Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Regarding Transfer of Designated Primary Market Maker Appointments, 31239-31241 [E6-8480]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 2006 / Notices
average clearing firm per contract fee.
The reference in the Fees Schedule to
the $.09 per contract credit would be
deleted.
Also, the Exchange proposes to credit
DPMs an amount per contract on CBOE
transactions against customer and
broker-dealer orders underlying P/A and
P orders, and on P/A and P order
transactions at other exchanges, to offset
the Sales Value Fee DPMs may incur on
those transactions.11
Under the current Program, the
Exchange caps the amount of the credits
at the amount of total fees received by
the Exchange from inbound linkage
transaction fees. Because the Exchange
proposes to completely cover (to the
extent possible) the costs incurred by
DPMs in executing such transactions,
the Exchange proposes to delete this
cap.12
As under the current Program, a DPM
would be expected to reimburse the
Exchange to the extent that the funds
received by the DPM via the Program
exceed the DPM’s actual costs incurred
in executing Linkage-related
transactions.13
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 14
in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 15 in
particular, in that it is designed to
provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among CBOE members.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will not impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
11 The Sales Value Fee is assessed by CBOE to
each member for sales of securities on CBOE with
respect to which CBOE is obligated to pay a fee to
the SEC under Section 31 of the Exchange Act.
Other exchanges refer to this fee by different names.
See Section 6 of the CBOE Fees Schedule.
12 The Exchange notes that a Linkage Plan
amendment has been separately submitted to the
Commission to permit an Exchange account,
instead of the DPM’s account, to be used by the
Exchange to send and respond to P/A orders
(‘‘Linkage Account Plan Amendment’’). Pursuant to
Section 21 of the Fees Schedule, the DPM Linkage
Fee Credit Program with respect to P/A orders will
expire upon the earlier of: (i) 30 days after
Commission approval of the Linkage Account Plan
Amendment; or (ii) July 31, 2006, which is the
expiration date of the Linkage fees pilot program.
13 The Exchange intends to monitor on a regular
basis to ensure that no DPM receives funds via the
Program in amounts that exceed the DPM’s actual
costs in executing Linkage-related transactions.
14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:10 May 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange has neither solicited
nor received written comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing proposed rule change
has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,16 and
paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4
thereunder17 because it establishes or
changes a due, fee, or other charge
applicable only to members of the
Exchange. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–CBOE–2006–44 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2006–44. 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 (https://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
16 15
17 17
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31239
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. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at
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–CBOE–
2006–44 and should be submitted on or
before June 22, 2006.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.18
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–8476 Filed 5–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–53869; File No. SR–CBOE–
2006–38]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change and
Amendment No. 1 Thereto Regarding
Transfer of Designated Primary Market
Maker Appointments
May 25, 2006.
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 April 17,
2006, the Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by CBOE. On May 11, 2006,
the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change.3 The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
18 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the
original filing in its entirety. In Amendment No. 1,
CBOE corrected a reference in the rule text and
elaborated on the purpose of and rationale for the
proposed rule change.
1 15
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
31240
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 2006 / Notices
change, as amended, from interested
persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
CBOE proposes to amend its rules
relating to the transfer of Designated
Primary Market Maker (‘‘DPM’’)
appointments. The text of the proposed
rule change, as amended, is available on
CBOE’s Web site (https://
www.cboe.com), at CBOE’s principal
office, 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,
CBOE included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it had received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. CBOE
has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant aspects of such statements.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend
Exchange rules applicable to the transfer
of DPM appointments between CBOE
members, which is governed by CBOE
Rule 8.89. Generally, any DPM
proposing a sale, transfer, or assignment
of any ownership interest or a change to
the DPM’s capital structure, voting
authority, or distribution of profits or
losses (collectively, a ‘‘transfer
proposal’’) must provide the appropriate
Exchange committee with the specifics
and terms of the transfer proposal in a
form and manner specified under CBOE
Rule 8.89(c). The appropriate Exchange
committee then will undergo a review
process, which includes a publication of
notice of the transfer proposal and a
subsequent publication of the notice of
the decision by the committee on the
transfer proposal.4 Currently, the
appropriate Exchange committee that
reviews transfer proposals under CBOE
Rule 8.89 is the Allocation Committee.
The Exchange proposes to eliminate
section (f) of CBOE Rule 8.89, which
subjects any transfer proposal decision
made by the appropriate Exchange
committee (‘‘transfer proposal
decision’’) to a 10-day review period in
4 See
CBOE Rules 8.89(d) and (e).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:10 May 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
which any transfer proposal decision
may be directly reviewed by the Board
of Directors upon: (1) A written
application by a party claiming to be
aggrieved 5 by the DPM transfer
decision, or (2) a request for review by
any five Directors.
The Exchange believes that, with the
expiration of the DPM appointment
transfer fee in June 2004 6 and the fact
that DPM transfers, in general, have
become more routine, the Board review
process under CBOE Rule 8.89(f) is no
longer necessary. The Exchange also
believes that the elimination of CBOE
Rule 8.89(f) will improve the efficiency
of the Exchange’s decision-making
processes. Currently, because of the
review process under CBOE Rule
8.89(f), a memo is forwarded to the
Board of Directors after each decision
regarding a transfer proposal is made.
This requires Directors to take time to
review each of these matters so that they
can determine whether to make a
request for review of the decision by the
Board. Because transfer proposal
decisions have become more routine,
the Exchange no longer sees a need to
have Directors devote special attention
to these decisions or for there to be a
special review process for these
decisions that is different from the
review processes and procedures that
are generally applicable to other
Exchange decisions.
Further, any member aggrieved by a
decision regarding a transfer proposal
decision could still seek a review of the
decision through the hearing and review
process provided for under Chapter XIX
of CBOE’s rules.7 In any such appeal
proceeding under Chapter XIX, the
decision regarding a transfer proposal
by the appropriate Exchange committee
under CBOE Rule 8.89 would be subject
to review by the CBOE Appeals
Committee. Additionally, the Appeals
Committee decision in the matter would
be subject to review by the CBOE Board
of Directors on its own motion, or could
be appealed to the Board of Directors,
pursuant to CBOE Rule 19.5.
Finally, as a matter of housekeeping,
the Exchange proposes to delete
Interpretation and Policy .02 of CBOE
Rule 8.89, which provided for the
application of a transfer fee on any DPM
appointment transfer. As this provision
5 Under CBOE Rule 8.89, a person must be
‘‘aggrieved’’ as described in Chapter XIX of
Exchange Rules.
6 Until it expired on June 30, 2004, Interpretation
and Policy .02 of CBOE Rule 8.89 applied a transfer
fee to certain types of DPM transfers.
7 Chapter XIX of CBOE Rules governs the process
by which persons, including members, claiming to
be economically aggrieved by Exchange action may
seek a review of such a decision.
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
expired on June 30, 2004, continued
inclusion in CBOE Rules is unnecessary.
2. Statutory Basis
Because it believes that the proposed
rule change, as amended, will make the
review process for DPM appointment
transfer proposals more efficient, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change, as amended, is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,8 in general,
and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5),9 in particular, in that it is
designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market,
and to protect investors and the public
interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the
proposed rule change, as amended, 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, as amended.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 35 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 CBOE consents, the
Commission will:
(A) By order approve such proposed
rule change, as amended; or
(B) Institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change, as
amended, 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, as amended, is consistent with
the Act. Comments may be submitted by
any of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
8 15
9 15
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
01JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 2006 / Notices
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–CBOE–2006–38 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
Station Place, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2006–38. 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 (https://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. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at
the principal office of CBOE. 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–CBOE–2006–38 and should
be submitted on or before June 22, 2006.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.10
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–8480 Filed 5–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–53859; File No. SR–CHX–
2006–18]
Self-Regulatory Organization; Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change Waiving a
Notice Provision Relating to the
Renewal of Trading Permits
May 24, 2006.
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 May 10,
2006, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘CHX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the CHX. 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 amend its
rules to waive for 2006 the 60-day
notice requirement relating to the
cancellation of trading permits that were
issued as a result of the Exchange’s
demutualization. The text of this
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site at https://
www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.htm
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
CHX included statements concerning
the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received regarding the
proposal. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. The CHX has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
At the time of the Exchange’s
demutualization on February 9, 2005,
the Exchange issued trading permits to
1 15
1017
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:10 May 31, 2006
2 17
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31241
each member that held a CHX
membership on the previous day.
Pursuant to CHX Article II, Rule 3, each
of these trading permits had a one-year
term (through February 8, 2006) and
was to be automatically renewed at the
end of that term for another year
(through February 8, 2007), unless the
participant 3 gave the Exchange at least
60 days’ notice that the trading permit
should be allowed to expire.
Although some Exchange participants
that wanted certain trading permits to
expire provided the 60 days’ notice
contemplated by the Exchange’s rules, a
few participants did not. Because this is
the first year of this new requirement
and it appears to have created confusion
among some of the Exchange’s
participants, the Exchange believes that
it would be appropriate to waive the 60day notice requirement in 2006.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes
Interpretation and Policy .01 to CHX
Article II, Rule 3, which would allow for
2006 a trading permit to expire if a
participant provided notice of waiver of
renewal with respect to such trading
permit during the 60 days preceding
February 9, 2006, even though the
participant did not provide the full 60
days’ prior notice required by the
Exchange’s rules.
2. Statutory Basis
The CHX believes that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a
national securities exchange, and, in
particular, with the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.4 The CHX
believes that the proposal is consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 5 in that
it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest by permitting the
Exchange to waive, on a one-time basis,
a rule provision relating to the renewal
of trading permits that caused confusion
among some of the Exchange’s
participants.
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.
3 See CHX Article I, Rule 1(l) for the definition
of a ‘‘participant.’’
4 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b).
5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
E:\FR\FM\01JNN1.SGM
01JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31239-31241]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8480]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-53869; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-38]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment
No. 1 Thereto Regarding Transfer of Designated Primary Market Maker
Appointments
May 25, 2006.
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 April 17, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by CBOE. On
May 11, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule
[[Page 31240]]
change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing
in its entirety. In Amendment No. 1, CBOE corrected a reference in
the rule text and elaborated on the purpose of and rationale for the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
CBOE proposes to amend its rules relating to the transfer of
Designated Primary Market Maker (``DPM'') appointments. The text of the
proposed rule change, as amended, is available on CBOE's Web site
(https://www.cboe.com), at CBOE's principal office, 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, CBOE included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it had received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange rules applicable to the
transfer of DPM appointments between CBOE members, which is governed by
CBOE Rule 8.89. Generally, any DPM proposing a sale, transfer, or
assignment of any ownership interest or a change to the DPM's capital
structure, voting authority, or distribution of profits or losses
(collectively, a ``transfer proposal'') must provide the appropriate
Exchange committee with the specifics and terms of the transfer
proposal in a form and manner specified under CBOE Rule 8.89(c). The
appropriate Exchange committee then will undergo a review process,
which includes a publication of notice of the transfer proposal and a
subsequent publication of the notice of the decision by the committee
on the transfer proposal.\4\ Currently, the appropriate Exchange
committee that reviews transfer proposals under CBOE Rule 8.89 is the
Allocation Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See CBOE Rules 8.89(d) and (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to eliminate section (f) of CBOE Rule 8.89,
which subjects any transfer proposal decision made by the appropriate
Exchange committee (``transfer proposal decision'') to a 10-day review
period in which any transfer proposal decision may be directly reviewed
by the Board of Directors upon: (1) A written application by a party
claiming to be aggrieved \5\ by the DPM transfer decision, or (2) a
request for review by any five Directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Under CBOE Rule 8.89, a person must be ``aggrieved'' as
described in Chapter XIX of Exchange Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that, with the expiration of the DPM
appointment transfer fee in June 2004 \6\ and the fact that DPM
transfers, in general, have become more routine, the Board review
process under CBOE Rule 8.89(f) is no longer necessary. The Exchange
also believes that the elimination of CBOE Rule 8.89(f) will improve
the efficiency of the Exchange's decision-making processes. Currently,
because of the review process under CBOE Rule 8.89(f), a memo is
forwarded to the Board of Directors after each decision regarding a
transfer proposal is made. This requires Directors to take time to
review each of these matters so that they can determine whether to make
a request for review of the decision by the Board. Because transfer
proposal decisions have become more routine, the Exchange no longer
sees a need to have Directors devote special attention to these
decisions or for there to be a special review process for these
decisions that is different from the review processes and procedures
that are generally applicable to other Exchange decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Until it expired on June 30, 2004, Interpretation and Policy
.02 of CBOE Rule 8.89 applied a transfer fee to certain types of DPM
transfers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, any member aggrieved by a decision regarding a transfer
proposal decision could still seek a review of the decision through the
hearing and review process provided for under Chapter XIX of CBOE's
rules.\7\ In any such appeal proceeding under Chapter XIX, the decision
regarding a transfer proposal by the appropriate Exchange committee
under CBOE Rule 8.89 would be subject to review by the CBOE Appeals
Committee. Additionally, the Appeals Committee decision in the matter
would be subject to review by the CBOE Board of Directors on its own
motion, or could be appealed to the Board of Directors, pursuant to
CBOE Rule 19.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Chapter XIX of CBOE Rules governs the process by which
persons, including members, claiming to be economically aggrieved by
Exchange action may seek a review of such a decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, as a matter of housekeeping, the Exchange proposes to
delete Interpretation and Policy .02 of CBOE Rule 8.89, which provided
for the application of a transfer fee on any DPM appointment transfer.
As this provision expired on June 30, 2004, continued inclusion in CBOE
Rules is unnecessary.
2. Statutory Basis
Because it believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, will
make the review process for DPM appointment transfer proposals more
efficient, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as
amended, is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5),\9\ in particular, in that
it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market, and to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended,
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, as amended.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 35 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 CBOE consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended; or
(B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form https://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
[[Page 31241]]
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2006-38 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-38. 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 (https://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. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of CBOE. 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-CBOE-2006-38 and should be submitted on or before June 22, 2006.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-8480 Filed 5-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
