Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving Joint Amendment No. 24 to the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage Regarding Elimination of the Class Gate, 65772-65773 [E7-22842]
Download as PDF
65772
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 225 / Friday, November 23, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
estimate that the burden allocated to
rule 17e–1 for this contract change
would be 0.75 hours.5 Assuming that all
600 funds that enter into new
subadvisory contracts each year make
the modification to their contract
required by the rule, we estimate that
the rule’s contract modification
requirement will result in 450 burden
hours annually, with an associated cost
of approximately $131,400.6
Based on an analysis of fund filings,
the staff estimates that approximately
300 funds use at least one affiliated
broker. Based on conversations with
fund representatives, the staff estimates
that rule 17e–1’s exemption would free
approximately 40 percent of
transactions that occur under rule 17e–
1 from the rule’s recordkeeping and
review requirements. This would leave
approximately 180 funds (300 funds × .6
= 180) still subject to the rule’s
recordkeeping and review requirements.
The staff estimates that each of these
funds spends approximately 60 hours
per year (40 hours by accounting staff,
15 hours by an attorney, and 5 director
hours) 7 at a cost of approximately
$10,495 per year to comply with rule
17e–1’s requirements that (i) the fund
retain records of transactions entered
into pursuant to the rule, and (ii) the
fund’s directors review those
transactions quarterly.8 We estimate,
therefore, that the total yearly hourly
burden for all funds relying on this
exemption is 10,800 hours,9 with yearly
costs of approximately $1,889,100.10
Therefore, the annual aggregate burden
hour associated with rule 17e–1 is
11,250,11 and the annual aggregate cost
associated with it is $2,020,500.12
The estimate of average burden hours
is made solely for the purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not
derived from a comprehensive or even
a representative survey or study. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Written comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the collections of information
are 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 burdens of the collections of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burdens of the collections
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 R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way,
Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
5 This estimate is based on the following
calculation (3 hours ÷ 4 rules = .75 hours).
6 These estimates are based on the following
calculations: (0.75 hours × 600 portfolios = 450
burden hours); ($292 per hour × 450 hours =
$131,400 total cost).
7 The Commission staff’s estimates concerning the
wage rate for professional time are based on salary
information for the securities industry compiled by
the Securities Industry Association. The $292 per
hour estimate for an attorney, $116 per hour
estimate for accountant time, and $295 per hour
estimate for directors (based on comparable
position) is from the SIA Report on Management &
Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry
2006, modified to account for an 1800-hour workyear and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses,
firm size, employee benefits and overhead.
8 This estimate is based on the following
calculations: (40 hours accounting staff × $116 per
hour = $4640) (15 hours by an attorney × $292 per
hour = $4380); (5 hours by directors × $295 =
$1475) ($4640 + $4380 + $1475 = $10,495 total
cost).
9 This estimate is based on the following
calculation: (180 funds × 60 hours = 10,800).
10 This estimate is based on the following
calculation: ($10,495 × 180 funds = $1,889,100).
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Nov 21, 2007
Jkt 214001
Dated: November 15, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–22843 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am]
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No.
28040; 812–13376]
MyShares Trust, et al.; Notice of
Application
Correction
In FR Document No. E7–21739,
beginning on page 62701 for Tuesday,
November 6, 2007, the release number
was incorrectly stated. The release
11 This estimate is based on the following
calculation: (450 hours + 10,800 hours = 11,250
total hours).
12 This estimate is based on the following
calculation: ($131,400 + $1,889,100 = $2,020,500).
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–22846 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–56806; File No. 4–429]
Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving
Joint Amendment No. 24 to the Plan
for the Purpose of Creating and
Operating an Intermarket Option
Linkage Regarding Elimination of the
Class Gate
November 16, 2007.
I. Introduction
On September 14, 2007, September
19, 2007, August 29, 2007, August 30,
2007, and September 26, 2007,
American Stock Exchange LLC
(‘‘Amex’’), Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘BSE’’), Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’),
International Securities Exchange, LLC
(‘‘ISE’’), NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE
Arca’’), and Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’) (collectively,
the ‘‘Participants’’), respectively, filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant
to Section 11A of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
608 thereunder2 an amendment (‘‘Joint
Amendment No. 24’’) to the Plan for the
Purpose of Creating and Operating an
Intermarket Option Linkage (‘‘Linkage
Plan’’).3 In Joint Amendment No. 24, the
Participants propose to eliminate the
‘‘Class Gate’’ restriction on Principal
Order (‘‘P Order’’) access through the
Linkage. The proposed Joint
Amendment No. 24 was published in
the Federal Register on October 12,
2007.4 The Commission received no
comments on Joint Amendment No. 24.
1 15
U.S.C. 78k–1.
CFR 242.608.
3 On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved a
national market system plan for the purpose of
creating and operating an intermarket options
market linkage (‘‘Linkage’’) proposed by Amex,
CBOE, and ISE. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023
(August 4, 2000). Subsequently, Phlx, Pacific
Exchange, Inc. (n/k/a NYSE Arca), and BSE joined
the Linkage Plan. See Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR
70851 (November 28, 2000); 43574 (November 16,
2000), 65 FR 70850 (November 28, 2000); and 49198
(February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029 (February 12, 2004).
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56596
(October 2, 2007), 72 FR 58133.
2 17
November 19, 2007.
PO 00000
number is revised to read as noted
above.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM
23NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 225 / Friday, November 23, 2007 / Notices
This order approves Joint Amendment
No. 24.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
II. Description of the Proposed
Amendment
In Joint Amendment No. 24, the
Participants proposed to modify section
7(a)(ii)(C) of the Linkage Plan so as to
eliminate the Class Gate restriction on P
Order access through the Linkage.
Currently, section 7(a)(ii)(C) of the
Linkage Plan provides that, once a
Participant automatically executes a P
Order in a series of an Eligible Option
Class, it may reject any other P Orders
sent in the same Eligible Option Class
by the same Participant for 15 seconds
after the initial execution unless there is
a price change in the receiving
Participant’s disseminated offer (bid) in
the series in which there was the initial
execution and such price continues to
be the NBBO. After the 15 second
period, and until the sooner of one
minute after the initial execution or a
change in its disseminated offer (bid),
section 7(a)(ii)(C) provides that the
Participant that provided the initial
execution is not obligated to execute
any P Orders received from the same
Participant in the same Eligible Option
Class in its automatic execution system.
In Joint Amendment No. 24, the
Participants proposed to eliminate the
Class Gate restriction because all
Participants have removed restrictions
on non-customer access to the automatic
execution systems, rendering the Class
Gate restriction unnecessary.
III. Discussion and Commission
Findings
After careful consideration of Joint
Amendment No. 24, the Commission
finds that approving Joint Amendment
No. 24 is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder.
Specifically, the Commission finds that
Joint Amendment No. 24 is consistent
with section 11A of the Act 5 and Rule
608 thereunder 6 in that it is appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection
of investors and the maintenance of fair
and orderly markets. The Commission
recognizes that, at the time of the
creation of the Linkage, certain
Participants had restrictions on noncustomer access to their automatic
execution systems. The Class Gate
provision served to protect those
Participants that did not limit noncustomer access against being obligated
to automatically execute an unlimited
number of P Orders. Since the
implementation of the Linkage, all
5 15
6 17
U.S.C. 78k–1.
CFR 242.608.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Nov 21, 2007
Jkt 214001
Participants have removed restrictions
on non-customer access to their
automatic execution systems. All of the
exchanges, therefore, allow access to
their trading platforms orders on behalf
of non-member market makers. The
Commission believes that the greater
access to automatic execution systems
has rendered the Class Gate provision
unnecessary and that eliminating the
Class Gate provision should facilitate
the more efficient operation of the
options markets.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
section 11A of the Act 7 and Rule 608
thereunder,8 that Joint Amendment No.
24 is approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.9
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–22842 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–56787; File No. SR–Amex–
2007–108]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change To
Increase the Annual Listing Fees for
Certain Stock Issues of Listed
Companies
November 15, 2007.
On October 3, 2007, the American
Stock Exchange LLC (‘‘Amex’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
amend Section 141 of the Amex
Company Guide to increase the annual
listing fees for certain stock issues of
listed companies. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on October 16,
2007.3 The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposal. This
order approves the proposed rule
change.
Amex proposes to amend Section 141
of the Amex Company Guide to raise the
7 15
U.S.C. 78k–1.
CFR 242.608.
9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(29).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56636
(October 10, 2007), 72 FR 58691.
8 17
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65773
annual listing fee, for any stock issue of
50 million shares or less, to $27,500 per
year. Currently, for such issues, Amex
charges between $16,500 and $24,500
per year, depending on the number of
shares outstanding.
After careful review, the Commission
finds that Amex’s proposal is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities
exchange.4 In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act,5 which requires, among other
things, that the rules of the Exchange
provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among members and issuers and other
persons using the Exchange’s facilities.
The Commission notes that no
comments were received on the
proposed fee increase, which is
comparable to the annual listing fee
imposed by another exchange that has
been approved by the Commission.6
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 that the
proposed rule change (SR–Amex–2007–
108), be, and hereby is, approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.8
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–22777 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–56805; File No. SR–Amex–
2007–122]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Exchange Liability for the Actions or
Omission of Amex Book Clerks
November 16, 2007.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’)1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
4 In approving this proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55202
(January 30, 2007), 72 FR 6017 (February 8, 2007)
(SR–NASDAQ–2006–040) (approving $27,500
annual fee on Nasdaq Capital Market issuers for any
amount of shares outstanding).
7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM
23NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 225 (Friday, November 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65772-65773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-22842]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-56806; File No. 4-429]
Joint Industry Plan; Order Approving Joint Amendment No. 24 to
the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket
Option Linkage Regarding Elimination of the Class Gate
November 16, 2007.
I. Introduction
On September 14, 2007, September 19, 2007, August 29, 2007, August
30, 2007, and September 26, 2007, American Stock Exchange LLC
(``Amex''), Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE''), Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''), International Securities
Exchange, LLC (``ISE''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), and
Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'') (collectively, the
``Participants''), respectively, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 608 thereunder\2\ an
amendment (``Joint Amendment No. 24'') to the Plan for the Purpose of
Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (``Linkage
Plan'').\3\ In Joint Amendment No. 24, the Participants propose to
eliminate the ``Class Gate'' restriction on Principal Order (``P
Order'') access through the Linkage. The proposed Joint Amendment No.
24 was published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2007.\4\ The
Commission received no comments on Joint Amendment No. 24.
[[Page 65773]]
This order approves Joint Amendment No. 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
\2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
\3\ On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved a national market
system plan for the purpose of creating and operating an intermarket
options market linkage (``Linkage'') proposed by Amex, CBOE, and
ISE. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000),
65 FR 48023 (August 4, 2000). Subsequently, Phlx, Pacific Exchange,
Inc. (n/k/a NYSE Arca), and BSE joined the Linkage Plan. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65
FR 70851 (November 28, 2000); 43574 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70850
(November 28, 2000); and 49198 (February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029
(February 12, 2004).
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56596 (October 2,
2007), 72 FR 58133.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
In Joint Amendment No. 24, the Participants proposed to modify
section 7(a)(ii)(C) of the Linkage Plan so as to eliminate the Class
Gate restriction on P Order access through the Linkage. Currently,
section 7(a)(ii)(C) of the Linkage Plan provides that, once a
Participant automatically executes a P Order in a series of an Eligible
Option Class, it may reject any other P Orders sent in the same
Eligible Option Class by the same Participant for 15 seconds after the
initial execution unless there is a price change in the receiving
Participant's disseminated offer (bid) in the series in which there was
the initial execution and such price continues to be the NBBO. After
the 15 second period, and until the sooner of one minute after the
initial execution or a change in its disseminated offer (bid), section
7(a)(ii)(C) provides that the Participant that provided the initial
execution is not obligated to execute any P Orders received from the
same Participant in the same Eligible Option Class in its automatic
execution system. In Joint Amendment No. 24, the Participants proposed
to eliminate the Class Gate restriction because all Participants have
removed restrictions on non-customer access to the automatic execution
systems, rendering the Class Gate restriction unnecessary.
III. Discussion and Commission Findings
After careful consideration of Joint Amendment No. 24, the
Commission finds that approving Joint Amendment No. 24 is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder. Specifically, the Commission finds that Joint Amendment No.
24 is consistent with section 11A of the Act \5\ and Rule 608
thereunder \6\ in that it is appropriate in the public interest, for
the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets. The Commission recognizes that, at the time of the creation of
the Linkage, certain Participants had restrictions on non-customer
access to their automatic execution systems. The Class Gate provision
served to protect those Participants that did not limit non-customer
access against being obligated to automatically execute an unlimited
number of P Orders. Since the implementation of the Linkage, all
Participants have removed restrictions on non-customer access to their
automatic execution systems. All of the exchanges, therefore, allow
access to their trading platforms orders on behalf of non-member market
makers. The Commission believes that the greater access to automatic
execution systems has rendered the Class Gate provision unnecessary and
that eliminating the Class Gate provision should facilitate the more
efficient operation of the options markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
\6\ 17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 11A of the Act \7\ and
Rule 608 thereunder,\8\ that Joint Amendment No. 24 is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
\8\ 17 CFR 242.608.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-22842 Filed 11-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P