13938 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 

9 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(I). 10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

proposed to be changed, and OCC is not 

proposing to change any other aspect of 

its procedures governing overnight 

trading, which have previously been 

approved by the Commission. Finally, 

the proposed change is not inconsistent 

with the existing rules of OCC, 

including any other rules proposed to be 

amended. 

(B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on 

Burden on Competition 

OCC does not believe that the 

proposed rule change would impose a 

burden on competition.9 The proposed 

rule change concerns operational 

changes that are designed to reduce 

OCC’s exposure to risk as a result of 

clearing member activities during 

overnight trading sessions and is 

protective in nature. This change will be 

applied uniformly across all clearing 

members participating in overnight 

trading sessions. Accordingly, OCC does 

not believe that the proposed rule 

change would impose a burden on 

competition. 

(C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on 

Comments on the Proposed Rule 

Change Received From Members, 

Participants or Others 

Written comments on the proposed 

rule change were not and are not 

intended to be solicited with respect to 

the proposed rule change and none have 

been 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) 

of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 

19b–4 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. 

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 rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

OCC–2015–005 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–OCC–2015–005. 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 Section, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of OCC and on OCC’s Web site at 

http://www.theocc.com/components/

docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_15_

005.pdf. 

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–OCC–2015–005 and should 

be submitted on or before April 7, 2015. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.10

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06019 Filed 3–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74478; File No. SR–MIAX– 

2015–16] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Miami International Securities 

Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Its Fee 

Schedule 

March 11, 2015 

Pursuant to the provisions of 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 February 27, 2015, Miami 

International Securities Exchange LLC 

(‘‘MIAX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) a 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 is filing a proposal to 

amend the MIAX Options Fee Schedule. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s Web site 

at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/

wotitle/rule_filing, 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 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend its 

Fee Schedule to: (i) Increase the 

transaction fees for Public Customers 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 13939 

3See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing 

Schedule, Section II; NYSE Amex Options Fee 

Schedule, p. 6; Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated, Fee Schedule, p.1. See also Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 68556 (January 2, 2013), 

78 FR 1293 (January 8, 2013) (SR–BX–2012–074). 

4See Securities Exchange Release Nos. 72988 

(September 4, 2014), 79 FR 53808 (September 10, 

2014) (SR–MIAX–2014–46); 72989 (September 4, 

2014), 79 FR 53792 (September 10, 2014) (SR– 

MIAX–2014–47). 

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

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

7See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing 

Schedule, Section II; NASDAQ Options Market 

LLC’s Pricing Schedule, Chapter XV. 8See Exchange Rules 603 and 604. 

that are not a Priority Customer and 

Firms; and (ii) modify the transaction 

fees for non-Priority Customers and 

Firms for achieving certain Priority 

Customer Rebate Program volume tiers. 

The proposed changes are based on the 

similar fees of other competing options 

exchange.3

The Exchange proposes to increase 

the transaction fees for Public 

Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer and Firms. Specifically, the 

Exchange proposes to assess the 

following fees for transactions for Public 

Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer: (i) $0.47 per contract for 

standard options and $0.05 per contract 

for mini options in Penny Pilot options 

classes; and (ii) $0.62 per contract for 

standard options and $0.06 per contract 

for mini options in non-Penny Pilot 

options classes. In addition, the 

Exchange proposes to assess the 

following fees for transactions for Firms: 

(i) $0.37 per contract for standard 

options and $0.04 per contract for mini 

options in Penny Pilot options classes; 

and (ii) $0.42 per contract for standard 

options and $0.04 per contract for mini 

options in non-Penny Pilot options 

classes. 

The Exchange proposes to continue to 

offer Public Customers that are not a 

Priority Customer and Firms the 

opportunity to reduce transaction fees 

by $0.02 per contract in standard 

options in both Penny Pilot and nonPenny Pilot options classes.4

Specifically, any Member or its affiliates 

of at least 75% common ownership 

between the firms as reflected on each 

firm’s Form BD, Schedule A, that 

qualifies for Priority Customer Rebate 

Program volume tiers 3, 4, or 5 and is 

a Public Customer that are not a Priority 

Customer will be assessed $0.45 per 

contract for standard options in Penny 

Pilot options classes and $0.60 per 

contract for standard options in nonPenny Pilot options classes. Further, 

any Member or its affiliates of at least 

75% common ownership between the 

firms as reflected on each firm’s Form 

BD, Schedule A, that qualifies for 

Priority Customer Rebate Program 

volume tiers 3, 4, or 5 and is a Firm will 

be assessed $0.35 per contract for 

standard options in Penny Pilot options 

classes and $0.40 per contract in nonPenny Pilot options classes. The 

Exchange believes that these incentives 

will encourage Public Customers that 

are not a Priority Customer and Firms to 

transact a greater number of orders on 

the Exchange. 

The Exchange proposes to implement 

the new transaction fees beginning 

March 1, 2015. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

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

furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) 

of the Act 6 in particular, in that it is an 

equitable allocation of reasonable fees 

and other charges among Exchange 

members. 

The Exchange’s proposal to increase 

the transaction fees for Public 

Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer and Firms is reasonable 

because the Exchange’s fees will remain 

competitive with fees at other options 

exchanges.7 The Exchange’s proposal to 

increase the transaction fees for Public 

Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer and Firms is equitable and not 

unfairly discriminatory because the 

increase applies equally to all such 

market participants. The Exchange does 

not assess Priority Customers 

transactions fees because Priority 

Customer order flow enhances liquidity 

on the Exchange for the benefit of all 

market participants. Priority Customer 

liquidity benefits all market participants 

by providing more trading 

opportunities, which attracts Market 

Makers and other market participants. 

An increase in the activity of these 

market participants in turn facilitates 

tighter spreads, which may cause an 

additional corresponding increase in 

order flow from other market 

participants. Market Makers are 

assessed lower transaction fees as 

compared to Public Customers that are 

not a Priority Customer, Non-MIAX 

Market Makers, Non-Member BrokerDealers, and Firms because they have 

obligations to the market and regulatory 

requirements, which normally do not 

apply to other market participants.8

They have obligations to make 

continuous markets, engage in a course 

of dealings reasonably calculated to 

contribute to the maintenance of a fair 

and orderly market, and not make bids 

or offers or enter into transactions that 

are inconsistent with a course of 

dealings. In addition, charging nonmembers higher transaction fees is a 

common practice amongst exchanges 

because Members are subject to other 

fees and dues associated with their 

membership to the Exchange that do not 

apply to non-members. The proposed 

differentiation as between Public 

Customer that is not a Priority 

Customer, Firms, and other market 

participants recognizes the differing 

contributions made to the liquidity and 

trading environment on the Exchange by 

these market participants. 

The Exchange’s proposal to offer 

Public Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer and Firms the opportunity to 

reduce transaction fees by $0.02 per 

contract in standard options, provided 

certain criteria are met, is reasonable 

because the Exchange desires to offer all 

such market participants an opportunity 

to lower their transaction fees. The 

Exchange’s proposal to offer Public 

Customers that are not a Priority 

Customer and Firms the opportunity to 

reduce transaction fees by $0.02 per 

contract in standard options, provided 

certain criteria are met, is equitable and 

not unfairly discriminatory because the 

Exchange will offer all market 

participants, excluding Priority 

Customers, a means to reduce 

transaction fees by qualifying for 

volume tiers in the Priority Customer 

Rebate Program. The Exchange believes 

that offering all such market 

participants the opportunity to lower 

transaction fees by incentivizing them to 

transact Priority Customer order flow in 

turn benefits all market participants. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposal to allow the aggregation of 

trading activity of separate Members or 

its affiliates for purposes of the fee 

reduction is fair, equitable and not 

unreasonably discriminatory. The 

Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change is reasonable because it would 

allow aggregation of the trading activity 

of separate Members or its affiliates for 

purposes of the fee reduction only in 

very narrow circumstances, namely, 

where the firm is an affiliate, as defined 

herein. Furthermore, other exchanges, 

as well as MIAX, have rules that permit 

the aggregation of the trading activity of 

affiliated entities for the purposes of 

calculating and assessing certain fees. 

The Exchange believes that offering all 

such market participants the 

opportunity to lower transaction fees by 

incentivizing them to transact Priority 

Customer order flow in turn benefits all 

market participants. 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal to assess transaction fees in 

non-Penny Pilot options classes, which 

differs from Penny Pilot options classes, 

is consistent with other options markets 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

13940 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 

9See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing 

Schedule, Section II; NYSE Amex Options Fee 

Schedule, p. 6; Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated, Fee Schedule, p. 1. See also Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 68556 (January 2, 2013), 

78 FR 1293 (January 8, 2013) (SR–BX–2012–074). 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

that also assess different transaction fees 

for non-Penny Pilot options classes as 

compared to Penny Pilot options 

classes. The Exchange believes that 

establishing different pricing for nonPenny Pilot options and Penny Pilot 

options is reasonable, equitable, and not 

unfairly discriminatory because Penny 

Pilot options are more liquid options as 

compared to non-Penny Pilot options. 

Additionally, other competing options 

exchanges differentiate pricing in the 

similar manner today.9

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 proposal 

is similar to the transaction fees found 

on other options exchanges; therefore, 

the Exchange believes the proposal is 

consistent with robust competition by 

increasing the intermarket competition 

for order flow from market participants. 

The proposal more closely aligns the 

fees for Public Customers that is not a 

Priority Customer and Firms to those of 

non-MIAX Market Makers and nonMember Broker-dealers. To the extent 

that there is additional competitive 

burden on non-member market 

participants, the Exchange believes that 

this is appropriate because charging 

non-members higher transaction fees is 

a common practice amongst exchanges 

and Members are subject to other fees 

and dues associated with their 

membership to the Exchange that do not 

apply to non-members. To the extent 

that there is additional competitive 

burden on market participants that are 

Public Customer not Priority Customers 

or Firms, the Exchange believes that this 

is appropriate because the proposal 

should incent Members to direct 

additional order flow to the Exchange 

and thus provide additional liquidity 

that enhances the quality of its markets 

and increases the volume of contracts 

traded here. To the extent that this 

purpose is achieved, all the Exchange’s 

market participants should benefit from 

the improved market liquidity. 

Enhanced market quality and increased 

transaction volume that results from the 

anticipated increase in order flow 

directed to the Exchange will benefit all 

market participants and improve 

competition on the Exchange. 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 to attract order flow. The 

Exchange believes that the proposal 

reflects this competitive environment. 

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.10 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. 

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 rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

MIAX–2015–16 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities 

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street 

NE., Washington, DC 20549. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–MIAX–2015–16. 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 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–MIAX– 

2015–16 and should be submitted on or 

before April 7, 2015. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.11

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06009 Filed 3–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74482; File No. SR–FINRA– 

2014–050] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc; Notice of Filing of 

Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting 

Accelerated Approval of a Proposed 

Rule Change, as Amended, To Require 

a Member To Identify Transactions 

With a Non-Member Affiliate and To 

Change How FINRA Disseminates a 

Subset of Such Transactions 

March 11, 2015 

I. Introduction 

On November 21, 2014, 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES