13286 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 57 / Thursday, March 26, 2009 / Notices 

36 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

37 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3 17 CFR 240 19b–4(f)(6). 

4 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq. 

5 17 CFR 240.9b–1. 

6See Exemption for Standardized Options From 

Provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and From 

the Registration Requirements of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934; Final Rule, Securities Act 

Release No. 8171 and Exchange Act Release No. 

47082 (December 23, 2002), 68 FR 188 (January 2, 

2003). 

7The options disclosure document (‘‘ODD’’) 

prepared in accordance with Rule 9b–1 under the 

Exchange Act is not deemed to be a prospectus. 17 

CFR 230.135b. See, e.g., Securities Act Release No. 

8049 (Dec. 21, 2001), 67 FR 228 (Jan. 2, 2002). 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–FINRA–2008–055. 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 FINRA. 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–FINRA–2008–055 and 

should be submitted on or before April 

16, 2009. 

VI. Conclusions 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,36 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–FINRA– 

2008–055), as modified by Amendment 

No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved on an 

accelerated basis. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.37

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–6659 Filed 3–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–59600; File No. SR–ISE– 

2009–09] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

International Securities Exchange, 

LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule 

Change to Amend Rule 623 

(Communications to Customers) 

March 19, 2009. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Exchange Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 

thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that 

on March 11, 2009, the International 

Securities Exchange, LLC (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or the ‘‘ISE’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

the proposed rule change, as described 

in Items I and II below, which items 

have been prepared by the Exchange. 

ISE has designated the proposed rule 

change as constituting a noncontroversial rule change under Rule 

19b–4(f)(6) under the Act,3 which 

renders the proposal effective upon 

filing with the Commission. 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 remove or 

otherwise amend elements of ISE Rule 

623 (‘‘Communications to Customers’’) 

that incorporate provisions of the 

Securities Act of 1933 (‘‘Securities 

Act’’) 4 because options traded on the 

Exchange consist solely of standardized 

options issued by the Options Clearing 

Corporation (‘‘OCC’’), a registered 

clearing agency, that are exempt under 

Rule 238 of the Securities Act from all 

provisions of the Securities Act except 

the antifraud provisions of Section 17. 

Additionally, the proposed amendments 

expand the types of communications 

governed by Rule 623 to include 

independently prepared reprints and 

other communications between a 

member or member organization and a 

customer. The proposed amendments 

also exempt certain options 

communications from the pre-approval 

requirement by a Registered Options 

Principal (‘‘ROP’’). The text of the 

proposed rule change is available at the 

Exchange, the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, and http:// 

www.ise.com. 

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 

self-regulatory organization 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 self-regulatory organization has 

prepared summaries, set forth in 

sections A, B and C below. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

On December 23, 2002, the 

Commission published final rules that 

exempt standardized options, as defined 

in Rule 9b–1 5 of the Exchange Act, that 

are issued by a registered clearing 

agency and traded on a registered 

national securities exchange or on a 

registered national securities 

association, from all provisions of the 

Securities Act (other than the anti-fraud 

provisions) and the registration 

requirements of the Exchange Act.6

Because the Securities Act and the rules 

thereunder (other than the anti-fraud 

provisions) are no longer applicable to 

such standardized options, the 

Exchange proposes to remove elements 

of the Securities Act that are embedded 

in ISE Rule 623. In particular, ISE 

proposes to remove all references to a 

‘‘prospectus’’ from Rule 623. 

Prospectuses are no longer required for 

such standardized options, and the OCC 

has, in fact, ceased publication of a 

prospectus.7 In addition, the proposed 

amendments will update and reorganize 

Rule 623. The proposed amendments 

are similar to amendments filed with 

and approved by the Commission by the 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc. and the Chicago Board 

Options Exchange, and, if adopted, 

would provide a more uniform 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 57 / Thursday, March 26, 2009 / Notices 13287 

8See Exchange Act Release No. 57720 (Apr. 25, 

2008), 73 FR 24332 (May 2, 2008) (SR FINRA– 

2008–13), and Exchange Act Release No. 58823 

(October 21, 2008), 73 FR 63747 (October 28, 2008) 

(SR–CBOE 2007–30). 

9This paragraph essentially incorporates 

language of Securities Act Rule 134a. While this 

amendment would eliminate the separate 

educational material category, as discussed below 

the Exchange also proposes to revise the definition 

of Sales Literature to include educational material. 

10This paragraph essentially incorporates 

language of Securities Act Rule 134. 

11See note 9, supra. 

12 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(54). 

13 17 CFR 240.17a–4. More specifically, Rule 17a– 

4(b)(4) requires that a broker-dealer retain ‘‘originals 

of all communications received and copies of all 

communications sent * * * including all 

communications which are subject to rules of a selfregulatory organization of which the member, 

broker or dealer is a member regarding 

communications with the public.’’ 

approach to communications to 

customers regarding standardized 

options.8

a. Deletion of Certain Provisions 

As noted above, ISE Rule 623 contains 

a number of references to a prospectus 

and other Securities Act requirements. 

The Exchange proposes to delete the 

following from Rule 623: Rule 623(a)(4), 

which references the Securities Act 

definition of prospectus; Rule 623(e), 

which incorporates Securities Act 

principles in that it prohibits written 

material concerning options from being 

furnished to any person who has not 

previously or contemporaneously 

received the ODD; Rule 623(a)(2), which 

defines the term ‘‘Educational 

Material;’’ 9 Rule 623(g), which outlines 

what is permitted in an 

‘‘Advertisement;’’ 10 and Rule 623(h), 

which concerns educational material.11

b. Redesignation of Rule 623(a) to 

Proposed Rule 623(d) and Related 

Amendments 

Rule 623(a) currently contains an 

outline of the ‘‘General Rule’’ for 

options communications. ISE proposes 

to redesignate paragraph (a) as 

paragraph (d), and to incorporate 

limitations on the use of options 

communications contained in Rule 

623(f) into proposed Rule 623(d). In 

addition, proposed Rule 623(d)(3) 

would amend Rule 623(a)(3) by 

clarifying the types of cautionary 

statements and caveats that are 

prohibited. Also, as previously noted, 

ISE proposes to delete Rule 623(a)(4). 

Further, current Rule 623(i) sets forth 

the standards applicable to Sales 

Literature and (i)(1) sets forth the 

requirement that Sales Literature shall 

state that supporting documentation for 

any claims, comparisons, 

recommendations, statistics or other 

technical data, will be supplied upon 

request. The Exchange proposed to 

redesignate Rule 623(i)(1) as proposed 

Rule 623(d)(7). 

c. Redesignation of Rule 623(c) to 

Proposed Rule 623(b) and Proposed 

Amendments 

ISE proposes to redesignate paragraph 

(c) as paragraph (b). ISE also proposes 

to amend this paragraph to include the 

types of communications proposed to be 

added to the definition of ‘‘Options 

Communications’’ in proposed Rule 

623(a). Proposed Rules 623(b)(2) and 

(b)(3) would also amend the current 

requirements to obtain advance 

approval by a ROP for most options 

communications by exempting certain 

options communications, defined as 

‘‘Correspondence’’ and ‘‘Institutional 

Sales Material.’’ Specifically, proposed 

Rule 623(b)(2) would exempt 

correspondence from the pre-approval 

requirement unless the correspondence 

is distributed to 25 or more existing 

retail customers within any 30 calendarday period and makes any financial or 

investment recommendation or 

otherwise promotes a product or service 

of the member. All correspondence 

would be subject to general supervision 

and review requirements. Proposed Rule 

623(b)(3) would exempt institutional 

sales material from the pre-approval 

requirement if the material is 

distributed to ‘‘qualified investors’’ (as 

defined in Section 3(a)(54) of the 

Exchange Act).12 Pre-approval by a ROP 

would, however, be required with 

respect to independently prepared 

reprints. In addition, Proposed Rule 

623(b)(4) would require that firms retain 

options communications in accordance 

with the record-keeping requirements of 

Rule 17a–4 under the Exchange Act.13

Proposed Rule 623(b)(4) would also 

require that firms retain other related 

documents in the form and for the time 

periods required for options 

communications by Rule 17a–4. 

d. Redesignation of Rule 623(d) to 

Proposed Rule 623(c) and Related 

Amendments 

ISE proposes to redesignate paragraph 

(d) as paragraph (c). Rule 623(d) 

currently requires members to obtain 

approval for every advertisement and all 

educational material from the Exchange. 

This requirement applies regardless of 

whether the options communications 

are used before or after the delivery of 

a current ODD. ISE proposes to amend 

this provision to require approval by the 

Exchange only with respect to options 

communications used prior to the 

delivery of a current ODD. The 

Exchange pre-approval requirement for 

options communications used 

subsequent to the delivery of the ODD 

is being eliminated because the ODD 

should help alert the customer to the 

characteristics and risks associated with 

trading in options and because Rule 

623(b) requires the Registered Options 

Principal of a member organization to 

pre-approve options communications 

(with certain exceptions for 

‘‘Correspondence’’ and ‘‘Institutional 

Sales Material’’). This provision would 

also be amended to include the types of 

communications added to the definition 

of ‘‘Options Communications’’ in 

proposed Rule 623(a). 

e. Redesignation of Rule 623(b) to 

Proposed Rule 623(a) and Related 

Amendments 

Rule 623(b) currently defines terms 

used in Rule 623. ISE proposes to 

redesignate paragraph (b) as paragraph 

(a). ISE also proposes to amend the 

definition of ‘‘Options 

Communications’’ in proposed Rule 

623(a) to expand the types of 

communications governed by Rule 623 

to include independently prepared 

reprints and other communications 

between a member or member 

organization and a customer. The 

Exchange proposes to amend the 

definitions of ‘‘Advertisement’’ and 

‘‘Sales Literature;’’ and define 

‘‘Correspondence,’’ ‘‘Institutional Sales 

Material,’’ ‘‘Public Appearances,’’ and 

‘‘Independently Prepared Reprints;’’ to 

clarify the rule. In addition, as 

previously noted, ISE proposes to delete 

the definition of ‘‘Educational 

Material.’’ 

f. Proposed Rule 623(e) 

Proposed Rule 623(e) would set forth 

(i) standards for options 

communications that are not preceded 

or accompanied by an ODD and (ii) 

standards for options communications 

used prior to delivery of an ODD. These 

requirements generally would clarify 

and restate the requirements contained 

in the current Rule 623(i). Proposed 

Rule 623(e)(1)(B) would require options 

communications to contain contact 

information for obtaining a copy of the 

ODD. As previously noted, the 

provisions of Rule 623(g) that outline 

what is permitted in an advertisement 

are proposed to be deleted and the 

provisions relating to standards for 

options communications used prior to 

delivery of the ODD are proposed to be 

incorporated into proposed Rule 

623(e)(2). 

13288 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 57 / Thursday, March 26, 2009 / Notices 

14See Proposed Rule 623(a)(2). 

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

16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

18 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

20 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

21 ISE’s proposed rule change is substantially 

identical to a proposed rule change by the Chicago 

Board Options Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’) that was 

recently approved by the Commission. See 

Exchange Act Release No. 58823 (October 21, 2008), 

73 FR 63747 (October 28, 2008) (SR–CBOE–2007– 

30). 

22For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 

operative delay, the Commission has considered the 

proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, 

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

g. Redesignation of Portions of Rule 

623(i) to Proposed Rule 623(g), 

Proposed Rule 623(h), Proposed Rule 

623(i), and Related Amendments 

As stated above, the Exchange 

proposes to redesignate Rule 623(i)(1) as 

proposed Rule 623(d)(7). Current Rule 

623(i)(2) pertains to standards for Sales 

Literature that contains projected 

performance figures and current Rule 

623(i)(3) pertains to standards for Sales 

Literature that contains historical 

performance figures. The Exchange 

proposes to redesignate Rule 623(i)(2) as 

proposed Rule 623(g)(1) and Rule 

623(i)(3) as proposed Rule 623(h). Rule 

623(i) currently requires that a copy of 

the ODD precede or accompany options 

related sales literature. The Exchange is 

proposing to modify the ODD delivery 

requirement applicable to sales 

literature to provide that an ODD must 

precede or accompany any 

communication that conveys past or 

projected performance figures involving 

options or constitutes a 

recommendation pertaining to options. 

A notice providing the name and 

address of a person from whom the ODD 

may be obtained would be required in 

sales literature that does not contain a 

recommendation or past or projected 

performance figures. Because ISE is 

proposing to merge educational material 

into the sales literature category,14 this 

amendment would continue to allow 

communications that are educational in 

nature to be disseminated without being 

preceded or accompanied by a copy of 

the ODD. 

The Exchange proposes to redesignate 

current Rule 623(i)(4) as proposed Rule 

623(i). The Exchange proposes to delete 

Rules 623(i)(5), (i)(6), and (i)(7). The 

Exchange believes that (i)(5) and (i)(6) 

are unnecessary because worksheets are 

included in the definition of ‘‘Sales 

Literature.’’ The Exchange believes that 

(i)(7) is no longer necessary because the 

Exchange is proposing to clarify the 

record-keeping requirements applicable 

to options communications in proposed 

Rule 623(b)(4). 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposal is consistent with the 

requirements of Section 6(b) of the 

Act,15 in general, and furthers the 

objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,16

in particular, in that it is designed to 

prevent fraudulent and manipulative 

acts and practices, to promote just and 

equitable principles of trade, and to 

protect investors and the public interest 

in that it is designed to foster 

cooperation and coordination with 

persons engaged in regulating, clearing, 

settling, processing information with 

respect to, and facilitating transactions 

in securities, to remove impediments to 

and perfect the mechanism for a free 

and open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. 

Specifically, this proposed rule change 

will promote consistency between ISE 

and other SRO rules and provide the 

investing public with options 

communications rules that are designed 

to provide appropriate safeguards and 

greater clarity. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The proposed rule change does not 

impose any burden on competition that 

is 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 not solicited, and 

does not intend to solicit, comments on 

this proposed rule change. The 

Exchange has not received any written 

comments from members or other 

interested parties. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Because the foregoing rule change: (1) 

Does not significantly affect the 

protection of investors or the public 

interest; (2) does not impose any 

significant burden on competition and 

(3) by its terms, does not become 

operative for 30 days from the date on 

which it was filed, or such shorter time 

as the Commission may designate, it has 

become effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 17 and Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) 18 thereunder. 

A proposed rule change filed under 

Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 19 does not become 

operative prior to 30 days after the date 

of filing or such shorter time as the 

Commission may designate if such 

action is consistent with the protection 

of investors and the public interest. 

However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 20 permits the 

Commission to designate a shorter time 

if such action is consistent with the 

protection of investors and the public 

interest. The Exchange requests that the 

Commission waive the 30-day operative 

delay period to permit the proposed rule 

change to be implemented immediately. 

The Commission notes that the 

proposed rule change is substantially 

identical to a proposed rule change that 

was approved by the Commission after 

an opportunity for public comment,21

and does not raise any new substantive 

issues. For these reasons, the 

Commission believes that waiver of the 

30-day operative delay 22 is consistent 

with the protection of investors and the 

public interest and designates the 

proposal operative upon filing. 

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 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 e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

No. SR–ISE–2009–09 on the subject 

line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–ISE–2009–09. 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 Commissions 

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 57 / Thursday, March 26, 2009 / Notices 13289 

23 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57577 

(March 28, 2008), 73 FR 18022 (April 2, 2008) (File 

No. SR–MSRB–2007–06). 6 15 U.S.C. 78o–4(b)(2)(C). 

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 ISE. 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–ISE–2009–09 and should be 

submitted on or before April 16, 2009. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.23

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–6617 Filed 3–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–59602; File No. SR–MSRB– 

2009–01] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Municipal Securities Rulemaking 

Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of Proposed Rule 

Change To Extend the Electronic 

Municipal Market Access System Pilot 

March 19, 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 March 18, 

2009, the Municipal Securities 

Rulemaking Board (‘‘MSRB’’ or 

‘‘Board’’), 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 substantially prepared by the 

MSRB. The MSRB has filed the proposal 

as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ rule change 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) 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 change 

from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The MSRB is proposing to extend the 

MSRB’s pilot of its Electronic Municipal 

Market Access system, currently 

operating as a facility of the MSRB’s 

Municipal Securities Information 

Library system (the ‘‘EMMA pilot’’), to 

the earlier of July 1, 2009 or the date on 

which the MSRB places into operation 

EMMA’s permanent primary market 

disclosure service for electronic 

submission and public availability on 

EMMA’s Internet portal (the ‘‘EMMA 

portal’’) of official statements, advance 

refunding documents and related 

primary market documents and 

information (the ‘‘primary market 

disclosure service’’) and permanent 

transparency service making municipal 

securities transaction price data 

publicly available on the EMMA portal 

(the ‘‘trade price transparency service’’ 

and, together with the primary market 

disclosure service, the ‘‘permanent 

EMMA services’’). The proposed rule 

change does not effect a change in 

existing rule language. 

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 

MSRB 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 MSRB 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 Commission has previously 

approved the operation by the MSRB of 

the EMMA pilot for a period of one year 

from the date the EMMA pilot became 

operational.5 The EMMA pilot became 

operational on March 31, 2008. The 

MSRB expects to file with the 

Commission in the near future a 

proposed rule change to establish the 

permanent EMMA services, with a 

proposed date for commencement of 

operation of the permanent EMMA 

services on the later of (i) May 11, 2009 

or (ii) the date announced by the MSRB 

in a notice published on the MSRB Web 

site, which date shall be no earlier than 

ten business days after Commission 

approval of the permanent EMMA 

services and shall be announced no 

fewer than five business days prior to 

such date. Upon the permanent EMMA 

services being approved and placed into 

operation, the permanent EMMA 

services would replace the EMMA pilot, 

at which time the EMMA pilot would be 

terminated. 

In order to maintain the EMMA pilot 

in operation until the permanent EMMA 

services become operational, the MSRB 

is requesting that the Commission 

extend the EMMA pilot to the earlier of 

July 1, 2009 or the date on which the 

MSRB places into operation the 

permanent EMMA services. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The MSRB believes that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with Section 

15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act,6 which provides 

that the MSRB’s rules shall: 

be 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 regulating, clearing, 

settling, processing information with respect 

to, and facilitating transactions in municipal 

securities, to remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and open 

market in municipal securities, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the public 

interest. 

The MSRB believes that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the Act. 

The extension of the EMMA pilot will 

continue to remove impediments to and 

help perfect the mechanisms of a free 

and open market in municipal 

securities, assist in preventing 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, and will in general promote 

investor protection and the public 

interest by ensuring equal access for all 

market participants to the critical 

disclosure information needed by 

investors in the municipal securities 

market. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Board does not believe that the 

proposed rule change will impose any 

burden on competition not necessary or