[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67485-67488]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26841]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73544; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 967NY To Enhance the Functionality
of the Trade Collar Protection Mechanism

November 6, 2014.
    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 October 24, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 967NY to enhance the
functionality of the trade collar protection mechanism. The text of 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 967NY(a) to clarify and
conform with the functionality of the trade collar protection mechanism
in use on the Exchange. The Exchange's amendment is to specify (a) how
marketable Limit Orders behave when received in a wide market, (b) how
subsequently-arriving Market Orders effect collared orders, and (c) the
values associated with a Trading Collar. The Exchange also seeks to
make non-substantive wording changes to Rule 967NY(a).

Background

    Pursuant to Rule 967NY(a), the Exchange applies a ``Trade Collar
Protection'' mechanism that prevents the immediate execution of certain
orders at prices outside of a specified parameter (referred to as a
``Trading Collar'').\4\ Pursuant to Rule 967NY(a)(3), the Trade Collar
Protection mechanism is not available for quotes or for orders with
execution conditions IOC, AON, FOK and NOW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange adopted Rule 967NY governing Trade Collar
Protection in 2013. See, Exchange Rule 967NY (Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 70037) (July 25, 2013), 78 FR 46399 (July 31, 2013)
(NYSEMKT-2013-62).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Trading Collars are determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class
basis and, unless announced otherwise via Trader Update, are the same
value as the bid-ask differential guidelines established pursuant to
Rule 925NY(b)(4), as set forth in Rule 967NY(a)(2). For example, Rule
925NY(b)(4) sets the bid-ask differential for an option priced less
than $2.00 at $0.25. For any option that has a bid less than $2.00, the
Trading Collar will be $0.25. Accordingly, if the National Best Bid and
Offer (``NBBO'') for XYZ is $0.75 bid and $1.75 offer, certain orders
the Exchange receives will be subject to a $0.25 Trading Collar.\5\ If
necessary to preserve a fair and orderly market, the Exchange may, with
the approval of two Trading Officials,\6\ widen or narrow the Trading
Collar for one or more option series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The bid-ask differential changes as the price increases.
Rule 925NY(b)(4) sets the bid-ask differential at no more than $0.40
where the bid is $2.00 or more but does not exceed $5.00.
Accordingly, if the NBBO for XYZ is $3.00 bid and $3.50 offer,
certain orders the Exchange receives will be subject to a $0.40
Trading Collar Protection.
    \6\ A Trading Official, as defined by Rule 900.2NY(82) is an
officer or employee of the Exchange. Trading Officials are not
affiliated with ATP Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Trade Collar Protection applies to two scenarios. First, pursuant
to Rule 967NY(a)(1)(i), Trade Collar Protection prevents executions of
certain orders when the difference between the National Best Offer
(``NBO'') and the National Best Bid (``NBB'') is greater than one
Trading Collar. Second, pursuant to Rule 967NY(a)(1)(ii), Trade Collar
Protection prevents the execution of the balance of an eligible buy
order if it were to execute at a price that is the NBO plus a Trading
Collar (or a price that is the NBB minus a Trading Collar for an
eligible sell order).
    Pursuant to Rule 967NY(a)(1)(i), if the difference between the NBO
and the NBB is greater than one Trading Collar, the Exchange will
prevent execution or routing of certain orders. Instead, pursuant to
Rule 967NY(a)(4)(A), the Exchange will display the order at a price
equal to the NBO minus one Trading Collar for sell orders or the NBB
plus one Trading Collar for buy orders (the ``collared order''). The
Exchange will then attempt to execute or route the collared order to
buy (sell) against any contra interest priced within one Trading Collar
above (below) the displayed price of the collared order.\7\ As set
forth in Rule 967NY(a)(4)(C)(iii), should market conditions prevent the
order from trading or recalculating for a period of one second, the
order will improve its displayed price by an amount equal to an
additional Trading Collar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, Rule 967NY(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The collared order will re-price before the expiration of one
second as a result of certain changes in the market. Pursuant to Rule
967NY(a)(4)(C)(i), an update to the NBBO (based on another market
center or a quote or order on the Exchange) that improves the same side
of the market as the collared order will cause the collared order to be
redisplayed at the same price as the updated NBBO. In accordance with
Rule 967NY(a)(4)(C)(ii), a Limit Order (which is not an IOC Order, AON
Order, FOK Order or NOW Order) on the same side of the market priced
better than one Trading Collar from the collared order will also become
subject to Trade Collar Protection and will cause the collared order to
improve by one Trading Collar (which will redisplay at the new price
and additional size of the new Limit Order).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Rule 967NY(a)(4)(C)(iv) states that a new Market Order on
the same side as a collared order will not cause the order subject
to Trade Collar Protection to be recalculated (but will redisplay
with the additional size of the new Market Order).

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

    As set forth in Rule 967NY(a)(1)(ii), when the difference between
the NBB and NBO is within the bid-ask differential guidelines, orders
execute against the NBB or NBO, but Trade Collar Protection prevents
execution of the balance of certain order at prices that are a Trading
Collar above the NBO for buy orders (or at prices that are a Trading
Collar below the NBB for sell orders). Essentially, the Exchange will
permit the immediate execution of a Market Order or a marketable Limit
Order (together a ``marketable order'') up to a Trading Collar away
from the NBBO. Pursuant to Rule 967NY(a)(5), the balance of the
partially executed order will be subject to Trade Collar Protection and
will display at the last sale price. However, if there is an
opportunity for trading within one Trading Collar of the last sale
price, the order will continue to be displayed at the NBB (NBO)
established at the time of the initial execution. Once subject to Trade
Collar Protection, the order will follow the re-pricing mechanism
described above.
Proposed Change
    The Exchange seeks to clarify and correct Rule 967NY so as to
conform to current functionality. Pursuant to the language of Rule
967NY(a)(1)(i), the Exchange will prevent the immediately [sic]
execution of ``Market Orders or marketable Limit Orders'' if the width
of the bid-ask differential of the NBBO is greater than one Trading
Collar. However, during wide market conditions, the Exchange only
prevents the immediate execution of Market Orders. Orders with limit
prices that are executable against the NBB or NBO, regardless of the
width of the bid-ask differential of the NBBO, immediately execute.\9\
The Exchange believes that Market Orders need this additional level of
protection as such orders do not suggest that the submitting market
participant is aware of the market (or the dislocation associated
therewith). Conversely, the Exchange believes that an order with a
limit price evidences specific interest at which the submitting market
participant is willing to trade. While marketable Limit Orders are
immediately executable in situations where the bid-ask differential of
the NBBO is greater than one Trading Collar, they nonetheless remain
subject to the protections of the Limit Order Filter of 967NY(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Rule 967NY(a)(4)(C)(ii) and 967NY(b) explain two scenarios
where marketable Limit Orders might not immediately execute: (1)
When there is already a collared order or (2) when the Limit Order
is priced significantly through the contra-side BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also seeks to delete 967NY(a)(4)(C)(iv), which states
that a Market Order that arrives while another order is being displayed
due to Trade Collar Protection will join the collared order and display
at the same price. While the Exchange believes this behavior beneficial
to the market, it has not yet deployed the functionality. While it
intends to incorporate such an enhancement in the near future, the
Exchange is deleting (a)(4)(C)(iv) in order for its rules to comply
with current functionality. Market Orders that arrive while another
order is displayed due to Trade Collar Protection will behave in the
same manner as later-arriving marketable Limit Orders. Specifically,
the later-arriving Market Order will join the already collared order
and both will display at a price one Trading Collar above (below) the
previous displayed price. The Exchange intends to make another filing
to re-establishing the language of (a)(4)(C)(iv) once the functionality
is available.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 967NY(a) to add language
that clarifies the current operation of the trading collar mechanism.
In particular, the Exchange proposes to delete the reference to Rule
925NY(b)(4) and instead codify the values of the Trading Collar
directly in Rule 967NY(a). Rule 925NY(b)(4) sets the bid-ask
differentials based exclusively on the bid price. The trading collar
mechanism employs the same values for determining the Trading Collar.
However, while those values are based upon the NBB for buy orders, the
value of the Trading Collar for sell orders is based upon the NBO. The
Exchange uses the NBB for buy orders because it believes that a market
participant who is looking to buy would derive its price off of what
other market participants are willing to pay (i.e. the prevailing bid).
Similarly, the Exchange uses the NBO for sell orders because it
believes that a market participant who is looking to sell would derive
its price off of what other market participants are willing to sell
(i.e. the prevailing offer). Accordingly, the Exchange proposes new
sections (a)(2)(A) and (a)(2)(B) to Rule 967NY, which specifies the
values based upon whether the order subject to Trade Collar Protection
is to buy or sell.
    As an example, the NBBO for XYZ is $1.00 bid and $6.00 offer. Based
upon Rule 967NY's reference to Rule 925NY(b)(4), it could be
interpreted that the Trading Collar would be $0.25 regardless of
whether the Exchange received an order to buy or sell (based upon the
bid being less than $2.00). However, collared sell orders currently
derive their Trading Collar and display price from the NBO.
Accordingly, a Market Order to buy would display at $1.25 (i.e., the
$1.00 NBB plus the $0.25 Trading Collar (based upon the NBB being less
than $2.00)) and would attempt to execute against any contra interest
(on any market) priced $1.50 or less (i.e., $1.25 bid plus the $0.25
Trading Collar). However, a Market Order to sell would display at $5.50
(i.e., the $6.00 NBO minus the $0.50 Trading Collar (based upon the NBO
being more than $5.00 but does not exceed $10.00)) and would attempt to
execute against any contra interest (on any market) priced $5.00 or
greater (i.e., $5.50 offer minus the $0.50 Trading Collar).
    As a further example, the NBBO for XYZ is $1.45 x 200 bid and $2.10
x 200 offer with a $0.05 MPV. If the Exchange receives a market order
to buy 100 contracts, the Trading Collar would be $0.25 (pursuant to
new section (a)(2)(B)(i)). Accordingly, the order will be displayed at
$1.70 (i.e., $1.45 bid plus the $0.25 Trading Collar). For a period of
one second, the Exchange will attempt to execute the buy order against
any contra interest (on any market) priced $1.95 or less (i.e., $1.70
plus the $0.25 Trading Collar). Under Rule 967NY(a)(4)(C)(iii), at the
expiration of one second, the Exchange will attempt to redisplay the
market buy order subject to Trade Collar Protection at $1.95 (i.e.,
$1.70 plus the $0.25 Trading Collar). However, since the $2.10 NBO
represents contra interest priced $2.20 or less (i.e. $1.95 plus the
$0.25 Trading Collar), the market buy order would execute its 100
contracts against the NBO at $2.10. In comparison, in the same market
for XYZ, if the Exchange receives a market order to sell 100 contracts,
the Trading Collar would be $0.40 (pursuant to new section
(a)(2)(B)(ii)). Accordingly, the Exchange will attempt to display the
market sell order at $1.70 (i.e., $2.10 offer minus the $0.40 Trading
Collar). However, since the $1.45 NBB represents contra interest priced
$1.45 or greater, (i.e. $1.70 minus the $0.25 Trading Collar), the
market sell order would execute its 100 contracts against the NBB at
$1.45.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 967NY(a) to strike the
extraneous term ``inbound'' from the rule, which could cause confusion
as to when Trade Collar Protection is available because the trade
collar mechanism continues to apply to resting orders. In addition, the
Exchange proposes to delete the reference in 967NY(a)(3) to the
cancellation of IOC Orders, AON Orders, FOK Orders and NOW Orders if
not immediately executed, as such is not the behavior of AON Orders.
The

Exchange also proposes to capitalize the term ``limit order'' as used
in Rule 967NY(a)(4)(D) to conform with its use in the rest of the rule.
Finally, the Exchange proposes to make non-substantive changes to Rule
967NY(a)(4)(C)(i) and (ii) to better clarify behavior in situations
where there already exists an already collared order.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \10\ which requires the
rules of an exchange 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. The proposed rule change also is
designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \11\ of the Act
in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers
and among exchange markets. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule amendments relating to the behavior of Limit Orders in a wide
market and the effect on Market Orders on already collared orders
assist with the maintenance of fair and orderly markets and protects
investors by correcting inaccurate language and clarifying existing
functionality so that market participants better understand how the
Exchange handles certain orders in times of market dislocation. The
Exchange also believes that it promotes just and equitable principles
of trade to allow marketable Limit Orders received in a wide market to
immediately execute against contra-side interest before receiving Trade
Collar Protection because Limit Orders provide evidence of prices for
which market participants are willing to trade. Accordingly, to the
extent contra-side interest exists at the NBBO, the Exchange believes
it is appropriate to permit such executions before providing Trade
Collar Protection for potential subsequent executions at inferior
prices. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that it assists in the fair
and orderly market to have Market Orders advance an already collared
order in the same fashion as marketable Limit Orders as both are
subsequent orders representing executable interest. The Exchange
believes that its proposal to clarify that Trading Collar values are
based upon the NBB for buy orders and the NBO for sell orders removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by
basing the Trading Collar upon the benchmark from which a market
participant would most likely derive its price. The Exchange recognizes
that there could be potential market conditions that result in
different Trading Collar values depending on whether the order
submitted is to buy or sell. However, the Exchange believes that any
such differences are outweighed by meeting the expectations of market
participants who submit buy orders based upon the price of the
prevailing NBB and sell orders based upon the price of the prevailing
NBO. Further, the Exchange believes that clearly setting forth these
benchmarks removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free
and open market by ensuring that market participants better understand
the functionality of the trade collar mechanism on the Exchange and the
execution opportunities afforded their orders in certain market
conditions. The Exchange also believes that making non-substantive
wording changes enhances the description of Trade Collar Protection
will add transparency and clarity to the Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 believes the
proposal will provide market participants with clarity relating to how
the Exchange systems provides protection from anomalous executions.
Thus, the Exchange does not believe the proposal creates any
significant impact on competition.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-14 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-14. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of 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-NYSEMKT-2014-14, and should
be submitted on or before December 4, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-26841 Filed 11-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28476-28477]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11662]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 275

[Release No. IA-3403; File No. S7-36-10]

Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
making a technical amendment to the definition of ``covered associate''
in rule 206(4)-5 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers
Act'') to correct an inadvertent error in the rule as published in the
Federal Register on July 19, 2011.

DATES: Effective date: May 15, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vanessa M. Meeks, Attorney-Adviser, or
Melissa A. Roverts, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Office of Investment Adviser Regulation, Division of Investment
Management, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-8549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Commission adopted rule 206(4)-5 in July 2010 to prohibit an
investment adviser from providing advisory services for compensation to
a government client for two years after the adviser or certain of its
executives or employees (``covered associates'') make a contribution to
certain elected officials or candidates.\1\ In November 2010, the
Commission proposed new rules and rule amendments under the Advisers
Act to implement provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act.\2\ In that release, the Commission also
proposed several amendments to rule 206(4)-5, including a minor change
to the rule's definition of a ``covered associate'' to replace the word
``individual'' with the word ``person.'' \3\ The proposed change would
have specified that a legal entity, not just a natural person, that is
a general partner or managing member of an investment adviser would
meet the definition of ``covered associate.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers,
Investment Advisers Act Release No. 3043 (July 1, 2010) [75 FR 41018
(July 14, 2010)].
    \2\ Rules Implementing Amendments to the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 3110 (Nov. 19, 2010)
[75 FR 77052 (Dec. 10, 2010)] (``Implementing Proposing Release'').
    \3\ See id. at section II.D.1.
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In June 2011, the Commission adopted many of the new rules and rule
amendments set forth in the Implementing Proposing Release, including
amendments to rule 206(4)-5.\5\ The Commission specified in the
``Discussion'' section of the Implementing Adopting Release that it was
not adopting the proposed amendment to the definition of ``covered
associate,'' i.e., that the definition would continue to use the word
``individual.'' \6\ However, the text of rule 206(4)-5(f)(2)(i)
published in the ``Text of Rule and Form Amendments'' section of the
Implementing Adopting Release, and subsequently in the Federal
Register, incorrectly reflected the replacement of the word
``individual'' with the word ``person,'' as though that proposed change
had been adopted. To correct this mistake, the Commission is making a
technical amendment to rule 206(4)-5(f)(2)(i) to replace the word
``person'' with the word ``individual.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rules Implementing Amendments to the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 3221 (June 22,
2011) [76 FR 42950 (July 19, 2011)] (``Implementing Adopting
Release'').
    \6\ Id. at n.340 (``We are not, however, adopting an amendment
we proposed to specify that a legal entity, not just a natural
person, that is a general partner or managing member of an
investment adviser would meet the definition of ``covered
associate'' in the rule. Upon reflection, it would broaden the
application of the rule more than we intended.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Certain Findings

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''), notice of
proposed rulemaking is not required when an agency, for good cause,
finds ``that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' \7\ The Commission
is making a technical amendment to rule 206(4)-5 to reflect the
Commission's stated intent in the Implementing Adopting Release. The
Commission finds that because the amendment is technical and is being
made solely to correct a mistake, publishing the amendment for comment
is unnecessary.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
    \8\ For similar reasons, the amendment does not require analysis
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA'') or analysis of major
rule status under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2) (for purposes of RFA analysis, the term
``rule'' means any rule for which the agency publishes a general
notice of proposed rulemaking); and 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(C) (for purposes
of Congressional review of agency rulemaking, the term ``rule'' does
not include any rule of agency organization, procedure or practice
that does not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-
agency parties).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The APA also requires publication of a rule at least 30 days before
its effective date unless the agency finds otherwise for good cause.\9\
For the same reasons described above with respect to notice and
opportunity for comment, the Commission finds that there is good cause
for this technical amendment to take effect on May 15, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendment the Commission is adopting does not make substantive
or material modifications to any collection of information requirements
as defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as amended.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 44 U.S.C. 3501, 3507.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is sensitive to the costs and benefits of its rules.
The rule amendment the Commission is adopting today is technical and is
being made solely to correct a mistake and therefore will have minimal,
if any, economic effect.

III. Statutory Text and Text of Amendment

    We are adopting this technical amendment to rule 206(4)-5 under the
authority set forth in sections 206(4) and 211(a) of the Advisers
Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 80b-6(4) and 80b-11(a).

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

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 275

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Securities.

Text of Amendment

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of
the Code of the Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 275--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940

0
1. The authority for part 275 continues to read in part as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)(11)(H), 80b-2(a)(17), 80b-3, 80b-
4, 80b-4a, 80b-6(4), 80b-6a, and 80b-11, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Section 275.206(4)-5 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2)(i) to
read as follows:

Sec.  275.206(4)-5  Political contributions by certain investment
advisers.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Any general partner, managing member or executive officer, or
other individual with a similar status or function;
* * * * *

    Dated: May 8, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-11662 Filed 5-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P