82 FR 11272 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX PEARL Fee Schedule To Establish an Options Regulatory Fee (“ORF”)

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 33 (February 21, 2017)

Page Range		11272-11274
FR Document		2017-03300
Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 33 (Tuesday, February 21, 2017)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11272-11274]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03300]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80035; File No. SR-PEARL-2017-09]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX 
PEARL Fee Schedule To Establish an Options Regulatory Fee (``ORF'')

February 14, 2017.
    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 February 3, 2017, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL'' or 
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, 
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 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 Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is filing a proposal rule change to amend the MIAX 
PEARL Fee Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') by establishing an Options 
Regulatory Fee (``ORF'').
    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are 
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be 
operative February 6, 2017.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl, at MIAX's 
principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange 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 the 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to establish an ORF in 
the amount of $0.0010 per contract side. The per-contract ORF will be 
assessed by MIAX PEARL to each MIAX PEARL Member for all options 
transactions executed, cleared, or ultimately cleared by the Member 
which are cleared by OCC in the ``customer'' range, regardless of the 
exchange on which the transaction occurs. The ORF will be collected 
indirectly from Members through their clearing firms by OCC on behalf 
of MIAX PEARL.
    In the case where a non-Member executes a transaction and a Member 
clears the transaction, the ORF will be assessed to the Member who 
clears the transaction. In the case where a Member executes a 
transaction and another Member clears the transaction, the ORF will be 
assessed to the Member who clears the transaction. Further, the ORF 
will be assessed on transactions that are not executed by a Member, but 
are ultimately cleared by a Member. The Exchange notes that, in the 
limited circumstance in which a Member executes or clears a transaction 
and then ``gives-up'' or ``CMTAs'' the trade to a non-member of MIAX 
PEARL (which non-member becomes the ultimate clearing firm for the 
transaction), MIAX PEARL will collect the ORF from such non-member 
involving [sic] that transaction. However, for the avoidance of doubt, 
the Exchange will not assess the ORF when the transaction is not 
executed on the Exchange and neither the executing clearing firm nor 
the ultimate clearing firm (e.g., such as when the Member is ``given-
up'' or ``CMTAed'' and then subsequently ``gives-up'' or ``CMTAs'' the 
transaction to another non-member via a CMTA reversal) is a Member. 
Further, the Exchange will not assess the ORF on linkage trades, 
whether executed at the Exchange or an away exchange. A customer order 
routed to another exchange results in two customer trades, one from the 
originating exchange and one from the recipient exchange. Charging ORF 
on both trades could result in double-billing of ORF for a single 
customer order, thus the Exchange chooses not to charge ORF on the 
trade from the originating exchange in a linkage scenario. This 
assessment practice will be identical to the assessment practice 
currently utilized by the Exchange's affiliate, Miami International 
Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX Options'').
    As a practical matter, when a transaction that is subject to the 
ORF is not executed on the Exchange, the Exchange lacks the information 
necessary to identify the executing member for that transaction. There 
are countless executing market participants, and each day such 
participants can and often do drop their connection to one market 
center and establish themselves as participants on another. For these 
reasons, it is not possible for the Exchange to identify, and thus 
assess fees such as an ORF on, executing participants on away markets 
on a given trading day.
    Clearing members, however, are distinguished from executing 
participants because they remain identified to the Exchange regardless 
of the identity of the initiating executing participant, their 
location, and the market center on which they execute transactions. 
Therefore, the Exchange believes it is more efficient for the operation 
of the Exchange and for the marketplace as a whole to collect the ORF 
from clearing members.
    As discussed below, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to 
charge the ORF only to transactions that clear as customer at the OCC. 
The Exchange believes that its broad regulatory responsibilities with 
respect to a Member's activities supports applying the ORF to 
transactions cleared but not executed by a Member. The Exchange's 
regulatory responsibilities are the same regardless of whether a Member 
executes a transaction or clears a transaction executed on its behalf. 
The Exchange regularly reviews all such activities, including 
performing surveillance for position limit violations, manipulation, 
front-running, contrary exercise advice violations and

[[Page 11273]]

insider trading. These activities span across multiple exchanges.
    The ORF is designed to recover a material portion of the costs to 
the Exchange of the supervision and regulation of Members' customer 
options business, including performing routine surveillances and 
investigations, as well as policy, rulemaking, interpretive and 
enforcement activities. The Exchange believes that revenue generated 
from the ORF, when combined with all of the Exchange's other regulatory 
fees and fines, will cover a material portion, but not all, of the 
Exchange's regulatory costs. The Exchange notes that its regulatory 
responsibilities with respect to Member compliance with options sales 
practice rules have been allocated to the Financial Industry Regulatory 
Authority (``FINRA'') under a 17d-2 Agreement. The ORF is not designed 
to cover the cost of options sales practice regulation.
    The Exchange will continue to monitor the amount of revenue 
collected from the ORF to ensure that it, in combination with its other 
regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed the Exchange's total 
regulatory costs. The Exchange expects to monitor MIAX PEARL regulatory 
costs and revenues at a minimum on a semi-annual basis. If the Exchange 
determines regulatory revenues exceed or are insufficient to cover a 
material portion of its regulatory costs, the Exchange will adjust the 
ORF by submitting a fee change filing to the Commission. The Exchange 
will notify Members of adjustments to the ORF via regulatory circular 
at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the change.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable and appropriate for the 
Exchange to charge the ORF for options transactions regardless of the 
exchange on which the transactions occur. The Exchange has a statutory 
obligation to enforce compliance by Members and their associated 
persons under the Act and the rules of the Exchange and to surveil for 
other manipulative conduct by market participants (including non-
Members) trading on the Exchange. The Exchange cannot effectively 
surveil for such conduct without looking at and evaluating activity 
across all options markets. Many of the Exchange's market surveillance 
programs require the Exchange to look at and evaluate activity across 
all options markets, such as surveillance for position limit 
violations, manipulation, front-running and contrary exercise advice 
violations/expiring exercise declarations. Also, the Exchange and the 
other options exchanges are required to populate a consolidated options 
audit trail (``COATS'') \3\ system in order to surveil a Member's 
activities across markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ COATS effectively enhances intermarket options surveillance 
by enabling the options exchanges to reconstruct the market promptly 
to effectively surveil certain rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to its own surveillance programs, the Exchange works 
with other SROs and exchanges on intermarket surveillance related 
issues. Through its participation in the Intermarket Surveillance Group 
(``ISG''),\4\ the Exchange shares information and coordinates inquiries 
and investigations with other exchanges designed to address potential 
intermarket manipulation and trading abuses. The Exchange's 
participation in ISG helps it to satisfy the requirement that it has 
coordinated surveillance with markets on which security futures are 
traded and markets on which any security underlying security futures 
are traded to detect manipulation and insider trading.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ISG is an industry organization formed in 1983 to coordinate 
intermarket surveillance among the SROs by co-operatively sharing 
regulatory information pursuant to a written agreement between the 
parties. The goal of the ISG's information sharing is to coordinate 
regulatory efforts to address potential intermarket trading abuses 
and manipulations.
    \5\ See Section 6(h)(3)(I) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that charging the ORF across markets will 
avoid having Members direct their trades to other markets in order to 
avoid the fee and to thereby avoid paying for their fair share for 
regulation. If the ORF did not apply to activity across markets then a 
Member would send their orders to the least cost, least regulated 
exchange. Other exchanges do impose a similar fee on their member's 
activity, including the activity of those members on MIAX PEARL.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Similar regulatory fees have been instituted by PHLX (See 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61133 (December 9, 2009), 74 FR 
66715 (December 16, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-100)); ISE (See Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 61154 (December 11, 2009), 74 FR 67278 
(December 18, 2009) (SR-ISE-2009-105)); and ISE Gemini (See 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70200 (August 14, 2013) 78 FR 
51242 (August 20, 2013) (SR-Topaz-2013-01)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that there is established precedent for an SRO 
charging a fee across markets, namely, FINRAs Trading Activity Fee \7\ 
and the NYSE Amex, NYSE Arca, CBOE, PHLX, ISE, ISE Gemini and BOX ORF. 
While the Exchange does not have all the same regulatory 
responsibilities as FINRA, the Exchange believes that, like other 
exchanges that have adopted an ORF, its broad regulatory 
responsibilities with respect to a Member's activities, irrespective of 
where their transactions take place, supports a regulatory fee 
applicable to transactions on other markets. Unlike FINRA's Trading 
Activity Fee, the ORF would apply only to a Member's customer options 
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47946 (May 30, 
2003), 68 FR 34021 (June 6, 2003) (SR-NASD-2002-148).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to specify in the Fee Schedule 
that the Exchange may only increase or decrease the ORF semi-annually, 
and any such fee change will be effective on the first business day of 
February or August. In addition to submitting a proposed rule change to 
the Commission as required by the Act to increase or decrease the ORF, 
the Exchange will notify participants via a Regulatory Circular of any 
anticipated change in the amount of the fee at least 30 calendar days 
prior to the effective date of the change. The Exchange believes that 
by providing guidance on the timing of any changes to the ORF, the 
Exchange would make it easier for participants to ensure their systems 
are configured to properly account for the ORF.
2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX PEARL believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is 
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \8\ in general, and furthers 
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \9\ in particular, in that 
it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other 
charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its 
facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers the 
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ in that it is designed to 
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments 
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national 
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public 
interest and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between 
customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the ORF is equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory because it is objectively allocated to Members in that 
it is charged to all Members on all their transactions that clear as 
customer at the OCC. Moreover, the Exchange believes the ORF ensures 
fairness by assessing fees to those Members that are directly based on 
the amount of customer options business they conduct. Regulating 
customer trading activity is much more labor intensive and requires 
greater expenditure of human and technical resources than regulating 
non-

[[Page 11274]]

customer trading activity, which tends to be more automated and less 
labor-intensive. As a result, the costs associated with administering 
the customer component of the Exchange's overall regulatory program are 
materially higher than the costs associated with administering the non-
customer component (e.g., Member proprietary transactions) of its 
regulatory program.
    The ORF is designed to recover a material portion of the costs of 
supervising and regulating Members' customer options business including 
performing routine surveillances, investigations, examinations, 
financial monitoring, and policy, rulemaking, interpretive, and 
enforcement activities. The Exchange will monitor, on at least a semi-
annual basis the amount of revenue collected from the ORF to ensure 
that it, in combination with its other regulatory fees and fines, does 
not exceed the Exchange's total regulatory costs. The Exchange has 
designed the ORF to generate revenues that, when combined with all of 
the Exchange's other regulatory fees, will be less than or equal to the 
Exchange's regulatory costs, which is consistent with the Commission's 
view that regulatory fees be used for regulatory purposes and not to 
support the Exchange's business side. In this regard, the Exchange 
believes that the initial level of the fee is reasonable.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to limit changes to the ORF 
to twice a year on specific dates with advance notice is reasonable 
because it will give participants certainty on the timing of changes, 
if any, and better enable them to properly account for ORF charges 
among their customers. The Exchange believes that the proposed change 
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply in 
the same manner to all Members that are subject to the ORF and provide 
them with additional advance notice of changes to that fee.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The ORF is not intended to have 
any impact on competition. Rather, it is designed to enable the 
Exchange to recover a material portion of the Exchange's cost related 
to its regulatory activities. The Exchange is obligated to ensure that 
the amount of regulatory revenue collected from the ORF, in combination 
with its other regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed regulatory 
costs. Unilateral action by MIAX PEARL in establishing fees for 
services provided to its Members and others using its facilities will 
not have an impact on competition. As a new entrant in the already 
highly competitive environment for equity options trading, MIAX PEARL 
does not have the market power necessary to set prices for services 
that are unreasonable or unfairly discriminatory in violation of the 
Act. MIAX PEARL's proposed ORF, as described herein, are comparable to 
fees charged by other options exchanges for the same or similar 
services. The proposal to limit the changes to the ORF to twice a year 
on specific dates with advance notice is not intended to address a 
competitive issue but rather to provide Members with better notice of 
any change that the Exchange may make to the ORF.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \12\ thereunder. 
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, 
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it 
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate 
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise 
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such 
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether 
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
File No. SR-PEARL-2017-09 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-PEARL-2017-09. 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 (http://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 the filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office 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 No. SR-PEARL-2017-09, and should be 
submitted on or before March 14, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03300 Filed 2-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
11272 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 21, 2017 / Notices

filing also will be available for filings/pearl, at MIAX’s principal office, ‘‘CMTAed’’ and then subsequently
inspection and copying at the principal and at the Commission’s Public ‘‘gives-up’’ or ‘‘CMTAs’’ the transaction
office of the Exchange. All comments Reference Room. to another non-member via a CMTA
received will be posted without change; reversal) is a Member. Further, the
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
the Commission does not edit personal Exchange will not assess the ORF on
Statement of the Purpose of, and
identifying information from linkage trades, whether executed at the
submissions. You should submit only Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Exchange or an away exchange. A
information that you wish to make Change
customer order routed to another
available publicly. All submissions In its filing with the Commission, the exchange results in two customer trades,
should refer to File Number SR–CHX– Exchange included statements one from the originating exchange and
2017–04 and should be submitted on or concerning the purpose of and basis for one from the recipient exchange.
before March 14, 2017. the proposed rule change and discussed Charging ORF on both trades could
For the Commission, by the Division of any comments it received on the result in double-billing of ORF for a
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated proposed rule change. The text of these single customer order, thus the
authority.143 statements may be examined at the Exchange chooses not to charge ORF on
Eduardo A. Aleman, places specified in Item IV below. The the trade from the originating exchange
Assistant Secretary. Exchange has prepared summaries, set in a linkage scenario. This assessment
[FR Doc. 2017–03296 Filed 2–17–17; 8:45 am]
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of practice will be identical to the
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
the most significant aspects of such assessment practice currently utilized
statements. by the Exchange’s affiliate, Miami
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s International Securities Exchange, LLC
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement of the Purpose of, and the (‘‘MIAX Options’’).
COMMISSION Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule As a practical matter, when a
Change transaction that is subject to the ORF is
[Release No. 34–80035; File No. SR–
PEARL–2017–09] not executed on the Exchange, the
1. Purpose Exchange lacks the information
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX The purpose of the proposed rule necessary to identify the executing
PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing and change is to establish an ORF in the member for that transaction. There are
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed amount of $0.0010 per contract side. countless executing market participants,
Rule Change To Amend the MIAX The per-contract ORF will be assessed and each day such participants can and
PEARL Fee Schedule To Establish an by MIAX PEARL to each MIAX PEARL often do drop their connection to one
Options Regulatory Fee (‘‘ORF’’) Member for all options transactions market center and establish themselves
executed, cleared, or ultimately cleared as participants on another. For these
February 14, 2017. reasons, it is not possible for the
by the Member which are cleared by
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the OCC in the ‘‘customer’’ range, regardless Exchange to identify, and thus assess
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the of the exchange on which the fees such as an ORF on, executing
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 transaction occurs. The ORF will be participants on away markets on a given
notice is hereby given that on February collected indirectly from Members trading day.
3, 2017, MIAX PEARL, LLC (‘‘MIAX through their clearing firms by OCC on Clearing members, however, are
PEARL’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the behalf of MIAX PEARL. distinguished from executing
Securities and Exchange Commission In the case where a non-Member participants because they remain
(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule executes a transaction and a Member identified to the Exchange regardless of
change as described in Items I, II, and clears the transaction, the ORF will be the identity of the initiating executing
III below, which Items have been assessed to the Member who clears the participant, their location, and the
prepared by the Exchange. The transaction. In the case where a Member market center on which they execute
Commission is publishing this notice to executes a transaction and another transactions. Therefore, the Exchange
solicit comments on the proposed rule Member clears the transaction, the ORF believes it is more efficient for the
change from interested persons. will be assessed to the Member who operation of the Exchange and for the
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s clears the transaction. Further, the ORF marketplace as a whole to collect the
Statement of the Terms of Substance of will be assessed on transactions that are ORF from clearing members.
the Proposed Rule Change not executed by a Member, but are As discussed below, the Exchange
The Exchange is filing a proposal rule ultimately cleared by a Member. The believes it is appropriate to charge the
change to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee Exchange notes that, in the limited ORF only to transactions that clear as
Schedule (the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’) by circumstance in which a Member customer at the OCC. The Exchange
establishing an Options Regulatory Fee executes or clears a transaction and then believes that its broad regulatory
(‘‘ORF’’). ‘‘gives-up’’ or ‘‘CMTAs’’ the trade to a responsibilities with respect to a
While changes to the Fee Schedule non-member of MIAX PEARL (which Member’s activities supports applying
pursuant to this proposal are effective non-member becomes the ultimate the ORF to transactions cleared but not
upon filing, the Exchange has clearing firm for the transaction), MIAX executed by a Member. The Exchange’s
designated these changes to be operative PEARL will collect the ORF from such regulatory responsibilities are the same
non-member involving [sic] that regardless of whether a Member
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

February 6, 2017.
The text of the proposed rule change transaction. However, for the avoidance executes a transaction or clears a
is available on the Exchange’s Web site of doubt, the Exchange will not assess transaction executed on its behalf. The
at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule- the ORF when the transaction is not Exchange regularly reviews all such
executed on the Exchange and neither activities, including performing
143 17CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). the executing clearing firm nor the surveillance for position limit
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). ultimate clearing firm (e.g., such as violations, manipulation, front-running,
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. when the Member is ‘‘given-up’’ or contrary exercise advice violations and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:15 Feb 17, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21FEN1.SGM 21FEN1
11274 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 21, 2017 / Notices

customer trading activity, which tends exceed regulatory costs. Unilateral • Send an email to rule-comments@
to be more automated and less labor- action by MIAX PEARL in establishing sec.gov. Please include File No. SR–
intensive. As a result, the costs fees for services provided to its PEARL–2017–09 on the subject line.
associated with administering the Members and others using its facilities
customer component of the Exchange’s will not have an impact on competition. Paper Comments
overall regulatory program are As a new entrant in the already highly • Send paper comments in triplicate
materially higher than the costs competitive environment for equity to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
associated with administering the non- options trading, MIAX PEARL does not
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
customer component (e.g., Member have the market power necessary to set
proprietary transactions) of its Washington, DC 20549–1090.
prices for services that are unreasonable
regulatory program. or unfairly discriminatory in violation All submissions should refer to File No.
The ORF is designed to recover a of the Act. MIAX PEARL’s proposed SR–PEARL–2017–09. This file number
material portion of the costs of ORF, as described herein, are should be included on the subject line
supervising and regulating Members’ comparable to fees charged by other if email is used. To help the
customer options business including options exchanges for the same or Commission process and review your
performing routine surveillances, similar services. The proposal to limit comments more efficiently, please use
investigations, examinations, financial the changes to the ORF to twice a year only one method. The Commission will
monitoring, and policy, rulemaking, on specific dates with advance notice is
interpretive, and enforcement activities. post all comments on the Commission’s
not intended to address a competitive Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
The Exchange will monitor, on at least issue but rather to provide Members
a semi-annual basis the amount of rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
with better notice of any change that the submission, all subsequent
revenue collected from the ORF to Exchange may make to the ORF.
ensure that it, in combination with its amendments, all written statements
other regulatory fees and fines, does not C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s with respect to the proposed rule
exceed the Exchange’s total regulatory Statement on Comments on the change that are filed with the
costs. The Exchange has designed the Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission, and all written
ORF to generate revenues that, when Members, Participants, or Others communications relating to the
combined with all of the Exchange’s proposed rule change between the
other regulatory fees, will be less than Written comments were neither Commission and any person, other than
or equal to the Exchange’s regulatory solicited nor received.
those that may be withheld from the
costs, which is consistent with the III. Date of Effectiveness of the public in accordance with the
Commission’s view that regulatory fees Proposed Rule Change and Timing for provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
be used for regulatory purposes and not Commission Action available for Web site viewing and
to support the Exchange’s business side. printing in the Commission’s Public
In this regard, the Exchange believes The foregoing rule change has become Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
that the initial level of the fee is effective pursuant to Section Washington, DC 20549, on official
reasonable. 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,11 and Rule business days between the hours of
The Exchange believes that the 19b–4(f)(2) 12 thereunder. At any time
proposal to limit changes to the ORF to 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
within 60 days of the filing of the
twice a year on specific dates with filing also will be available for
proposed rule change, the Commission
advance notice is reasonable because it summarily may temporarily suspend inspection and copying at the principal
will give participants certainty on the such rule change if it appears to the office of the Exchange. All comments
timing of changes, if any, and better Commission that such action is received will be posted without change;
enable them to properly account for necessary or appropriate in the public the Commission does not edit personal
ORF charges among their customers. interest, for the protection of investors, identifying information from
The Exchange believes that the or otherwise in furtherance of the submissions. You should submit only
proposed change is equitable and not purposes of the Act. If the Commission information that you wish to make
unfairly discriminatory because it will takes such action, the Commission shall available publicly. All submissions
apply in the same manner to all institute proceedings to determine should refer to File No. SR–PEARL–
Members that are subject to the ORF and whether the proposed rule should be 2017–09, and should be submitted on or
provide them with additional advance approved or disapproved. before March 14, 2017.
notice of changes to that fee.
IV. Solicitation of Comments For the Commission, by the Division of
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
Statement on Burden on Competition Interested persons are invited to authority.13
The Exchange does not believe that submit written data, views, and Eduardo A. Aleman,
the proposed rule change will impose arguments concerning the foregoing, Assistant Secretary.
any burden on competition not including whether the proposed rule [FR Doc. 2017–03300 Filed 2–17–17; 8:45 am]
necessary or appropriate in furtherance change is consistent with the Act.
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
of the purposes of the Act. The ORF is Comments may be submitted by any of
not intended to have any impact on the following methods:
competition. Rather, it is designed to
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

Electronic Comments
enable the Exchange to recover a
material portion of the Exchange’s cost • Use the Commission’s Internet
related to its regulatory activities. The comment form (http://www.sec.gov/
Exchange is obligated to ensure that the rules/sro.shtml); or
amount of regulatory revenue collected
from the ORF, in combination with its 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
other regulatory fees and fines, does not 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:15 Feb 17, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21FEN1.SGM 21FEN1
Document Created: 2018-02-01 15:04:16
Document Modified: 2018-02-01 15:04:16
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
FR Citation		82 FR 11272