Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Rule 9217 (Violations Appropriate for Disposition Under Plan Pursuant to SEC Rule 19d-1(c)(2)), 49313-49317 [2013-19509]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 13, 2013 / Notices
of offering legging functionality for
complex orders with more than three
legs (in some cases with more than two
legs). In particular, the Exchange notes
that market makers may reduce the size
of their quotations in the regular market
because of the risk of executing the
cumulative size of their quotations
across multiple options series without
an opportunity to adjust their quotes.
Thus, the Exchange posits that limiting
the legging functionality to orders with
no more than three legs (in some cases
with no more than two legs) could
encourage market makers to add
liquidity to the regular market which
would in turn benefit investors.
Accordingly, the Commission believes
that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act.11
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,12 that the
proposed rule change (SR–ISE–2013–38)
is approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.13
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–19510 Filed 8–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[Release No. 34–70131; File No. SR–FINRA–
2013–033]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend
FINRA Rule 9217 (Violations
Appropriate for Disposition Under Plan
Pursuant to SEC Rule 19d–1(c)(2))
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
August 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on July 24,
2013, Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) 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 FINRA. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5)
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
12 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Aug 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of the Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA
Rule 9217 (Violations Appropriate for
Disposition Under Plan Pursuant to SEA
Rule 19d–1(c)(2)) to include additional
rule violations eligible for disposition
under FINRA’s Minor Rule Violation
Plan (‘‘MRVP’’).
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on FINRA’s Web site at
https://www.finra.org, at the principal
office of FINRA 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,
FINRA 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. FINRA 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
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
11 15
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
1. Purpose
FINRA Rule 9216(b) provides
procedures for disposition of certain
rule violations designated as minor rule
violations pursuant to a plan declared
effective by the Commission in
accordance with Section 19(d)(1) of the
Act and Rule 19d–1(c)(2) thereunder.
FINRA’s MRVP allows FINRA to impose
a fine of up to $2,500 on any member
or person associated with a member for
a minor violation of an eligible rule.
FINRA Rule 9217 sets forth the rules
eligible for disposition pursuant to
FINRA’s MRVP. FINRA is proposing to
expand the universe of eligible rules as
part of an effort to concentrate
regulatory resources on higher risk
matters: expanded use of the MRVP
could free up resources better allocated
to high-risk matters because MRVP
settlements typically are handled more
efficiently and expeditiously.
The purpose of the MRVP is to
provide reasonable but meaningful
sanctions for minor or technical
violations of rules when the conduct at
issue does not warrant stronger,
reportable disciplinary sanctions. The
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49313
inclusion of a rule in FINRA’s MRVP
does not minimize the importance of
compliance with such rule, nor does it
preclude FINRA from choosing to
pursue violations of eligible rules
through an Acceptance, Waiver and
Consent (‘‘AWC’’) or Complaint if the
nature of the violations or prior
disciplinary history warrants more
significant sanctions. Rather, the option
to impose an MRVP sanction gives
FINRA additional flexibility to
administer its enforcement program in
the most effective and efficient manner,
while still fully meeting FINRA’s
remedial objectives in addressing
violative conduct. For example, MRVP
dispositions provide a useful tool for
implementing the concept of
progressive discipline to remediate
misconduct. FINRA will continue to
examine and surveil for compliance
with eligible rules in a manner
consistent with its examination
programs and will determine on a caseby-case basis whether disposition
pursuant to the MRVP is appropriate.
FINRA conducted a comprehensive
review of its rules and examination
dispositions to determine the rules it
proposes to add to the MRVP. Among
other things, FINRA considered (1) rules
routinely cited in formal disciplinary
actions that are not currently part of the
MRVP; (2) rules cited frequently in
informal actions; (3) rules comparable to
existing rules in the MRVP; and (4) rules
included in other self-regulatory
organization MRVPs.
The rules proposed for inclusion in
the MRVP broadly can be grouped into
several categories.
Filings and Notifications
In general, FINRA believes that
isolated failures to comply with rules
that require periodic reporting, filings or
notifications are appropriate for
inclusion in the MRVP. At the same
time FINRA recognizes that willful,
widespread or repeated failures under
such eligible rules may be more
appropriate for disposition through an
AWC or the filing of a Complaint.
FINRA notes that the current MRVP
includes several such rules.
Accordingly, the proposed rule change
would add the following rules to the
MRVP for violations involving late or
incomplete notices or filings: FINRA
Rule 2251(a) (Forwarding of Proxy and
other Issuer-Related Materials) (failure
to timely forward proxy and other
issuer-related materials); FINRA Rule
4524 (Supplemental FOCUS
Information) (failure to timely file or
filing of incomplete reports or
information); FINRA Rule 5110(b)
(Corporate Financing Rule—
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
49314
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 13, 2013 / Notices
Underwriting Terms and Arrangements)
(failure to timely file or filing of
incomplete documents or information);
FINRA Rule 5121(b)(2) (Public Offerings
of Securities with Conflicts of Interest)
(failure to give timely notification of
termination or settlement of public
offering or failure to file net capital
computation); FINRA Rule 5122(b)(2)
(Private Placements of Securities Issued
by Members) (failure to timely file
private placement documents); FINRA
Rule 5190 (Notification Requirements
for Offering Participants) (failure to give
timely notification of participation in
offerings); and FINRA Rule 6760
(Obligation to Provide Notice) (failure to
give timely or complete notification
concerning offerings of TRACE-Eligible
Securities). FINRA believes inclusion of
these rules is appropriate, as certain
instances of late filings or notifications
may constitute minor, technical
violations of the applicable rules that
can be remediated through the MRVP.
Late Registrations
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
For many of the same reasons, the
proposed rule change also would
include in the MRVP the following
MSRB and FINRA rules for certain
isolated or technical failures to timely
register: MSRB Rule G–2 (Standards of
Professional Qualification) and MSRB
Rule G–3(b)(ii)(D) and (c)(ii)(D)
(Classification of Principals and
Representatives; Numerical
Requirements; Testing; Continuing
Education Requirements) (failure to pass
qualification examination within 90
days of becoming a principal) 3 and
NASD Rule 1021(d) (Registration
Requirements) (failure to pass
qualification examination within 90
days of acting in a principal capacity).
These provisions permit a municipal
securities representative or registered
representative, as applicable, to
temporarily function in a principal
capacity, provided such person registers
as a principal and passes the
appropriate qualification examination
within 90 days of acting in such
capacity. Typically, these circumstances
occur when a registered principal leaves
a firm or has an extended absence.
FINRA believes MRV disposition may
be appropriate in limited circumstances
where a representative assumes
principal duties but takes more than 90
3 The proposed rule change includes both MSRB
Rule G–2 and G–3 because the two are linked. Rule
G–3 states that no broker, dealer or municipal
securities dealer ‘‘shall be qualified for the purposes
of Rule G–2’’ unless the requirements set forth in
Rule G–3 are met. FINRA typically charges a
violation of both rules where there is a failure to
comply with the requirements of Rule G–3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Aug 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
days to pass the corresponding
qualification examination.
Untimely Marking, Transaction
Reporting and Other Market Rules
The proposed rule change similarly
would add to the MRVP late filing and
notification requirements related to
market regulation. The current FINRA
MRVP includes several such market
rules, including, for example, FINRA
Rule 4560 (failure to timely file reports
of short positions); FINRA Rules 6380A,
6622, 6730 (transaction reporting);
FINRA Rule 7450 (OATS reporting); and
MSRB Rule G–14 (failure to submit
reports). Thus, the proposed rule change
would include: Rule 605(a)(1) and (3) of
SEC Regulation NMS (Disclosure of
Order Execution Information) (failure to
timely report or provide complete order
execution information); Rule 606 of SEC
Regulation NMS (Disclosure of Order
Routing Information) (failure to timely
disclose or provide complete order
routing information); FINRA Rule 6181
(Timely Transaction Reporting) (failure
to timely report transactions in NMS
securities); and FINRA Rule 6623
(Timely Transaction Reporting) (failure
to timely report transactions in OTC and
restricted equity securities).
The proposed rule change further
would make eligible for MRVP
disposition other marking and reporting
requirements related to trade and audit
data: Rule 200(g) of SEC Regulation
SHO (Definition of ‘‘Short Sale’’ and
Marking Requirements) (failure to
accurately mark sell orders of equity
securities); FINRA Rule 6182 (Trade
Reporting of Short Sales) (failure to
accurately mark short sales in NMS
stocks); FINRA Rule 6250 (Quote and
Order Access Requirements) (failure to
comply with quote and order access
requirements for FINRA’s Alternative
Display Facility); FINRA Rule 6624
(Trade Reporting of Short Sales) (failure
to accurately mark short sales in OTC
Equity Securities); FINRA Rule 7330
(Trade Report Input) (failure to timely
and accurately input trade reports into
the OTC Reporting Facility); and FINRA
Rule 7360 (Audit Trail Requirements)
(ongoing obligation to input trade
reporting requirements in Rule 7330(d)
accurately and completely). In addition,
the proposed rule change would add
three rules governing the FINRA/NYSE
Trade Reporting Facility whose
counterpart rules regarding the FINRA/
NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility are
already subject to MRV treatment:
FINRA Rule 6380B (Transaction
Reporting); FINRA Rule 7230B (Trade
Report Input); and FINRA Rule 7260B
(Audit Trail Requirements).
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Rules To Achieve Consistency
In addition to the market rules
referenced above, FINRA further
proposes to add certain rules to the
MRVP to achieve consistency with rules
that already are part of the plan. Thus,
the proposed rule change would add
FINRA Rule 1250(a), the Regulatory
Element of FINRA’s continuing
education requirements. The current
MRVP includes FINRA Rule 1250(b),
the Firm Element provision of the
continuing education requirements, and
FINRA believes there is no compelling
reason to differentiate with respect to
the MRVP minor violations of the
regulatory element. Similarly, the
proposed rule change further would
bring consistency to the enforcement of
the MSRB Rules by adding to the MRVP
MSRB Rule G–3(h) (Classification of
Principals and Representatives;
Numerical Requirements; Testing;
Continuing Education Requirements)
(failure to comply with the continuing
education requirements) to include in
the MRVP both the Firm and Regulatory
Elements of the MSRB’s equivalent
continuing education requirements rule.
The proposed rule change also seeks
consistency by adding MSRB Rule G–21
(Advertising) to the MRVP, since the
FINRA communications with the public
counterparts, FINRA Rules 2210, 2212,
2213, 2215, 2216 and NASD Interpretive
Material 2210–2, already are subject to
MRVP disposition.
FINRA Rule 9217 currently states that
‘‘[f]ailures to provide or update contact
information as required by FINRA or
NASD rules’’ may be resolved pursuant
to the MRVP. Accordingly, FINRA
proposes to add NASD Rule 1150
(Executive Representative) (failure to
review and update executive
representative designation and contact
information) and NASD Rule 1160
(Contact Information Requirements) to
the MRVP. For the same reason, FINRA
also proposes to add MSRB Rules G–
40(a) and (c) (Electronic Mail Contacts),
which require each broker, dealer or
municipal securities dealer to designate
and update electronic mail contact
information for communications with
the MSRB, and FINRA Rule 4370(f)
(Business Continuity and Emergency
Contact Information), which requires a
member to report to FINRA emergency
contact information and to designate
emergency contact persons. Rule
4370(f)(2) further requires member to
promptly update such information in
the event of any material change in
accordance with NASD Rule 1160.
FINRA also proposes to include in the
MRVP other provisions of Rule 4370,
which are discussed below.
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 13, 2013 / Notices
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Recordkeeping
The current MRVP includes violations
of FINRA Rule 4510 Series (Books and
Records Requirements) for failure to
keep and preserve books, accounts,
records, memoranda, and
correspondence in conformance with all
applicable laws, rules and regulations
and statements of policy promulgated
thereunder, and with FINRA rules. Rule
4511 requires firms to preserve for at
least six years those FINRA books and
records for which there is no specified
period under FINRA rules or applicable
Exchange Act rules. Otherwise, the rule
mandates compliance with the books
and record requirements under FINRA
rules, the Exchange Act and the
applicable Exchange Act rules. The
proposed rule change would add to the
MRVP specific SEC and MSRB rules
that require records to be made and
preserved: Exchange Act Rule 17a–3(a)
(Records to Be Made By Certain
Exchange Members, Brokers and
Dealers); Exchange Act Rule 17a–4
(Records to Be Preserved By Certain
Exchange Members, Brokers and
Dealers); MSRB Rule G–8 (Books and
Records to Be Made By Brokers, Dealers
and Municipal Securities Dealers); and
MSRB Rule G–9 (Preservation of
Records). FINRA typically charges
recordkeeping violations under both
FINRA Rule 4511 or MSRB Rule G–9
and the applicable Exchange Act rules.
FINRA includes the Exchange Act rules
because those rules have greater
specificity than the self-regulatory
organization rules. In addition, the
violation often involves a record
specified in the Exchange Act rules,
such as an order ticket. Under such
circumstances, FINRA believes it
appropriate to charge a violation of the
specific Exchange Act provision, as well
as the more general FINRA rule that
requires compliance with the Exchange
Act books and records rules.
Supervisory Procedures Regarding
MRVP Rules
The current MRVP includes NASD
Rule 3010(b) (Supervision; Written
Procedures), but only with respect to
failures to timely file reports required of
a firm subject to the ‘‘Taping Rule’’—a
requirement to, among other things, tape
record conversations of its registered
persons and file with FINRA periodic
reports on supervision of telemarketing
activities of its registered persons. The
proposed rule change would expand the
MRVP to include any violation of NASD
Rule 3010(b) (Supervision; Written
Procedures) for failure to maintain
adequate written supervisory
procedures with respect to the provision
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Aug 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
of a rule that is eligible for MRV
disposition. Thus, for example, FINRA
Rules 7440 and 7450 currently are
included in FINRA’s MRVP and require
recording and transmission of Order
Audit Trail System (‘‘OATS’’) data.
NASD Rule 3010(b) requires members
with such data to have written
supervisory procedures reasonably
designed to achieve compliance with
the OATS rules. The proposed rule
change would allow FINRA to resolve as
an MRV a failure to maintain adequate
written supervisory procedures with
respect to compliance with OATS rules,
whether or not there is a violation of the
OATS rules themselves. The proposed
rule change would also include the
parallel MSRB Rule G–27 (Supervision)
to the same extent. FINRA believes
inclusion of these provisions is logically
consistent with the purposes of the
MRVP: If the potential underlying
violation is eligible for MRV
disposition, the procedures to require
compliance with that rule also should
be eligible for such disposition.
Options
FINRA Rule 2360(b)(5) (Reporting of
Options Positions) requires, among
other things, members to report each
account in which a member has an
interest that has established an aggregate
position of 200 or more option
contracts. The proposed rule change
makes this rule eligible for disposition
under the MRVP for, among other
things, technical or manual inputting
problems that in the judgment of FINRA
do not materially affect the market.
FINRA notes that other provisions of
FINRA’s options reporting rules are
eligible for MRVP disposition 4 and that
options reporting requirements are part
of the MRVP for almost all of the
options exchanges,5 thus including
them in FINRA’s plan would promote
greater consistency across the markets.
The need for such consistency is
heightened because FINRA is party to
an agreement allocating regulatory
responsibility for options reporting
rules.6
4 The MRVP currently covers violations of FINRA
Rule 2360(b)(3) regarding position limits, (b)(4)
regarding exercise limits and (b)(23) regarding
tendering procedures for exercise of options.
5 See NYSE MKT Rule 590(g) (referencing
violations of reporting rules including Rule 906
(Reporting of Options Positions)); NYSE Arca
Options Rule 10.12(h)(23); BATS Rule 25.3(b);
Nasdaq Options Rule Chapter X, Section 7(d); BX
Options Rule Chapter X, Section 7(d); CBOE Rule
17.50(g)(15); C2 Rule Chapter 17 (which
incorporates the rules contained in CBOE Chapter
XVII); ISE Rule 1614(d)(10).
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68362
(December 5, 2012) 77 FR 73719 (December 11,
2012) (Notice of Filing and Order Approving and
Declaring Effective an Amendment to the Plan for
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49315
Other Rules
Finally, the proposed rule change
would make violations of several other
rules eligible for disposition under the
MRVP. With respect to each rule,
FINRA believes that a minor violation,
depending on the circumstances, could
appropriately be remediated under the
terms of the MRVP without
compromising investor protection.
Exchange Act Rule 10b–10
(Confirmation of Transactions) requires
broker-dealers to disclose specified
information in writing to customers at
or before completion of a transaction,
including but not limited to information
concerning the date and time of the
transaction, the number of shares
bought or sold, the price or average
price of the transaction, the capacity in
which the member is acting in
connection with the transaction, and the
nature of the remuneration received or
to be received by the member. FINRA
has observed circumstances where
members have committed minor
violations of the rule by failing to fully
or accurately disclose such information.
For example, FINRA has seen
circumstances where a broker-dealer
mistakenly reported the ‘‘average price’’
of a transaction as the ‘‘price’’ or
mismarked a principal transaction as an
agency transaction. Depending upon the
specific facts and circumstances of the
transaction, including the sophistication
of the customer and the nature of the
information that was not disclosed or
improperly disclosed, FINRA believes
an MRV could be an appropriate
disposition.
FINRA Rule 4360(b) (Fidelity Bonds)
requires a member to maintain
minimum fidelity bond coverage
commensurate with its net capital
requirements. MSRB Rule G–6 (Fidelity
Bonding Requirements) requires a
broker, dealer or municipal securities
dealer to maintain the minimum fidelity
bond coverage that is required by the
national securities association with
which it is registered. FINRA has
observed instances where a member had
fidelity bond coverage but less than the
required coverage. FINRA believes MRV
disposition may be appropriate in such
circumstances, depending on the reason
for the shortfall and the magnitude and
the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities
Among the NYSE MKT LLC, BATS Exchange, Inc.,
BOX Options Exchange LLC, C2 Options Exchange,
Incorporated, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated, the International Securities Exchange
LLC, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.,
the NYSE Arca, Inc., The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX
PHLX, Inc., and Miami International Securities
Exchange, LLC concerning options-related market
surveillance).
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
49316
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 13, 2013 / Notices
duration of the failure. For example, a
modest shortfall in coverage based on a
miscalculation of net capital that was
quickly discovered and remedied might
be appropriate for an MRV disposition.
MSRB Rule G–10 (Delivery of Investor
Brochure) requires a broker, dealer or
municipal securities dealer to deliver a
copy of an investor brochure to a
customer promptly after receiving a
complaint from the customer. As with
other provisions referenced above and
those already part of FINRA’s MRVP
involving a late filing or delivery,
FINRA believes that a failure to timely
deliver such brochure may be
appropriate for MRV disposition under
certain factual circumstances; e.g.,
where a violation is not widespread or
willful.
FINRA By-Laws Schedule A, Sec. 1(b)
(Member Regulatory Fees) assesses on
members a Trading Activity Fee for the
sale of covered securities. The provision
defines covered securities, exempts
certain transactions, sets forth fee rates
and provides that members shall report
the volume of applicable sales in a
manner prescribed by FINRA. FINRA
has observed that firms sometimes fail
to make accurate payment of the
Trading Activity Fee based on an
inadvertent miscalculation of the fee or
failure to apply the fee to the proper
universe of trades. FINRA has also
observed instances where a firm has
inadvertently failed to accurately report
the volume of sales of covered
securities, thus impacting the proper
calculation of the fee. FINRA believes
such circumstances may be appropriate
for MRVP disposition and therefore has
included the By-Law provision in the
proposed rule change.
FINRA Rule 2266 (SIPC Information)
requires members to provide customers
with written notification of the
availability of SIPC information at
account opening and annually
thereafter. FINRA may consider isolated
failures to satisfy this requirement
without customer harm to be minor in
nature and therefore appropriate for an
MRV.
FINRA Rules 3160(a)(1), (3), (4) and
(5) (Networking Arrangements Between
Members and Financial Institutions) set
forth standards of conduct for
conducting broker-dealer services on or
off the premises of a financial
institution pursuant to a networking
arrangement. These provisions specify:
the setting in which a member may
conduct broker-dealer services on the
premises of a financial institution; the
disclosure required to inform the
customer that the broker-dealer
products sold are not guaranteed or
federally insured; the content
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Aug 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
requirements of communications with
the public; and the requirement to
promptly notify the financial institution
if any associated person of a member
employed by the institution has been
terminated for cause. FINRA believes
there are several potential factual
scenarios where a minor violation could
occur under these provisions. For
example, Rule 3160(a)(3)(B) requires a
member to disclose orally, in addition to
written disclosure, that the securities
products purchased are not guaranteed
or federally insured. FINRA could
foresee a circumstance where either
written or oral disclosure is provided
rather than both and believes an MRV
may be appropriate under such facts.
FINRA notes that the proposed rule
change excludes Rule 3160(a)(2), which
sets forth the requirement that a written
agreement govern any networking
arrangement and include key brokerdealer obligations pursuant to Rule 701
of SEC Regulation R and ensure access
to the financial institution’s premises by
broker-dealer supervisory personnel and
regulators from FINRA and the SEC.
FINRA Rules 4370(a), (b), (c) and (e)
(Business Continuity Plans and
Emergency Contact Information) require
a member to create, maintain and
update a written business continuity
plan and to disclose the elements of the
plan to customers at account opening,
on its Web site and upon customer
request. The provisions allow for
flexibility in the design of the plan but
also include a number of minimum
elements. While FINRA recognizes the
importance of an effective business
continuity plan, we also have seen
minor violations of the provisions that
may not implicate the overall
effectiveness of a plan. For example,
FINRA has observed instances where
members have failed for a short duration
to timely update their plans in violation
of Rule 4370(b) or failed to address one
of the ten elements set forth in Rule
4370(c). FINRA could also envision
circumstances where a member failed to
address an existing relationship with
another broker dealer in violation of
Rule 4370(a) or failed in an isolated
circumstance to timely provide
disclosure about its business continuity
plan after receiving a request from a
customer under Rule 4370(e). FINRA
believes these examples may be
appropriate for MRV disposition.
However, FINRA does not believe MRV
disposition would be appropriate where
a member has no business continuity
plan or procedures as required by Rule
4370(a).
FINRA has not proposed to include
Rule 4370(d) for MRVP eligibility. That
provision requires a member to
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
designate a member of senior
management to approve the plan and be
responsible for an annual review of it,
and FINRA does not foresee any
circumstances where a violation of
those requirements would be
appropriate for MRVP disposition.
FINRA Rule 5121(a) (Public Offerings
of Securities with Conflicts of Interest)
sets forth requirements for participation
in public offerings of a member’s
securities where a conflict of interest is
present. The rule requires prominent
disclosure in the prospectus, offering
circular or similar document of the
nature of the conflict of interest, the
name of a qualified independent
underwriter that has participated in the
preparation of the offering documents
and the role and responsibilities of that
independent underwriter. FINRA
believes that under certain facts, a
failure to prominently disclose these
items—e.g., disclosing them in smaller
font—may constitute a minor violation
appropriate for MRVP disposition.
FINRA Rule 7430 (Synchronization of
Member Business Clocks) requires
members to synchronize their business
clocks for the purposes of recording the
date and time of events that must be
reported pursuant to FINRA By-Laws
and rules. FINRA believes that isolated
violations where certain business clocks
fall out of synch due to software glitches
or other technical reasons may be
appropriate to resolve as an MRV, and
therefore FINRA has proposed to
include the rule in the MRVP.
FINRA reiterates that inclusion of a
rule in the MRVP does not mean that all
violations of that rule must be treated
pursuant to the MRVP. FINRA staff
maintains the discretion to handle any
violation of such rules through AWCs or
Complaints with the full range of
applicable sanctions.7 Similarly,
members and associated persons
maintain the right to a hearing, with all
the same procedural rights accorded all
formal disciplinary proceedings, instead
of accepting a Minor Rule Violation.
The implementation date will be the
date of Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
FINRA believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the provisions
of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,8 which
requires, among other things, that
FINRA rules must be designed to
7 FINRA does not intend to develop a formula as
to when a matter must be handled pursuant to the
MRVP, as opposed to informal action, or when an
otherwise eligible MRVP matter would be handled
through an AWC or the filing of a complaint. The
disposition of any matter will depend on the
particular facts and circumstances.
8 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 13, 2013 / Notices
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA further believes
that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Sections 15A(b)(2) and
(b)(7) of the Act,9 which require that
FINRA enforce and provide appropriate
discipline for violation of FINRA rules
and applicable federal securities laws,
rules and regulations. FINRA believes
that adopting the proposed rule change
will strengthen FINRA’s ability to carry
out its oversight and enforcement
responsibilities in cases where full
disciplinary proceedings are
unwarranted in view of the minor
nature of the particular violation.
In addition, FINRA’s MRVP, as
amended by this proposal, provides a
fair procedure for disciplining members
and persons associated with members,
consistent with Sections 15A(b)(8) and
15A(h)(1) of the Act.10 The MRVP does
not preclude a member or associated
person from contesting an alleged
violation and receiving a hearing on the
matter with the same procedural rights
through a litigated disciplinary
proceeding.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
FINRA does not believe that the
proposed rule change will result in any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. The
proposed rule change will allow for a
quicker, more efficient means to resolve
minor violations of the eligible rules,
potentially lessening the burden on
firms in those circumstances where,
absent the rule’s inclusion in the MRVP,
a more resource-intense formal
proceeding might ensue.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments were neither
solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 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 the self-regulatory
9 15
U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(2) and 78o–3(b)(7).
10 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(8) and 78o–3(h)(1).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Aug 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
organization consents, the Commission
will:
(A) by order approve or disapprove
such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
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 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 email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–FINRA–2013–033 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–FINRA–2013–033. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
offices of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–FINRA–
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49317
2013–033, and should be submitted on
or before September 3, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.11
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–19509 Filed 8–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
[Disaster Declaration # 13711 and # 13712]
North Carolina Disaster # NC–00054
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This is a notice of an
Administrative declaration of a disaster
for the State of North Carolina dated 08/
06/2013.
Incident: Severe storms and flooding.
Incident Period: 07/12/2013 through
07/27/2013.
DATES: Effective Date: 08/06/2013.
Physical Loan Application Deadline
Date: 10/07/2013.
Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan
Application Deadline Date: 05/06/2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan
applications to: U.S. Small Business
Administration, Processing And
Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster
Assistance, U.S. Small Business
Administration, 409 3rd Street SW.,
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given that as a result of the
Administrator’s disaster declaration,
applications for disaster loans may be
filed at the address listed above or other
locally announced locations.
The following areas have been
determined to be adversely affected by
the disaster:
Primary Counties: Catawba
Contiguous Counties: North Carolina
Alexander, Burke, Caldwell, Iredell,
Lincoln
The Interest Rates are:
SUMMARY:
Percent
For Physical Damage:
Homeowners
with
Credit
Available Elsewhere ..........
Homeowners without Credit
Available Elsewhere ..........
Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere ..................
11
17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
E:\FR\FM\13AUN1.SGM
13AUN1
3.750
1.875
6.000
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49313-49317]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19509]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-70131; File No. SR-FINRA-2013-033]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
FINRA Rule 9217 (Violations Appropriate for Disposition Under Plan
Pursuant to SEC Rule 19d-1(c)(2))
August 7, 2013.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 24, 2013, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') 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 FINRA. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 9217 (Violations Appropriate
for Disposition Under Plan Pursuant to SEA Rule 19d-1(c)(2)) to include
additional rule violations eligible for disposition under FINRA's Minor
Rule Violation Plan (``MRVP'').
The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at https://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
FINRA Rule 9216(b) provides procedures for disposition of certain
rule violations designated as minor rule violations pursuant to a plan
declared effective by the Commission in accordance with Section
19(d)(1) of the Act and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) thereunder. FINRA's MRVP
allows FINRA to impose a fine of up to $2,500 on any member or person
associated with a member for a minor violation of an eligible rule.
FINRA Rule 9217 sets forth the rules eligible for disposition pursuant
to FINRA's MRVP. FINRA is proposing to expand the universe of eligible
rules as part of an effort to concentrate regulatory resources on
higher risk matters: expanded use of the MRVP could free up resources
better allocated to high-risk matters because MRVP settlements
typically are handled more efficiently and expeditiously.
The purpose of the MRVP is to provide reasonable but meaningful
sanctions for minor or technical violations of rules when the conduct
at issue does not warrant stronger, reportable disciplinary sanctions.
The inclusion of a rule in FINRA's MRVP does not minimize the
importance of compliance with such rule, nor does it preclude FINRA
from choosing to pursue violations of eligible rules through an
Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (``AWC'') or Complaint if the nature of
the violations or prior disciplinary history warrants more significant
sanctions. Rather, the option to impose an MRVP sanction gives FINRA
additional flexibility to administer its enforcement program in the
most effective and efficient manner, while still fully meeting FINRA's
remedial objectives in addressing violative conduct. For example, MRVP
dispositions provide a useful tool for implementing the concept of
progressive discipline to remediate misconduct. FINRA will continue to
examine and surveil for compliance with eligible rules in a manner
consistent with its examination programs and will determine on a case-
by-case basis whether disposition pursuant to the MRVP is appropriate.
FINRA conducted a comprehensive review of its rules and examination
dispositions to determine the rules it proposes to add to the MRVP.
Among other things, FINRA considered (1) rules routinely cited in
formal disciplinary actions that are not currently part of the MRVP;
(2) rules cited frequently in informal actions; (3) rules comparable to
existing rules in the MRVP; and (4) rules included in other self-
regulatory organization MRVPs.
The rules proposed for inclusion in the MRVP broadly can be grouped
into several categories.
Filings and Notifications
In general, FINRA believes that isolated failures to comply with
rules that require periodic reporting, filings or notifications are
appropriate for inclusion in the MRVP. At the same time FINRA
recognizes that willful, widespread or repeated failures under such
eligible rules may be more appropriate for disposition through an AWC
or the filing of a Complaint. FINRA notes that the current MRVP
includes several such rules. Accordingly, the proposed rule change
would add the following rules to the MRVP for violations involving late
or incomplete notices or filings: FINRA Rule 2251(a) (Forwarding of
Proxy and other Issuer-Related Materials) (failure to timely forward
proxy and other issuer-related materials); FINRA Rule 4524
(Supplemental FOCUS Information) (failure to timely file or filing of
incomplete reports or information); FINRA Rule 5110(b) (Corporate
Financing Rule--
[[Page 49314]]
Underwriting Terms and Arrangements) (failure to timely file or filing
of incomplete documents or information); FINRA Rule 5121(b)(2) (Public
Offerings of Securities with Conflicts of Interest) (failure to give
timely notification of termination or settlement of public offering or
failure to file net capital computation); FINRA Rule 5122(b)(2)
(Private Placements of Securities Issued by Members) (failure to timely
file private placement documents); FINRA Rule 5190 (Notification
Requirements for Offering Participants) (failure to give timely
notification of participation in offerings); and FINRA Rule 6760
(Obligation to Provide Notice) (failure to give timely or complete
notification concerning offerings of TRACE-Eligible Securities). FINRA
believes inclusion of these rules is appropriate, as certain instances
of late filings or notifications may constitute minor, technical
violations of the applicable rules that can be remediated through the
MRVP.
Late Registrations
For many of the same reasons, the proposed rule change also would
include in the MRVP the following MSRB and FINRA rules for certain
isolated or technical failures to timely register: MSRB Rule G-2
(Standards of Professional Qualification) and MSRB Rule G-3(b)(ii)(D)
and (c)(ii)(D) (Classification of Principals and Representatives;
Numerical Requirements; Testing; Continuing Education Requirements)
(failure to pass qualification examination within 90 days of becoming a
principal) \3\ and NASD Rule 1021(d) (Registration Requirements)
(failure to pass qualification examination within 90 days of acting in
a principal capacity). These provisions permit a municipal securities
representative or registered representative, as applicable, to
temporarily function in a principal capacity, provided such person
registers as a principal and passes the appropriate qualification
examination within 90 days of acting in such capacity. Typically, these
circumstances occur when a registered principal leaves a firm or has an
extended absence. FINRA believes MRV disposition may be appropriate in
limited circumstances where a representative assumes principal duties
but takes more than 90 days to pass the corresponding qualification
examination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The proposed rule change includes both MSRB Rule G-2 and G-3
because the two are linked. Rule G-3 states that no broker, dealer
or municipal securities dealer ``shall be qualified for the purposes
of Rule G-2'' unless the requirements set forth in Rule G-3 are met.
FINRA typically charges a violation of both rules where there is a
failure to comply with the requirements of Rule G-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Untimely Marking, Transaction Reporting and Other Market Rules
The proposed rule change similarly would add to the MRVP late
filing and notification requirements related to market regulation. The
current FINRA MRVP includes several such market rules, including, for
example, FINRA Rule 4560 (failure to timely file reports of short
positions); FINRA Rules 6380A, 6622, 6730 (transaction reporting);
FINRA Rule 7450 (OATS reporting); and MSRB Rule G-14 (failure to submit
reports). Thus, the proposed rule change would include: Rule 605(a)(1)
and (3) of SEC Regulation NMS (Disclosure of Order Execution
Information) (failure to timely report or provide complete order
execution information); Rule 606 of SEC Regulation NMS (Disclosure of
Order Routing Information) (failure to timely disclose or provide
complete order routing information); FINRA Rule 6181 (Timely
Transaction Reporting) (failure to timely report transactions in NMS
securities); and FINRA Rule 6623 (Timely Transaction Reporting)
(failure to timely report transactions in OTC and restricted equity
securities).
The proposed rule change further would make eligible for MRVP
disposition other marking and reporting requirements related to trade
and audit data: Rule 200(g) of SEC Regulation SHO (Definition of
``Short Sale'' and Marking Requirements) (failure to accurately mark
sell orders of equity securities); FINRA Rule 6182 (Trade Reporting of
Short Sales) (failure to accurately mark short sales in NMS stocks);
FINRA Rule 6250 (Quote and Order Access Requirements) (failure to
comply with quote and order access requirements for FINRA's Alternative
Display Facility); FINRA Rule 6624 (Trade Reporting of Short Sales)
(failure to accurately mark short sales in OTC Equity Securities);
FINRA Rule 7330 (Trade Report Input) (failure to timely and accurately
input trade reports into the OTC Reporting Facility); and FINRA Rule
7360 (Audit Trail Requirements) (ongoing obligation to input trade
reporting requirements in Rule 7330(d) accurately and completely). In
addition, the proposed rule change would add three rules governing the
FINRA/NYSE Trade Reporting Facility whose counterpart rules regarding
the FINRA/NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility are already subject to MRV
treatment: FINRA Rule 6380B (Transaction Reporting); FINRA Rule 7230B
(Trade Report Input); and FINRA Rule 7260B (Audit Trail Requirements).
Rules To Achieve Consistency
In addition to the market rules referenced above, FINRA further
proposes to add certain rules to the MRVP to achieve consistency with
rules that already are part of the plan. Thus, the proposed rule change
would add FINRA Rule 1250(a), the Regulatory Element of FINRA's
continuing education requirements. The current MRVP includes FINRA Rule
1250(b), the Firm Element provision of the continuing education
requirements, and FINRA believes there is no compelling reason to
differentiate with respect to the MRVP minor violations of the
regulatory element. Similarly, the proposed rule change further would
bring consistency to the enforcement of the MSRB Rules by adding to the
MRVP MSRB Rule G-3(h) (Classification of Principals and
Representatives; Numerical Requirements; Testing; Continuing Education
Requirements) (failure to comply with the continuing education
requirements) to include in the MRVP both the Firm and Regulatory
Elements of the MSRB's equivalent continuing education requirements
rule. The proposed rule change also seeks consistency by adding MSRB
Rule G-21 (Advertising) to the MRVP, since the FINRA communications
with the public counterparts, FINRA Rules 2210, 2212, 2213, 2215, 2216
and NASD Interpretive Material 2210-2, already are subject to MRVP
disposition.
FINRA Rule 9217 currently states that ``[f]ailures to provide or
update contact information as required by FINRA or NASD rules'' may be
resolved pursuant to the MRVP. Accordingly, FINRA proposes to add NASD
Rule 1150 (Executive Representative) (failure to review and update
executive representative designation and contact information) and NASD
Rule 1160 (Contact Information Requirements) to the MRVP. For the same
reason, FINRA also proposes to add MSRB Rules G-40(a) and (c)
(Electronic Mail Contacts), which require each broker, dealer or
municipal securities dealer to designate and update electronic mail
contact information for communications with the MSRB, and FINRA Rule
4370(f) (Business Continuity and Emergency Contact Information), which
requires a member to report to FINRA emergency contact information and
to designate emergency contact persons. Rule 4370(f)(2) further
requires member to promptly update such information in the event of any
material change in accordance with NASD Rule 1160. FINRA also proposes
to include in the MRVP other provisions of Rule 4370, which are
discussed below.
[[Page 49315]]
Recordkeeping
The current MRVP includes violations of FINRA Rule 4510 Series
(Books and Records Requirements) for failure to keep and preserve
books, accounts, records, memoranda, and correspondence in conformance
with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and statements of
policy promulgated thereunder, and with FINRA rules. Rule 4511 requires
firms to preserve for at least six years those FINRA books and records
for which there is no specified period under FINRA rules or applicable
Exchange Act rules. Otherwise, the rule mandates compliance with the
books and record requirements under FINRA rules, the Exchange Act and
the applicable Exchange Act rules. The proposed rule change would add
to the MRVP specific SEC and MSRB rules that require records to be made
and preserved: Exchange Act Rule 17a-3(a) (Records to Be Made By
Certain Exchange Members, Brokers and Dealers); Exchange Act Rule 17a-4
(Records to Be Preserved By Certain Exchange Members, Brokers and
Dealers); MSRB Rule G-8 (Books and Records to Be Made By Brokers,
Dealers and Municipal Securities Dealers); and MSRB Rule G-9
(Preservation of Records). FINRA typically charges recordkeeping
violations under both FINRA Rule 4511 or MSRB Rule G-9 and the
applicable Exchange Act rules. FINRA includes the Exchange Act rules
because those rules have greater specificity than the self-regulatory
organization rules. In addition, the violation often involves a record
specified in the Exchange Act rules, such as an order ticket. Under
such circumstances, FINRA believes it appropriate to charge a violation
of the specific Exchange Act provision, as well as the more general
FINRA rule that requires compliance with the Exchange Act books and
records rules.
Supervisory Procedures Regarding MRVP Rules
The current MRVP includes NASD Rule 3010(b) (Supervision; Written
Procedures), but only with respect to failures to timely file reports
required of a firm subject to the ``Taping Rule''--a requirement to,
among other things, tape record conversations of its registered persons
and file with FINRA periodic reports on supervision of telemarketing
activities of its registered persons. The proposed rule change would
expand the MRVP to include any violation of NASD Rule 3010(b)
(Supervision; Written Procedures) for failure to maintain adequate
written supervisory procedures with respect to the provision of a rule
that is eligible for MRV disposition. Thus, for example, FINRA Rules
7440 and 7450 currently are included in FINRA's MRVP and require
recording and transmission of Order Audit Trail System (``OATS'') data.
NASD Rule 3010(b) requires members with such data to have written
supervisory procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with
the OATS rules. The proposed rule change would allow FINRA to resolve
as an MRV a failure to maintain adequate written supervisory procedures
with respect to compliance with OATS rules, whether or not there is a
violation of the OATS rules themselves. The proposed rule change would
also include the parallel MSRB Rule G-27 (Supervision) to the same
extent. FINRA believes inclusion of these provisions is logically
consistent with the purposes of the MRVP: If the potential underlying
violation is eligible for MRV disposition, the procedures to require
compliance with that rule also should be eligible for such disposition.
Options
FINRA Rule 2360(b)(5) (Reporting of Options Positions) requires,
among other things, members to report each account in which a member
has an interest that has established an aggregate position of 200 or
more option contracts. The proposed rule change makes this rule
eligible for disposition under the MRVP for, among other things,
technical or manual inputting problems that in the judgment of FINRA do
not materially affect the market. FINRA notes that other provisions of
FINRA's options reporting rules are eligible for MRVP disposition \4\
and that options reporting requirements are part of the MRVP for almost
all of the options exchanges,\5\ thus including them in FINRA's plan
would promote greater consistency across the markets. The need for such
consistency is heightened because FINRA is party to an agreement
allocating regulatory responsibility for options reporting rules.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The MRVP currently covers violations of FINRA Rule
2360(b)(3) regarding position limits, (b)(4) regarding exercise
limits and (b)(23) regarding tendering procedures for exercise of
options.
\5\ See NYSE MKT Rule 590(g) (referencing violations of
reporting rules including Rule 906 (Reporting of Options
Positions)); NYSE Arca Options Rule 10.12(h)(23); BATS Rule 25.3(b);
Nasdaq Options Rule Chapter X, Section 7(d); BX Options Rule Chapter
X, Section 7(d); CBOE Rule 17.50(g)(15); C2 Rule Chapter 17 (which
incorporates the rules contained in CBOE Chapter XVII); ISE Rule
1614(d)(10).
\6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68362 (December 5,
2012) 77 FR 73719 (December 11, 2012) (Notice of Filing and Order
Approving and Declaring Effective an Amendment to the Plan for the
Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Among the NYSE MKT LLC,
BATS Exchange, Inc., BOX Options Exchange LLC, C2 Options Exchange,
Incorporated, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, the
International Securities Exchange LLC, Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc., the NYSE Arca, Inc., The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC,
NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc., and Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC concerning options-related market
surveillance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Rules
Finally, the proposed rule change would make violations of several
other rules eligible for disposition under the MRVP. With respect to
each rule, FINRA believes that a minor violation, depending on the
circumstances, could appropriately be remediated under the terms of the
MRVP without compromising investor protection.
Exchange Act Rule 10b-10 (Confirmation of Transactions) requires
broker-dealers to disclose specified information in writing to
customers at or before completion of a transaction, including but not
limited to information concerning the date and time of the transaction,
the number of shares bought or sold, the price or average price of the
transaction, the capacity in which the member is acting in connection
with the transaction, and the nature of the remuneration received or to
be received by the member. FINRA has observed circumstances where
members have committed minor violations of the rule by failing to fully
or accurately disclose such information. For example, FINRA has seen
circumstances where a broker-dealer mistakenly reported the ``average
price'' of a transaction as the ``price'' or mismarked a principal
transaction as an agency transaction. Depending upon the specific facts
and circumstances of the transaction, including the sophistication of
the customer and the nature of the information that was not disclosed
or improperly disclosed, FINRA believes an MRV could be an appropriate
disposition.
FINRA Rule 4360(b) (Fidelity Bonds) requires a member to maintain
minimum fidelity bond coverage commensurate with its net capital
requirements. MSRB Rule G-6 (Fidelity Bonding Requirements) requires a
broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer to maintain the minimum
fidelity bond coverage that is required by the national securities
association with which it is registered. FINRA has observed instances
where a member had fidelity bond coverage but less than the required
coverage. FINRA believes MRV disposition may be appropriate in such
circumstances, depending on the reason for the shortfall and the
magnitude and
[[Page 49316]]
duration of the failure. For example, a modest shortfall in coverage
based on a miscalculation of net capital that was quickly discovered
and remedied might be appropriate for an MRV disposition.
MSRB Rule G-10 (Delivery of Investor Brochure) requires a broker,
dealer or municipal securities dealer to deliver a copy of an investor
brochure to a customer promptly after receiving a complaint from the
customer. As with other provisions referenced above and those already
part of FINRA's MRVP involving a late filing or delivery, FINRA
believes that a failure to timely deliver such brochure may be
appropriate for MRV disposition under certain factual circumstances;
e.g., where a violation is not widespread or willful.
FINRA By-Laws Schedule A, Sec. 1(b) (Member Regulatory Fees)
assesses on members a Trading Activity Fee for the sale of covered
securities. The provision defines covered securities, exempts certain
transactions, sets forth fee rates and provides that members shall
report the volume of applicable sales in a manner prescribed by FINRA.
FINRA has observed that firms sometimes fail to make accurate payment
of the Trading Activity Fee based on an inadvertent miscalculation of
the fee or failure to apply the fee to the proper universe of trades.
FINRA has also observed instances where a firm has inadvertently failed
to accurately report the volume of sales of covered securities, thus
impacting the proper calculation of the fee. FINRA believes such
circumstances may be appropriate for MRVP disposition and therefore has
included the By-Law provision in the proposed rule change.
FINRA Rule 2266 (SIPC Information) requires members to provide
customers with written notification of the availability of SIPC
information at account opening and annually thereafter. FINRA may
consider isolated failures to satisfy this requirement without customer
harm to be minor in nature and therefore appropriate for an MRV.
FINRA Rules 3160(a)(1), (3), (4) and (5) (Networking Arrangements
Between Members and Financial Institutions) set forth standards of
conduct for conducting broker-dealer services on or off the premises of
a financial institution pursuant to a networking arrangement. These
provisions specify: the setting in which a member may conduct broker-
dealer services on the premises of a financial institution; the
disclosure required to inform the customer that the broker-dealer
products sold are not guaranteed or federally insured; the content
requirements of communications with the public; and the requirement to
promptly notify the financial institution if any associated person of a
member employed by the institution has been terminated for cause. FINRA
believes there are several potential factual scenarios where a minor
violation could occur under these provisions. For example, Rule
3160(a)(3)(B) requires a member to disclose orally, in addition to
written disclosure, that the securities products purchased are not
guaranteed or federally insured. FINRA could foresee a circumstance
where either written or oral disclosure is provided rather than both
and believes an MRV may be appropriate under such facts. FINRA notes
that the proposed rule change excludes Rule 3160(a)(2), which sets
forth the requirement that a written agreement govern any networking
arrangement and include key broker-dealer obligations pursuant to Rule
701 of SEC Regulation R and ensure access to the financial
institution's premises by broker-dealer supervisory personnel and
regulators from FINRA and the SEC.
FINRA Rules 4370(a), (b), (c) and (e) (Business Continuity Plans
and Emergency Contact Information) require a member to create, maintain
and update a written business continuity plan and to disclose the
elements of the plan to customers at account opening, on its Web site
and upon customer request. The provisions allow for flexibility in the
design of the plan but also include a number of minimum elements. While
FINRA recognizes the importance of an effective business continuity
plan, we also have seen minor violations of the provisions that may not
implicate the overall effectiveness of a plan. For example, FINRA has
observed instances where members have failed for a short duration to
timely update their plans in violation of Rule 4370(b) or failed to
address one of the ten elements set forth in Rule 4370(c). FINRA could
also envision circumstances where a member failed to address an
existing relationship with another broker dealer in violation of Rule
4370(a) or failed in an isolated circumstance to timely provide
disclosure about its business continuity plan after receiving a request
from a customer under Rule 4370(e). FINRA believes these examples may
be appropriate for MRV disposition. However, FINRA does not believe MRV
disposition would be appropriate where a member has no business
continuity plan or procedures as required by Rule 4370(a).
FINRA has not proposed to include Rule 4370(d) for MRVP
eligibility. That provision requires a member to designate a member of
senior management to approve the plan and be responsible for an annual
review of it, and FINRA does not foresee any circumstances where a
violation of those requirements would be appropriate for MRVP
disposition.
FINRA Rule 5121(a) (Public Offerings of Securities with Conflicts
of Interest) sets forth requirements for participation in public
offerings of a member's securities where a conflict of interest is
present. The rule requires prominent disclosure in the prospectus,
offering circular or similar document of the nature of the conflict of
interest, the name of a qualified independent underwriter that has
participated in the preparation of the offering documents and the role
and responsibilities of that independent underwriter. FINRA believes
that under certain facts, a failure to prominently disclose these
items--e.g., disclosing them in smaller font--may constitute a minor
violation appropriate for MRVP disposition.
FINRA Rule 7430 (Synchronization of Member Business Clocks)
requires members to synchronize their business clocks for the purposes
of recording the date and time of events that must be reported pursuant
to FINRA By-Laws and rules. FINRA believes that isolated violations
where certain business clocks fall out of synch due to software
glitches or other technical reasons may be appropriate to resolve as an
MRV, and therefore FINRA has proposed to include the rule in the MRVP.
FINRA reiterates that inclusion of a rule in the MRVP does not mean
that all violations of that rule must be treated pursuant to the MRVP.
FINRA staff maintains the discretion to handle any violation of such
rules through AWCs or Complaints with the full range of applicable
sanctions.\7\ Similarly, members and associated persons maintain the
right to a hearing, with all the same procedural rights accorded all
formal disciplinary proceedings, instead of accepting a Minor Rule
Violation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ FINRA does not intend to develop a formula as to when a
matter must be handled pursuant to the MRVP, as opposed to informal
action, or when an otherwise eligible MRVP matter would be handled
through an AWC or the filing of a complaint. The disposition of any
matter will depend on the particular facts and circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The implementation date will be the date of Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\8\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to
[[Page 49317]]
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade and, in general, to protect investors
and the public interest. FINRA further believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Sections 15A(b)(2) and (b)(7) of the Act,\9\
which require that FINRA enforce and provide appropriate discipline for
violation of FINRA rules and applicable federal securities laws, rules
and regulations. FINRA believes that adopting the proposed rule change
will strengthen FINRA's ability to carry out its oversight and
enforcement responsibilities in cases where full disciplinary
proceedings are unwarranted in view of the minor nature of the
particular violation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(2) and 78o-3(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, FINRA's MRVP, as amended by this proposal, provides a
fair procedure for disciplining members and persons associated with
members, consistent with Sections 15A(b)(8) and 15A(h)(1) of the
Act.\10\ The MRVP does not preclude a member or associated person from
contesting an alleged violation and receiving a hearing on the matter
with the same procedural rights through a litigated disciplinary
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(8) and 78o-3(h)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change will
allow for a quicker, more efficient means to resolve minor violations
of the eligible rules, potentially lessening the burden on firms in
those circumstances where, absent the rule's inclusion in the MRVP, a
more resource-intense formal proceeding might ensue.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 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 the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A) by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change 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 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 email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2013-033 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2013-033. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2013-
033, and should be submitted on or before September 3, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-19509 Filed 8-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P