Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Notices 86979 

167 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1This estimate is based on the following 

calculation: (1.5 hours × 3 responses annually = 4.5 

hours). 

2This estimate is based on a review of Form N– 

17f–1 filings made with the Commission over the 

last three years. 

3This estimate is based on the following 

calculations: (4.5 hours × 21 funds = 94.5 total 

hours). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–PEARL–2023–64 and should be 

submitted on or before January 5, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.167

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27531 Filed 12–14–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–316, OMB Control No. 

3235–0359] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Form 

N–17f–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. 3501 et seq.), 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. 

Form N–17f–1 (17 CFR 274.219) is 

entitled ‘‘Certificate of Accounting of 

Securities and Similar Investments of a 

Management Investment Company in 

the Custody of Members of National 

Securities Exchanges.’’ The form serves 

as a cover sheet to the accountant’s 

certificate that is required to be filed 

periodically with the Commission 

pursuant to rule 17f–1 (17 CFR 270.17f– 

1) under the Act, entitled ‘‘Custody of 

Securities with Members of National 

Securities Exchanges,’’ which sets forth 

the conditions under which a fund may 

place its assets in the custody of a 

member of a national securities 

exchange. Rule 17f–1 requires, among 

other things, that an independent public 

accountant verify the fund’s assets at the 

end of every annual and semi-annual 

fiscal period, and at least one other time 

during the fiscal year as chosen by the 

independent accountant. Requiring an 

independent accountant to examine the 

fund’s assets in the custody of a member 

of a national securities exchange assists 

Commission staff in its inspection 

program and helps to ensure that the 

fund assets are subject to proper 

auditing procedures. The accountant’s 

certificate stating that it has made an 

examination, and describing the nature 

and the extent of the examination, must 

be attached to Form N–17f–1 and filed 

with the Commission promptly after 

each examination. The form facilitates 

the filing of the accountant’s certificates, 

and increases the accessibility of the 

certificates to both Commission staff 

and interested investors. 

Commission staff estimates that it 

takes: (i) 1 hour of clerical time to 

prepare and file Form N–17f–1; and (ii) 

0.5 hour for the fund’s chief compliance 

officer to review Form N–17f–1 prior to 

filing with the Commission, for a total 

of 1.5 hours. Each fund is required to 

make 3 filings annually, for a total 

annual burden per fund of 

approximately 4.5 hours.1 Commission 

staff estimates that an average of 21 

funds currently file Form N–17f–1 with 

the Commission 3 times each year, for 

a total of 64 responses annually.2 The 

total annual hour burden for Form N– 

17f-1 is therefore estimated to be 

approximately 95 hours.3

The estimate of average burden hours 

is made solely for the purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not 

derived from a comprehensive or even 

a representative survey or study of the 

costs of Commission rules. Compliance 

with the collections of information 

required by Form N–17f–1 is mandatory 

for funds that place their assets in the 

custody of a national securities 

exchange member. Responses 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 16, 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 12, 2023. 

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27571 Filed 12–14–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–99131; File No. SR–ISE– 

2023–33] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq 

ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Its GPS 

Antenna Fees at General 8, Section 1 

December 11, 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 November 

29, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86980 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Notices 

3The Exchange initially filed the proposed 

pricing changes on September 29, 2023 with an 

effective date of October 1, 2023 (SR–ISE–2023–21). 

On November 15, 2023, the Exchange withdrew 

SR–ISE–2023–21 and replaced with SR–ISE–2023– 

29. The instant filing replaces SR–ISE–2023–29, 

which was withdrawn on November 29, 2023. 

4The Exchange offers customers the opportunity 

to co-locate their servers and equipment within the 

Exchange’s primary data center, located in Carteret, 

New Jersey. 

5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81903 

(October 19, 2017), 82 FR 49450 (October 25, 2017) 

(SR–ISE–2017–91). 

6NYSE provides a similar service for a $3,000 

initial charge plus a $400 monthly charge. See 

https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/Wireless_

Connectivity_Fees_and_Charges.pdf. 

7For example, Pico, Guava Tech, and SFTI 

provide time synchronization services. 

8As needed, firms and vendors use latency 

between the data centers to adjust their time 

synchronization. 

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 the 

Exchange’s GPS antenna fees at General 

8, Section 1, as described further below. 

The text of the proposed rule change is 

available on the Exchange’s Website at 

https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/ 

rulebook/ise/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. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 3

The Exchange offers a GPS antenna, 

which allows co-location customers 4 to 

synchronize their time recording 

systems to the U.S. Government’s Global 

Positioning System (‘‘GPS’’) network 

time (the ‘‘Service’’). The Exchange 

proposes to modify its monthly fees for 

the Service at General 8, Section 1(d). 

GPS network time is the atomic time 

scale implemented by the atomic clocks 

in the GPS ground control stations and 

GPS satellites. Each GPS satellite 

contains multiple atomic clocks that 

contribute precise time data to the GPS 

signals. GPS receivers decode these 

signals, synchronizing the receivers to 

the atomic clocks. A GPS antenna serves 

as a time signal receiver and feeds a 

primary clock device the GPS network 

time using precise time data. Firms can 

use the precise time data provided by 

the GPS antenna to time-stamp 

transactional information. 

Time synchronization services are 

well established in the U.S. and utilized 

in many areas of the U.S. economy and 

infrastructure. The Service is not novel 

to the securities markets, or to the 

Exchange. 

The Exchange offers connectivity to a 

GPS antenna via two options, over 

shared infrastructure or a dedicated 

antenna. If a firm wishes to connect via 

a dedicated connection, it must supply 

the antenna hardware. 

The Exchange currently charges a 

monthly fee of $200 for the Service, 

which applies to both the shared 

infrastructure option and the dedicated 

antenna option. The Exchange proposes 

to increase the monthly fee to $600 for 

the Service, which would apply to both 

the shared infrastructure option and the 

dedicated antenna option. As such, the 

Exchange proposes to amend its fee 

schedule at General 8, Section 1(d) to 

reflect the increased monthly fee for the 

GPS antenna. The Exchange has not 

raised such price since the monthly fee 

of $200 was adopted.5 In addition, the 

Exchange charges a higher monthly fee 

of $350 for cross-connections to 

approved telecommunication carriers in 

the data center and for inter-cabinet 

connections to other co-location 

customers in the data center, despite the 

fact that the Service not only provides 

connectivity (like the crossconnections), but also provides data 

(i.e., the network time) to co-location 

customers. 

In addition, the Exchange’s fee 

schedule at General 8, Section 1(d) 

currently states that the installation fee 

for the GPS antenna is installation 

specific. The Exchange proposes to add 

specific installation amounts for the 

Service within the fee schedule, 

providing greater transparency to 

market participants. Specifically, the 

Exchange proposes to charge an 

installation fee of $900 for connectivity 

to a GPS antenna over shared 

infrastructure and $1,500 for 

connectivity to a GPS antenna over a 

dedicated antenna.6 The difference in 

installation costs reflects the differing 

levels of complexity. For the dedicated 

antenna option, installation involves 

installing an antenna on the roof 

whereas the shared option involves 

extending a cable from a device located 

inside the data center. 

The Service is an optional product 

available to any firm that chooses to 

subscribe. Firms may cancel their 

subscription at any time. The Service 

simply provides time synchronization 

that may be utilized by firms to adjust 

their own time systems and time-stamp 

transactional information. The GPS 

antenna is offered on a completely 

voluntary basis. No customer is required 

to purchase the GPS antenna. Potential 

subscribers may subscribe to the Service 

only if they voluntarily choose to do so. 

It is a business decision of each firm 

whether to subscribe to the Service or 

not. Furthermore, firms have an array of 

options for time synchronization. Firms 

may purchase the Service (or enhanced 

time synchronization services) from 

other vendors.7 Customers do not 

receive an advantage by purchasing the 

Service from the Exchange rather than 

another provider. The Exchange is 

merely providing access to GPS signals, 

which can also be accessed via other 

providers. 

In addition to cost, a firm’s decision 

regarding which, if any, time 

synchronization option to purchase may 

depend, among other factors, on 

whether it wants to build or buy a time 

feed as well as the design of a firm’s 

systems. A firm may prefer to build out 

its own time feed using GPS network 

time (as provided by the Exchange or a 

third-party vendor) or purchase a time 

synchronization service that handles the 

time feed for them. Examples of 

enhanced time synchronization include 

Precision Time Protocol (‘‘PTP’’), Pulse 

Per Second Time Synchronization 

Protocol (‘‘PPS’’), and Network Time 

Protocol (‘‘NTP’’), each of which are 

feeds that a client can consume rather 

than creating a feed itself. Such a choice 

may depend on a firm’s desire for 

control of the feed, time sensitivity, and 

trade strategy, including whether a firm 

uses such time information to trigger 

trading decisions, as well as other 

considerations such as cost and 

convenience. In addition, with respect 

to the design of a firm’s systems, a firm 

may choose to have its time 

synchronization equipment centralized 

or in multiple locations. Third-party 

vendors may be situated in Carteret or 

other New York metro financial data 

centers. Clients and vendors alike can 

produce a time feed in Carteret or any 

of the other locations.8


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Notices 86981 

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

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

11See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 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)). 

12See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

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

(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’). 13See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 534–35; see also 

H.R. Rep. No. 94–229 at 92 (1975) (‘‘[I]t is the intent 

of the conferees that the national market system 

evolve through the interplay of competitive forces 

as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are 

removed.’’). 14See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 

(December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770 (December 9, 

2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21). 15 Id. 

16See U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 

‘‘Staff Guidance on SRO Rule filings Relating to 

Fees’’ (May 21, 2019), available at https:// 

www.sec.gov/tm/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees. 

17Of the Exchange’s co-location customers that 

subscribe to the Service, approximately 9% of such 

co-location customers purchase both the dedicated 

and the shared options of the Service. 

18 In offering the Service as a convenience to 

firms, the Exchange incurs certain costs, including 

costs related to the data center facility, hardware 

and equipment, and personnel. 

Approximately 59% of the Exchange’s 

co-location customers subscribe to the 

Service, most of which opt for the 

shared option. The fact that 

approximately 41% of the Exchange’s 

co-location customers do not subscribe 

to the Service demonstrate that there are 

alternative options available. 

If the Exchange is incorrect in its 

determination that the proposed fees 

reflect the value of the GPS antenna, 

customers will not purchase the product 

or will seek other options at their 

disposal, such as purchasing time 

synchronization services from thirdparty vendors. 

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 change to the pricing 

schedule is reasonable in several 

respects. As a threshold matter, the 

Exchange is subject to significant 

competitive forces in the market for 

order flow, which constrains its pricing 

determinations. The fact that the market 

for order flow is competitive has long 

been recognized by the courts. In 

NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange 

Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated, 

‘‘[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 broker-dealers 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 to determine 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

Congress directed the Commission to 

‘‘rely on ‘competition, whenever 

possible, in meeting its regulatory 

responsibilities for overseeing the SROs 

and the national market system.’’’ 13 As 

a result, the Commission has 

historically relied on competitive forces 

to determine whether a fee proposal is 

equitable, fair, reasonable, and not 

unreasonably or unfairly discriminatory. 

‘‘If competitive forces are operative, the 

self-interest of the exchanges themselves 

will work powerfully to constrain 

unreasonable or unfair behavior.’’ 14

Accordingly, ‘‘the existence of 

significant competition provides a 

substantial basis for finding that the 

terms of an exchange’s fee proposal are 

equitable, fair, reasonable, and not 

unreasonably or unfairly 

discriminatory.’’ 15 In its 2019 guidance 

on fee proposals, Commission staff 

indicated that they would look at factors 

beyond the competitive environment, 

such as cost, only if a ‘‘proposal lacks 

persuasive evidence that the proposed 

fee is constrained by significant 

competitive forces.’’ 16

The proposed fees are reasonable and 

unlikely to burden the market because 

the purchase of the Service is optional 

for all categories of co-location 

customers. No firms are required to 

purchase the Service. Though many 

firms use GPS network time to 

synchronize their internal primary clock 

devices, firms can purchase time sync 

services from third-party vendors. Firms 

are also free to utilize other services that 

may assist them in enhanced time 

synchronization of their systems by 

consuming time feeds, such as PTP, 

PPS, and NTP. As noted above, 

approximately 59% of the Exchange’s 

co-location customers subscribe to the 

Service, most of which opt for the 

shared option. The fact that 

approximately 41% of the Exchange’s 

co-location customers do not subscribe 

to the Service demonstrate that there are 

alternative options available. Firms may 

choose to purchase multiple time 

synchronization services for resiliency 

or otherwise.17 For example, a decision 

to purchase multiple synchronization 

services could be based on client 

strategy, as some strategies require more 

precise time than others. As described 

above, in addition to cost, a firm’s 

decision regarding which, if any, time 

synchronization option to purchase may 

depend, among other factors, on 

whether a firm wishes to build or buy 

a time feed, the design of a firm’s 

systems, including whether a firm 

chooses to have its time synchronization 

equipment centralized or in multiple 

locations, a firm’s time sensitivity, a 

firm’s trading strategy, including 

whether it uses such time information to 

trigger trading decisions, and a firm’s 

desire for control of the time feed. 

The Exchange offers the Service as a 

convenience to firms to provide them 

with the ability to synchronize their 

own primary clock devices to the GPS 

network time and time-stamp 

transactional information.18 Customers 

do not receive an advantage by 

purchasing the Service from the 

Exchange rather than another provider. 

The Exchange is merely providing 

access to GPS signals, which can also be 

accessed via other providers. Firms that 

choose to subscribe to the Service may 

discontinue the use of the Service at any 

time if they determine that the time 

synchronization services provided via 

the GPS antenna are no longer useful. In 

sum, co-location customers can 

discontinue the use of the Service at any 

time, decide not to subscribe, or use a 

third-party vendor for time 

synchronization services, for any 

reason, including the fees. 

The optional Service is available to all 

co-location customers that choose to 

subscribe. The proposed fees would 

apply to all co-location customers on a 

non-discriminatory basis, and therefore 

are not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The Exchange also believes that the 

proposed changes to include specific 

installation fees promote just and 

equitable principles of trade and remove 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86982 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Notices 

19 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 20 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system because 

the proposed rule changes will provide 

greater clarity to Members and the 

public regarding the Exchange’s fees. It 

is in the public interest for rules to be 

accurate and transparent so as to 

eliminate the potential for confusion. 

If the Exchange is incorrect in its 

determination that the proposed fees 

reflect the value of the GPS antenna, 

customers will not purchase the product 

or will seek other options at their 

disposal, such as purchasing time 

synchronization services from thirdparty vendors. 

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. 

In terms of inter-market competition 

(the competition among self-regulatory 

organizations), 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 and with alternative trading 

systems that have been exempted from 

compliance with the statutory standards 

applicable to exchanges. Because 

competitors are free to modify their own 

fees in response, the Exchange believes 

that the degree to which fee changes in 

this market may impose any burden on 

competition is extremely limited. 

Approval of the proposal does not 

impose any burden on the ability of 

other exchanges to compete. As noted 

above, time synchronization services are 

offered by other vendors and any 

exchange has the ability to offer such 

services if it so chooses. 

Nothing in the proposal burdens 

intra-market competition (the 

competition among consumers of 

exchange data) because the GPS antenna 

is available to any co-location customer 

under the same fees as any other colocation customer, and any co-location 

customer that wishes to purchase a GPS 

antenna can do so on a nondiscriminatory basis. 

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.19 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– 

ISE–2023–33 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–ISE–2023–33. 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 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–ISE–2023–33 and should be 

submitted on or before January 5, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.20

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27527 Filed 12–14–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–177, OMB Control No. 

3235–0177] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

6e–2 and Form N–6EI–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. 3501 et seq.), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget a 

request for extension of the previously 

approved collection of information 

discussed below. 

Rule 6e–2 (17 CFR 270.6e–2) under 

the Investment Company Act of 1940 

(‘‘Act’’) 

(15 U.S.C. 80a) is an exemptive rule 

that provides separate accounts formed 

by life insurance companies to fund 

certain variable life insurance products, 

exemptions from certain provisions of 

the Act, subject to conditions set forth 

in the rule. 

Rule 6e–2 provides a separate account 

with an exemption from the registration 

provisions of section 8(a) of the Act if 

the account files with the Commission 

Form N–6EI–1 (17 CFR 274.301), a 

notification of claim of exemption. 

The rule also exempts a separate 

account from a number of other sections 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1