Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 231 / Monday, December 2, 2024 / Notices 95299 

34See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

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

35NetCoalition 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)). 

36 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

37 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f). 38 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

impose an undue burden on 

competition. Rather, the proposal seeks 

to benefit all market participants by 

encouraging the efficient utilization of 

the Exchange’s network while taking 

into account the important liquidity 

provided by its Members. As discussed 

above potential impact on exchange 

systems, bandwidth and capacity 

becomes greater with increased ADO 

and ADQ rates. The Exchange also 

anticipates that the vast majority of 

Members on the Exchange will not be 

subject to any fees under the proposed 

tiers. Accordingly, the Exchange 

believes that the proposed ADO and 

ADQ fees do not favor certain categories 

of market participants in a manner that 

would impose a burden on competition. 

Next, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change does not impose 

any burden on intermarket competition 

that is not necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

As previously discussed, the Exchange 

operates in a highly competitive market, 

including competition for exchange 

memberships. Market Participants have 

numerous alternative venues that they 

may participate on, including 17 other 

options exchanges (including 3 other 

non-Cboe options exchanges), as well as 

off-exchange venues, where competitive 

products are available for trading. 

Indeed, participants can readily choose 

to submit their order flow to other 

exchange and off-exchange venues if 

they deem fee levels at those other 

venues to be more favorable. Moreover, 

the Commission has repeatedly 

expressed its preference for competition 

over regulatory intervention in 

determining prices, products, and 

services in the securities markets. 

Specifically, in Regulation NMS, 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.’’ 34 The 

fact that this market is competitive has 

also 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’. . . .’’.35 Accordingly, the 

Exchange does not believe its proposed 

change imposes 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 neither solicited nor 

received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

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 36 and paragraph (f) of Rule 

19b–4 37 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. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission will institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

change 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– 

CboeBZX–2024–113 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–CboeBZX–2024–113. 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–CboeBZX–2024–113 and should be 

submitted on or before December 23, 

2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.38

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–28112 Filed 11–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–792; OMB Control No. 

3235–0739] 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request; Extension: Order Granting a 

Conditional Exemption Under the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 From 

the Confirmation Requirements of 

Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(a) for 

Certain Transactions in Money Market 

Funds 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: U.S. Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
95300 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 231 / Monday, December 2, 2024 / Notices 

1See generally Money Market Fund Reform; 

Amendments to Form PF, Securities Act Release 

No. 9408, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 

3616, Investment Company Act Release No. 30551 

(June 5, 2013), 78 FR 36834, 36934 (June 19, 2013); 

see also Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(b)(1), 17 CFR 

240.10b–10(b)(1) (limiting alternative monthly 

reporting to money market funds that attempt to 

maintain a stable NAV). 

2See Order Granting a Conditional Exemption 

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 From 

the Confirmation Requirements of Exchange Act 

Rule 10b–10(a) for Certain Transactions in Money 

Market Funds, Exchange Act Release No. 34–76480 

(Nov. 19, 2015), 80 FR 73849 (Nov. 25, 2015). 

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’’) is soliciting comments 

on the existing collection of information 

provided for in the Order Granting a 

Conditional Exemption under the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from 

the Confirmation Requirements of 

Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(a) for Certain 

Transactions in Money Market Funds 

(17 CFR 240.10b–10(a)). The 

Commission plans to submit this 

existing collection of information to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) for extension and approval. 

Rule 10b–10 under the Securities 

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

(15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) generally requires 

broker-dealers to provide customers 

with specified information relating to 

their securities transactions at or before 

the completion of the transactions. 

Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(b), however, 

provides an exception from this 

requirement for certain transactions in 

money market funds that attempt to 

maintain a stable net asset value when 

no sales load or redemption fee is 

charged. The exception permits brokerdealers to provide transaction 

information to money market fund 

shareholders on a monthly, rather than 

immediate, basis, subject to the 

conditions. Amendments to Rule 2a–7 

(17 CFR 270.2a–7) of the Investment 

Company Act of 1940 (‘‘Investment 

Company Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 80a–1 et seq.) 

among other things, means, absent an 

exemption, broker-dealers would not be 

able to continue to rely on the exception 

under Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(b) for 

transactions in money market funds 

operating in accordance with 

Investment Company Act Rule 2a– 

7(c)(1)(ii).1

In 2015, the Commission issued an 

Order Granting a Conditional 

Exemption under the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 From The 

Confirmation Requirements of Exchange 

Act Rule 10b–10(a) For Certain 

Transactions In Money Market Funds 

(‘‘Order’’) 2 which allows broker-dealers, 

subject to certain conditions, to provide 

transaction information to investors in 

any money market fund operating 

pursuant to Investment Company Act 

Rule 2a–7(c)(1)(ii) on a monthly basis in 

lieu of providing immediate 

confirmations as required under 

Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(a) (‘‘the 

Exemption’’). Accordingly, to be eligible 

for the Exemption, a broker-dealer must 

(1) provide an initial written 

notification to the customer of its ability 

to request delivery of immediate 

confirmations consistent with the 

written notification requirements of 

Exchange Act Rule 10b–10(a), and (2) 

not receive any such request to receive 

immediate confirms from the customer. 

As of December 31, 2023, the 

Commission estimates there are 

approximately 206 broker-dealers that 

clear customer transactions or carry 

customer funds and securities who 

would be responsible for providing 

customer confirmations. The 

Commission estimates that the cost of 

the ongoing notification requirements 

would be minimal, approximately 5% of 

the initial burden which was previously 

estimated to be 36 hours per brokerdealer, or approximately 1.8 hours per 

broker-dealer per year, to provide 

ongoing notifications, or a total burden 

of approximately 371 hours annually for 

the 206 carrying broker-dealers. 

Written comments are invited on: (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

estimates of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Consideration will be given to 

comments and suggestions submitted by 

January 31, 2025. 

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. 

Please direct your written comments 

to: Austin Gerig, Director/Chief Data 

Officer, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, c/o Tanya Ruttenberg, 100 

F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or 

send an email to: PRA_Mailbox@

sec.gov. 

Dated: November 25, 2024. 

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–28123 Filed 11–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–028, OMB Control No. 

3235–0032] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

17f–1(b) 

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 17f–1(b) (17 CFR 240.17f–1(b)), 

under the Securities Exchange Act of 

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

Under Rule 17f–1(b) under the 

Exchange Act, approximately 9,500 

entities in the securities industry are 

registered in the Lost and Stolen 

Securities Program (‘‘Program’’). 

Registration fulfills a statutory 

requirement that entities report and 

inquire about missing, lost, counterfeit, 

or stolen securities. Registration also 

allows entities in the securities industry 

to gain access to a confidential database 

that stores information for the Program. 

The Commission staff estimates that 4 

new entities will register in the Program 

each year. The staff estimates that the 

average number of hours necessary to 

comply with Rule 17f–1(b) is one-half 

hour. Accordingly, the staff estimates 

that the total annual burden for all 

participants is 2 hours (4 × one-half 

hour). The Commission staff estimates 

that compliance staff work at subject 

entities results in an internal cost of 

compliance, at an estimated hourly 

wage of $344, of $172 per year per entity 

(.5 hours × $344 per hour = $172 per 

year). Therefore, the aggregate annual 

internal cost of compliance is 

approximately $688 ($172 × 4= $688). 

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 30-day public comment period 

for this information collection request 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1