[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66405-66408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26411]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-70776; File No. SR-FINRA-2013-031]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove Proposed Rule Change Relating to Participation on
the Alternative Display Facility
October 30, 2013.
I. Introduction
On July 18, 2013, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') 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\
proposed rule change to amend FINRA Rules 6271 and 6272 regarding the
requirements for members seeking registration as FINRA Alternative
Display Facility (``ADF'') Market Participants (the ``Proposal'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposal was published for comment in the Federal Register on
August 1, 2013.\3\ The Commission received one comment letter on the
Proposal.\4\ On September 10, 2013, the Commission extended the time
period in which to either approve, disapprove, or to institute
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the Proposal,
to October 30, 2013.\5\ On October 25, 2013, FINRA responded to the
comment letter.\6\ This order institutes proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine whether to approve or disapprove
the Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70048 (July 26,
2013), 78 FR 46652 (``Notice'').
\4\ See Letter to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
from David Harris, Chairman and CEO, National Stock Exchange, Inc.,
dated September 9, 2013 (``NSX Letter'').
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70358, 78 FR 56967
(September 16, 2013) (SR-FINRA-2013-031).
\6\ See Letter from Stephanie M. Dumont, Senior Vice President
and Director of Capital Markets Policy, FINRA to the Commission
dated October 25, 2013, (``FINRA Response'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
Current ADF Registration Requirements
The ADF is a quotation collection and trade reporting facility.
According to FINRA, the ADF provides (1) ADF market participants (i.e.,
ADF-registered market makers (``ADF Market Makers'') or electronic
communications networks (``ECNs'' and, with ``ADF Market Makers'',
``ADF Market Participants'')) with the ability to post quotations or
display orders in NMS stocks and (2) all member firms that participate
in the ADF the ability to view quotations and report transactions in
NMS stocks to the Securities Information Processors (``SIPs'') for
consolidation and dissemination of data to vendors and ADF Market
Participants.\7\ FINRA states that the ADF is also designed to deliver
real-time data to FINRA for regulatory purposes, including enforcement
of requirements imposed by Regulation NMS.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Notice, 78 FR at 46652. The ADF was initially approved
by the Commission on July 24, 2002, in connection with the SEC's
approval of SuperMontage and Nasdaq's registration as a national
securities exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46249
(July 24, 2002), 67 FR 49822 (July 31, 2002); see also NASD Notice
to Members 02-45 (August 2002). At that time, the ADF was approved
for Nasdaq-listed securities for a nine-month pilot period to
provide FINRA members with an alternative to the Nasdaq systems for
reporting quotations and transactions in Nasdaq UTP Plan securities.
On September 28, 2006, the SEC approved amendments to extend the
ADF's functionality to all NMS stocks. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 54537 (September 28, 2006), 71 FR 59173 (October 6,
2006); see also NASD Notice to Members 06-67 (November 2006). The
ADF was approved on a permanent basis for NMS stocks on January 26,
2007. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55181 (January 26,
2007), 72 FR 5093 (February 2, 2007).
\8\ See 17 CFR 242.600.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA rules provide that ADF Market Participants (i.e., either
registered reporting ADF Market Makers or registered reporting ADF
ECNs) \9\ must register as ADF market makers or ECNs before making a
market or displaying orders on the ADF.\10\ Members are required to
register as ADF Market Participants by applying to FINRA, which
includes certifying the member's good standing with FINRA and
demonstrating compliance with the net capital and other financial
responsibility provisions of the Act.\11\ Before displaying quotations
or orders on the ADF, ADF Trading Centers \12\ must also execute and
comply with a Certification Record to certify the ADF Trading Center's
compliance efforts with its obligations under Regulation NMS.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See FINRA Rule 6220(a)(3), (12), (13).
\10\ See FINRA Rule 6271.
\11\ See FINRA Rule 6271(b).
\12\ An ``ADF Trading Center'' is a registered reporting ADF
Market Maker or registered reporting ADF ECN that is a ``Trading
Center,'' as defined in Rule 600(b)(78) of SEC regulation NMS, and
that is certified to display its quotations or orders through the
ADF. See FINRA Rule 6220(a)(4); see also 17 CFR 242.600(b)(87).
\13\ See FINRA Rules 6220(a)(5), 6250(a)(7); NASD Notice to
Members 06-67 (November 2006); see also SR-NASD-2006-091, Exhibit 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status of the ADF and Other FINRA Transparency Facilities
According to FINRA, no member has registered with FINRA as a
registered reporting ADF Market Maker since the ADF was launched in
2002, and there have been four members that, at various points in time,
were registered as registered reporting ADF ECNs.\14\ Since the second
quarter of 2010, FINRA states that there have been no ADF Market
Participants.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Notice, 78 FR at 46653.
\15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA states that in 2011, it began the process of updating and
migrating all of its transparency facilities (including the FINRA Trade
Reporting Facilities, the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine
(``TRACE''), and the ADF) off of independent technology platforms and
onto a new, single, updated technology platform known as the Multi
Product Platform (``MPP'').\16\ FINRA originally scheduled the
migration of the ADF onto MPP last, anticipating onboarding of a new
ADF Market Participant no sooner than mid-2014.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See id.
\17\ See id. After the ADF is migrated to MPP, however, FINRA
claims that it will only have the ADF base infrastructure completed.
FINRA estimates that it would take at least an additional six months
to complete further specific build-outs are necessary to accommodate
an individual ADF Market Participant seeking to quote on or report
trades to the ADF. To determine the specific build-outs necessary to
support a new ADF Market Participant, a member would need to provide
FINRA with estimated volume projections of quotation and trade
reporting activity that would flow through the ADF. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66406]]
According to FINRA, several of its members have discussed the
possibility with FINRA of becoming an ADF Market Participant, and some
have asked whether the migration of the ADF to MPP could be
accelerated.\18\ FINRA states that such acceleration requires delaying
the migration of other FINRA facilities onto MPP, reallocating
resources, shifting scheduling, and implementing ADF-specific
enhancements and hosting in the new technology environment--all of
which, in turn, impose significant costs on FINRA, including prolonging
the substantially higher expenses associated with the legacy OTC Equity
Trade Reporting Facility (``ORF'') infrastructure (i.e., legacy ORF
support costs are significantly higher than the expected costs of
supporting the ORF in the new MPP technology environment).\19\ In
addition to the costs of accelerating the migration of the ADF onto
MPP, FINRA claims that bringing the new ADF base infrastructure live in
the MPP technology environment to accommodate an ADF Market Participant
will impose significant direct costs on FINRA related to building and
testing the new ADF component on the MPP infrastructure and also
related to paying for SIP capacity usage allocations as well as various
related costs.\20\ FINRA estimates that the MPP component re-sequencing
necessary to accommodate ADF acceleration and the costs associated with
bringing the ADF base infrastructure live will conservatively cost
FINRA in excess of $3 million.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See id.
\19\ See id.
\20\ See id.
\21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Amendments to the ADF Rules
FINRA proposes to consolidate into a single rule (FINRA Rule 6271)
the existing requirements that a member must meet to register as an ADF
Market Participant and introduce new requirements that potential ADF
Market Participants must meet to participate on the ADF. According to
FINRA, these new requirements are intended to mitigate the substantial
financial risks to FINRA of accelerating the migration of the ADF onto
MPP or of building out the ADF base platform to accommodate an ADF
Market Participant.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See id. For example, FINRA Rule 6271 would specify that a
member seeking registration as an ADF Market Participant must file
an application with FINRA, execute the Certification Record, and
execute a Participant Agreement. Rule 6271(a)(1) would require a
potential ADF Market Participant to file an application with FINRA
in which the member would provide various specifications and
certifications.
The first three requirements of the application, which specify
whether the member is seeking registration in Nasdaq and/or CQS
securities, certify the member's good standing with FINRA, and
demonstrate compliance with the net capital and other financial
responsibility provisions of the Act, are the same as the
requirements currently in Rule 6271(b). The Proposal would also
codify other current requirements into a single rule. See id., 78 FR
at 46654.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADF Deposit Amount
The Proposal would, in part, add several new requirements into the
application that members must complete to become ADF Market
Participants. The new provisions require that a member seeking to
become an ADF Market Participant: (i) Provide FINRA with reasonable
monthly projections of the volume of data that the member anticipates
submitting to the ADF; (ii) agree to submit the ADF Deposit Amount \23\
in five equal installments into an escrow account at a bank mutually
acceptable to the member and FINRA on a timetable as agreed to by the
member and FINRA (the ``ADF Escrow Account''); (iii) agree that failing
to submit quotes and report trades to the ADF for a two-year period
(the ``ADF Quoting Term'') will result in the forfeiture of some or all
of the ADF Deposit Amount; (iv) agree that failing to submit 75% of the
member's trade and quote volume in NMS stocks to the ADF (the ``ADF
Quoting Requirement'') will result in the forfeiture of some or all of
the ADF Deposit Amount; and (v) agree to the other ADF Deposit Terms
set forth in the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The Proposal requires potential ADF Market Participants to
agree to submit an ``ADF Deposit Amount'' in five equal installments
into an escrow account. The proposed rule change defines the ``ADF
Deposit Amount'' as $500,000 if the member requests that FINRA
accelerate the ADF migration or if the member begins quoting on or
reporting trades to the ADF within 90 calendar days after an ADF
Market Participant that requested acceleration of the ADF migration
begins quoting on or reporting trades to the ADF. For all other ADF
Participants, the ADF Deposit Amount is $250,000. FINRA claims that
this is designed to ensure that applicable volume commitments are
met. FINRA is proposing to establish the two separate levels of the
ADF Deposit Amount to reflect the differing costs FINRA claims it
will incur under either of two scenarios. Because FINRA states that
it will incur significantly higher costs if the migration of the ADF
is accelerated at a member's request, FINRA has proposed an ADF
Deposit Amount of $500,000 should the member request such
acceleration. Additionally, to ensure that ADF Market Participants
benefitting from an acceleration of the ADF onto MPP are treated
equally, FINRA proposes to charge $500,000 to any member that begins
quoting on or reporting trades to the ADF within ninety (90) days
after an existing ADF Market Participant that requested acceleration
of the ADF migration begins quoting on or reporting trades to the
ADF. According to FINRA, this amount, which, as noted above, FINRA
claims is substantially lower than the actual costs FINRA will incur
by amending the current MPP migration schedule reflects an
appropriate balance between ensuring that FINRA is able to recover a
portion of the costs associated with an accelerated migration while
not representing a significant financial barrier to participation on
the ADF, particularly since members can potentially recover 100% of
the ADF Deposit Amount over the two-year term and up to 80% of the
ADF Deposit Amount in the first quarter of their participation on
the ADF through the credit structure for market data revenue
described below. Moreover, FINRA believes that permitting potential
participants to earn back the entire deposit amount is more
equitable than charging potential ADF Market Participants a one-time
payment without the ability to recover some, or all, of the amount.
The Proposal reduces the ADF Deposit Amount to $250,000 if the
member has not requested an accelerated migration or does not become
an ADF Market Participant within 90 days after another ADF Market
Participant that had requested acceleration (i.e., paid an escrow
amount of $500,000) begins quoting on or reporting trades to the
ADF. According to FINRA, the lower amount reflects the fact that the
costs to FINRA are significantly reduced under these circumstances
because the ADF base platform will have already been migrated to
MPP. However, although reduced, FINRA anticipates such costs will
still be significantly higher than the $250,000 deposit amount in
such a scenario based on costs related to possible additional
hardware and software deployments, paying for SIP capacity usage
allocations, and costs related to general staff labor, support and
testing. See Notice, 78 FR at 46654-46655.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA contends that these new provisions are designed to ensure
that FINRA can recover a portion of the costs associated with
accelerating the migration of the ADF to MPP and bringing a new ADF
Market Participant onto the ADF if the ADF Market Participant fails to
participate on the ADF as anticipated. FINRA also argues that certain
provisions of the application are designed to (1) provide FINRA the
information necessary to ensure the ADF can accommodate the volume of
data the member anticipates submitting to the ADF and (2) establish the
basis upon which FINRA will be safeguarded by ensuring that the
potential ADF Market Participant will bear some of the financial
responsibility should FINRA undertake the efforts and incur the costs
necessary to bring the ADF Market Participant onto the ADF, only to
have the ADF Market Participant fail to participate at all or at the
agreed level.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The Proposal includes several required terms for the
handling of the ADF Deposit Amount (referred to as ``ADF Deposit
Terms''), including the methods for ADF Market Participants to
recover some or all of the ADF Deposit Amount as a result of meeting
its participation commitments (or due to FINRA's inability to meet
its obligations) and methods for FINRA to receive the funds if
commitments are not met. The proposed rule change retains some
flexibility in the precise terms of any agreements between FINRA and
potential ADF Market Participants to ensure that any unique
circumstances can be addressed by permitting de minimis additions or
qualifications to the ADF Deposit Terms, provided both FINRA and the
member agree to those additions or qualifications. See Notice, 78 FR
at 46655.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66407]]
ADF Market Data Rebate
The Proposal includes a means for ADF Market Participants to earn
back the ADF Deposit Amount (the ``ADF Market Data Rebate'').
Specifically, the Proposal provides that for every $1.00 received by
FINRA from the National Market System (``NMS'') SIP data plans
associated with ADF activity attributable, as determined in FINRA's
sole discretion, to the member's trading activity on the ADF, the
member shall receive $0.50 out of the ADF Escrow Account. Thus, an ADF
Market Participant could recover an amount equal to one-half of the SIP
market data revenue generated by the ADF Market Participant's trading
activity on the ADF. The ADF Market Data Rebate would be paid on a
quarterly basis after FINRA has received its quarterly disbursement
from the NMS SIP data plans.\25\ According to FINRA, this provides for
a reasonable opportunity for FINRA to recover some of its costs of re-
sequencing the MPP rollout by virtue of the SIP market data revenue
split.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Charges or credits as a result of SIP audit recoveries,
which typically are de minimis as compared to the overall revenue
paid, would not be included in the calculation. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Proposal provides that the ADF Market Participant
is only entitled to receive an amount up to 80% of the ADF Deposit
Amount pursuant to this provision and is not entitled to the remaining
20% of the ADF Deposit Amount until the end of the ADF Quoting Term,
assuming its trading activity has earned the requisite market data
revenue from the SIPs. To the extent that the ADF Market Participant
opts to stop participating on the ADF before the end of the ADF Quoting
Term or stop meeting its ADF Quoting Requirement before the end of the
ADF Quoting Term (i.e., chooses to quote or trade through another
trading venue), it would be free to do so but could potentially forfeit
some or all of the remaining ADF Deposit Amount.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See id. If FINRA does not make the ADF available within
nine months of an ADF Market Participant's first deposit of the ADF
Deposit Amount into the ADF Escrow Account, one-fifth of the ADF
Deposit Amount will be released from such ADF Escrow Account to the
ADF Market Participant. An additional one-fifth of the initial ADF
Deposit Amount will be released to the ADF Market Participant every
month thereafter that FINRA has not made the ADF available, until
all funds have been released from such ADF Escrow Account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposal also includes certain provisions designed to protect
FINRA if a member requests that the ADF be migrated to MPP on an
accelerated basis or if FINRA undertakes efforts to build out the
system to support the member, and in either instance, the member fails
to participate.\27\ The proposed rule change provides that one-fifth of
the ADF Deposit Amount shall be released to FINRA if, in any calendar
month beginning with the fourth calendar month following certification
of the ADF Market Participant to quote on or report trades to the ADF,
the ADF Market Participant fails to submit 75% of the member's quoting
and trade reporting activity to the ADF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ In addition, if a member is sold (other than a sale to an
entity that would otherwise meet the FINRA qualifications as an ADF
Market Participant), goes out of business, otherwise does not meet
its obligations, or fails to complete the process for becoming an
ADF Market Participant, the member will forfeit the ADF Deposit
Amount, or any lesser amount remaining in the ADF Escrow Account,
and all funds will be released from the ADF Escrow Account to FINRA.
See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the proposed rule change would make clear that a member
would become an ADF Market Participant only after (i) the member
received a notice of approval from FINRA that its application was
accepted, (ii) the member executed the Certification Record, and (iii)
FINRA executed the Participant Agreement.
III. Comment Letters
The Commission received one comment letter in response to the
Proposal.\28\ The commenter, NSX, contends that the Proposal is
inconsistent with Sections 15A(b)(5), (6), and (9) of the Act.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See NSX Letter.
\29\ See NSX Letter, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act mandates that ``[t]he rules of the
association provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among members and issuers and other persons
using any facility or system which the association operates or
controls.'' \30\ NSX argues that that FINRA ``fails to meet its burden
of adequately articulating and justifying the reasonableness of the ADF
Participant fees.'' \31\ In particular, NSX contends that
reasonableness of the ADF Deposit Amount and ADF Market Data Rebate can
only be determined after analyzing total cost, projected volume, source
of funds, and future fees. Accordingly, NSX argues, the Proposal is
deficient as it does not disclose the specific percentage that the
Deposit Amount is of total development costs.\32\ In response, FINRA
contends that it has provided enough information to demonstrate that
the ADF Deposit Amount is reasonable.\33\ In particular, FINRA included
detailed cost estimates regarding the accelerated ADF migration. In
addition, FINRA notes in establishing the ADF Deposit Amount it
considered its ability to recover costs and whether the ADF Deposit
Amount would preclude potential ADF Market Participants from using the
ADF.\34\ Finally, FINRA disputes NSX's argument that it is required to
include a forecast of all future fees as part of its analysis of the
reasonableness of the fees contemplated in the Proposal.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
\31\ Id. at 1.
\32\ See NSX Letter, at 2.
\33\ See FINRA Response, at 2.
\34\ See FINRA Response, at 3-4.
\35\ Id. at 5. NSX also argues that the Proposal is not
consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, which provides that
``the rules of an association are designed . . . to protect
investors and the public interest; and are not designed to permit
unfair discrimination ``between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.'' 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5). Specifically, NSX claims that the
Proposal may raise issues with respect to an ADF Participant's
ability to comply with its best execution obligation. See NSX
Letter, at 5. FINRA responds that this concern is misplaced since
the Quoting Requirement relates to posting of quotes and the
reporting of trades, whereas best execution obligation implicates a
broker-dealer's handling of customer orders for execution. See FINRA
Response, at 6 n.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSX also argues that FINRA failed to demonstrate that the Proposal
constitutes an equitable allocation of fees and other charges
consistent with Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act.\36\ Specifically, NSX
questions whether it is consistent with the Act for FINRA to (1) charge
the same ADF Deposit Amount regardless of a potential ADF Participant's
use of the ADF and (2) offer the ADF at a cost which will be spread
among all FINRA members and not just ADF Participants.\37\ FINRA
counters that the fixed ADF Deposit Amount is not tied to the amount of
usage since costs of on-boarding each participant are fixed and do not
vary by ADF Market Participant.\38\ In addition, FINRA claims that the
ADF Deposit Amount is designed to defray costs but not cover costs
entirely. Imposing all costs only on ADF Market Participants, FINRA
argues, would discourage new ADF Market Participants from joining the
ADF and reduce potential ADF revenue thereby increasing ADF-related
losses.\39\ Further, FINRA notes that absent the Proposal, FINRA would
incur all of the costs regarding the migration
[[Page 66408]]
and operation of the ADF without the potential to offset such
costs.\40\ Finally, FINRA argues that the ADF Deposit Amount reflects
an ``appropriate balance between helping to defray the costs of
migrating and operating the ADF while not making participation in the
ADF cost-prohibitive'' that is reasonable in light of projected $3
million total costs cited in its Proposal and an equitable allocation
among ADF Participants and its member firms.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See NSX Letter, at 3.
\37\ Id. at 3-4.
\38\ See FINRA Response, at 3.
\39\ Id.
\40\ See id., at 6.
\41\ See id., at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act provides that ``[t]he rules of the
association do not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of this title.'' \42\ NSX
argues that FINRA fails to adequately address whether the Proposal
imposes a burden on competition for other self-regulatory organization
(``SRO''s) such as NSX.\43\ According to NSX, the Proposal is an unfair
subsidy of FINRA's trading facility. In addition, NSX claims that the
ADF Deposit Amount and the requirement to send 75% of quotes and trades
to FINRA amount to an unprecedented burden on competition. NSX argues
that the ADF Quoting Requirement would make it economically unfeasible
for any other SRO that provides order delivery functionality to compete
with FINRA. FINRA responds that the ADF Deposit Amount is not an unfair
subsidy; rather it is designed to recoup expenses.\44\ Moreover, FINRA
notes that the ADF Quoting Requirement is not an unnecessary or
appropriate burden on competition because it is not a requirement to
use the ADF, and is only a means to earn back the ADF Deposit
Amount.\45\ According to FINRA, therefore, meeting the ADR Quoting
Requirement is voluntary and at the discretion of an ADF
Participant.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
\43\ Id.
\44\ See FINRA Response, 5 at 6.
\45\ Id. at 6.
\46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-FINRA-
2013-031 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine whether the Proposal should be
approved or disapproved. Institution of such proceedings is appropriate
at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the
Proposal that are discussed below. Institution of these proceedings
does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with
respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, as described in greater
detail below, the Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to
provide additional comment to inform the Commission's analysis of
whether to approve or disapprove the Proposal.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B), the Commission is providing notice
of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. In particular,
Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act \47\ requires that FINRA rules do not
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of this title. As noted above, NSX raises
concerns, among other things, as to whether the Proposal creates a
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the Act, including whether it would impose a burden on
competition for other self-regulatory organizations such as NSX. The
Commission believes that questions remain as to whether the Proposal is
consistent with the requirements of Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Solicitation of Comments
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data and arguments with respect to the
concerns identified above, as well as any others they may have with the
Proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of
interested persons concerning whether the Proposals are inconsistent
with Section 15A(b)(9) or any other provision of the Act, or the rules
and regulation thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any
issues relevant to approval or disapproval which would be facilitated
by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission
will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an opportunity
to make an oral presentation.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular Proposals by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments regarding whether the Proposals should be disapproved by
November 26, 2013. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any
other person's submission must file that rebuttal by December 10, 2013.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2013-031 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-2013-031. These
file numbers 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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the Proposals that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
Proposals 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 filings also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchanges. 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-2013-031 and should be
submitted on or before November 26, 2013. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by December 10, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-26411 Filed 11-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P