Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 88433 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3The Exchange initially filed the proposed 

pricing changes on November 28, 2023 (SR–MRX– 

2023–23). On December 5, 2023, the Exchange 

withdrew that filing and submitted this filing. 

associated with the information 

collection requirements. 

The estimate of average burden hours 

is made solely for purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act and is not 

derived from a comprehensive or even 

a representative survey or study of the 

cost of Commission rules. The 

collection of information required by 

rule 2a–5 is necessary to obtain the 

benefits of the rule. Other information 

provided to the Commission in 

connection with staff examinations or 

investigations is kept confidential 

subject to the provisions of applicable 

law. If information collected pursuant to 

rule 2a–5 is reviewed by the 

Commission’s examination staff, it is 

accorded the same level of 

confidentiality accorded to other 

responses provided to the Commission 

in the context of its examination and 

oversight program. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid control number. 

The public may view background 

documentation for this information 

collection at the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice by January 22, 2024 to (i) 

MBX.OMB.OIRA.SEC_desk_officer@

omb.eop.gov and (ii) David Bottom, 

Director/Chief Information Officer, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, c/ 

o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an 

email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: December 18, 2023. 

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28115 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–418, OMB Control No. 

3235–0485] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

15c2–1 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 

100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 

20549–2736 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) a request for approval of 

extension of the previously approved 

collection of information provided for in 

Rule 15c2–1, (17 CFR 240.15c2–1), 

under the Securities Exchange Act of 

1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). 

Rule 15c2–1 prohibits broker-dealers 

from commingling under the same lien 

securities of their margin customers 

with securities of the broker-dealer and 

those of other customers without their 

written consent. The rule also prohibits 

the re-hypothecation of customers’ 

margin securities for a sum in excess of 

the customer’s aggregate indebtedness. 

Respondents must collect information 

necessary to prevent the rehypothecation of customer securities, 

issue and retain copies of notices of 

hypothecation of customer securities, 

and collect written consents from 

customers. 

There are approximately 59 

respondents. Each of these respondents 

makes an estimated 45 responses per 

year and each response takes 

approximately 0.5 hours to complete, 

resulting in an industry-wide annual 

burden of approximately 1,327 hours. 

The retention period for the 

recordkeeping requirement under Rule 

15c2–1 is not less than two years 

following the date the notice is 

submitted. The recordkeeping 

requirement under this rule is 

mandatory to assist the Commission in 

monitoring respondents who fail to 

collect the information required under 

the rule. This rule does not involve the 

collection of confidential information. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

under the PRA unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The public may view background 

documentation for this information 

collection at the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent by 

January 22, 2024 to 

(i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, 

Director/Chief Information Officer, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an 

email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: December 18, 2023. 

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28114 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–99189; File No. SR–MRX– 

2023–25] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq 

MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Options 7, 

Section 6 

December 15, 2023. 

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 December 

5, 2023, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (‘‘MRX’’ or 

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities 

and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or 

‘‘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. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend its 

Rules at Options 7, Section 6, Ports and 

Other Services.3

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/ 

rulebook/mrx/rules, at the principal 

office of the Exchange, 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
88434 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 

4 ‘‘Specialized Quote Feed’’ or ‘‘SQF’’ is an 

interface that allows Market Makers to connect, 

send, and receive messages related to quotes, 

Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and auction responses 

to the Exchange. Features include the following: (1) 

options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying 

and complex instruments); (2) system event 

messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and 

start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., 

halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) 

quote messages; (6) Immediate-or-Cancel Order 

messages; (7) risk protection triggers and purge 

notifications; (8) opening imbalance messages; (9) 

auction notifications; and (10) auction responses. 

The SQF Purge Interface only receives and notifies 

of purge requests from the Market Maker. Market 

Makers may only enter interest into SQF in their 

assigned options series. Immediate-or-Cancel 

Orders entered into SQF are not subject to the (i) 

Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread 

Protection, and Size Limitation Protection in 

Options 3, Section 15(a)(1)(A), (1)(B), and (2)(B) 

respectively, for single leg orders, or (ii) Complex 

Order Price Protection as defined in Options 3, 

Section 16(c)(1) for Complex Orders. See 

Supplementary Material .03(c) to Options 3, Section 

7. 

5SQF Purge is a specific port for the SQF 

interface that only receives and notifies of purge 

requests from the Market Maker. Dedicated SQF 

Purge Ports enable Market Makers to seamlessly 

manage their ability to remove their quotes in a 

swift manner. The SQF Purge Port is designed to 

assist Market Makers in the management of, and 

risk control over, their quotes. Market Makers may 

utilize a purge port to reduce uncertainty and to 

manage risk by purging all quotes in their assigned 

options series. Of note, Market Makers may only 

enter interest into SQF in their assigned options 

series. Additionally, the SQF Purge Port may be 

utilized by a Market Maker in the event that the 

Member has a system issue and determines to purge 

its quotes from the order book. 

6For example, a Market Maker may desire to 

utilize multiple SQF Ports for accounting purposes, 

to measure performance, for regulatory reasons or 

other determinations that are specific to that 

Member. 

7MRX Market Makers have various regulatory 

requirements as provided for in Options 2, Section 

4. Additionally, MRX Market Makers have certain 

quoting requirements with respect to their assigned 

options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5. 

SQF Ports are the only quoting protocol available 

on MRX and only Market Makers may utilize SQF 

Ports. The same is true for SQF Purge Ports. 

8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96120 

(October 21, 2022), 87 FR 65105 (October 27, 2022) 

(SR–MRX–2022–21) (Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change 

To Amend Options 7 in Connection With a 

Technology Migration). 

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

10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). 

11NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. 

Cir. 2010) (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release 

No. 59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782– 

83 (December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21)). 

12Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) 

(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’). 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Options 7, Section 6, Ports and Other 

Services. Specifically, the Exchange 

proposes to amend the monthly caps for 

SQF Ports 4 and SQF Purge Ports.5 The 

Exchange also proposes to remove 

unnecessary rule text from Options 7, 

Section 6 related to a technology 

migration. Both changes are explained 

below. 

Today, MRX assesses $1,250 per port, 

per month for an SQF Port as well as an 

SQF Purge Port. Today, MRX waives 

one SQF Port fee per Market Maker per 

month. Also, today, SQF Ports and SQF 

Purge Ports are subject to a monthly cap 

of $17,500, which cap is applicable to 

Market Makers. 

At this time, the Exchange proposes to 

increase the SQF Port and SQF Purge 

Port monthly cap fee of $17,500 per 

month to $27,500 per month. The 

Exchange is not amending the $1,250 

per port, per month SQF Port and SQF 

Purge Port fees and the Exchange would 

continue to waive one SQF Port fee per 

Market Maker per month. As is the case 

today, the Exchange would not assess a 

Member an SQF Port or SQF Purge Port 

fee beyond the monthly cap once the 

Member has exceeded the monthly cap 

for the respective month. Despite 

increasing the monthly cap for SQF 

Ports and SQF Purge Ports from $17,500 

per month to $27,500 per month, the 

Exchange will continue to offer 

Members the opportunity to cap their 

SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees so 

that they would not be assessed these 

fees beyond the cap. Further, an MRX 

Market Maker requires only one SQF 

Port to submit quotes in its assigned 

options series into MRX. An MRX 

Market Maker may submit all quotes 

through one SQF Port and utilize one 

SQF Purge Port to view its purge 

requests. While a Market Maker may 

elect to obtain multiple SQF Ports and 

SQF Purge Ports to organize its 

business,6 only one SQF Port and SQF 

Purge Port is necessary for a Market 

Maker to fulfill its regulatory quoting 

obligations.7

The Exchange proposes to remove the 

italicized language in Options 7, Section 

6 related to a technology migration that 

took place in 2022. In 2022, MRX filed 

a pricing change 8 to permit Members to 

request certain duplicative ports at no 

additional cost, from November 1, 2022 

through December 30, 2022, to facilitate 

a technology migration. The rule text 

related to the 2022 technology migration 

is no longer necessary because the 

migration is complete and the pricing is 

no longer applicable. At this time, the 

Exchange proposes to remove this rule 

text. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) 

of the Act,9 in general, and furthers the 

objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) 

of the Act,10 in particular, in that it 

provides for the equitable allocation of 

reasonable dues, fees, and other charges 

among members and issuers and other 

persons using any facility, and is not 

designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The proposed pricing change to 

increase the monthly cap applicable to 

SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports is 

reasonable in several respects. As a 

threshold matter, the Exchange is 

subject to significant competitive forces 

in the market for options securities 

transaction services that constrain its 

pricing determinations in that market. 

The fact that this market is competitive 

has long been recognized by the courts. 

In NetCoalition v. Securities and 

Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit 

stated as follows: ‘‘[n]o one disputes 

that competition for order flow is 

‘fierce.’ . . . As the SEC explained, ‘[i]n 

the U.S. national market system, buyers 

and sellers of securities, and the brokerdealers that act as their order-routing 

agents, have a wide range of choices of 

where to route orders for execution’; 

[and] ‘no exchange can afford to take its 

market share percentages for granted’ 

because ‘no exchange possesses a 

monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in 

the execution of order flow from broker 

dealers’. . . .’’ 11

The Commission and the courts have 

repeatedly expressed their preference 

for competition over regulatory 

intervention in determining prices, 

products, and services in the securities 

markets. In Regulation NMS, while 

adopting a series of steps to improve the 

current market model, the Commission 

highlighted the importance of market 

forces in determining prices and SRO 

revenues and, also, recognized that 

current regulation of the market system 

‘‘has been remarkably successful in 

promoting market competition in its 

broader forms that are most important to 

investors and listed companies.’’ 12

Numerous indicia demonstrate the 

competitive nature of this market. 

Within this environment, market 

participants can freely and often do shift 

their order flow among the Exchange 

and competing venues in response to 

changes in their respective pricing 

schedules. 

The proposed pricing change to 

increase the SQF Port and SQF Purge 

Port monthly cap from $17,500 per 

month to $27,500 per month is 

reasonable because despite the increase 

in the monthly cap, the Exchange will 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 88435 

13For example, a Market Maker or may desire to 

utilize multiple SQF Ports for accounting purposes, 

to measure performance, for regulatory reasons or 

other determinations that are specific to that 

Member. 

14MRX Market Makers have various regulatory 

requirements as provided for in Options 2, Section 

4. Additionally, MRX Market Makers have certain 

quoting requirements with respect to their assigned 

options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5. 

SQF Ports are the only quoting protocol available 

on MRX and only Market Makers may utilize SQF 

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

continue to offer Members the 

opportunity to cap their SQF Port and 

SQF Purge Port fees so that they would 

not be assessed these fees beyond the 

cap. Additionally, an MRX Market 

Maker requires only one SQF Port to 

submit quotes in its assigned options 

series into MRX. An MRX Market Maker 

may submit all quotes through one SQF 

Port and utilize one SQF Purge Port to 

view its purge requests. While a Market 

Maker may elect to obtain multiple SQF 

Ports and SQF Purge Ports to organize 

its business,13 only one SQF Port and 

SQF Purge Port is necessary for a Market 

Maker to fulfill its regulatory quoting 

obligations.14

The Exchange’s proposed pricing 

change to increase the SQF Port and 

SQF Purge Port monthly cap from 

$17,500 per month to $27,500 per 

month is equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because the Exchange 

would uniformly not assess any Market 

Makers that exceeded the proposed 

monthly cap any SQF Port and SQF 

Purge Port fees for that month beyond 

the cap. Market Makers are the only 

market participants that are assessed 

SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees 

because they are the only market 

participants that are permitted to quote 

on the Exchange. 

The Exchange’s proposal to remove 

the italicized language in Options 7, 

Section 6 related to a technology 

migration that took place in 2022 is 

reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because the rule text 

related to the technology migration is no 

longer necessary because the migration 

is complete and the fees are no longer 

applicable. No Member is subject to the 

pricing described for the 2022 

technology migration. 

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. 

Intermarket Competition 

The proposal does not impose an 

undue burden on intermarket 

competition. The Exchange believes its 

proposal remains competitive with 

other options markets who also offer 

order entry protocols. The Exchange 

notes that it operates in a highly 

competitive market in which market 

participants can readily favor competing 

venues if they deem fee levels at a 

particular venue to be excessive. In such 

an environment, the Exchange must 

continually adjust its fees to remain 

competitive with other exchanges. 

Because competitors are free to modify 

their own fees in response, and because 

market participants may readily adjust 

their order routing practices, the 

Exchange believes that the degree to 

which fee changes in this market may 

impose any burden on competition is 

extremely limited. 

Intramarket Competition 

The Exchange’s proposed pricing 

change to increase the SQF Port and 

SQF Purge Port monthly cap from 

$17,500 per month to $27,500 per 

month does not impose an undue 

burden on competition because the 

Exchange would uniformly not assess 

any Market Makers that exceeded the 

proposed monthly cap any SQF Port 

and SQF Purge Port fees for that month 

beyond the cap. Market Makers are the 

only market participants that are 

assessed SQF Port and SQF Purge Port 

fees because they are the only market 

participants that are permitted to quote 

on the Exchange. The Exchange’s 

proposal to remove the italicized 

language in Options 7, Section 6 related 

to a technology migration that took 

place in 2022 does not impose an undue 

burden on competition because the rule 

text related to the technology migration 

is no longer necessary because the 

migration is complete and the fees are 

no longer applicable. No Member is 

subject to the pricing described for the 

2022 technology migration. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or 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.15 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: (i) 

necessary or appropriate in the public 

interest; (ii) for the protection of 

investors; or (iii) 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. 

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– 

MRX–2023–25 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 

number SR–MRX–2023–25. 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 website (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 website 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 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
88436 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 244 / Thursday, December 21, 2023 / Notices 

16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1Based on a review of fund filings for the threeyear period from January 1, 2020 to December 2022, 

Commission staff calculates there are 2,186 funds 

(registered open- and closed-end funds, and 

business development companies) that must 

comply with the collections of information under 

rule 17g–1, and which collectively submit an 

estimated 2,543 filings on Form 17G annually. 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–MRX–2023–25 and should be 

submitted on or before January 11, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.16

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28040 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–208, OMB Control No. 

3235–0213] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

17g–1 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 

100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 

20549–2736 

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 350l–3520), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget a 

request for extension of the previously 

approved collection of information 

discussed below. 

Rule 17g–1 (17 CFR 270.17g–1) under 

the Investment Company Act of 1940 

(the ‘‘Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 80a–17(g)) 

governs the fidelity bonding of officers 

and employees of registered 

management investment companies 

(‘‘funds’’) and their advisers. Rule 17g– 

1 requires, in part, the following: 

Independent Directors’ Approval 

The form and amount of the fidelity 

bond must be approved by a majority of 

the fund’s independent directors at least 

once annually, and the amount of any 

premium paid by the fund for any ‘‘joint 

insured bond,’’ covering multiple funds 

or certain affiliates, must be approved 

by a majority of the fund’s independent 

directors. 

Terms and Provisions of the Bond 

The amount of the bond may not be 

less than the minimum amounts of 

coverage set forth in a schedule based 

on the fund’s gross assets. The bond 

must provide that it shall not be 

cancelled, terminated, or modified 

except upon 60-days written notice to 

the affected party and to the 

Commission. In the case of a joint 

insured bond, 60-days written notice 

must also be given to each fund covered 

by the bond. A joint insured bond must 

provide that the fidelity insurance 

company will provide all funds covered 

by the bond with a copy of the 

agreement, a copy of any claim on the 

bond, and notification of the terms of 

the settlement of any claim prior to 

execution of that settlement. Finally, a 

fund that is insured by a joint bond 

must enter into an agreement with all 

other parties insured by the joint bond 

regarding recovery under the bond. 

Filings With the Commission 

Upon the execution of a fidelity bond 

or any amendment thereto, a fund must 

file with the Commission within 10 

days: (i) a copy of the executed bond or 

any amendment to the bond, (ii) the 

independent directors’ resolution 

approving the bond, and (iii) a 

statement as to the period for which 

premiums have been paid on the bond. 

In the case of a joint insured bond, a 

fund must also file: (i) a statement 

showing the amount the fund would 

have been required to maintain under 

the rule if it were insured under a single 

insured bond; and (ii) the agreement 

between the fund and all other insured 

parties regarding recovery under the 

bond. A fund must also notify the 

Commission in writing within five days 

of any claim or settlement on a claim 

under the fidelity bond. 

Notices to Directors 

A fund must notify by registered mail 

each member of its board of directors of: 

(i) any cancellation, termination, or 

modification of the fidelity bond at least 

45 days prior to the effective date; and 

(ii) the filing or settlement of any claim 

under the fidelity bond when 

notification is filed with the 

Commission. 

Rule 17g–1’s independent directors’ 

annual review requirements, fidelity 

bond content requirements, joint bond 

agreement requirement, and the 

required notices to directors are 

designed to ensure the safety of fund 

assets against losses due to the conduct 

of persons who may obtain access to 

those assets. These requirements also 

seek to facilitate oversight of a fund’s 

fidelity bond. The rule’s required filings 

with the Commission are designed to 

assist the Commission in monitoring 

funds’ compliance with the fidelity 

bond requirements. 

Based on conversations with 

representatives in the fund industry, the 

Commission staff calculates that for 

each of the estimated 2,543 active funds 

(respondents),1 the average annual 

paperwork burden associated with rule 

17g–1’s requirements is two hours, one 

hour each for a compliance attorney and 

the board of directors as a whole. The 

time spent by a compliance attorney 

includes time spent filing reports with 

the Commission for fidelity losses (if 

any) as well as paperwork associated 

with any notices to directors, and 

managing any updates to the bond and 

the joint agreement (if one exists). The 

time spent by the board of directors as 

a whole includes any time spent 

initially establishing the bond, as well 

as time spent on annual updates and 

approvals. The Commission staff 

therefore estimates the total ongoing 

paperwork burden hours per year for all 

funds required by rule 17g–1 to be 5,086 

hours (2,543 funds × 2 hours = 5,086 

hours). Commission staff continues to 

estimate that the filing and reporting 

requirements of rule 17g–1 do not entail 

any external cost burdens. 

These estimates of average burden 

hours are made solely for the purposes 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act. These 

estimates are not derived from a 

comprehensive or even a representative 

survey or study of Commission rules. 

The collection of information required 

by Rule 17g–1 is mandatory and will not 

be kept confidential. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid control number. 

The public may view background 

documentation for this information 

collection at the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice by January 22, 2024 to (i) 

MBX.OMB.OIRA.SEC_desk_officer@

omb.eop.gov and (ii) David Bottom, 

Director/Chief Information Officer, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, c/ 

o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an 

email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: December 18, 2023. 

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28119 Filed 12–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES