
Opening and Halt Cross
    The Exchange's proposal to reflect QUO, the renamed current OTTO
protocol, within Chapter VI at Sections 6(e), 8 and 19 and permit the
references to the current OTTO protocol to reflect the new OTTO
protocol will account for all the protocols available on NOM within
these Rules. Specifically, the Exchange's proposal will make clear that
QUO will be available to NOM Market Makers and would be considered
eligible interest during the Opening Process and which types of orders
are eligible as Valid Width Quotes. Finally, the features available for
disconnects and the availability of QUO DROP are being specified in
this proposal. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because current OTTO is simply being renamed ``QUO.'' Renaming this
protocol with its rules will make clear how QUO orders may be entered
and cancelled by the System and avoid confusion for investors. With
respect to the Opening Process described in NOM Rules at Chapter VI,
Section 8, the Exchange's proposal to replace ``OTTO'' with ``QUO''
reflects the name change. Only quotes and in this case orders, which
are treated as quotes for quoting obligations, may qualify for a Valid
Width National Best Bid or Offer during the Opening Process. Also,
adding QUO to the list of Eligible Interest brings greater clarity to
market participants regarding the changes to the NOM protocols. The
current OTTO references will reflect the new OTTO protocol with these
changes. Finally, the change to Chapter VI, Section 19(b) simply
accounts for the name change. The Exchange is not amending the proposed
``QUO DROP'' functionality.
Risk Protections
    With respect to not offering OPP for QUO, the Exchange believes it
is consistent with the Act because unlike other market participants,
Market Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as compared to other
market participants and are able to manage their risk, particularly
with respect to quoting, using tools that are not available to other
market participants. Also, QUO is subject to the quote protections
listed in Chapter VI, Section 18(c). Market Makers handle a large
amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections
required by the Exchange and utilize their own risk management
parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of error.
The Exchange believes that Market Makers, unlike other market
participants, have the ability to manage their risk and are being
offered two protocols to quote.
    The Exchange's proposal to expand the Market Order Spread
Protection permits the Exchange to establish different thresholds for
one or more series or classes of options which is the same as Phlx. The
Exchange desires this flexibility to allow it, the same as Phlx,\14\ to
determine a threshold suitable for each series or class of option. The
Exchange believes that expanding this capability is consistent with the
Act because it would allow the Exchange to consider thresholds for
Market Order Spread Protection at a more granular level, per series or
class, to ensure that the displayed bid and offer are within reasonable
ranges and do not represent erroneous prices. The Exchange intends that
this risk protection would bolster the normal resilience and market
behavior that persistently produces robust reference prices, while
creating a level of protection that prevents Market Orders from
entering the Order Book outside of an acceptable range for the Market
Order to execute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 10 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Exchange's proposal to
adopt new definitions and amend the rule text for Anti-Internalization
to conform the rule text to other risk protection rules and utilize a
proposed new definition does not impose an undue burden on competition
because the proposal brings transparency to the Exchange's rules.
    The Exchange's proposal to add references to renamed QUO to Chapter
VI, Sections 6(e), 8 and 19 will clarify the name change of the current
OTTO protocol to renamed ``QUO'' and will also make clear that QUO is
available only to NOM Market Makers. The Exchange's proposal to
introduce the new OTTO protocol for purposes of the detection of loss
of communication functionality does not impose an undue burden on
competition because all market participants will be permitted to
utilize OTTO to submit orders during the opening and will also be able
to avail themselves of the protections offered by a loss of
communication, similar to other protocols.
    Finally, no Market Maker would receive OPP protection, however all
Market Makers would receive the quote protections listed in Chapter VI,
Section 18(c). The Exchange believes that unlike other market
participants, Market Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as
compared to other market participants and are able to manage their
risk, particularly with respect to quoting, using tools that are

not available to other market participants.
    The Exchange's proposal to expand the Market Order Spread
Protection to permit the Exchange to establish different thresholds for
one or more series or classes of options, the same as Phlx, would apply
uniformly to all market participants.

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) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \17\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \18\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. The
Exchange believes that waiver of the operative delay would allow the
Exchange to update its rules without delay to reflect the proposed
amendments with respect to QUO and OTTO at the same time as it proposes
to implement the new OTTO functionality, and bring greater transparency
to the Exchange's risk protections. Additionally, the Commission notes
that the changes relating to the OTTO protocol and risk protections are
based on the operation of similar functionality on Nasdaq ISE and Phlx,
respectively. Therefore, the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the
operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon
filing.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
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 change 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2018-085 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-NASDAQ-2018-085. 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 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 Number SR-NASDAQ-2018-085, and should be submitted
on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-24981 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 245)]
[Notices]
[Page 68289-68290]
[DOCID:fr23de09-96]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copy Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form N-5; SEC File No. 270-172; OMB Control No. 3235-0169.

    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 (the ``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously
approved collection of information discussed below.
    Form N-5 (17 CFR 239.24 and 274.5)--Registration Statement of Small
Business Investment Companies Under the Securities Act of 1933 (15
U.S.C. 77a et seq.) and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C.
80a-1 et seq.). Form N-5 is the integrated registration statement form
adopted by the Commission for use by a small business investment
company which has been licensed as such under the Small Business
Investment Act of 1958 and has been notified by the Small Business
Administration that the company may submit a license application, to
register its securities under the Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities
Act''), and to register as an investment company under section 8 of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Investment Company Act''). The
purpose of registration under the Securities Act is to ensure that
investors are provided with material information concerning securities
offered for public sale that will permit investors to make informed
decisions regarding such securities. The Commission staff reviews the
registration statements for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure
contained therein. Without Form N-5, the Commission would be unable to
carry out the requirements to the Securities Act and Investment Company
Act for registration of small business investment companies. The
respondents to the collection of information are small business
investment companies seeking to register under the Investment

Company Act and to register their securities for sale to the public
under the Securities Act. The estimated number of respondents is one
and the proposed frequency of response is annually. The estimate of the
total annual reporting burden of the collection of information is
approximately 352 hours per respondent, for a total annual burden of
352 hours. Providing the information on Form N-5 is mandatory.
Responses will not be kept confidential. Estimates of the burden hours
are made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and
are not derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or
study of the costs of SEC rules and forms. 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.
    Please direct general comments regarding the above information to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or send an e-mail to Shagufta
Ahmed at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Charles Boucher,
Director/CIO, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within
30 days of this notice.

    Dated: December 16, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-30430 Filed 12-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 204 (Monday, October 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 64278]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22976]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-187, OMB Control No. 3235-0211]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 18f-1 and
Form N-18f-1

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

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), 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.
    Rule 18f-1 (17 CFR 270.18f-1) enables a registered open-end
management investment company (``fund'') that may redeem its securities
in-kind, by making a one-time election, to commit to make cash
redemptions pursuant to certain requirements without violating section
18(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-18(f)). A
fund relying on the rule must file Form N-18F-1 (17 CFR 274.51) to
notify the Commission of this election. The Commission staff estimates
that 12 funds file Form N-18F-1 annually, and that each response takes
one hour. Based on these estimates, the total annual burden hours
associated with the rule is estimated to be 12 hours. The estimated
burden hours associated with rule 18f-1 and Form 18F-1 have decreased
by 10 hours from the current allocation of 22 hours. This decrease is
due to a decrease in the estimated number of investment companies
filing Form N-18F-1 annually. There is no external cost associated with
this collection of information.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules. 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.
    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
estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information 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. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted by December 23, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an
email to: [email protected].

    Dated: October 18, 2022.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-22976 Filed 10-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 42 (Monday, March 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12642-12646]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04206]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80122; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 103B

February 28, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on February 22, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''
or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 amend Rule 103B, which governs the
allocation of securities to Designated Market Makers. The proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 103B, which governs the
allocation of securities to DMMs, to streamline the allocation process
and facilitate the selection of DMM units by issuers. Specifically, as
described in more detail below, the Exchange proposes to:
     Amend Rule 103B(III)(A), which provides for issuer
selection of DMM units, to require issuers select all DMM units to
interview, permit senior officials at issuers to designate a
representative to attend DMM interviews, and eliminate the cap on the
number of DMM representatives that can participate in issuer
interviews;
     amend Rule 103B(III)(B), which provides for selection of
DMM units by the Exchange, to remove the requirement that the Exchange
Selection Panel (``ESP'') base its review only on information available
to an issuer and reduce the size of the ESP to three Exchange employees
designated by the Chief Executive Officer;
     renumber Rule 103B(III)(B)(2), which describes the DMM one
year obligation, as new Rule 103B(III)(C) and make certain non-
substantive changes to the existing rule text;
     renumber Rule 103B(III)(B)(3), which describes foreign
listing considerations, as new Rule 103B(III)(D);
     amend Rule 103B(VI)(D) (1) and (3), governing listed
company mergers, to make certain non-substantive changes;
     amend Rule 103B(VI)(F), governing allocation of closed-end
management investment companies, to specify that the group of eligible
DMM units an issuer listing additional funds can select from also
includes DMM units the issuer ``reviewed'' during the initial
allocation;
     amend Rule 103B(VI)(G), governing the allocation freeze
policy, to replace references to ``specialty stock'' with ``DMM
interest''; and
     amend Rule 103B(VI)(H), setting forth the allocation
sunset policy, to provide that allocation decisions remain effective
for initial public offerings (``IPO'') that list on the Exchange within
eighteen months of such decision rather than the current twelve months
and to specify that, in situations where the proposed individual DMM is
no longer with the selected DMM unit, the company may choose to stay
with the selected DMM or be referred to allocation and may interview a
replacement individual DMM prior to making that decision.
Current Rule 103B
    Rule 103B currently provides two options for the allocation of
securities to DMMs: (1) The issuer selects the DMM unit; or (2) the
issuer delegates selection of the DMM unit to the Exchange.
    If the issuer proceeds under the first option, the listing company
selects a minimum of four DMM units to interview.\4\ A DMM unit's
eligibility to participate in the allocation process is based on
objective criteria and determined at the time the interview is
scheduled. No more than three representatives of each DMM unit may
currently participate in the interview, each of whom must be employees
of the DMM unit.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Rule 103B(III)(A)(1).
    \5\ See Rule 103B(III)(A)(2)(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Within five business days after the issuer selects the DMM units to
be interviewed, the issuer meets with representatives of each of the
DMM units. At least one representative of the listing company must be a
senior official of the rank of Corporate Secretary or above of that
company. Additionally, no more than three representatives of each DMM
unit may participate in the meeting, each of whom must be an employee
of the DMM unit, and one of whom must be the individual DMM

who is proposed to trade the company's security, unless that DMM is
unavailable to appear, in which case a telephone interview is
permitted.
    Following the interview, a DMM unit may not have any contact with
an issuer. If an issuer has a follow-up question regarding any DMM
unit(s) it interviewed, it must be conveyed to the Exchange. The
Exchange then contacts the unit(s) to which the question pertains and
provides any available information received from the unit(s) to the
listing company. Within two business days of the issuer's interviews
with the DMM units, the issuer selects its DMM unit in writing. The
Exchange then confirms the allocation of the security to that DMM unit,
at which time the security is deemed to have been so allocated.
    If the issuer proceeds under the second option and delegates
selection of the DMM unit to the Exchange, the Exchange convenes an ESP
to select the DMM unit based on a review of all information available
to the issuer. The current ESP must consists of (1) at least one member
of the Exchange's Senior Management, as designated by the CEO or his or
her designee, (2) any combination of two Exchange Senior Management or
Exchange Floor Operations Staff, to be designated by the Executive
Vice-President of Exchange Floor Operations or his/her designee; and
(3) three non-DMM Floor Governors for a total of six members.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 103B(III)(B)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change
    The Exchange proposes the following changes to Rule 103B to
streamline the allocation process and facilitate the selection of DMM
units by issuers, as follows.
Rule 103B(III)(A)--Issuer Selection of DMM Unit by Interview
    Rule 103B(III)(A) is currently titled ``DMM Unit Selected by the
Issuer'' and describes the first allocation option, which is selection
of a DMM unit by the issuer following interviews.
    The Exchange proposes to delete the current title and replace it
with ``Issuer Selection of DMM Unit by Interview'' to more specifically
delineate the first option.
    The Exchange proposes amending subsection (1) of Rule 103B(III)(A),
which provides that the issuer shall select a minimum of four DMM units
to interview, to require that issuers select all DMM units to
interview. To effectuate this change, the Exchange would delete ``a
minimum of four'' and add ``all'' after ``select'' and before ``DMM
units to interview.'' Requiring issuers to select all DMM units to
interview would provide all eligible DMM units with an opportunity to
participate in the allocation process, which will lead to an increase
in competition without being overly burdensome on the issuer. The
Exchange believes that the increase in competition would provide DMM
units with a greater incentive to perform optimally. The proposed
change would also provide the issuer with more choice in the selection
of its assigned DMM unit.
    The Exchange also proposes a non-substantive change to Rule
103B(III)(A) to replace ``shall'' with ``must'' before ``select.''
    Further, the Exchange proposes amending the first sentence of Rule
103B(III)(A)(2)(b), which provides that issuers meet with DMM units
within five business days after the issuer select the DMM units, to add
the word ``eligible'' before ``DMM units.''
    The Exchange also proposes amending the second sentence of Rule
103B(III)(A)(2)(b), which provides that at least one representative of
the listing company must be a senior official of the rank of Corporate
Secretary or higher. The Exchange proposes to provide senior officials
at the issuer with the option to designate an individual to participate
in the meeting on their behalf by adding the clause ``or a designee of
such senior official'' at the end of the second sentence of the Rule.
The Exchange believes that the proposed change would enable issuers to
more efficiently manage the interview process and prevent scheduling
conflicts among its most senior executives from unduly delaying the
interviews.
    Current Rule 103B(A)(2)(b) further provides that no more than three
representatives of each DMM unit may participate in the meeting, each
of whom must be employees of the DMM unit. The Exchange proposes to
eliminate the cap on the number of DMM representatives that can
participate in issuer interviews by deleting the phrase ``No more than
three'' before ``representatives of each DMM unit'' and capitalize the
``r''. The Exchange believes that the current cap on number of
representatives from the DMM unit limits the ability of a DMM unit to
assess who may be best suited to attend an interview with an issuer.
The Exchange further believes that providing DMM units with greater
flexibility in determining how many people to bring to an interview
would enable the DMMs to make that determination as necessary.
    The Exchange also proposes to make participation by representatives
of the DMM units mandatory by deleting ``may'' before ``participate in
the meeting'' and replacing it with ``must.''
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to specify that employees of a
member organization operating a DMM unit are permitted to attend
allocation interviews by adding ``member organization operating a''
before ``DMM unit.'' Under Exchange Rules, a ``DMM unit'' can be
operated as either a stand-alone member organization or as a trading
unit within a member organization.\7\ The proposed change would enable
senior management of a broker-dealer operating a DMM unit to be
eligible to participate in allocation interviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Rules 2(j) and 98(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to delete the heading of Rule
103B(III)(A)(3), which is currently ``Issuer's Selection of DMM Unit,''
and subpart (a). The text of current Rule 103B(III)(A)(3)(a) would
become the text of new Rule 103(III)(A)(3) and would be amended to
replace references to ``shall'' with ``will'' in two places and ``shall
then'' with ``will'' in another.
Rule 103B(III)(B)--Exchange Selection of DMM Unit by Delegation
    Rule 103B(III)(B) is currently titled ``DMM Unit Selected by the
Exchange'' and sets forth the second allocation option, which is
selection of a DMM unit by the Exchange by delegation from the issuer.
    The Exchange proposes to delete the current title and replace it
with ``Exchange Selection of DMM Unit by Delegation'' to more
accurately delineate the second option. As discussed below, the
Exchange proposes various changes to Rule 103B(III)(B) to further
delineate selection of a DMM unit based on delegated authority from the
issuer and distinguish it from direct issuer selections under Rule
103B(III)(A).
    The Exchange proposes to amend subsection (B)(1) to remove the
clause providing that ESP selection of a DMM unit be ``based on a
review of all information available to the issuer.'' The proposed
change would enable the ESP to consider confidential statistical or
market quality data for each eligible DMM unit that is only available
to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that enabling the ESP, which as
discussed below would be composed of Exchange staff only, to consider
such information in its selection of a DMM unit on behalf of an issuer
would facilitate more informed and objective decisions and

would expedite the allocation, and ultimately the trading, of
securities on the Exchange.
    Relatedly, the Exchange proposes to reduce the size of the ESP to
three Exchange employees designated by the Chief Executive Officer in
order to streamline the ESP selection process and the operations of the
ESP itself. The Exchange believes that limiting the ESP to Exchange
employees would be appropriate given that the ESP would have access to
highly confidential statistical or market quality data about DMM firms
that would be inappropriate to share with non-Exchange employees.
    Further, the second paragraph of current Rule 103B(III)(B)(1) would
become Rule 103B(III)(B)(2). The Exchange proposes to specify in this
provision that the ESP would select the DMM unit and remove the clause
providing that the ESP select the DMM unit ``pursuant to the provisions
of 103B(III)(A) above'' as unnecessary.
    The second paragraph of current Rule 103B(III)(B)(1) would become
Rule 103B(III)(B)(3). The Exchange proposes to remove the clause
providing that tie votes are decided by the CEO of the Exchange or his
or her designee as unnecessary given that the proposed three-person ESP
could not deadlock. The Exchange also proposes non-substantive changes
to the remainder of this paragraph to clarify that selection of the ESP
selects the DMM unit and to replace ``shall'' with ``will'' in three
places.
    Current Rule 103B(III)(B)(2), governing the DMM one-year
obligation, would become Rule 103B(III)(C). The first sentence would be
deleted as unnecessary in order to streamline the Rule. The text of the
Rule would also be amended to replace ``shall be'' with ``with'' before
``required.''
    Finally, current Rule 103B(III)(B)(3), governing foreign listing
considerations, would become Rule 103B(III)(D).
Rule 103B(VI)--Policy Notes
    The Exchange proposes the following changes to Rule 103B(VI).
    First, the last sentence of subsections (1) and (3) of Rule
103B(VI)(D) (Listed Company Mergers) would be amended to delete an
extra period in each.
    Second, Rule 103B(VI)(F) (Allocation of Group of Closed-End
Management Investment Companies) would be amended to specify that an
issuer listing additional funds within nine months from the initial
listing may select a different DMM unit from the group of eligible DMM
units that the issuer interviewed or reviewed in the allocation
process. The current Rule only references DMM units that the issuer has
``interviewed.'' Including ``or reviewed'' in the proposed Rule would
explicitly cover allocations made by delegation to the Exchange under
option two where an issuer reviewed but may not have formally
interviewed a DMM unit.
    Second, Rule 103B(VI)(G) (Allocation Freeze Policy) would be
amended to remove outdated references to Exchange Rules 475 or 476,
which have been replaced by the Rule 8000 and 9000 Series references in
the Rule. Further, the Exchange proposes to replace the two outdated
references to ``specialty stock'' with ``DMM security.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As defined in Rule 98(b)(2), the term ``DMM securities''
means any securities allocated to the DMM unit pursuant to Rule 103B
or other applicable rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 103B(VI)(H)
(Allocation Sunset Policy) to extend the period an allocation decision
remains binding on an IPO listing from twelve to eighteen months of
such decision. The proposed change would provide listing issuers with
greater flexibility when an IPO is postponed before being referred for
allocation through the allocation process pursuant to NYSE Rule
103B(III).
    The Exchange also proposes to amend the Rule to cover the
contingency where the individual DMM selected by an issuer to trade its
securities is no longer with the selected DMM unit during the period
that allocation decisions remain effective. The Exchange proposes to
permit a company in that circumstance to choose whether to stay with
the selected DMM unit or be referred to allocation. Further, the
Exchange proposes to provide the company with the choice of
interviewing a replacement DMM from that DMM unit prior to deciding
whether to stay with the selected DMM unit or be referred to
allocation. Finally, the Exchange proposes to replace one reference to
``shall'' in the last sentence of the Rule with ``will.''
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change 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, because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and protect investors and the public interest, as
follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule
103B(III)(A)(1) to provide that issuers interview all DMMs would
promote just and equitable principles of trade because no eligible DMM
unit would be excluded from the issuer interview. Additionally, the
Exchange believes that the proposal is designed to remove impediments
to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, because it would lead to increased competition without
being overly burdensome on issuers and would provide issuers with
greater choice in the selection of a DMM unit. The Exchange believes
that the increase in competition would also provide DMM units with a
greater incentive to perform optimally.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule
103B(III)(A)(2)(b) to permit senior officials at issuers to designate a
representative to attend DMM interviews would remove impediments to,
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, by allowing
issuers to more efficiently manage the interview process and prevent
scheduling conflicts from unduly delaying interviews and the assignment
of securities to DMM units, which ultimately facilitates the fair and
orderly trading in the subject security.
    The Exchange believes that the additional proposed amendments to
Rule 103B(III)(A)(2)(b) to eliminate the cap on the number of DMM
representatives that can participate in issuer interviews, making
participation by representatives of the DMM units in such interviews
mandatory, and permitting employees of a member organization operating
a DMM to attend allocation interviews, is designed to remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market,
because it would give issuers greater exposure to management and other
staff at the proposed DMM units and provide them with more information
about the firms during the interview, thus enhancing the value of the
interviews for issuers and facilitating their choice of DMM.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule
103B(III)(B)(1) to remove the requirement that the ESP base its review
on information available to the issuer would remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, by enabling the ESP
consider confidential statistical or market quality data for each
eligible DMM unit that is only available to the

Exchange, thereby facilitating more informed and objective decisions by
the ESPs on behalf of issuers. Similarly, the Exchange believes that
the proposed amendments to Rule 103B(III)(B)(1) reducing the size of
the ESP to three Exchange employees designated by the Chief Executive
Officer would streamline and facilitate the process of assigning
securities to DMM units by allowing for more flexibility in composing
the ESP, which ultimately facilitates and expedites the allocation and
ultimately the trading of securities on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that the amendments to Rule 103B(VI)(H)
extending the sunset period from twelve to eighteen months will foster
cooperation and coordination with person engaged in facilitating
securities transactions and will remove impediments to a free and open
market because it recognizes that all IPOs may not be brought to market
in a twelve month period and avoids repeating administrative steps in
the listing process, thereby promoting efficient use of the Exchange's
resources. The proposed rule change also remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, by providing issuers
with a greater opportunity for input in the allocation process.
    Finally, the Exchange's proposal to make various technical, non-
substantive changes to the text of Rules 103B(III) and (VI)--renaming
headings and section renumbering, replacing ``shall'' with ``will,''
deleting extraneous punctuation, deleting redundant and unnecessary
clauses, adding clarifying text and updated references, and replacing
outdated references--adds clarity and transparency to the Exchange's
Rules and reduces potential investor confusion, which would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that
the proposed changes would increase competition among DMM units by
allowing more DMM units to participate in the interview process and
provide DMM units with a greater incentive to perform optimally
potentially and enhance the quality of the services DMMs provide to
issuers. Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes would
not be burdensome to issuers. Further, even assuming an increase in the
burden on issuers during the allocation process resulting from the
proposed changes, the Exchange believes that any such increased burden
will be small relative to the benefits that additional competition
between DMM units may provide. Issuers could, moreover, permit the
Exchange to select the DMM unit pursuant to the process found in NYSE
Rule 103B(III)(B).

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, 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\13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \15\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\16\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \17\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2017-06 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-NYSE-2017-06. 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-
NYSE-2017-06 and should be submitted on or before March 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-04206 Filed 3-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14963-14965]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5968]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0030]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Moss Point Rockin' the Riverfront
Festival; O'Leary Lake; Moss Point, MS

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary special local
regulation for a portion of O'Leary Lake, Moss Point, MS, on April 28-
29, 2012. This action is necessary for the safeguarding of participants
and spectators, including crews, vessels, and persons on navigable
waters during the Moss Point Rockin' the Riverfront Festival high speed
boat races. Entry into, transiting in or anchoring in this area is
prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or not part of the regatta patrol, unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Mobile or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11 a.m. on April 28, 2012, until 4
p.m. on April 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0030 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0030 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays and
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Mobile (spw), Building 102, Brookley Complex
South Broad Street Mobile, AL 36615, between 8 a.m. and 3:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email LT Lenell J. Carson, Coast Guard Sector
Mobile, Waterways Division; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
or providing a comment period with respect to this rule. The Coast
Guard received an application for a Marine Event Permit on December 23,
2011 from the Moss Point Main Street Association to conduct a high
speed boat race. After reviewing the details of the event and the
permit application, the Coast Guard determined that a special local
regulation is needed. Delaying or foregoing this safety measure to
provide a comment period would be contrary to the public interest. The
special local regulation is needed to safeguard persons and vessels
from safety hazards associated with the Moss Point Rockin' the
Riverfront Festival high speed boat races. The Coast Guard believes
that the public's desire to have the race at the scheduled time is
greater than the imposition on navigation which this regulation will
impose, and that the public interest favors enacting this regulation
without publishing an NPRM.

Basis and Purpose

    The Moss Point Main Street Association applied for a Marine Event
Permit to conduct a high speed boat race on O'Leary Lake, Moss Point,
MS on April 28-29, 2012. This event will draw in a large number of
pleasure craft and the high speed boats pose a significant safety
hazard to both vessels and mariners operating in or near the area. The
COTP Mobile is establishing a temporary special local regulation for a
portion of O'Leary Lake, Moss Point, MS, to safeguard persons and
vessels during the high speed boat races.

    The COTP anticipates minimal impact on vessel traffic due to this
regulation. However, this special local regulation is deemed necessary
for the safeguard of life and property within the COTP Mobile zone.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary special local
regulation for a portion of O'Leary Lake, Moss Point, MS, enclosed by a
bounded area starting at a point on the shore at approximately
30[deg]25'11.0'' N, 088[deg]32'24.4'' W, then east to 30[deg]25'12.9''
N, 088[deg]32'18.0'' W, then south to 30[deg]24'50.9'' N,
088[deg]32'09.6'' W, then west following the shore line back to the
starting point at 30[deg]25'11.0'' N, 088[deg]32'24.4'' W. This
temporary rule will safeguard life and property in this area. Entry
into, transiting in or anchoring in this zone is prohibited to all
vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or not part of
the regatta patrol, unless specifically authorized by the COTP Mobile
or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel
16 or through Coast Guard Sector Mobile at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The COTP Mobile or a designated representative will inform the
public through broadcast notice to mariners of changes in the effective
period for the special local regulation. This rule is effective from 11
a.m. until 4 p.m. on April 28-29, 2012.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under that those Orders.
    The special local regulation listed in this rule will only restrict
vessel traffic from entering, transiting, or anchoring within a small
portion of O'Leary Lake, Moss Point, MS. The effect of this regulation
will not be significant for several reasons: (1) This rule will only
affect vessel traffic for a short duration; (2) vessels may request
permission from the COTP to transit through the regulated area; and (3)
the impacts on routine navigation are expected to be minimal.
Notifications to the marine community will be made through broadcast
notice to mariners. These notifications will allow the public to plan
operations around the regulated area.

Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. However, when an
agency is not required to publish an NPRM for a rule, the RFA does not
require an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. The
Coast Guard was not required to publish an NPRM for this rule for the
reasons stated in the section titled ``Regulatory Information'' and
therefore is not required to publish a regulatory flexibility analysis.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in affected portions of O'Leary Lake during the high speed
boat races. This special local regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. The zone is limited in size, is of short duration
and vessel traffic may request permission from the COTP Mobile or a
designated representative to enter or transit through the regulated
area.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). 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 calls 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 the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(h), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing a special
local regulation, requiring a permit wherein an analysis of the
environmental impact of the regulations was performed. Under figure 2-
1, paragraph (34)(h.), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required
for this rule.

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.35T08-0030 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T08-0030  Special Local Regulation; O'Leary Lake; Moss
Point, MS.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a regulated area: a
portion of O'Leary Lake, Moss Point, MS, enclosed by a bounded area
starting at a point on the shore at approximately 30[deg]25'11.0'' N,
088[deg]32'24.4'' W, then east to 30[deg]25'12.9'' N, 088[deg]32'18.0''
W, then south to 30[deg]24'50.9'' N, 088[deg]32'09.6'' W, then west
following the shore line back to the starting point at 30[deg]25'11.0''
N, 088[deg]32'24.4'' W.
    (b) Enforcement dates. This rule will be enforced from 11 a.m.
until 4 p.m. on April 28-29, 2012.
    (c) Special Local Regulations.
    (1) The Coast Guard will patrol the regulated area under the
direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Patrol
Commander may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by the call
sign ``PATCOM''.
    (2) All Persons and vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators. The
``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state, or local
law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned or approved by
the Captain of the Port Mobile to patrol the regulated area.
    (3) Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do
so only with prior approval of the Patrol Commander and when so
directed by that officer and will be operated at a minimum safe
navigation speed in a manner which will not endanger participants in
the regulated area or any other vessels.
    (4) No spectator shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the through
transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the regulated
area during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for entry by
or through an official patrol vessel.
    (5) The patrol commander may forbid and control the movement of all
vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official
patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an immediate stop and comply with
the directions given. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the
area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (6) Any spectator vessel may anchor outside the regulated area, but
may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a navigable channel. Spectator
vessels may be moored to a waterfront facility within the regulated
area in such a way that they shall not interfere with the progress of
the event. Such mooring must be complete at least 30 minutes prior to
the establishment of the regulated area and remain moored through the
duration of the event.
    (7) The Patrol Commander may terminate the event or the operation
of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of
life or property.
    (8) The Patrol Commander will terminate enforcement of the special
local regulations at the conclusion of the event.
    (d) Informational Broadcasts. The Captain of the Port or a
designated representative will inform the public through broadcast
notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the regulated area as
well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: February 8, 2012.
D.J. Rose,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Mobile.
[FR Doc. 2012-5968 Filed 3-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 68492]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23905]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78965; File No. SR-FINRA-2016-032]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change Relating to FINRA Rule 2232
(Customer Confirmations) To Require Members To Disclose Additional
Pricing Information on Retail Customer Confirmations Relating to
Transactions in Fixed Income Securities

September 28, 2016.
    On August 12, 2016, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') 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 FINRA Rule 2232 to require its members to
disclose additional pricing information on retail customer
confirmations relating to transactions in fixed income securities. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on August 19, 2016.\3\ The Commission has received nine comments on the
proposal.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78573 (Aug. 15,
2016), 81 FR 55500.
    \4\ See Letter from Manisha Kimmel, Chief Regulatory Officer,
Wealth Management, Thomson Reuters to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept. 19, 2016); Letter from
Mary Lou Von Kaenel, Managing Director, Financial Information Forum
to Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission (Sept. 9, 2016); Letter from Sean Davy, Managing
Director, Capital Markets Division and Leslie M. Norwood, Managing
Director and Associate General Counsel, Municipal Securities
Division, SIFMA to Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission (Sept. 9, 2016); Letter from Norman L.
Ashkenas, Chief Compliance Officer, Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC
and Richard J. O'Brien, Chief Compliance Officer, National Financial
Services, LLC to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission (Sept. 9, 2016); Letter from Mike Nicholas, Chief
Executive Officer, Bond Dealers of America to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept. 9, 2016);
Letter from Robert J. McCarthy, Director of Regulatory Policy, Wells
Fargo Advisors, LLC to Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept. 9, 2016); Letter from
Scott A. Eichhorn, Practitioner in Residence and Supervising
Attorney, Investor Rights Clinic, University of Miami, et al., to
Brent Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept.
8, 2016); Letter from Manisha Kimmel, Chief Regulatory Officer,
Wealth Management, Thomson Reuters to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept. 8, 2016); and Letter from
Hugh Berkson, President, PIABA to Robert W. Errett, Deputy
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission (Sept. 7, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is October 3, 2016. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider this proposed rule change. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\6\ designates
November 17, 2016, as the date by which the Commission shall either
approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FINRA-2016-032).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-23905 Filed 10-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P