[Federal Register: August 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 166)]
[Notices]
[Page 44423-44425]
[DOCID:fr28au09-95]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60563; File No. SR-NYSE-2009-87]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by New York Stock Exchange LLC
Extending Until August 31, 2009, the Operation of Interim NYSE Rule 128
Which Permits the Exchange To Cancel or Adjust Clearly Erroneous
Executions If They Arise Out of the Use or Operation of Any Quotation,
Execution or Communication System Owned or Operated by the Exchange,
Including Those Executions That Occur in the Event of a System
Disruption or System Malfunction

August 24, 2009.
    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 August 21, 2009, 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 extend until August 31, 2009, the
operation of interim NYSE Rule 128 (``Clearly Erroneous Executions for
NYSE Equities'') which permits the Exchange to cancel or adjust clearly
erroneous executions if they arise out of the use or operation of any
quotation, execution or communication system owned or operated by the
Exchange, including those executions that occur in the event of a
system disruption or system malfunction. The text of the proposed rule
change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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 proposes to extend until August 31, 2009, the
operation of interim NYSE Rule 128 (``Clearly Erroneous Executions for
NYSE Equities'') which permits the Exchange to cancel or adjust clearly
erroneous executions if they arise out of the use or operation of any
quotation, execution or communication system owned or operated by the
Exchange, including those executions that occur in the event of a
system disruption or system malfunction.
    Prior to the implementation of NYSE Rule 128 on January 28,
2008,\4\ the NYSE did not have a rule providing the Exchange with the
authority to cancel or adjust clearly erroneous trades of securities
executed on or through the systems and facilities of the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57323 (February 13,
2008), 73 FR 9371 (February 20, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order for the NYSE to be consistent with other national
securities exchanges which have some version of a clearly erroneous
execution rule, the Exchange is drafting an amended clearly erroneous
rule which will accommodate such other exchanges but will be
appropriate for the NYSE market model.
    The NYSE notes that the Commission approved an amended clearly
erroneous execution rule for Nasdaq in May 2008.\5\ On July 28, 2008,
the Exchange filed with the SEC a request to extend the operation of
interim Rule 128 until October 1, 2008 \6\ in order to review the
provisions of Nasdaq's clearly erroneous rule and to consider
integrating similar standards into its own amendment to Rule 128. On
October 1, 2008,\7\ the Exchange filed with the SEC a further request
to extend the operation of interim Rule 128 until January 9, 2009

in order to consider integrating similar standards into the amendment
to Rule 128. On January 9, 2009,\8\ the Exchange filed with the SEC a
request to extend the operation of interim Rule 128 until March 9,
2009, indicating that the Exchange was still in the process of
reviewing the Nasdaq rule with a view towards incorporating certain
provisions into the amendment of interim Rule 128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57826 (May 15,
2008), 73 FR 29802 (May 22, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-001).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58328 (August 8,
2008), 73 FR 47247 (August 13, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-63).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58732 (October 3,
2008), 73 FR 61183 (October 15, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-99).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59255 (January 15,
2009), 74 FR 4496 (January 26, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-02).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 10, 2009, NYSE Arca submitted a proposal to the SEC to
amend its clearly erroneous rule. The NYSE Arca proposed rule differed
in certain respects from the Nasdaq clearly erroneous rule. On March 9,
2009, the Exchange filed with the SEC a request to extend the operation
of interim Rule 128 until June 9, 2009 \9\ to finalize review of NYSE
Arca's proposed amended CEE rule, which included marketwide CEE
initiatives, to determine if it was appropriate to incorporate such
provisions into the Rule 128 amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59581 (March 9,
2009), 74 FR 12431 (March 24, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thereafter, on April 24, 2009, NYSE Arca filed a revised rule
change with the Commission to amend its clearly erroneous rule (NYSE
Arca Rule 7.10).\10\ The Exchange was in the process of finalizing its
review of NYSE Arca's revised CEE rule change, which also included
marketwide CEE initiatives, to determine if it was appropriate to
incorporate all such provisions into NYSE's interim Rule 128 amendment.
On June 9, 2009, the Exchange filed with the SEC a request to extend
the operation of interim Rule 128 until July 15, 2009 \11\ to finalize
review of NYSE Arca's proposed amended CEE rule. On July 15, 2009 \12\
the Exchange filed with the SEC a request to extend the operation of
interim Rule 128 until August 1, 2009 to finalize review of NYSE Arca's
proposed amended CEE rule. On July 31, 2009 the Exchange filed with the
SEC a request to extend the operation of interim Rule 128 until August
10, 2009 \13\ to finalize review of NYSE Arca's proposed amended CEE
rule. On August 11, 2009 the Exchange filed with the SEC a request to
extend the operation of interim Rule 128 until August 21, 2009 \14\ to
finalize review of NYSE Arca's proposed amended CEE rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59838 (April 28,
2009), 74 FR 20767 (May 5, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-36) (See NYSE
Arca Rule 7.10).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60131 (June 17,
2009), 74 FR 30196 (June 24, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-57).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60312 (July 15,
2009), 74 FR 36298 (July 22, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-70).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60419 (August 7,
2009), 74 FR 39987 (August 10, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-79).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60478 (August 11,
2009), 74 FR 41769 (August 18, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-81).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange anticipates finalizing proposed rule text of its
clearly erroneous execution rule shortly, and is, therefore, requesting
to extend the operation of interim Rule 128 until August 31, 2009.
Prior to August 31, 2009, the Exchange intends to formally file a 19b-4
rule change amending interim Rule 128.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'')
\15\ for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section
6(b)(5) \16\ that an Exchange have rules that are 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(a). [sic]
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As articulated more fully in the ``Purpose'' Section above, the
proposed rule would place the NYSE on equal footing with other national
securities exchanges. This will promote the integrity of the market and
protect the public interest, since it would permit all exchanges to
cancel or adjust clearly erroneous trades when such trades occur,
rather than canceling them on all other markets, but leaving them
standing on only one market.

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.

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

    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 \17\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Commission has determined to waive the five-day pre-filing
period in this case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \19\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \20\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. NYSE requests that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay because the Exchange
believes that the absence of such a rule in an automated and fast-paced
trading environment poses a danger to the integrity of the markets and
the public interest. NYSE notes that immediate effectiveness of the
proposed rule change will immediately and timely enable NYSE to cancel
or adjust clearly erroneous trades that may present a risk to the
integrity of the equities markets and all related markets. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay \21\ is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because such waiver will permit the Exchange to continue operation of
interim NYSE Rule 128 on an uninterrupted basis, and therefore
designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission 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 may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2009-87 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-87. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-87 and should be
submitted on or before September 18, 2009.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-20821 Filed 8-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 28 (Wednesday, February 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7609-7610]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02788]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1031]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Food and Drug
Administration Recall Regulations

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by March
13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0249.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

FDA Recall Regulation--21 CFR Part 7 (OMB Control Number 0910-0249)--
Extension

    Section 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act charges the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, through FDA, with the
responsibility of assuring recalls (21 U.S.C. 371, Regulations and
Hearings, and 21 CFR part 7, Enforcement Policy, Subpart C, Recalls
(Including Product Corrections)--Guidance on Policy, Procedures, and
Industry Responsibilities) which pertain to the recall regulations and
provide guidance to manufacturers on recall responsibilities. The
guidelines apply to all FDA-regulated products (i.e., food, including
animal feed; drugs, including animal drugs; medical devices, including
in vitro diagnostic products; cosmetics; biological products intended
for human use; and tobacco).
    These responsibilities include providing FDA with complete details
of the recall including reason(s) for the removal or correction, risk
evaluation, quantity produced, distribution information, the firm's
recall strategy, a copy of any recall communication(s), and a contact
official (Sec.  7.46 (21 CFR 7.46)); notifying direct accounts of the
recall, providing guidance regarding further distribution, giving
instructions as to what to do with the product, providing recipients
with a ready means of reporting to the recalling firm (Sec.  7.49); and
submitting periodic status reports so that FDA may assess the progress
of the recall. Status report information may be determined by, among
other things, evaluation return reply cards, effectiveness checks and
product returns (Sec.  7.53); and providing the opportunity for a firm
to request in writing that FDA terminate the recall (Sec.  7.55(b)).
    A search of FDA's database was performed to determine the number of
recalls that took place during fiscal years 2011 to 2013. The resulting
number of total recalls (11,403) from this database search were then
averaged over the 3 years, and the resulting per year average of
recalls (3,801) are used in estimating the current annual reporting
burden for this report. The resulting number of total terminations
(11,403) from this database search were then averaged over the 3 years,
and the resulting per year average of terminations (3,801) are used in
estimating the current annual reporting burden for this report.
    In the Federal Register of August 4, 2014 (79 FR 45197), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the total annual industry burden to collect and
provide the previous information to be 721,886 burden hours.
    The following is a summary of the estimated annual burden hours for
recalling firms (manufacturers, processors, and distributors) to comply
with the voluntary reporting requirements of FDA's recall regulations,
recognizing that there may be a vast difference in the information
collection and reporting time involved in different recalls of FDA's
regulated products.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                        Average
             Recall                  Number of     responses per   Total annual     burden per      Total hours
                                    respondents     respondent       responses       response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firm Initiated Recall (21 CFR              3,801               1           3,801              25          95,025
 7.46) and Recall Communications
 (21 CFR 7.49)..................
Recall Status Reports (21 CFR              3,801              13          49,413              10         494,130
 7.53)..........................
Termination of a Recall (21 CFR            3,801               1           3,801              10          38,010
 7.55(b)).......................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         627,165
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

I. Total Annual Reporting

A. Firm Initiated Recall and Recall Communications

    Request firms voluntarily remove or correct foods and drugs (human
or animal), cosmetics, medical devices, biologics, and tobacco to
immediately notify the appropriate FDA District Office of such actions.
The firm is to provide complete details of the recall reason, risk
evaluation, quantity produced, distribution information, firms' recall
strategy and a contact official as well as requires firms to notify
their direct accounts of the recall and to provide recipients with a
ready means of reporting to the recalling firm. Under these portions of
the collection of information, the Agency estimates it will receive
3,801 responses annually based on the average number of recalls over
the last 3 fiscal years. The number of responses multiplied by the
number of respondents equal 3,801. The average burden hours of 25
multiplied by the total number of annual responses equal 95,025. The
average burden hour person response was 30 and has decreased by 5.

B. Recall Status Reports

    Request that recalling firms provide periodic status reports so FDA
can ascertain the progress of the recall. This request only applies to
firms with active recalls, and is estimated to be reported every 2 to 4
weeks. This collection of information will generate approximately 3,801
responses annually, based on the average number of recalls over the
last 3 fiscal years (11,403). The number of respondents multiplied by
the number of responses per respondents (13) equal a total number of
annual responses of 49,413. The total number of responses 49,413 with
an average burden hours of 10 per response equal a total of 494,130
total hours.

C. Termination of a Recall

    Provide the firms an opportunity to request in writing that FDA end
the recall. The Agency estimates it will receive 3,801 responses
annually based on the average number of terminations over the past 3
fiscal years. The total annual responses of 3,801 multiplied by the
average burden hours of 10 per response equal a total number of hours
of 38,010.

II. Total Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden

    Recall Communications. Request firms to notify their consignees of
the recall and to provide recipients with a ready means of reporting to
the recalling firm. Under this portion of the collection of
information, the Agency estimates firms will provide 1,691,445
notifications annually based on the number of respondents/consignees
(3,807) multiplied by the number of disclosures per respondent (445).
The total number of hours is 94,721 (based on 1,691,445 multiplied by
0.056 hours).

                                                 Table 2--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                          21 CFR Part                              Number of     disclosures per    Total annual    Average  burden per    Total hours
                                                                  respondents       respondent      disclosures         disclosure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recall Communications (21 CFR 7.49)...........................           3,801              445        1,691,445     0.056 (3 minutes)           94,721
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA regulates many different types of products including, but not
limited to, medical products, food and feed, cosmetics, and tobacco
products. FDA notes that not all third-party disclosures provided by
firms to their consignees are similar in nature and may entail
different methods and mediums of communication. FDA estimates the
burden for third-party disclosure per recall event to be an average of
25 hours. This burden estimate factored out to the average number of
consignees per recall (445) results in a burden per disclosure estimate
of approximate hours (25 hours per recall/445 disclosures/recall =
0.056 hours).

    Dated: February 5, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-02788 Filed 2-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 45 (Thursday, March 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13161-13163]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04606]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80154; File Nos. SR-NYSEMKT-2016-52 and SR-NYSEArca-
2016-103]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; NYSE Arca Inc.;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes To Extend the Time Within Which a
Member, Member Organization, an ATP Holder, OTP Holder, or OTP Firm
Must File a Uniform Termination Notice for Securities Industry
Registration (``Form U5'')

March 3, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On June 16, 2016, NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ a proposed rule change to extend the
time within which a member or member organization, or an Amex Trading
Permit Holder (``ATP Holder'') must file a Form U5, or any amendments
thereto. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on July 7, 2016.\4\ On July 14, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca'') (NYSE MKT and NYSE Arca, each an ``Exchange'') filed
with the Commission, a proposed rule change to extend the time within
which an Options Trading Permit Holder (``OTP Holder'') or Options
Trading Permit Firm (``OTP Firm'') must file a Form U5, or any
amendments thereto. The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 27, 2016.\5\ The Commission received
two comment letters regarding the proposals.\6\ NYSE responded to the
NASAA Letter on August 12, 2016.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78198 (June 30,
2016), 81 FR 44363 (``NYSE MKT Notice'').
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78381 (July 21,
2016), 81 FR 49286 (``NYSE Arca Notice'').
    \6\ See letters from Judith Shaw, President, North American
Securities Administrators Association, Inc., dated August 3, 2016
(``NASAA Letter'') and Rick A. Fleming, Investor Advocate and Tracey
L. McNeil, Ombudsman, Office of the Investor Advocate, Commission,
dated October 3, 2016 (``OIA Letter''), to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission.
    \7\ See letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') dated
August 12, 2016 (``NYSE Letter I''), to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 5, 2016, the Commission instituted proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
changes.\8\ The Commission received four additional comment letters
regarding the proposals.\9\ NYSE responded to the OIA Letter on October
26, 2016.\10\ On December 21, 2016, the Commission designated a longer
period of time to determine whether to approve or disapprove the
proposed rule changes.\11\ Thereafter the Commission received one
additional comment letter.\12\ NYSE submitted a response on January 16,
2017.\13\ This order approves the proposed rule changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79055, 81 FR 70460
(October 12, 2016).
    \9\ See letters from Kevin Zambrowicz, Associate General
Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association,
dated October 19, 2016 (``SIFMA Letter''), Michele Van Tassel,
President, Association of Registration Management (``ARM''), dated
November 4, 2016 (``ARM Letter I''), Edwin L. Reed, Deputy Director,
Alabama Securities Commission, dated November 14, 2016 (``ASC
Letter''), and Mike Rothman, President, NASAA, dated November 16,
2016 (``NASAA Response'') to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission.
    \10\ See letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary, NYSE, dated October 26, 2016 (``NYSE Letter
II'') to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79645, 81 FR 95679
(December 28, 2016).
    \12\ See letter from Michele Van Tassel, President, ARM, dated
January 4, 2017 (``ARM Letter II'') to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission.
    \13\ See letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary, NYSE, dated January 16, 2017 (``NYSE Letter
III'') to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposals

NYSEMKT-2016-52

    As set forth in the NYSE MKT Notice, NYSE MKT proposes to amend its
rules regarding when a member, member

organization, or an ATP Holder must file a Form U5 and amendments
thereto. Under Commentary .01 to NYSE MKT Rule 340, members and member
organizations (collectively, ``Members'') are required to file a Form
U5 and any amendment thereto with the Central Registration Depository
(``CRD'') within 10 days of the date of termination of an employee who
has been approved for admission to the trading floor. Under Commentary
.09 to NYSE MKT Rule 341, Members must submit information concerning
the termination of employment of a Member, registered employee, or an
officer on Form U5 within 10 days of the date of termination. Under
NYSE MKT Rule 359(a), an ATP Holder that terminates an ATP Holder or
approved person must file a Form U5 within 10 days of the termination.
    NYSE MKT proposes to amend these rules by replacing the 10-day
deadline with a requirement to promptly file a Form U5 with CRD, but
not later than 30 calendar days after the date of termination of a
Member, ATP Holder, registered employee, officer, or approved person.
Further, the proposed rule change would require that any amendment to a
Form U5 be promptly filed with CRD, but not later than 30 calendar days
after learning of the facts or circumstances giving rise to the need to
amend the Form. In addition, the proposed rule change would require
that the Form U5 be provided to the terminated person concurrently with
filing.

NYSEArca-2016-103

    As set forth in the NYSE Arca Notice, NYSE Arca also proposes to
amend its rules regarding when an OTP Holder and an OTP Firm must file
a Form U5 and amendments thereto. Under NYSE Arca Rule 2.17(c), an OTP
Holder that terminates an OTP is required to file a Form U5 or any
amendment thereto within 10 business days of the termination or the
occurrence requiring the amendment. Under NYSE Arca Rule 2.23(i), OTP
Holders and OTP Firms are required to file a Form U5 and any amendment
thereto within 10 business days of the termination date of an employee
who has been approved for admission to the trading floor or
participation on any trading system. Similar to NYSE MKT, NYSE Arca
proposes to amend its rules to require OTP Holders and OTP Firms to
promptly file a Form U5 with CRD, but not later than 30 calendar days
after the date of termination of an OTP or employee, as applicable. In
addition, NYSE Arca proposes to require that any amendment to a Form U5
be promptly filed with CRD, but not later than 30 calendar days after
learning of the facts or circumstances giving rise to the need to amend
the Form U5 and add a requirement to the rules that the Form U5 be
provided to the terminated person concurrently with filing. The
Exchanges state that the proposed rule changes would harmonize their
rules with the requirements of other exchanges and FINRA.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., NYSE Rule 345(a).17(a) (providing for prompt
reporting but in any event no later than 30 days following
termination, and concurrently to the person); BATS BZX Exchange,
Inc. Rule 2.5 Interpretations and Policies .04(a) Termination of
Employment (providing for immediate reporting but in no event later
than 30 days following termination, and concurrently to the person);
FINRA By-Laws Article 5 Sec. 3(a) (providing for giving notice not
later than 30 days after termination, and concurrently to the
person).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
changes are consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\15\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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, to protect investors and the public interest, and not to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers. The proposed rule changes, which will provide additional time
for Members to file Forms U5, should help to ensure more accurate
information regarding the reasons for the termination of a registered
person, which would serve to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In approving the proposed rule changes, the Commission has
considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Commission received seven comment letters on
the proposed rule changes and three letters from the NYSE responding to
the comments.\17\ SIFMA and ARM support the proposed 30-day filing
deadline \18\ because they think it is more reasonable than the current
10-day period\19\ and would align the Form U5 filing requirement with
the more broadly applicable FINRA standard.\20\ SIFMA also notes that
the 10-day period may create challenges for firms in the process of
collecting and reviewing information that may be relevant to the
accuracy of the filing.\21\ ARM also supports the 30-day filing
deadline and asserts that the 10-day Form U5 filing requirement imposes
unnecessary urgency on the process, causing Members to rush to meet the
deadline at the risk of being less thorough than a 30-day review period
would allow.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See NASAA Letter, OIA Letter, SIFMA Letter, ARM Letter I,
ASC Letter, NASAA Response, and ARM Letter II and NYSE Letter I
responding to the NASAA Letter, NYSE Letter II responding to the OIA
Letter, and NYSE Letter III responding to all the comment letters.
    \18\ See SIFMA Letter, ARM Letter I, and ARM Letter II.
    \19\ See SIFMA Letter at 2, ARM Letter I at 2.
    \20\ See SIFMA Letter at 2.
    \21\ See id.
    \22\ See ARM Letter I at 2 and ARM Letter II at 2. SIFMA and ARM
object to the use of the word ``promptly'' in the rule language
because they believe it may create unnecessary ambiguity regarding
the standard. SIFMA Letter at 3 and ARM Letter I at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, NASAA, OIA, and the ASC object to extending the time
for filing Form U5 because regulators use the information on the Form
U5 and need the information on a timely basis.\23\ All three commenters
argue that the 10-day filing requirement for Form U5 should be
maintained, noting that any harmonization effort among self-regulatory
organizations should focus on shortening the Form U5 filing deadlines
across the industry, rather than on lengthening them.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See NASAA Letter at 1-2, NASAA Response at 1-2, OIA Letter
at 2-7, and ASC Letter.
    \24\ See NASAA Letter at 1-2, NASAA Response at 3, OIA Letter at
6, and ASC Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASAA, the OIA, and the ASC also raise concerns about the impact of
the proposed rule changes on investor protection, including potential
challenges the proposals would pose for state regulators trying to
fulfill their regulatory responsibilities, and note that the Form U5
contains valuable regulatory information relating to the termination of
securities industry professionals, which is used by regulators in
making licensing decisions, often under short timeframes.\25\ The OIA
notes that the information on Form U5 is used by state regulators
making licensing decisions, FINRA to identify and initiate
investigations, firms when making hiring decisions, and the information
alerts investors about potential red flags in a broker's employment
history.\26\ NASAA states that a 30-day filing deadline for the Form U5
poses significant challenges for state regulators, particularly due to
the often

automatic nature of the registration process in many states where,
under a 30-day standard, a state may not have Form U5 information
before it is required to make a new licensing decision.\27\ NASAA
further suggests that it is time for a comprehensive review of Form U5
filing deadlines.\28\ In addition, NASAA asserts that the importance of
state licensing decisions outweigh any arguable burden of the shorter
filing deadline.\29\ NASAA also asserts that because ``approximately
73% of Form U5s are already filed within 10 days of a representative's
termination,'' the burden of maintaining a shorter filing deadline is
demonstrably minimal, as the vast majority of firms already comply with
the deadline.\30\ Thus, NASAA does not believe that the 10-day
requirement imposes a competitive disadvantage on the Exchanges'
members.\31\ NASAA also asserts that Commission approval of the
proposal would be premature, as NASAA's ongoing work in this area may
lead to an industry-wide examination of Form U5 filing issues, and
ultimately a recommendation to shorten the deadlines for filing the
Form U5.\32\ OIA supports a harmonized approach among the self-
regulatory organizations but argues that the appropriate way to
harmonize the requirement would be to shorten the filing timeframes to
10 days across the industry.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See NASAA Letter at 1-2, OIA Letter at 2--7, and ASC
Letter.
    \26\ See OIA Letter at 3.
    \27\ See NASAA Letter at 2 and NASAA Response at 2. See also ASC
Letter at 2 (stating it is far more efficient for a state to prevent
an agent with disqualifying history from becoming registered than it
is to revoke or suspend a registered agent).
    \28\ See NASAA Response at 2.
    \29\ See id.
    \30\ See id.
    \31\ See id. at 2-3.
    \32\ See id. at 3.
    \33\ See OIA Letter at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE responds by stating that the proposed rule changes would
harmonize the Exchanges' rules with the existing rules of the other
exchanges and FINRA and thereby ensure uniformity and promote clarity
and consistency.\34\ In addition, the Exchange believes that
maintaining a requirement for NYSE MKT and NYSE Arca Members different
from the requirement for FINRA members results in a burden on
competition.\35\ With respect to concerns regarding timely access to
information by investors, NYSE references a proposed rule change that
amended FINRA's rules to reduce the time period within which
information disclosed on Form U5 is made available to the public via
BrokerCheck from 15 days to three days.\36\ In this regard, NYSE
suggests that the relevant timing is when information provided on the
Form U5 is made available on BrokerCheck. NYSE also states that unless
FINRA moves to a shorter timeframe it would be a burden on competition
for NYSE MKT and NYSE Arca to continue to maintain a different standard
than is required of members of other self-regulatory organizations.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See NYSE Letter III at 2.
    \35\ See NYSE Letter I at 1, NYSE Letter II at 2.
    \36\ See NYSE Letter I at 2. But see OIA Letter at 6 noting
``that, while timelier disclosure of Form U5 information on
BrokerCheck impacts the speed in which a retail investor may be
alerted to red flag conduct, it has no impact on the speed in which
regulators are alerted to, and can respond to, the information in
the Form U5.''
    \37\ See NYSE Letter I at 2, NYSE Letter II at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, NYSE asserts its belief that the proposals are consistent
with the Act because they conform to the rules of other self-regulatory
organizations.\38\ Further, NYSE believes that the proposals should
eliminate potential reporting inaccuracies caused by any such
disparities among exchanges' regulatory reporting requirements and
ensure greater accuracy in Form U5 reporting because the proposed
timeframes would provide Members with sufficient time to perform due
diligence before reporting a termination.\39\ Specifically responding
to SIFMA and ARM, NYSE states that the proposed rule language is not
ambiguous, adding that the ``prompt'' requirement is consistent with
rules of other self-regulatory organizations and should encourage
prompt filing of Form U5, but does not shorten the deadline of 30
days.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See NYSE Letter I at 1-2, NYSE Letter II at 1-2, NYSE
Letter III at 1-2. NYSE refers to similar exchange rules featuring a
30-day time limit for the filing and amending of the Form U5,
including two rules adopted in 2016. See NYSE Letter II at 2. The
Commission approved a rule change, SR-NYSEArca-2016-104, which
amended one rule to add ``calendar'' to modify the 30-day time frame
within which to submit Form U5 and a second rule to shorten the time
within which to submit the Form U5 from 30 business days to 30
calendar days. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78809
(September 9, 2016), 81 FR 63543 (September 15, 2016).
    \39\ See NYSE Letter III at 2.
    \40\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Commission believes that the changes, which
will provide additional time for Members to file Forms U5, may result
in more accurate information describing the reasons for the termination
of a registered person, which would serve to protect investors and the
public interest. Certain commenters appear to be concerned that Members
may require additional time to accurately and completely respond to
questions on the Form U5.\41\ The additional time associated with the
proposed rule change should contribute to the accuracy of information
contained in the Form U5. The Commission notes that Forms U5 must be
accurate and complete so that investors have the information that they
need to determine if they wish to work with a particular registered
person, and regulators have the information they need to properly
oversee the associated persons engaged in the securities business in
their jurisdictions, as soon as possible. In addition, the Commission
notes that proposed time limits are consistent with the rules of other
self-regulatory organizations.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See SIFMA letter at 2, ARM Letter I at 1-2 and ARM Letter
II at 2.
    \42\ See supra, note 14 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\43\ that the proposed rule changes (SR-NYSEMKT-2016-52 and SR-NYSE
Arca 2016-103) be, and hereby are, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \44\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\44\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-04606 Filed 3-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 164 (Monday, August 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52190-52191]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18482]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2020-0027-N-19]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below. Before submitting this ICR
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is
soliciting public comment on specific aspects of the activities
identified in the ICR.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
October 23, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR to
Ms. Hodan Wells, Information Collection Clearance Officer at email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please refer to the
assigned OMB control number in any correspondence submitted. FRA will
summarize comments received in response to this notice in a subsequent
notice and include them in its information collection submission to OMB
for approval.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information
collection activities before seeking OMB approval of the activities.
See 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.8 through 1320.12. Specifically,
FRA invites interested parties to comment on the following ICR
regarding: (1) Whether the information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether
the activities will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's
estimates of the burden of the information collection activities,
including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (3) ways for FRA to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (4) ways
for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection activities on
the public, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 5
CFR 1320.8(d)(1).
    FRA believes that soliciting public comment may reduce the
administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of
information that Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA reasons
that comments received will advance three objectives: (1) Reduce
reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection requirements in
a ``user-friendly'' format to improve the use of such information; and
(3) accurately assess the resources expended to retrieve and produce
information requested. See 44 U.S.C. 3501.
    The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB
clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: Track Safety Standards; Concrete Crossties.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0592.
    Abstract: In 2011, FRA mandated specific requirements for effective
concrete crossties, for rail fastening systems connected to concrete
crossties, and for automated inspections of track constructed with
concrete crossties. FRA uses the information collected under 49 CFR
213.234 to ensure automated track inspections of track constructed with
concrete crossties are carried out as specified in the rule to
supplement visual inspections by Class I and Class II railroads,
intercity passenger railroads, and commuter railroads.

    Type of Request: Extension with change (revised estimates) of a
currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form(s): N/A.
    Respondent Universe: 30 railroads.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Reporting Burden:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Note: The current inventory estimates a total burden of
4,875 hours while the requesting inventory estimates a total burden
of 279 hours. FRA determined some of the estimates were double
counted and/or outdated, while other estimates were not PRA
requirements, thus leading to the increased figures in the current
inventory, which were decreased accordingly in this notice. Also,
totals may not add due to rounding.
    \2\ The dollar equivalent cost is derived from the Surface
Transportation Board's Full Year Wage A&B data series using the
appropriate employee group hourly wage rate that includes a 75-
percent overhead charge.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average time  per       Total annual  burden     Total cost
          CFR Section \1\             Respondent  universe     Total annual  responses         responses                  hours           equivalent \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
213.234(e)--Automated inspection    30 railroads............  125 reports.............  15 minutes.............  31 hours...............          $1,813
 of track constructed with
 concrete crossties--Exception
 reports listing all exception to
 Sec.   213.109(d)(4).
--(g) Procedure for integrity of    30 railroads............  30 revised procedures...  2 hours................  60 hours...............           7,200
 data--Track owners to institute
 procedures for maintaining the
 integrity of the data collected
 by the measurement system.
--(h)(3) Training--Track owners to  30 railroads............  2,250 records of trained  5 minutes..............  188 hours..............          10,875
 provide annual training in                                    employees.
 handling rail seat deterioration
 exceptions to all persons
 designated as fully qualified
 under Sec.   213.7 and whose
 territories are subject to the
 requirements of Sec.   213.234--
 Recordkeeping.
    Total.........................  30 railroads............  2,405 Responses.........  N/A....................  279 Hours..............          19,888
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 2,405.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 279 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent: $19,888.
    Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi),
FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or sponsor,
and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

Brett A. Jortland,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2020-18482 Filed 8-21-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 2732]
[FR Doc No: C1-2020-28107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0119]

Notice Regarding the Applicability of NHTSA FMVSS Test Procedures
to Certifying Manufacturers

Correction

    In notice document 2020-28107 appearing on pages 83143-83152 in the
issue of Monday, December 21, 2020, make the following correction:
    (1) On page 83143, in the second column, in the DATES section,
change ``January 20, 2021'' to read ``January 21, 2021.''

[FR Doc. C1-2020-28107 Filed 1-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301-00-D