Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 5, To Amend the Rules of the Boston Options Exchange Related To Obvious Error Procedures, 19534-19535 [E8-7511]
Download as PDF
19534
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 70 / Thursday, April 10, 2008 / Notices
person is subject to a statutory
disqualification. In such an instance, the
Exchange reviews the fingerprint results
to determine the possible existence of a
statutory disqualification as defined in
section 3(a)(39) of the Act, and takes
appropriate action, if necessary,
concerning eligibility or continued
eligibility of the individual for
employment or association with an
Exchange member.
The Commission has reviewed the
procedures detailed in the Plan and
believes that the Plan is consistent with
the public interest and the protection of
investors. Thus, the Commission
declares the Plan effective.
The Commission notes that the
securities industry fingerprinting
procedures are in a state of flux due to
rapidly advancing technology. In the
event that an industry-wide standard is
adopted or becomes prevalent and in
the event that this Plan substantially
differs therefrom, the Commission
would expect the BSE to revise its
fingerprint plan to incorporate the
industry-wide standard.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.3
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Exhibit A
Boston Stock Exchange Fingerprinting
Plan
The Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘BSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) submits this
Fingerprint Plan (‘‘Plan’’) pursuant to
section 17(f)(2) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule
17f–2(c) thereunder.
The purpose of this Plan is to
facilitate compliance by Exchange
Members with section 17(f)(2) of the Act
and Rule 17f–2(c) thereunder, by
providing a facility for the fingerprints
of directors, partners, officers and
employees of Exchange members to be
submitted to the Attorney General of the
United States or his designee (‘‘Attorney
General’’) and processed electronically.
The Exchange has established an
arrangement with the Financial Industry
Regulation Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’), to
permit all individuals that must be
registered with, or approved by, the
Exchange (‘‘registered persons’’) to be
electronically registered with the
Exchange through FINRA’s Web Central
Registration Depository (‘‘Web CRD’’).
The Web CRD is a Web-based system
that provides broker-dealers and their
associated person with ‘‘one-stop filing’’
with the Commission, FINRA and other
self-regulatory organizations and
regulators. The Web CRD is operated by
FINRA and is used by participating
regulators in connection with registering
and licensing broker-dealers and their
associated persons.
In connection with the arrangement
with FINRA, all persons who are
seeking registration with the Exchange
or are currently registered with the
Exchange, submit fingerprint cards or
fingerprint results to FINRA for
processing and/or submission to the
Attorney General. The Attorney General
provides FINRA with fingerprint
processing results for persons seeking
registration, and results are provided to
the members. FINRA notifies the
Exchange if the fingerprint results
received by FINRA contain information
indicating that the person is subject to
a statutory disqualification. In such an
instance, the Exchange reviews the
fingerprint results to determine the
possible existence of a statutory
disqualification as defined in section
3(a)(39) of the Act, and takes
appropriate action, if necessary,
concerning eligibility or continued
eligibility of the individual for
employment or association with an
Exchange member.
The Exchange advises its members
and member applicants of any fees
charged in connection with processing
of fingerprints pursuant to this Plan.
The Exchange will file any such
Exchange member fees with the
Commission pursuant to section 19(b) of
the Act.
Copies of fingerprint reports received
from the Attorney General with respect
to fingerprints submitted by the
Exchange pursuant to this Plan will be
maintained by the Exchange in
accordance with the Exchange’s record
retention obligations under the Act. Any
maintenance of fingerprint records by
the Exchange shall be for the Exchange’s
own administrative purposes, and the
Exchange is not undertaking to maintain
fingerprint records on behalf of
Exchange members pursuant to Rule
17f–2(d)(2).
The Exchange shall not be liable for
losses or damages of any kind in
connection with the fingerprint services,
as a result of a failure to properly follow
the procedures described above, or as a
result of lost or delayed fingerprint
cards, fingerprint records, or fingerprint
processing results, or as a result of any
action by the Exchange or the
Exchange’s failure to take action in
connection with this Plan.
[FR Doc. E8–7506 Filed 4–9–08; 8:45 am]
3 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(17)(iii).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Apr 09, 2008
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–57623; File No. SR–BSE–
2008–05]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston
Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change,
as Modified by Amendment No. 5, To
Amend the Rules of the Boston
Options Exchange Related To Obvious
Error Procedures
April 4, 2008.
I. Introduction
On January 29, 2008, the Boston Stock
Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’ 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 the Boston Options
Exchange (‘‘BOX’’) Rules related to
Obvious Error procedures. On February
21, 2008, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. On
February 22, 2008, the Exchange
submitted Amendment Nos. 2, 3, and 4,
and withdrew Amendment Nos. 1, 2,
and 3 to the proposal. On February 26,
2008, the exchange withdrew
Amendment No. 4 and submitted
Amendment No. 5 to the proposal.3 The
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 5, was published for
comment in the Federal Register on
March 3, 2008.4 The Commission
received no comment letters on the
proposal. This order approves the
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 5.
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
BOX has an established process
whereby, in the event that a suspected
Obvious Error has occurred during
trading on the BOX market, a request for
review may be made by one or both of
the parties involved. To request a
review of a suspected Obvious Error
under current BOX rules, one or both of
the parties involved must notify the
Market Regulation Center (‘‘MRC’’) of
the existence of a suspected erroneous
transaction. The MRC would then
initiate a review process. If the MRC
determines that the transaction does in
fact represent an Obvious Error, the
transaction would either be adjusted or
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 Amendment No. 5 replaced and superseded the
original filing and all previous amendments in their
entirety.
4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57383
(February 26, 2008), 73 FR 11452.
2 17
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
10APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 70 / Thursday, April 10, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
busted. Depending on the parties
involved in the transaction, the
adjustments would either be set
according to pre-determined increments
or by mutual agreement between the
parties.
The proposed rule change would
require that one or both parties contact
the BOX Market Operations Center
(‘‘MOC’’),5 instead of the MRC, to
request a review of a suspected
erroneous transaction. The MOC would
then be required to promptly notify the
MRC, since the MRC would continue to
be the body that makes adjust or bust
decisions.
The proposed change also would
provide an additional avenue of relief
for non-BOX market makers, resulting in
the Obvious Error Rules applying not
only to BOX Market Makers, but also to
market makers on other exchanges
whose orders are designated with a
market maker account type in the BOX
Trading Host. Under current BOX Rules,
only BOX Market Makers and non
market maker Options Participants may
request a review of a suspected
erroneous transaction. Under the
proposed rule change, non-BOX market
makers also may request a review of a
suspected erroneous transaction.
Moreover, only BOX Market Makers
involved in an erroneous transaction
with another BOX Market Maker
currently may avail themselves to the
pre-determined obvious error
Theoretical Price plus or minus
adjustment levels. The proposed rule
change would maintain and expand the
choices available to a non-BOX market
maker involved in an erroneous
transaction. Specifically, a non-BOX
market maker, like BOX Market Makers
today, would have the choice of
agreeing with the counter party to bust
the transaction, agreeing to adjust to an
agreed upon price for the transaction, or
now having the transaction adjusted to
the pre-determined levels.
Finally, the proposed rule change
would establish an additional course of
action if it is determined that an
Obvious Error has occurred. The current
BOX Rules allow for an adjustment in
the transaction price to the predetermined levels where both parties to
the transaction are BOX Market Makers.
If at least one party to the transaction is
a market maker on BOX, the BOX rules
5 This proposed rule change would also add the
MOC to the definitions section of the BOX Rules.
See Section 1 of Chapter I of the BOX Rules. The
remainder of the changes to the definition section
fall into two categories. The first is switching the
current Sections 31 and 32 so that they are in
alphabetical order. The second is, after inserting the
MOC as a definition, renumbering the remaining
definitions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Apr 09, 2008
Jkt 214001
call for the transaction to be busted,
unless both parties agree to an
adjustment price and notify the MRC.
The proposed rule change would: (1)
provide that the transaction would be
busted absent an agreement to an
adjusted price only when neither party
is a market maker; and (2) allow the non
market maker party to elect to have the
transaction busted or the price adjusted
to a pre-determined level, when one
party to the transaction is not a market
maker and the other party is a market
maker.
III. Discussion
The Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities
exchange 6 and, in particular, the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 7
and the rules and regulations
thereunder. Specifically, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,8 in that the proposal is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade, remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system, and, in general, protect
investors and the public interest.
The Commission considers that in
most circumstances trades that are
executed between parties should be
honored. On rare occasions, the price of
the executed trade indicates an
‘‘obvious error’’ may exist, suggesting
that it is unrealistic to expect that the
parties to the trade had come to a
meeting of the minds regarding the
terms of the transaction. In the
Commission’s view, the determination
of whether an ‘‘obvious error’’ has
occurred should be based on specific
and objective criteria and subject to
specific and objective procedures.
The Commission believes that the
proposed rule change is based on
specific and objective criteria and
subject to specific and objective
procedures. Specifically, expanding the
application of BOX’s Obvious Error rule
to non-BOX market makers would
extend the specific and objective criteria
and procedures applicable to BOX
Market Makers to non-BOX market
makers. In addition, under the proposed
rule change, an obviously erroneous
transaction that is not busted would be
adjusted to objective, pre-established
6 In approving this proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19535
numerical Obvious Error adjustment
increments.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,9 that the
proposed rule change (SR–BSE–2008–
05), as modified by Amendment No. 5,
is hereby approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.10
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–7511 Filed 4–9–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–57610; File No. SR–CBOE–
2008–14]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change To Establish a
Solicitation Auction Mechanism and To
Amend Its Automated Improvement
Mechanism
April 3, 2008.
I. Introduction
On February 7, 2008, the Chicago
Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(‘‘CBOE’’ 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 proposal to establish a
new automated mechanism for
auctioning larger-sized orders and to
modify its existing automated
improvement mechanism (‘‘AIM’’) to
permit its use for the execution of
complex orders. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on February 28,
2008.3 The Commission received no
comments regarding the proposed rule
change. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
II. Description of the Proposal
Under CBOE Rules 6.45A, Priority
and Allocation of Equity Option Trades
on the CBOE Hybrid System, and 6.45B,
Priority and Allocation of Trades in
Index Options and Options on ETFs on
the CBOE Hybrid System, order entry
9 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57357
(February 20, 2008), 73 FR 10837.
10 17
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
10APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 70 (Thursday, April 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19534-19535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-7511]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-57623; File No. SR-BSE-2008-05]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 5, To Amend the Rules of the Boston Options Exchange Related To
Obvious Error Procedures
April 4, 2008.
I. Introduction
On January 29, 2008, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' 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 the Boston Options Exchange (``BOX'')
Rules related to Obvious Error procedures. On February 21, 2008, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. On February 22, 2008,
the Exchange submitted Amendment Nos. 2, 3, and 4, and withdrew
Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 to the proposal. On February 26, 2008, the
exchange withdrew Amendment No. 4 and submitted Amendment No. 5 to the
proposal.\3\ The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 5,
was published for comment in the Federal Register on March 3, 2008.\4\
The Commission received no comment letters on the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Amendment No. 5 replaced and superseded the original filing
and all previous amendments in their entirety.
\4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57383 (February 26,
2008), 73 FR 11452.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
BOX has an established process whereby, in the event that a
suspected Obvious Error has occurred during trading on the BOX market,
a request for review may be made by one or both of the parties
involved. To request a review of a suspected Obvious Error under
current BOX rules, one or both of the parties involved must notify the
Market Regulation Center (``MRC'') of the existence of a suspected
erroneous transaction. The MRC would then initiate a review process. If
the MRC determines that the transaction does in fact represent an
Obvious Error, the transaction would either be adjusted or
[[Page 19535]]
busted. Depending on the parties involved in the transaction, the
adjustments would either be set according to pre-determined increments
or by mutual agreement between the parties.
The proposed rule change would require that one or both parties
contact the BOX Market Operations Center (``MOC''),\5\ instead of the
MRC, to request a review of a suspected erroneous transaction. The MOC
would then be required to promptly notify the MRC, since the MRC would
continue to be the body that makes adjust or bust decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ This proposed rule change would also add the MOC to the
definitions section of the BOX Rules. See Section 1 of Chapter I of
the BOX Rules. The remainder of the changes to the definition
section fall into two categories. The first is switching the current
Sections 31 and 32 so that they are in alphabetical order. The
second is, after inserting the MOC as a definition, renumbering the
remaining definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed change also would provide an additional avenue of
relief for non-BOX market makers, resulting in the Obvious Error Rules
applying not only to BOX Market Makers, but also to market makers on
other exchanges whose orders are designated with a market maker account
type in the BOX Trading Host. Under current BOX Rules, only BOX Market
Makers and non market maker Options Participants may request a review
of a suspected erroneous transaction. Under the proposed rule change,
non-BOX market makers also may request a review of a suspected
erroneous transaction. Moreover, only BOX Market Makers involved in an
erroneous transaction with another BOX Market Maker currently may avail
themselves to the pre-determined obvious error Theoretical Price plus
or minus adjustment levels. The proposed rule change would maintain and
expand the choices available to a non-BOX market maker involved in an
erroneous transaction. Specifically, a non-BOX market maker, like BOX
Market Makers today, would have the choice of agreeing with the counter
party to bust the transaction, agreeing to adjust to an agreed upon
price for the transaction, or now having the transaction adjusted to
the pre-determined levels.
Finally, the proposed rule change would establish an additional
course of action if it is determined that an Obvious Error has
occurred. The current BOX Rules allow for an adjustment in the
transaction price to the pre-determined levels where both parties to
the transaction are BOX Market Makers. If at least one party to the
transaction is a market maker on BOX, the BOX rules call for the
transaction to be busted, unless both parties agree to an adjustment
price and notify the MRC. The proposed rule change would: (1) provide
that the transaction would be busted absent an agreement to an adjusted
price only when neither party is a market maker; and (2) allow the non
market maker party to elect to have the transaction busted or the price
adjusted to a pre-determined level, when one party to the transaction
is not a market maker and the other party is a market maker.
III. Discussion
The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange \6\ and, in
particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act \7\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder. Specifically, the Commission finds
that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in
that the proposal is designed to promote just and equitable principles
of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission considers that in most circumstances trades that are
executed between parties should be honored. On rare occasions, the
price of the executed trade indicates an ``obvious error'' may exist,
suggesting that it is unrealistic to expect that the parties to the
trade had come to a meeting of the minds regarding the terms of the
transaction. In the Commission's view, the determination of whether an
``obvious error'' has occurred should be based on specific and
objective criteria and subject to specific and objective procedures.
The Commission believes that the proposed rule change is based on
specific and objective criteria and subject to specific and objective
procedures. Specifically, expanding the application of BOX's Obvious
Error rule to non-BOX market makers would extend the specific and
objective criteria and procedures applicable to BOX Market Makers to
non-BOX market makers. In addition, under the proposed rule change, an
obviously erroneous transaction that is not busted would be adjusted to
objective, pre-established numerical Obvious Error adjustment
increments.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BSE-2008-05), as modified by
Amendment No. 5, is hereby approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.56
[FR Doc. E8-7511 Filed 4-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P