43698 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 10, 2021 / Notices 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Exchange Act Release No. 91876 (May 12, 

2021), 86 FR 27005 (May 18, 2021) (File No. SR– 

FINRA–2021–009) (‘‘Notice’’). 4See Letter from Kevin Zambrowicz, Managing 

Director & Associate General Counsel, the Securities 

Industry and Financial Markets Association 

(‘‘SIFMA’’), dated June 8, 2021 (‘‘SIFMA Letter’’). 5See Letter from Adam Arkel, Associate General 

Counsel, Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to 

Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, U.S. Securities and 

Exchange Commission, dated July 7, 2021 (‘‘FINRA 

Letter’’). The FINRA Letter is available on FINRA’s 

website at https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/ 

2021-07/sr-finra-2021-009-response-tocomments.pdf, on the Commission’s website at 

https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2021-009/ 

srfinra2021009.htm, and at the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room. 

6The subsequent description of the proposed rule 

change is substantially excerpted from FINRA’s 

description in the Notice. See Notice, 86 FR at 

27005–06. 7 17 CFR 240.17a–5 (‘‘Rule 17a–5’’). Paragraph (a) 

of Rule 17a–5 requires a broker-dealer to file a 

version of the FOCUS Report. 

2021, to allow more time for members 

of the public to submit their comments. 

The NRC is interested in obtaining a 

broad range of perspectives from 

stakeholders and interested persons. 

The focus of this request is to gather 

information to inform a systematic 

assessment for how the NRC addresses 

environmental justice in its programs, 

policies, and activities, considering the 

agency’s mission and statutory 

authority. The NRC is particularly 

interested in receiving input on the 

following questions: 

(1) What is your understanding of 

what is meant by environmental justice 

at the NRC? 

(2) As described in the Commission’s 

2004 Policy Statement on the Treatment 

of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC 

Regulatory and Licensing Actions (69 

FR 52040), the NRC currently addresses 

environmental justice in its NEPA 

reviews to determine if a proposed 

agency action will have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impacts on minority and low-income 

communities, defined as environmental 

justice communities. 

(a) When the NRC is conducting 

licensing and other regulatory reviews, 

the agency uses a variety of ways to 

gather information from stakeholders 

and interested persons on 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

agency action, such as in-person and 

virtual meetings, Federal Register 

notices requesting input, and dialog 

with community organizations. 

(i) How could the NRC expand how 

it engages and gathers input? 

(ii) What formal tools might there be 

to enhance information gathering from 

stakeholders and interested persons in 

NRC’s programs, policies, and 

activities? 

(iii) Can you describe any challenges 

that may affect your ability to engage 

with the NRC on environmental justice 

issues? 

(b) How could the NRC enhance 

opportunities for members of 

environmental justice communities to 

participate in licensing and regulatory 

activities, including the identification of 

impacts and other environmental justice 

concerns? 

(c) What ways could the NRC enhance 

identification of environmental justice 

communities? 

(d) What has the NRC historically 

done well, or currently does well that 

we could do more of or expand with 

respect to environmental justice in our 

programs, policies, and activities, 

including engagement efforts? In your 

view, what portions of the 2004 Policy 

Statement are effective? 

(3) What actions could the NRC take 

to enhance consideration of 

environmental justice in the NRC’s 

programs, policies and activities and 

agency decision-making, considering 

the agency’s mission and statutory 

authority? 

(a) Would you recommend that NRC 

consider any particular organization’s 

environmental justice program(s) in its 

assessment? 

(b) Looking to other Federal, State, 

and Tribal agencies’ environmental 

justice programs, what actions could the 

NRC take to enhance consideration of 

environmental justice in the NRC’s 

programs, policies, and activities? 

(c) Considering recent Executive 

Orders on environmental justice, what 

actions could the NRC take to enhance 

consideration of environmental justice 

in the NRC’s programs, policies, and 

activities? 

(d) Are there opportunities to expand 

consideration of environmental justice 

in NRC programs, policies, and 

activities, considering the agency’s 

mission? If so, what are they? 

Dated: August 4, 2021. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Gregory F. Suber, 

Director, Environmental Justice Review Team, 

Office of the Executive Director for 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2021–16970 Filed 8–9–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–92561; File No. SR–FINRA– 

2021–009] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a 

Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a 

Supplemental Liquidity Schedule, and 

Instructions Thereto, Pursuant to 

FINRA Rule 4524 (Supplemental 

FOCUS Information) 

August 4, 2021. 

I. Introduction 

On April 30, 2021, the Financial 

industry Regulatory Authority 

(‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section 

19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act 

(‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 

thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to 

adopt a Supplemental Liquidity 

Schedule, and Instructions thereto, 

pursuant to FINRA Rule 4524 

(Supplemental FOCUS Information). 

The proposed rule change was 

published for comment in the Federal 

Register on May 18, 2021.3 The 

comment period closed on June 8, 2021. 

The Commission received one comment 

letter in response to the Notice.4 On 

June 22, 2021, FINRA extended the time 

period in which the Commission must 

approve the proposed rule change, 

disapprove the proposed rule change, or 

institute proceedings to determine 

whether to disapprove the proposed 

rule change to August 16, 2021. On July 

7, 2021, FINRA responded to the 

comment letter received in response to 

the Notice.5 For the reasons discussed 

below, the Commission is approving the 

proposed rule change. 

II. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Change 6

FINRA Rule 4524 provides in part 

that FINRA may require certain 

members to file supplements to the 

Financial and Operational Combined 

Uniform Single Report (‘‘FOCUS 

Report’’), which is filed pursuant to 

Rule 17a–5 under the Exchange Act 7

and FINRA Rule 2010. These 

supplements may include such 

additional financial or operational 

schedules or reports as FINRA may 

deem necessary or appropriate for the 

protection of investors or in the public 

interest. FINRA Rule 4524 further 

requires FINRA to file a proposed 

schedule or report with the Commission 

pursuant to section 19(b) of the 

Exchange Act. Pursuant to FINRA Rule 

4524, FINRA proposed to adopt a 

Supplemental Liquidity Schedule 

(‘‘SLS’’), and Instructions thereto. 

A FINRA member that would be 

required to file the Form SLS would 

report detailed information relating to 

the member’s: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 10, 2021 / Notices 43699 

8 17 CFR 240.15c3–3 (‘‘Rule 15c3–3’’). 

9See supra note 4. 

10According to SIFMA, member firms are 

expected to be working on the implementation of 

the Federal Reserve 6G reporting through the end 

of 2022. 

11See SIFMA Letter at 3. 

12See SIFMA Letter at 3–4. 

13See FINRA Letter at 2. 

14 Id. 

15 Id. at 3. 

16 Id. 

17 In approving this rule change, the Commission 

has considered the rule’s impact on efficiency, 

competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 

78c(f). 

18 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 

• Reverse repurchase and repurchase 

agreements; 

• securities borrowed and securities 

loaned; 

• non-cash reverse repurchase and 

securities borrowed transactions; 

• non-cash repurchase and securities 

loaned transactions; 

• bank loan and other committed and 

uncommitted credit facilities; 

• total available collateral in the 

member’s custody; 

• margin and non-purpose loans; 

• collateral securing margin loans; 

• deposits at clearing organizations; 

and 

• cash and securities received and 

delivered on derivative transactions not 

cleared through a central clearing 

counterparty (‘‘CCP’’). 

According to FINRA, the SLS is 

tailored to apply only to members with 

the largest customer and counterparty 

exposures. Unless otherwise permitted 

by FINRA in writing, each carrying 

member with $25 million or more in 

free credit balances, as defined under 

Exchange Act Rule 15c3–3(a)(8),8 and 

each member whose aggregate amount 

outstanding under repurchase 

agreements, securities loan contracts 

and bank loans is equal to or greater 

than $1 billion, as reported on the 

member’s most recently filed FOCUS 

report, would be required to file the 

SLS. The SLS would be required to be 

completed as of the last business day of 

each month and filed within 24 

business days after the end of the 

month. A member would not need to 

file the SLS for any period where the 

member does not meet the $25 million 

or $1 billion thresholds. 

III. Comment Summary 

As noted above, the Commission 

received one comment letter in response 

to the Notice.9 In its comment letter, 

SIFMA asked that the implementation 

timing of the SLS be aligned with the 

implementation of the Federal Reserve 

Board’s ‘‘6G’’ reporting framework with 

respect to the FR 2052a reports required 

to be filed by FINRA member firms that 

have bank holding company affiliates,10

or that additional time be allotted for 

the implementation of the SLS.11

Additionally, noting that some of the 

reporting requirements for the SLS may 

be duplicative of information that must 

be reported to the Federal Reserve Board 

on FR 2052a reports, SIFMA has asked 

that the SLS contain an ‘‘overlay’’ that 

is mapped to the 5G/6G reporting 

frameworks of the Federal Reserve 

Board. According to SIFMA, this would 

have the effect of consolidating certain 

reporting categories where the 

respective categories and definitions 

align for the FINRA and the Federal 

Reserve Board reports, which would in 

turn streamline the reporting process for 

firms that are required to file with both 

FINRA and the Federal Reserve Board. 

Firms that are not required to file with 

both FINRA and the Federal Reserve 

Board would not be impacted, according 

to SIFMA.12

In response, FINRA reiterated that the 

proposed SLS is designed to improve 

FINRA’s ability to monitor for events 

that signal an adverse change in the 

liquidity risk of broker-dealers that that 

file the schedule. FINRA also noted the 

extensive prior outreach and 

discussions that FINRA conducted 

regarding the potential burdens on 

broker-dealers that are subsidiaries of 

bank holding companies. According to 

FINRA, this consultation resulted in the 

alignment of categories in the proposed 

SLS with reporting required in the 

Federal Reserve Board’s Complex 

Institution Liquidity Monitoring Report 

(referred to as ‘‘FR 2052a’’).13

FINRA also stated the SLS serves an 

important regulatory purpose because 

access to the information that would be 

reported on the SLS is important for 

FINRA to efficiently monitor on an 

ongoing basis the liquidity profile of its 

members. FINRA stated that the 

information would facilitate FINRA’s 

efforts to understand and respond to 

firms that may appear similar based on 

their balance sheets, but in fact have 

different liquidity risk profiles which 

could negatively the ability to fund 

operations during periods of market 

stress or other stress events. Absent the 

reporting set forth in the SLS, FINRA 

noted that it would need to request such 

information on a firm-by-firm basis as 

the need arises, which could, according 

to FINRA, result in similar or 

potentially larger costs for some firms.14

While acknowledging that some 

members that would be subject to the 

proposed SLS could face potential 

burdens with respect to reporting 

requirements from other regulators, 

FINRA stated that it would revisit the 

reporting categories in the proposed SLS 

as appropriate with respect to potential 

alignments of such categories with other 

reporting requirements, including the 

FR 2052a, depending on how they 

evolve in the future. Consequently, 

FINRA stated that it believes it would 

not be appropriate to delay 

implementation of the proposed SLS.15

Finally, FINRA stated that it believes 

that the proposed timeframe for 

implementation of the proposed SLS set 

forward in the Notice affords members 

sufficient time to prepare.16

IV. Discussion and Commission 

Findings 

After careful review of the proposed 

rule change, the comment letter, and 

FINRA’s response to the comment letter, 

the Commission finds that the proposal 

is consistent with the requirements of 

the Exchange Act and the rules and 

regulations thereunder that are 

applicable to a national securities 

association.17 Specifically, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with Section 

15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act,18 which 

requires, among other things, that the 

Commission determine any FINRA rule 

to be designed to protect investors and 

the public interest. 

The Commission believes that the 

proposed SLS, which will require 

certain FINRA members, subject to the 

thresholds described above, to provide 

detailed information regarding various 

aspects of the member’s liquidity profile 

will enable more effective monitoring of 

the liquidity risk of FINRA members by 

the Commission and FINRA. The 

Commission believes that regular and 

ongoing access to such information is 

important for the purpose of 

understanding the liquidity risks that 

member firms face, as well as 

differences in liquidity risks among 

firms that otherwise may appear to be 

similar based on similar characteristics 

in the firms’ balance sheets. By enabling 

more effective monitoring of liquidity 

risk, the Commission believes that the 

information obtained through the SLS 

will protect investors and the public 

interest by providing FINRA and the 

Commission with information needed to 

better anticipate and respond to the 

risks that FINRA member firms may face 

during market or other stress events that 

could jeopardize their ability to fund 

their operations. FINRA estimates that 

between 85 and 100 broker-dealers will 

be required to file Form SLS, the 

universe of broker-dealers carrying 

customer accounts with at least $25 

million in free credit balances or with 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
43700 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 10, 2021 / Notices 

19See Regulatory Notice 18–02 (January 2018) 

(Liquidity Reporting and Notification). See also 

Notice, 86 FR at 27006. 

20See Notice, 86 FR at 27005. 

21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

4See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 88595 

(April 8, 2020), 85 FR 20737 (April 14, 2020) (SR– 

NYSEAMER–2020–25) (waiving Floor-based fixed 

fees); 88840 (May 8, 2020), 85 FR 28992 (May 14, 

2020) (SR–NYSEAMER–2020–37) (extending April 

2020 fee changes through May 2020); and 89049 

(June 11, 2020), 85 FR 36649 (June 17, 2020) (SR– 

NYSEAMER–2020–44) (extending April and May 

fee changes through June 2020). 

a minimum of $1 billion in repurchase 

agreements, bank loans or securities 

loans outstanding. Therefore, the 

Commission believes that the proposed 

Form SLS is reasonably designed to 

apply only to those broker-dealers that 

have the highest potential to adversely 

affect investors and the public interest 

in a liquidity stress event. 

Finally, the Commission believes that 

FINRA has reasonably addressed the 

concerns raised by SIFMA’s comment 

letter. Specifically, the Commission 

agrees that the SLS would serve an 

important regulatory purpose by 

providing FINRA and the Commission 

with information useful in evaluating a 

member firm’s liquidity risk profile. 

While the Commission recognizes that 

there is the potential for burdens on 

certain member firms that are subject to 

the regulatory reporting requirements of 

other regulators, the Commission 

believes that the important regulatory 

purpose served by the SLS justifies the 

potential burdens. The Commission 

believes that absent the SLS, FINRA and 

the Commission would be required to 

request the information supplied in the 

SLS repeatedly and on a firm-by-firm 

basis in order to obtain the information 

necessary to monitor member firms for 

potential liquidity concerns. Such an 

approach would not only create 

regulatory inefficiency, but could also 

result in similar or potentially larger 

costs for firms, as FINRA noted. 

Moreover, in light of the prior 

outreach that FINRA has conducted 

including publishing an earlier version 

of SLS in January 2018 and revising it 

in response to feedback from industry 

participants,19 the Commission believes 

that FINRA’s proposed approach to 

revisit the reporting categories in the 

SLS with a view to potential alignments 

of such categories with other reporting 

requirements depending on how they 

evolve would have the effect of further 

minimizing the regulatory burdens on 

member firms subject to the SLS. 

Consequently, the Commission believes 

that FINRA has appropriately addressed 

concerns raised in the comment letter 

concerning reducing the reporting costs 

imposed by the SLS. 

Finally, the Commission agrees with 

FINRA that it is not appropriate to delay 

implementation of the SLS beyond the 

timeframe set forth in the Notice. 

Because FINRA previously published a 

version of the SLS in 2018, and will 

announce an effective date that will be 

180 days following the publication of a 

Regulatory Notice published no later 

than 30 days after Commission 

approval, the Commission believes that 

member firms will have sufficient time 

to prepare to implement the SLS. 

Furthermore, in light of recent events 

connected to market volatility, which 

were discussed in the Notice,20 the 

Commission believes that further 

delaying implementation of the SLS will 

undermine the regulatory interest that 

the Commission and FINRA have in 

monitoring member firms’ liquidity risk 

profiles. 

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,21 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–FINRA– 

2021–009) be, and hereby is, approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.22

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–16965 Filed 8–9–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–92559; File No. SR– 

NYSEAMER–2021–34] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE 

American LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the NYSE 

American Options Fee Schedule 

August 4, 2021. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3

notice is hereby given that, on July 28, 

2021, NYSE American LLC (‘‘NYSE 

American’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed 

with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the 

proposed rule change as described in 

Items I, II, and III below, which Items 

have been prepared by the selfregulatory organization. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

NYSE American Options Fee Schedule 

(‘‘Fee Schedule’’). The Exchange 

proposes to implement the fee change 

effective July 28, 2021. The proposed 

rule change is available on the 

Exchange’s website at www.nyse.com, 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 

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 those 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 parts of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and the 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The purpose of this filing is to amend 

the Fee Schedule to remove language 

associated with fee waivers that expired 

at the close of business on June 30, 

2021. 

On March 18, 2020, the Exchange 

announced that it would temporarily 

close the Trading Floor, effective 

Monday, March 23, 2020, as a 

precautionary measure to prevent the 

potential spread of COVID–19. 

Following the temporary closure of the 

Trading Floor, the Exchange waived 

certain Floor-based fixed fees for April, 

May, and June 2020.4 Although the 

Trading Floor partially reopened on 

May 26, 2020 and Floor-based open 

outcry activity was supported, certain 

participants were unable to resume preFloor closure levels of operations. As a 

result, the Exchange extended the fee 

waiver through June 2021, but only for 

Floor Broker firms that were unable to 

operate at more than 50% of their March 

2020 on-Floor staffing levels and for 

Market Maker firms that had vacant or 

‘‘unmanned’’ Podia for the entire month 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES