Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 11384-11385 [2017-03421]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
11384
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 22, 2017 / Notices
(b) the accuracy of the agency’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
in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
Please direct your written comments
to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: February 15, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–03393 Filed 2–21–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[SEC File No. 270–259, OMB Control No.
3235–0269]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–2736.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Extension:
Rule 17f–5.
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 the existing collection
of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension
and approval.
Rule 17f–5 (17 CFR 270.17f–5) under
the Investment Company Act of 1940
[15 U.S.C. 80a] (the ‘‘Act’’) governs the
custody of the assets of registered
management investment companies
(‘‘funds’’) with custodians outside the
United States. Under rule 17f–5, a fund
or its foreign custody manager (as
delegated by the fund’s board) may
maintain the fund’s foreign assets in the
care of an eligible fund custodian under
certain conditions. If the fund’s board
delegates to a foreign custody manager
authority to place foreign assets, the
fund’s board must find that it is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Feb 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
reasonable to rely on each delegate the
board selects to act as the fund’s foreign
custody manager. The delegate must
agree to provide written reports that
notify the board when the fund’s assets
are placed with a foreign custodian and
when any material change occurs in the
fund’s custody arrangements. The
delegate must agree to exercise
reasonable care, prudence, and
diligence, or to adhere to a higher
standard of care. When the foreign
custody manager selects an eligible
foreign custodian, it must determine
that the fund’s assets will be subject to
reasonable care if maintained with that
custodian, and that the written contract
that governs each custody arrangement
will provide reasonable care for fund
assets. The contract must contain
certain specified provisions or others
that provide at least equivalent care.
The foreign custody manager must
establish a system to monitor the
performance of the contract and the
appropriateness of continuing to
maintain assets with the eligible foreign
custodian.
The collection of information
requirements in rule 17f–5 are intended
to provide protection for fund assets
maintained with a foreign bank
custodian whose use is not authorized
by statutory provisions that govern fund
custody arrangements,1 and that is not
subject to regulation and examination
by U.S. regulators. The requirement that
the fund board determine that it is
reasonable to rely on each delegate is
intended to ensure that the board
carefully considers each delegate’s
qualifications to perform its
responsibilities. The requirement that
the delegate provide written reports to
the board is intended to ensure that the
delegate notifies the board of important
developments concerning custody
arrangements so that the board may
exercise effective oversight. The
requirement that the delegate agree to
exercise reasonable care is intended to
provide assurances to the fund that the
delegate will properly perform its
duties.
The requirements that the foreign
custody manager determine that fund
assets will be subject to reasonable care
with the eligible foreign custodian and
under the custody contract, and that
each contract contain specified
provisions or equivalent provisions, are
intended to ensure that the delegate has
evaluated the level of care provided by
the custodian, that it weighs the
adequacy of contractual provisions, and
that fund assets are protected by
minimal contractual safeguards. The
1 See
PO 00000
section 17(f) of the Act. 15 U.S.C. 80a–17(f).
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requirement that the foreign custody
manager establish a monitoring system
is intended to ensure that the manager
periodically reviews each custody
arrangement and takes appropriate
action if developing custody risks may
threaten fund assets.2
Commission staff estimates that each
year, approximately 97 registrants 3
could be required to make an average of
one response per registrant under rule
17f–5, requiring approximately 2.5
hours of board of director time per
response, to make the necessary
findings concerning foreign custody
managers. The total annual burden
associated with these requirements of
the rule is up to approximately 243
hours (97 registrants × 2.5 hours per
registrant). The staff further estimates
that during each year, approximately 15
global custodians 4 are required to make
an average of 4 responses per custodian
concerning the use of foreign custodians
other than depositories. The staff
estimates that each response will take
approximately 270 hours, requiring
approximately 1080 total hours
annually per custodian (270 hours × 4
responses per custodian). The total
annual burden associated with these
requirements of the rule is
approximately 16,200 hours (15 global
custodians × 1080 hours per custodian).
Therefore, the total annual burden of all
collection of information requirements
of rule 17f–5 is estimated to be up to
16,443 hours (243 + 16,200). The total
annual cost of burden hours is estimated
to be $4,522,392 ((243 hours × $4,144/
hour for board of director’s time) +
(16,200 hours × $217/hour for a trust
administrator’s time)).5 Compliance
with the collection of information
requirements of the rule is necessary to
obtain the benefit of relying on the
2 The staff believes that subcustodian monitoring
does not involve ‘‘collection of information’’ within
the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) (‘‘Paperwork Reduction
Act’’).
3 This figure is an estimate of the number of new
funds each year, based on data reported by funds
for 2014, 2015, and 2016. In practice, not all funds
will use foreign custody managers. The actual figure
therefore may be smaller.
4 This estimate is based on staff research.
5 Based on fund industry representations, the staff
estimated in 2014 that the average cost of board of
director time, for the board as a whole, was $4,000
per hour. Adjusting for inflation, the staff estimates
that the current average cost of board of director
time is approximately $4,144 per hour. The $217/
hour figure for a trust administrator is from
SIFMA’s Management & Professional Earnings in
the Securities Industry 2013, modified by
Commission staff to account for an 1800-hour workyear and inflation, and multiplied by 5.35 to
account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits,
and overhead.
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 22, 2017 / Notices
rule’s permission for funds to maintain
their assets in foreign custodians.
The estimate of average burden hours
is made solely for the purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act. The estimate
is not derived from a comprehensive or
even a representative survey or study of
the costs of Commission rules and
forms.
Written comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission,
including whether the information has
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 in
writing within 60 days of this
publication.
Please direct your written comments
to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: February 15, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–03421 Filed 2–21–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–80046; File No. SR–BX–
2017–008]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Extend the
Implementation Date of Its
Functionality Relating to Post-Only
Orders and Orders With Midpoint
Pegging, and Its Trade-Now
Functionality
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
February 15, 2017.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on February
3, 2017, NASDAQ BX, Inc. (‘‘BX’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:05 Feb 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
‘‘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.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to extend the
implementation date of its functionality
relating to Post-Only Orders and Orders
with Midpoint Pegging, and its TradeNow functionality.
There is no rule text for this proposed
rule change.
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
BX is filing this proposal to extend
the implementation date of its
functionality relating to Post-Only
Orders and Orders with Midpoint
Pegging, and its Trade-Now
functionality. The functionality relating
to Post-Only Orders and Orders with
Midpoint Pegging was approved by the
SEC on November 10, 2016,3 and the
Trade-Now functionality was submitted
on an immediately effective basis on
November 8, 2016.4
Under the new Post-Only
functionality, the behavior of Post-Only
orders would be altered when the
adjusted price of such orders lock or
cross a non-displayed price on the
Exchange’s Book. Specifically, if the
adjusted price of the Post-Only Order
would lock or cross a non-displayed
price on the Exchange’s Book, the Post3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79290
(November 10, 2016), 81 FR 81184 (November 17,
2016) (SR–BX–2016–046) (‘‘Post-Only Approval
Order’’).
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79281
(November 10, 2016), 81 FR 81203 (November 17,
2016) (SR–BX–2016–059).
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11385
Only order would be posted in the same
manner as a Price to Comply Order.
However, the Post-Only Order would
execute if (i) it is priced at $1.00 or
more, or (ii) it is priced below $1.00 and
the value of price improvement
associated with executing against an
Order on the Exchange Book (as
measured against the original limit price
of the Order) equals or exceeds the sum
of fees charged for such execution and
the value of any rebate that would be
provided if the Order posted to the
Exchange Book and subsequently
provided liquidity.5
Additionally, if the Post-Only Order
would not lock or cross a Protected
Quotation but would lock or cross a
Non-Displayed Order on the Exchange’s
Book, the Post-Only Order would be
posted, ranked, and displayed at its
limit price. The Post-Only Order would
execute if (i) it is priced at $1.00 or
more, or (ii) it is priced below $1.00 and
the value of price improvement
associated with executing against an
Order on the Exchange Book equals or
exceeds the sum of fees charged for such
execution and the value of any rebate
that would be provided if the Order
posted to the Exchange Book and
subsequently provided liquidity.6
BX also proposed to change its
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order, so that,
if the Inside Bid and Inside Offer are
crossed, any existing Order with
Midpoint Pegging would be rejected and
any new Order with Midpoint Pegging
would be cancelled.7
Under BX’s Trade-Now functionality,
participants could enter an instruction
to have a locked resting buy (sell) order
execute against the locking sell (buy)
order. BX proposed to offer the
functionality on its OUCH, RASH,
FLITE and FIX protocols. Depending on
the protocol used by the participant to
access the BX system, the participant
could either specify that the order
execute against locking interest
automatically, or the participant would
be required to send a Trade Now
instruction to the Exchange once the
order has become locked. BX proposed
to offer the Trade Now instruction for
all orders that may be sent to the BX
book and that are not subject to other
BX rules regarding the display and
execution of those orders.8
BX initially proposed to implement
the new Post-Only, Midpoint Pegging
and Trade-Now functionality on
5 See
Post-Only Approval Order, supra note 3.
6 Id.
7 Id.
8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79281
(November 10, 2016), 81 FR 81203 (November 17,
2016) (SR–BX–2016–059).
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11384-11385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03421]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[SEC File No. 270-259, OMB Control No. 3235-0269]
Proposed Collection; Comment Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.
Extension:
Rule 17f-5.
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 the
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
Rule 17f-5 (17 CFR 270.17f-5) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 [15 U.S.C. 80a] (the ``Act'') governs the custody of the assets of
registered management investment companies (``funds'') with custodians
outside the United States. Under rule 17f-5, a fund or its foreign
custody manager (as delegated by the fund's board) may maintain the
fund's foreign assets in the care of an eligible fund custodian under
certain conditions. If the fund's board delegates to a foreign custody
manager authority to place foreign assets, the fund's board must find
that it is reasonable to rely on each delegate the board selects to act
as the fund's foreign custody manager. The delegate must agree to
provide written reports that notify the board when the fund's assets
are placed with a foreign custodian and when any material change occurs
in the fund's custody arrangements. The delegate must agree to exercise
reasonable care, prudence, and diligence, or to adhere to a higher
standard of care. When the foreign custody manager selects an eligible
foreign custodian, it must determine that the fund's assets will be
subject to reasonable care if maintained with that custodian, and that
the written contract that governs each custody arrangement will provide
reasonable care for fund assets. The contract must contain certain
specified provisions or others that provide at least equivalent care.
The foreign custody manager must establish a system to monitor the
performance of the contract and the appropriateness of continuing to
maintain assets with the eligible foreign custodian.
The collection of information requirements in rule 17f-5 are
intended to provide protection for fund assets maintained with a
foreign bank custodian whose use is not authorized by statutory
provisions that govern fund custody arrangements,\1\ and that is not
subject to regulation and examination by U.S. regulators. The
requirement that the fund board determine that it is reasonable to rely
on each delegate is intended to ensure that the board carefully
considers each delegate's qualifications to perform its
responsibilities. The requirement that the delegate provide written
reports to the board is intended to ensure that the delegate notifies
the board of important developments concerning custody arrangements so
that the board may exercise effective oversight. The requirement that
the delegate agree to exercise reasonable care is intended to provide
assurances to the fund that the delegate will properly perform its
duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See section 17(f) of the Act. 15 U.S.C. 80a-17(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requirements that the foreign custody manager determine that
fund assets will be subject to reasonable care with the eligible
foreign custodian and under the custody contract, and that each
contract contain specified provisions or equivalent provisions, are
intended to ensure that the delegate has evaluated the level of care
provided by the custodian, that it weighs the adequacy of contractual
provisions, and that fund assets are protected by minimal contractual
safeguards. The requirement that the foreign custody manager establish
a monitoring system is intended to ensure that the manager periodically
reviews each custody arrangement and takes appropriate action if
developing custody risks may threaten fund assets.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The staff believes that subcustodian monitoring does not
involve ``collection of information'' within the meaning of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (``Paperwork
Reduction Act'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission staff estimates that each year, approximately 97
registrants \3\ could be required to make an average of one response
per registrant under rule 17f-5, requiring approximately 2.5 hours of
board of director time per response, to make the necessary findings
concerning foreign custody managers. The total annual burden associated
with these requirements of the rule is up to approximately 243 hours
(97 registrants x 2.5 hours per registrant). The staff further
estimates that during each year, approximately 15 global custodians \4\
are required to make an average of 4 responses per custodian concerning
the use of foreign custodians other than depositories. The staff
estimates that each response will take approximately 270 hours,
requiring approximately 1080 total hours annually per custodian (270
hours x 4 responses per custodian). The total annual burden associated
with these requirements of the rule is approximately 16,200 hours (15
global custodians x 1080 hours per custodian). Therefore, the total
annual burden of all collection of information requirements of rule
17f-5 is estimated to be up to 16,443 hours (243 + 16,200). The total
annual cost of burden hours is estimated to be $4,522,392 ((243 hours x
$4,144/hour for board of director's time) + (16,200 hours x $217/hour
for a trust administrator's time)).\5\ Compliance with the collection
of information requirements of the rule is necessary to obtain the
benefit of relying on the
[[Page 11385]]
rule's permission for funds to maintain their assets in foreign
custodians.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This figure is an estimate of the number of new funds each
year, based on data reported by funds for 2014, 2015, and 2016. In
practice, not all funds will use foreign custody managers. The
actual figure therefore may be smaller.
\4\ This estimate is based on staff research.
\5\ Based on fund industry representations, the staff estimated
in 2014 that the average cost of board of director time, for the
board as a whole, was $4,000 per hour. Adjusting for inflation, the
staff estimates that the current average cost of board of director
time is approximately $4,144 per hour. The $217/hour figure for a
trust administrator is from SIFMA's Management & Professional
Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013, modified by Commission
staff to account for an 1800-hour work-year and inflation, and
multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee
benefits, and overhead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act. The estimate is not derived
from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the
costs of Commission rules and forms.
Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has 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 in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: February 15, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03421 Filed 2-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
