26832 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 

16See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60817 

(October 13, 2009), 74 FR 54111 (October 21, 2009). 

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

18 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

transaction in the Exchange’s flash 

auction as a response to orders from 

persons who are not broker/dealers and 

who are not Priority Customers to $0.10 

per contract. 

• The Exchange has a $0.20 per 

contract fee for market maker orders 

sent to the Exchange by EAMs.16 Market 

maker orders sent to the Exchange by 

EAMs will be assessed a fee of $0.25 per 

contract for removing liquidity in 

QQQQ, BAC, C, SPY, IWM, XLF, AAPL, 

GE, JPM, INTC, GS, RIMM, T, VZ, UNG, 

FCX, CSCO, DIA, AMZN and X options 

and $0.10 per contract for adding 

liquidity in QQQQ, BAC, C, SPY, IWM, 

XLF, AAPL, GE, JPM, INTC, GS, RIMM, 

T, VZ, UNG, FCX, CSCO, DIA, AMZN 

and X options. 

The Exchange has designated this 

proposal to be operative on May 3, 2010. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The basis under the Exchange Act for 

this proposed rule change is the 

requirement under Section 6(b)(4) that 

an exchange have an equitable 

allocation of reasonable dues, fees and 

other charges among its members and 

other persons using its facilities. The 

impact of the proposal upon the net fees 

paid by a particular market participant 

will depend on a number of variables, 

most important of which will be its 

propensity to add or remove liquidity in 

QQQQ, BAC, C, SPY, IWM, XLF, AAPL, 

GE, JPM, INTC, GS, RIMM, T, VZ, UNG, 

FCX, CSCO, DIA, AMZN and X options. 

The Exchange operates in a highly 

competitive market in which market 

participants can readily direct order 

flow to another exchange if they deem 

fee levels at a particular exchange to be 

excessive. The Exchange believes that 

the proposed fees it charges for options 

overlying QQQQ, BAC, C, SPY, IWM, 

XLF, AAPL, GE, JPM, INTC, GS, RIMM, 

T, VZ, UNG, FCX, CSCO, DIA, AMZN 

and X remain competitive with fees 

charged by other exchanges and 

therefore continue to be reasonable and 

equitably allocated to those members 

that opt to direct orders to the Exchange 

rather than to a competing exchange. 

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 

unsolicited written comments from 

members or other interested parties. 

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) of 

the Act 17 and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) 18

thereunder. At any time within 60 days 

of the filing of such 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 

Number SR–ISE–2010–43 on the subject 

line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, 

NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–ISE–2010–43. 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 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 

a.m. and 3 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 

publicly available. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–ISE– 

2010–43 and should be submitted on or 

before June 2, 2010. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.19

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–11254 Filed 5–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–62052; File No. SR– 

NYSEArca–2010–38] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice 

of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness 

of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE 

Arca, Inc. to Clarify, Eliminate, Revise, 

or Delete Certain Out-Dated or 

Obsolete Rules 

May 6, 2010. 

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 April 28, 

2010, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’ or 

‘‘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 self-regulatory 

organization. The Commission is 

publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change 

from interested persons. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 26833 

3OTP Holders and OTP Firms are required to 

keep a current e-mail address on file with the 

Exchange. In addition, the NYSE Arca Trade 

Processing Department maintains contact names 

and phone numbers for all OTP Holders. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to revise its 

rules by clarifying existing provisions, 

eliminating superfluous provisions, and 

revising or deleting certain out-dated or 

obsolete rules. The text of the proposed 

rule change is available on the 

Exchange’s Web site at http:// 

www.nyse.com, at the principal office of 

the Exchange, on the Commission’s Web 

site at http://www.sec.gov, 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 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 purpose of this filing is to revise 

certain Exchange rules in order to 

clarify existing provisions, eliminate 

superfluous provisions, delete certain 

out-dated or obsolete rules and to 

incorporate current policies and 

procedures applicable to existing rules. 

A description of each of the proposed 

rules changes is shown below. 

Rule 2.12—OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms: 

Rule 2.12(a) requires that each OTP 

Firm and OTP Holder shall be fully 

qualified to do business in California. 

This rule dates back to when NYSE Arca 

(f/k/a The Pacific Exchange) was 

headquartered in California and all 

business on the Exchange was 

conducted on the physical trading floor. 

While the Exchange still operates a 

trading floor in California, OTP Holders 

and OTP Firms are not required to have 

a floor presence. OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms are able to conduct business from 

remote locations throughout the 

country. 

NYSE Arca proposes to remove this 

outdated and obsolete requirement that 

OTP Holders and OTP Firms be fully 

qualified to conduct business in 

California. 

Rule 2.24—Floor Employees of OTP 

Firms: 

Rule 2.24(d) states that an OTP Firm 

or OTP Holder with an employee on the 

options trading floor of the Exchange 

must have at least one OTP Holder or 

nominee present on the floor at all 

times, and that such OTP Holders or 

nominees shall be responsible for all 

floor employees of the OTP Firm. The 

rationale for this rule is to help ensure 

that there is adequate supervision of all 

firm employees while on the options 

trading floor. 

With the advent of remote market 

making and electronic access, NYSE 

Arca no longer requires that all OTP 

Holders, or nominees thereof, be 

physically present on the floor. 

However, there could be occasions 

where an OTP Firm does have 

employees on the floor, but the actual 

person designated as the OTP Holder 

works from a remote location. These 

employees would typically operate in a 

trade support, technical or clearing 

capacity, but would not be directly 

involved in the trading of options. 

Pursuant to Rule 11.18, OTP Holders 

or OTP Firms must establish and 

maintain a system to supervise the 

activities of its associated persons and 

the operations of its business. Such 

system must be reasonably designed to 

ensure compliance with applicable 

federal securities laws and regulations 

and the rulers [sic] of NYSE Arca. In 

addition, OTP Holders and OTP Firms 

must designate a person with authority 

to reasonably discharge his/her duties 

and obligations in connection with 

supervision and control of the activities 

of the associated persons of the OTP 

Holder or OTP Firm. In addition, the 

OTP Holder or OTP Firm must 

undertake reasonable efforts to 

determine that all supervisory personnel 

are qualified by virtue of experience or 

training to carry out their assigned 

responsibilities. 

The Exchange now proposes to revise 

Rule 2.24 so that an OTP Holder or OTP 

Firm with employees on the options 

trading floor, none of which are directly 

involved in the trading of options, will 

no longer be required to have an OTP 

Holder, or Nominee thereof, present on 

the options trading floor at all times. 

Instead, the Exchange proposes that in 

keeping with the supervisory 

obligations contained in rule 11.18, OTP 

Holders and OTP Firms with nontrading employees on the options floor, 

must have at least one employee with 

supervisory responsibilities present on 

the trading floor. Each OTP Holder or 

OTP Firm must designate and 

specifically identify to the Exchange one 

or more persons who will be responsible 

for supervision and control of the 

activities of the associated persons of 

the OTP Holder or OTP Firm. 

This rule change does not in any way 

affect the obligation of OTP Holders and 

OTP Firms to properly supervise their 

floor employees. The proposed rule 

change is simply designed to offer 

flexibility to OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms when establishing their 

supervisory systems in accordance with 

Rule 11.18. 

Rule 3.1—Overview: 

Rule 3.1 Commentary .01 contains an 

outdated provision related to the 

demutualization of The Pacific 

Exchange (n/k/a NYSE Arca). 

Commentary .01 states that rule changes 

regarding demutualization in SR–PCX– 

2004–08 would become effective once 

the appropriate federal and state 

regulatory approvals were received and 

NYSE Arca filed the applicable 

documentation with the State of 

Delaware. All approvals pertaining to 

the demutualization of the Pacific 

Exchange were received, and all 

applicable documentation was filed 

with the State of Delaware. The 

Exchange now proposes to delete Rule 

3.1 Commentary .01, in its entirety. 

Rule 6.17—Verification of Compared 

Trades and Reconciliation of 

Uncompared Trades: 

Rule 6.17 Commentary .01 states that 

OTP Holders and OTP Firms that are 

clearing members of the Options 

Clearing Corporation must have a 

representative physically present on the 

trading floor to reconcile uncompared 

trades. In addition, Rule 6.17 

Commentary .01 contains guidelines for 

how long such representative must 

remain on the floor after the close of 

trading. 

The Exchange realizes that it is no 

longer necessary for a representative of 

an OTP Holder or OTP Firm to be 

physically present on the trading floor 

in order to reconcile uncompared 

trades. Thus, the Exchange proposes to 

revise Rule 6.17, Commentary .01 by 

adding language stating that in addition 

to being physically present on the floor, 

such representative may be accessible 

via telephone or e-mail.3 In addition, 

the Exchange proposes to remove the 

specific guidelines for how long a 

representative must remain available 

after the close of trading and instead 

state that a representative of an OTP 

Holder or OTP Firm must be available 

to resolve unmatched trades until the 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

26834 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 

4This requirement is based on Rule 6.61(a) of The 

Chicago Board Options Exchange. 

5The Exchange notes that books and records 

pertaining to brokerage commissions may be 

requested by the Exchange during the course of an 

examination or investigation of OTP Holders and 

OTP Firms. 

final trade transmission is sent to The 

Options Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’).4

Rule 6.17 also states that OTP Holders 

and OTP Firms, that are clearing 

members of the Options Clearing 

Corporation, must have a representative 

present on the floor each Saturday 

immediately following expiration, and 

that it is the responsibility of the 

Exchange staff member to determine 

that such representative is present. The 

Exchange now proposes to add language 

stating that an alternative to being 

physically present on the floor, such 

representative may be accessible via 

telephone or e-mail. 

In addition, Exchange staff will no 

longer make a determination as to 

whether representatives are present on 

the Trading Floor, or otherwise 

accessible. However, it will be 

considered a violation of Rule 6.17 if the 

responsible OTP Holder or OTP Firm is 

not available to reconcile an 

uncompared trade when contacted by 

NYSE Arca Trade Processing 

Department. 

Currently, OTP Holders that fail to 

remain accessible for a specified amount 

of time after trade processing are subject 

to disciplinary action pursuant to the 

NYSE Arca Minor Rule Plan. The 

Exchange proposes to revise the text in 

Rule 10.12(h)(9) and Rule 10.12(k)(9) of 

the Minor Rule Plan to state that it will 

be a violation if an OTP Holder is not 

available when contacted by the 

Exchange to reconcile an uncompared 

trade. 

Rule 6.29—Payment for Floor 

Brokerage Services: 

When an OTP Holder acts as a Floor 

Broker for another OTP Holder they may 

receive remuneration for such brokerage 

services. Rule 6.29 states that payment 

of brokerage commissions to Floor 

Brokers shall be made no later than the 

thirtieth day of the month provided that 

an invoice detailing the brokerage 

charges for the services performed is 

delivered to the OTP Holder or OTP 

Firm receiving such brokerage services 

no later than the tenth day of that 

month. 

The terms of floor brokerage 

remuneration is generally spelled out in 

a contractual agreement between OTP 

Holders. The Exchange does not set 

commission rates for brokerage services, 

nor is the Exchange a party to any 

contractual agreements between OTP 

Holders, nor is the Exchange involved 

in the billing and collecting of such 

commissions. All terms related to the 

payment of brokerage commissions are 

between OTP Holders, and do not in 

any way involve the Exchange.5

Therefore, NYSE Arca does not believe 

there is cause for an Exchange rule that 

specifies when payment for brokerage 

services is payable by OTP Holders. 

The Exchange proposes to delete the 

text of Rule 6.29 in its entirety and 

reserve the rule number for future use. 

Rule 6.32—Market Maker Defined 

6.32A—Market Maker Defined—OX: 

Rule 6.32(a) defines a Market Maker 

as an individual who is registered with 

the Exchange for the purpose of making 

transactions as a dealer-specialist on the 

Floor of the Exchange or for the purpose 

of submitting quotes electronically and 

making transactions as a dealerspecialist through the NYSE Arca OX 

electronic trading system. 

Rule 6.32A defines a Market Maker as 

an OTP Holder or OTP Firm that is 

registered with the Exchange for the 

purpose of submitting quotes 

electronically and making transactions 

as a dealer-specialist through the OX 

trading platform from on the trading 

floor or remotely from off the trading 

floor. 

Both 6.32(a) and 6.32A also contain 

additional descriptive language 

regarding Market Makers, and Lead 

Market Makers. This language is 

virtually identical in both rules. In 

addition, Rule 6.32A contains a 

provision that states that a Market 

Maker submitting quotes remotely is not 

eligible to participate in trades effected 

in open outcry except to the extent that 

such Market Maker’s quotation 

represents the BBO. 

Given that the two rules described 

above are vastly similar, the Exchange 

now proposes to delete Rule 6.32A in its 

entirety while incorporating a portion of 

it into Rule 6.32(a). Since most of Rule 

6.32A is already included in Rule 

6.32(a), Rule 6.32(a) will remain 

virtually unchanged except for the 

addition of a new subsection (2) which 

will contain the provision from Rule 

6.32A regarding a remote Market 

Maker’s ability to participate in trades 

effected in open outcry. 

This proposal is intended to simplify 

existing rules regarding the definition of 

a Market Maker by deleting the 

duplicative text contained in Rule 

6.32A, while incorporating the still 

relevant portions into Rule 6.32(a). This 

rule change will not in any way affect 

the rights or obligations of Market 

Makers. 

The Exchange also proposes to make 

technical revisions to rule reference 

contained in Rule 6.1A(a)(8) and Rule 

6.87 Commentary .05 to reflect the 

proposed change to Rule 6.32A. 

Rule 6.36—Letters of Guarantee 

Rule 6.45—Letters of Authorization: 

Rule 6.36(c) addresses Letters of 

Guarantee for Market Makers and states 

that a Letter of Guarantee shall remain 

in effect until a final written notice of 

revocation has been filed with the 

Exchange and posted on the bulletin 

board of the Options Trading Floor. If 

such final written notice has not been 

posted for at least one hour prior to the 

opening of trading on a particular 

business day, such revocation shall not 

become effective until the close of 

trading on such day. 

Rule 6.45(c) addresses Letters of 

Authorization for Floor Brokers and 

states that a Letter of Authorization 

shall remain in effect until a written 

notice of revocation has been filed with 

the Exchange and posted on the bulletin 

board of the Options Trading Floor. If 

such written notice has not been posted 

for at least one hour prior to the opening 

of trading on a particular business day, 

such revocation shall not become 

effective until the close of trading on 

such day. 

NYSE Arca believes that the posting 

of notices of revocation on a bulletin 

board is simply an administrative 

function of the Exchange and should not 

actually define when a notice of 

revocation should be effective. The 

Exchange does not believe that it is 

necessary to require the actual posting 

of notices of revocations in order for 

them to be effective, provided the 

Exchange does receive notification at 

least one hour prior to the opening of 

trading. 

The Exchange now proposes to revise 

Rule 6.36(c) and Rule 6.45(c) by 

removing the requirement that the 

Exchange post the Letter of Revocation 

on the bulletin board on the floor one 

hour before the opening of business in 

order for the revocation to be effective. 

Instead, pursuant to the proposed rule 

change, Letters of Guarantee and Letters 

of Authorization will remain in effect 

until a final written notice of revocation 

has been filed via e-mail with the 

Exchange. If such final written notice 

has not been received via e-mail by the 

Exchange at least one hour prior to the 

opening of trading on a particular 

business day, such revocation shall not 

become effective until the close of 

trading on such day. 

Making notices of revocation, filed 

one hour before the opening of trading, 

effective without posting on a bulletin 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 26835 

6See NASDAQ PHLX OMX Rule 1062(c), NYSE 

Amex Rule 924NY(c). 

7NYSE Arca Weekly Bulletins can be found at 

http://www.nyx.com/regulation, under ‘‘Public 

Information.’’ 

8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60295 

(July 13, 2009), 74 FR 35215 (July 20, 2009) (SR– 

CBOE–2009–49) and Securities Exchange Act 

Release No. 60897 (October 28, 2009) 74 FR 57217 

(November 4, 2009) (SR–ISE–2009–85). 

9The last Order Service Firm ceased operations 

on the floor of the Exchange in 2005. 

10See SR–PCX–2004–122 (December 14, 2004), 

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50854 

(December 14, 2004), 72 FR 76808 (December 22, 

2004). 

board is consistent with rules regarding 

notices of revocation presently in place 

at NASDAQ OMX PHLX, and NYSE 

Amex.6

The Exchange recognizes that posting 

notices on the bulletin board also serves 

as a way to communicate membership 

information to OTP Holders. 

Accordingly, NYSE Arca will continue 

to publish the names of all terminated 

Market Makers and Floor Brokers in the 

Weekly Bulletin. The Weekly Bulletin is 

distributed via e-mail to all OTP 

Holders and is also posted on the 

Exchange Web site.7

Rule 6.37—Obligations of Market 

Makers 

Rule 6.37A—Obligations of Market 

Makers—OX: 

NYSE Arca proposes to amend Rules 

6.37 and 6.37A by eliminating 

provisions in each rule that provide for 

bids/offers to be no higher/lower than 

the last preceding transaction plus or 

minus the aggregate change in the last 

sale price of the underlying security 

(‘‘one point rule’’). 

Specifically, Rule 6.37(b)(2) and Rule 

6.37A(b)(6) both provide that Market 

Makers are expected ordinarily not to 

bid more than $1 lower or offer more 

than $1 higher than the last preceding 

transaction price for the particular 

option contract plus or minus the 

aggregate change in the last sale price of 

the underlying security since the time of 

the last preceding transaction for the 

particular option contract. 

The Exchange now proposes to 

eliminate the one point rule. The one 

point rule was first established when 

NYSE Arca (f/k/a The Pacific Exchange) 

started trading listed options in 1976. 

Since that time various market changes 

have rendered the rule obsolete and 

unnecessary. For example, market 

makers are now subject to various 

quotation requirements, including bid/ 

ask quote width requirements contained 

elsewhere in Rules 6.37 and 6.37A. The 

Exchange also has an obvious error rule 

that contains provisions on erroneous 

pricing errors (e.g., Rule 6.87). In 

addition, the NYSE Arca automated 

trading system has in place certain price 

check parameters that will not permit 

the automatic execution of certain 

orders if the execution would take place 

at prices inferior to the national best 

bid/offer. 

The text of Rule 6.37(b)(2) and Rule 

6.37A(b)(6) will be deleted; however the 

Exchange proposes to designate the rule 

numbers as ‘‘reserved’’ for possible 

future use. 

The elimination of the NYSE Arca one 

point rule is consistent with similar rule 

changes by the Chicago Board Options 

Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’) and the 

International Securities Exchange 

(‘‘ISE’’).8

NYSE Arca is also proposing to make 

non-substantive changes to certain 

provisions of Rules 6.37 and 6.37A 

containing references to the proposed 

rule deletions. 

Rule 6.60—Order Service Firms: 

An Order Service Firm is an OTP 

Holder or OTP Firm that is registered 

with the Exchange for the purpose of 

accepting orders for the purchase or sale 

of stocks or commodity futures contracts 

from Market Makers on the Floor of the 

Exchange, and forwarding such orders 

for execution. 

Prior to the advent of electronic 

access to the equities markets, Market 

Makers on the floor of the Exchange 

would use Order Service Firms to place 

stock orders used in hedging options 

trades. All Market Makers now have 

electronic access to the equities markets, 

rendering the use of an Order Service 

Firm obsolete. There are presently no 

Order Service Firms operating on the 

floor,9 nor does the Exchange anticipate 

ever having the need for them in the 

future. Therefore, NYSE Arca proposes 

to delete the language from Rule 6.60 in 

its entirety, and reserve the rule number 

for possible future use. 

Rule 6.66—Order Identification: 

Rule 6.66 deals with order 

identification and a Floor Broker’s 

responsibility to disclose certain 

information pertaining to the party for 

whom they are acting as agent. 

Rule 6.66 Commentary .01 requires a 

Floor Broker, when requesting a market 

and size, to disclose the name of the 

OTP Holder or OTP Firm for whom he 

is acting. Commentary .01 goes on to say 

a Floor Broker must, upon request, 

disclose the name of such OTP Holder 

or OTP Firm immediately upon 

effecting any transaction. 

NYSE Arca no longer believes that it 

is necessarily in the best interest of the 

marketplace to require Floor Brokers to 

supply such information when 

requesting quotations or effecting 

transactions. The Exchange feels that 

disclosing the name of the OTP Holder 

or OTP Firm when asking for a market 

and size could lead to disparate 

treatment on the part of trading crowd 

participants. Furthermore, requiring a 

Floor Broker to disclose the name of the 

OTP Holder or OTP Firm participating 

on a trade is not in keeping with an 

effort to provide anonymity when 

trading on NYSE Arca. 

While these provisions may have had 

merit when initially enacted, they have 

become outdated by today’s standards. 

There are other provisions within 

Exchange rules requiring a Floor Broker 

to disclose when they are trading on 

behalf of a BD or Market Maker, without 

compromising the anonymity of the 

market. Therefore, the Exchange 

proposes to eliminate Commentary .01 

in its entirety. 

Rule 6.68—Record of Orders: 

Rule 6.68(a) requires OTP Holder and 

OTP Firms to maintain and preserve a 

record of every order and of any other 

instruction given or received for the 

purchase or sale of option contracts for 

the period specified under SEC Rule 

17a–4. Rule 6.68(a) also states that the 

Exchange shall maintain and preserve 

all electronic orders on behalf of OTP 

Holders and OTP Firms. 

The maintenance and preservation of 

electronic orders by the Exchange, on 

behalf of OTP Holders and OTP Firms, 

came about in 2004 when the Exchange 

introduced the Electronic Order Capture 

(‘‘EOC’’) System.10 The EOC system is 

the Exchange’s electronic audit trail and 

order tracking system designed to 

provide an accurate time-sequenced 

record of all orders and transactions on 

the Exchange. Prior to the introduction 

of the EOC system, all orders were 

written on paper tickets, the 

maintenance of which was the 

responsibility of OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms. The EOC system is an Exchange 

proprietary system and at the time it 

was introduced OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms did not have access to historic 

order records contained in the system. 

In order to allow OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms to remain in compliance with 

their own books and records 

requirements, the Exchange preserved 

and maintained all records of electronic 

orders on their behalf. In the event an 

OTP Holder or OTP Firm needed access 

to these order records, the Exchange 

would furnish such records upon 

request. 

Beginning in 2007, the Exchange 

made electronic order records available 

to OTP Holders and OTP Firms via an 

electronic file. OTP Holders and OTP 

Firms are able to download this file on 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

26836 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 

11See SR–PCX–1999–44 (October 29, 1999), 

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43149 (August 

11, 2000), 65 FR 51392 (August 23, 2000) (File No. 

SR–PCX–99–44). 

12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 

15 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

17 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give the 

Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent 

to file the proposed rule change along with a brief 

description and text of the proposed rule change, 

at least five business days prior to the date of filing 

of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time 

as designated by the Commission. The Exchange 

has satisfied the pre-filing requirement. 

a daily basis and store the information 

on their own proprietary systems. The 

information contained in the daily 

report is identical to the information 

that the Exchange kept on behalf of OTP 

Holders and OTP Firms. Each daily 

trade report remains available on-line 

for a period of thirty days. Since OTP 

Holders and OTP Firms can now access 

this information themselves, there is no 

longer an ongoing need for the Exchange 

to maintain such records on behalf of 

OTP Holders and OTP Firms. The 

Exchange now proposes to remove the 

provision in Rule 6.68(a) that states that 

the Exchange shall maintain and 

preserve all electronic orders on behalf 

of OTP Holders and OTP Firms. 

NYSE Arca notes that this proposed 

rule change only affects the Exchange’s 

maintenance and preservation of 

electronic order records on behalf of 

OTP Holders and OTP Firms. The 

proposed rule change does not in any 

way alter the Exchange’s obligation to 

maintain and preserve order records 

pursuant to its own books and records 

requirements. 

Rule 6.70—Price Binding Despite 

Erroneous Report: 

Rule 6.70 states that the price at 

which an order is executed shall be 

binding notwithstanding that an 

erroneous report in respect thereto may 

have been rendered, or no report 

rendered. In addition, Rule 6.70 

contains commentary pertaining to 

erroneous prints and trades in securities 

underlying options traded on the 

Exchange. 

At the time this rule was adopted in 

1999,11 all trading was conducted on the 

floor of the Exchange via open outcry. 

Since that time, the Exchange has 

introduced electronic options trading, 

along with associated rules governing 

such trading. Specifically, erroneous 

transactions in the electronic market are 

governed by Rule 6.87. The Exchange 

now proposes to add commentary to 

Rule 6.70 stating that the rule is 

applicable only to non-electronic orders 

and transactions. The proposed rule 

change does not alter existing Exchange 

procedures pertaining to erroneous 

transactions, but simply serves to offer 

clarity on the applicability of Rule 6.70 

to open outcry transactions only. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b) of the Act 12 in general, and 

furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 

of the Act 13 in particular, because it is 

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 

facilitating transactions in securities, 

and to remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system. The changes proposed in this 

filing are simply designed to eliminate 

or revise outdated or obsolete rules and 

practices on NYSE Arca. 

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. 

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 with respect to the 

proposed rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The Exchange has filed the proposed 

rule change pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 14 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.15 Because the 

proposed rule change does not: (i) 

Significantly affect the protection of 

investors or the public interest; (ii) 

impose any significant burden on 

competition; and (iii) become operative 

prior to 30 days from the date on which 

it was filed, or such shorter time as the 

Commission may designate, if 

consistent with the protection of 

investors and the public interest, the 

proposed rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 

of the Act 16 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 

thereunder.17

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 

Number SR–NYSEArca–2010–38 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–NYSEArca–2010–38. 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 Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 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. 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–NYSEArca–2010–38 and 

should be submitted on or before June 

2, 2010. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 / Notices 26837 

18 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.18

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–11253 Filed 5–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 6999] 

Advisory Committee on Historical 

Diplomatic Documentation Notice of 

Meeting 

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on 

Historical Diplomatic Documentation 

will meet on June 7 and June 8, 2010 at 

the Department of State, 2201 ‘‘C’’ Street 

NW., Washington, DC. 

Prior notification and a valid 

government-issued photo ID (such as 

driver’s license, passport, U.S. 

government or military ID) are required 

for entrance into the building. Members 

of the public planning to attend must 

notify Margaret Morrissey, Office of the 

Historian (202–663–3529) no later than 

June 3, 2010, to provide date of birth, 

valid government-issued photo 

identification number and type (such as 

driver’s license number/state, passport 

number/country, or US government ID 

number/agency or military ID number/ 

branch), and relevant telephone 

numbers. If you cannot provide one of 

the specified forms of ID, please consult 

with Margaret Morrissey for acceptable 

alternative forms of picture 

identification. In addition, any requests 

for reasonable accommodation should 

be made no later than June 1, 2010. 

Requests for reasonable accommodation 

received after that time will be 

considered, but might be impossible to 

fulfill. 

The Committee will meet in open 

session from 1:30 p.m. through 2:30 

p.m. on Monday, June 7, 2010, in the 

Department of State, 2201 ‘‘C’’ Street 

NW., Washington, DC, in Conference 

Room 1205, to discuss declassification 

and transfer of Department of State 

records to the National Archives and 

Records Administration and the status 

of the Foreign Relations series. The 

remainder of the Committee’s sessions 

from 2:45 p.m. until 5 p.m. on Monday, 

June 7, 2010 and 9 a.m. until 12 p.m. on 

Tuesday, June 8, 2010, will be closed in 

accordance with Section 10(d) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463). The agenda calls for 

discussions of agency declassification 

decisions concerning the Foreign 

Relations series and other 

declassification issues. These are 

matters properly classified and not 

subject to public disclosure under 5 

U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and the public interest 

requires that such activities be withheld 

from disclosure. Questions concerning 

the meeting should be directed to 

Ambassador Edward Brynn, Executive 

Secretary, Advisory Committee on 

Historical Diplomatic Documentation, 

Department of State, Office of the 

Historian, Washington, DC 20520, 

telephone (202) 663–1123, (e-mail 

history@state.gov). 

Dated: April 29, 2010. 

Ambassador Edward Brynn, 

Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on 

Historical Diplomatic Documentation, 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2010–11328 Filed 5–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0038] 

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping 

Requirements 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Request for public comment on 

proposed collection of information. 

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can 

collect certain information from the 

public, it must receive approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Under procedures established 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before seeking 

OMB approval, Federal agencies must 

solicit public comment on proposed 

collections of information, including 

extensions and reinstatements of 

previously approved collections. 

This document describes an 

Information Collection Request (ICR) for 

which NHTSA intends to seek OMB 

approval. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before July 12, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation Dockets, 1200 New 

Jersey Ave, SE., Washington, DC, 20590. 

Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0038. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randolph Atkins, PhD, Contracting 

Officer’s Technical Representative, 

Office of Behavioral Safety Research 

(NTI–131), National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Ave, SE., W46–500, Washington, DC, 

20590. Dr. Atkins’ phone number is 

202–366–5597 and his e-mail address is 

randolph.atkins@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, before an agency submits a 

proposed collection of information to 

OMB for approval, it must publish a 

document in the Federal Register 

providing a 60-day comment period and 

otherwise consult with members of the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

each proposed collection of information. 

The OMB has promulgated regulations 

describing what must be included in 

such a document. Under OMB’s 

regulations (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an 

agency must ask for public comment on 

the following: 

(i) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; 

(iii) How to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and 

(iv) How to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, including the use 

of appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

In compliance with these 

requirements, NHTSA asks public 

comment on the following proposed 

collection of information: 

Title: Investigate the Use and 

Feasibility of Speed Warning Devices. 

Type of Request: New information 

collection request—debriefing session 

follow-up with participants from an 

earlier on-road instrumented vehicle 

study. 

OMB Clearance Number: N/A. 

Form Number: This collection of 

information uses no standard forms. 

Requested Expiration Date of 

Approval: September 17, 2011. 

Summary of the Collection of 

Information: In this pilot study, the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA) will be 

conducting on-road instrumented 

vehicle data collection in the Rockville, 

MD area with a total of 80 participants 

who have a history of speeding 

violations to examine the impact of invehicle speed warning devices on their 

driving speed patterns and speeding 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES