47300 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

Incident Period: 08/19/2009. 

Effective Date: 09/04/2009. 

Physical Loan Application Deadline 

Date: 11/03/2009. 

Economic injury (EIDL) Loan 

Application Deadline Date: 06/04/2010. 

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: A. 

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: Porter. 

Contiguous Counties: 

Indiana: Jasper; La Porte; Lake; Starke. 

The Interest Rates are: 

Percent 

Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere ......................... 5.500 

Homeowners Without Credit 

Available Elsewhere .................. 2.750 

Businesses With Credit Available 

Elsewhere ................................. 6.000 

Businesses & Small Agricultural 

Cooperatives Without Credit 

Available Elsewhere .................. 4.000 

Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available 

Elsewhere ................................. 4.500 

Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere ......................... 4.000 

The number assigned to this disaster 

for physical damage is 11870 C and for 

economic injury is 11871 0. 

The State which received an EIDL 

Declaration # is Indiana. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Numbers 59002 and 59008) 

Dated: September 4, 2009. 

Karen G. Mills, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–22207 Filed 9–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 

the provisions of the Government in the 

Sunshine Act, Public Law 94–409, that 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission will hold an Open Meeting 

on Thursday, September 17, 2009, at 

2:30 p.m., in the Multipurpose Room, 

Room L–006. 

The subject matter of the Open 

Meeting will be: 

1. Nationally Recognized Statistical 

Rating Organizations (‘‘NRSROs’’) 

A. Final Rule Amendments and 

Proposed Rule Amendments under the 

Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 

2006 

The Commission will consider 

whether to adopt rules and propose 

other rules that impose additional 

disclosure and conflict of interest 

requirements on NRSROs in order to 

address concerns about the integrity of 

the credit rating procedures and 

methodologies. 

B. References to Nationally Recognized 

Statistical Rating Organization Ratings 

in Commission Rules and Forms 

The Commission will consider 

whether to eliminate references to credit 

ratings by NRSROs from certain rules 

and forms, and whether to re-open the 

comment period to solicit further 

comment on elimination of additional 

NRSRO references. 

C. Credit Ratings and Rating Shopping 

Disclosure 

The Commission will consider 

whether to propose amendments to 

Regulation S–K, and rules and forms 

under the Securities Act of 1933 

(‘‘Securities Act’’), the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 

and the Investment Company Act of 

1940 (‘‘Investment Company Act’’) to 

require disclosure regarding credit 

ratings that a registrant uses in 

connection with a registered offering. 

D. Rule 436(g) 

The Commission will consider 

whether to issue a concept release and 

solicit comment on whether the 

Commission should propose to rescind 

Rule 436(g) under the Securities Act, in 

light of the disclosure regarding credit 

ratings being proposed in a companion 

release (see C above). 

2. Flash Orders: Proposed Amendment 

to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS 

The Commission will consider a 

recommendation to propose an 

amendment to Rule 602 of Regulation 

NMS under the Exchange Act that 

would eliminate an exception for the 

use of flash orders, as well as other 

related issues. If adopted, the proposals 

would prohibit the practice of 

displaying marketable flash orders. 

At times, changes in Commission 

priorities require alterations in the 

scheduling of meeting items. 

For further information and to 

ascertain what, if any, matters have been 

added, deleted or postponed, please 

contact: The Office of the Secretary at 

(202) 551–5400. 

Dated: September 10, 2009. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–22194 Filed 9–11–09; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–60633; File No. SR–BX– 

2009–052] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing 

and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change Regarding 

Audit Trail Information 

September 8, 2009. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on August 

25, 2009, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’) 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 the Exchange. The 

Exchange filed the proposed rule change 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the 

Act,3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder,4

which renders the proposal effective 

upon filing with the Commission. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Chapter V, Section 15 (Audit Trail) of 

the Rules of the Boston Options 

Exchange Group, LLC (‘‘BOX’’) to clarify 

the information that the BOX Rules 

currently require to be submitted to the 

BOX order entry system. The text of the 

proposed rule change is available from 

the principal office of the Exchange, at 

the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room and also on the Exchange’s 

Internet Web site at http:// 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices 47301 

5See BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 15(b)(ix). 

6See BOXR Regulatory Circular 2007–02. 

7See BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 15(b)(vii) and 

(viii). 

8See BOX Rules Chapter VIII (Records, Reports 

and Audits). 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

13As required under Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the 

Exchange provided the Commission with written 

notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change 

at least five business days before doing so. 

nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/ 

NASDAQOMXBX/Filings/. 

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 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The purpose of this proposal is to 

make changes to BOX Rules Chapter V, 

Section 15(b) to clarify the information 

required for orders submitted to the 

BOX Trading Host. The proposed 

changes will result in the modification 

of one (1) information item and the 

clarification regarding certain 

information items in the Supplementary 

Material. 

The item to be modified is account 

identification.5 The proposed change 

will allow Participants to align the 

terms utilized in their system protocols 

to the requirements and language of 

BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 15(b). 

There has been some uncertainty 

regarding the information required 

under the categories ‘‘customer 

identification’’ and ‘‘account 

identification’’. Therefore, the proposed 

change from ‘‘account identification’’ to 

‘‘account type’’ will clarify the details, 

without altering the scope, which the 

Exchange is requiring by using the same 

term provided in technical system 

guides. As a result of enhancements to 

BOX systems, the ‘‘type’’ of account, or 

sometimes referred to as ‘‘customer 

type’’ (i.e. Public Customer, Market 

Maker, etc.), is represented by one of 

several particular order origin codes, 

where the order origin code represents 

a separate and distinct account type.6

These order origin codes must be 

submitted to the BOX order entry 

system for each order and are used by 

the Trading Host. 

The Exchange proposes to add 

Supplementary Material to Section 15 to 

specify that the identity of the 

individual/terminal completing the 

order ticket and customer 

identification 7 (the specific customer or 

account number) are not required to be 

submitted into the order entry system. 

These are not details that the Exchange 

currently routinely utilizes for any 

trading or surveillance purpose and thus 

are not submitted in the order entry 

system. BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 

1(b)(iv) continues to require that 

Participants must maintain procedures 

and controls to monitor and supervise 

the entry of orders. Further, this type of 

specific information should be 

maintained as part of the Participant’s 

books and records requirements, and if 

requested, must be provided to the 

Exchange.8

This proposed change will not result 

in a decrease in the useful information 

BOX currently gathers about an order. 

BOX will continue to gather all details 

essential to an order submitted to BOX 

and to allow BOX to properly prioritize 

and match orders and report resulting 

transactions to the Options Clearing 

Corporation (‘‘OCC’’). In fact, system 

enhancements have improved the 

Exchange’s ability to surveil BOX 

trading and Participant compliance with 

BOX Rules. 

Participants will still be required to 

submit orders in a manner prescribed by 

the Exchange. 

2. Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposal is consistent with the 

requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,9

in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the 

Act,10 in particular, in that it is designed 

to prevent fraudulent and manipulative 

acts and practices, to promote just and 

equitable principles of trade, to foster 

cooperation and coordination with 

persons engaged in facilitating 

transactions in securities, 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. Specifically, the items 

and language that this proposal seeks to 

modify will not affect BOX’s ability to 

prioritize and match orders nor the 

reporting of executions to the OCC. 

Additionally, the renaming of terms will 

align them with the updated BOX 

system protocol. 

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. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange has neither solicited 

nor received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

This proposed rule change is filed 

pursuant to paragraph (A) of section 

19(b)(3) of the Exchange Act 11 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.12 This proposed 

rule change does not significantly affect 

the protection of investors or the public 

interest, does not impose any significant 

burden on competition, and, by its 

terms, does not become operative for 30 

days after the date of the filing, or such 

shorter time as the Commission may 

designate if consistent with the 

protection of investors and the public 

interest. 13 At any time within 60 days 

of the filing of the proposed rule change, 

the Commission may summarily 

abrogate 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. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposal 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 e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–BX–2009–052 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
47302 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 15, 2009 / Notices 

14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59788 

(April 17, 2009), 74 FR 18777 (‘‘Notice’’). 

4NASD Rule 2320 paragraph (a) governs best 

execution and paragraph (b) governs 

interpositioning. 

5See NASD Rule 2320(a). 

6 Id. 

7See NASD Rule 2320(b). 

8 Id. 

9See NASD Rule 2320(a). 

10 In approving this proposed rule change, the 

Commission has considered the proposed rule’s 

impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 

formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

11 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 

12See, e.g., In re Thomson & McKinnon, 

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 8310 (May 8, 

1968). In that proceeding, an NASD member firm 

interposed broker-dealers between itself and the 

best available market, and the added transaction 

cost was borne by its customers. The Commission 

found that, ‘‘[i]n view of the obligation of a broker 

to obtain the most favorable price for his customer, 

where he interposes another broker-dealer between 

himself and a third broker-dealer, he prima facie 

has not met that obligation and he has the burden 

of showing that the customer’s total cost or 

proceeds of the transaction is the most favorable 

obtainable under the circumstances.’’ 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–BX–2009–052. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and copying in 

the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, 

DC 20549, on official business days 

between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. 

Copies of such 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 

Number SR–BX–2009–052 and should 

be submitted on or before October 6, 

2009. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.14

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–22107 Filed 9–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–60635; File No. SR–FINRA– 

2007–024] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory, Inc.; 

Order Approving Proposed Rule 

Change as Modified by Amendment 

No. 1 Thereto Amending Rule 2320 

Regarding Best Execution and 

Interpositioning 

September 8, 2009. 

On November 27, 2007, 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 a 

proposed rule change to amend NASD 

Rule 2320, Best Execution and 

Interpositioning. On April 13, 2009, 

FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the 

proposed rule change. The proposed 

rule change was published for comment 

in the Federal Register on April 24, 

2009.3 The Commission received no 

comments regarding the proposal. This 

order approves the proposed rule 

change, as modified by Amendment No. 

1. 

In its filing, FINRA proposed to 

amend NASD Rule 2320, which governs 

members’ obligations regarding best 

execution and interpositioning.4 Rule 

2320(a) provides that, in any transaction 

for or with a customer or a customer of 

another broker-dealer, a member must 

use ‘‘reasonable diligence to ascertain 

the best market for the subject security,’’ 

so that the resulting price to the 

customer is ‘‘as favorable as possible 

under prevailing market conditions.’’ 5

A number of factors will be considered 

in determining whether the member 

exercised reasonable diligence, 

including the character of the market for 

the security, the size and type of the 

transaction, and the terms and 

conditions of the order that resulted in 

the transaction.6

Currently, Rule 2320(b) prohibits a 

member from interposing a third party 

between the member and the best 

available market for a security, unless 

the member ‘‘can demonstrate that to 

his knowledge at the time of the 

transaction the total cost or proceeds of 

the transaction * * * was better than 

the prevailing inter-dealer market for 

the security.’’ 7 In addition, a member’s 

obligations to its customer ‘‘are 

generally not fulfilled’’ under the 

current Rule when interposing a third 

party, unless the member can show that 

the interpositioning ‘‘reduced the costs 

of the transactions to the customer.’’ 8

With this rule change, FINRA 

proposed to apply the standards 

governing best execution, which are set 

forth in Rule 2320(a), to 

interpositioning. As such, a member 

interposing a third party will have to 

use ‘‘reasonable diligence to ascertain 

the best market for the subject security,’’ 

so that the resulting price to the 

customer is ‘‘as favorable as possible 

under prevailing market conditions.’’ 9

FINRA also proposed to make 

conforming amendments to other NASD 

and FINRA rules to reflect the redesignation of Rule 2320. 

The Commission has carefully 

reviewed the proposed rule change and 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Act and the rules and regulations 

thereunder applicable to a registered 

securities association 10 and, in 

particular, Section 15A(b)(6) of the 

Act,11 which requires that FINRA rules 

be designed to 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. 

In stating that interpositioning 

generally does not fulfill a member’s 

obligation to its customer unless that 

interpositioning ‘‘reduced the costs of 

the transactions to the customer,’’ the 

current rule contains a presumption 

against interpositioning.12 FINRA stated 

in its filing that the presumption is 

overbroad and may not accurately 

reflect the realities of the current 

market. The Commission understands 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES