Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Notices 8319 

17The Exchange notes that the distance of a 

wireless network provider’s wireless equipment 

from the User is only one factor in determining 

overall latency. Other factors include the number of 

repeaters in the route, the number of switches the 

data has to travel through, and the millimeter wave 

and switch technology used. 

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 

19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

20 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

21 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 

23 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

that its proposed wireless connection to 

TotalView Ultra would provide data at 

the same or similar speed, and at the 

same or similar cost, as its proposed 

wireless connection [sic], thereby 

enhancing competition.17

Finally, the Exchange notes that it 

operates in a highly competitive market 

in which market participants can 

readily favor competing venues if they 

deem fee levels at a particular venue to 

be excessive. In such an environment, 

the Exchange must continually review, 

and consider adjusting, its services and 

related fees and credits to remain 

competitive with other exchanges. For 

the reasons described above, the 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

rule change reflects this competitive 

environment. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were 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 18 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.19 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 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 

thereunder. 

A proposed rule change filed under 

Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 20 normally does not 

become operative prior to 30 days after 

the date of the filing. However, pursuant 

to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),21 the Commission 

may designate a shorter time if such 

action is consistent with the protection 

of investors and the public interest. 

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of such proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission shall institute proceedings 

under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 22 of the Act 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 (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File No. SR– 

NYSEMKT–2016–02 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 No. 

SR–NYSEMKT–2016–02. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

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

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549 on official 

business days between the hours of 

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

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File No. SR–NYSEMKT– 

2016–02, and should be submitted on or 

before March 10, 2016. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.23

Robert W. Errett, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03264 Filed 2–17–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–77116; File No. SR– 

NASDAQ–2016–012] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Amend 

NOM Rules at Chapter XV, Section 2 

February 11, 2016. 

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 January 

28, 2016, The NASDAQ Stock Market 

LLC (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed 

rule change as described in Items I, II, 

and III below, which Items have been 

prepared by the Exchange. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Chapter XV, entitled ‘‘Options Pricing,’’ 

at Section 2, which governs pricing for 

Exchange members using the NASDAQ 

Options Market (‘‘NOM’’), the 

Exchange’s facility for executing and 

routing standardized equity and index 

options. 

While changes to the Pricing 

Schedule pursuant to this proposal are 

effective upon filing, the Exchange has 

designated these changes to be operative 

on February 1, 2016. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s Web site 

at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

8320 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Notices 

3The term ‘‘NOM Market Maker’’ is a Participant 

that has registered as a Market Maker on NOM 

pursuant to Chapter VII, Section 2, and must also 

remain in good standing pursuant to Chapter VII, 

Section 4. In order to receive NOM Market Maker 

pricing in all securities, the Participant must be 

registered as a NOM Market Maker in at least one 

security. 

4The term ‘‘Non-NOM Market Maker’’ is a 

registered market maker on another options 

exchange that is not a NOM Market Maker. A NonNOM Market Maker must append the proper NonNOM Market Maker designation to orders routed to 

NOM. 

5The term ‘‘Customer’’ or (‘‘C’’) applies to any 

transaction that is identified by a Participant for 

clearing in the Customer range at The Options 

Clearing Corporation which is not for the account 

of broker or dealer or for the account of a 

‘‘Professional’’ (as that term is defined in Chapter 

I, Section 1(a)(48)). 

6The term ‘‘Professional’’ or (‘‘P’’) means any 

person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in 

securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in 

listed options per day on average during a calendar 

month for its own beneficial account(s) pursuant to 

Chapter I, Section 1(a)(48). All Professional orders 

shall be appropriately marked by Participants. 

7The term ‘‘Firm’’ or (‘‘F’’) applies to any 

transaction that is identified by a Participant for 

clearing in the Firm range at The Options Clearing 

Corporation. 

8The term ‘‘Broker-Dealer’’ or (‘‘B’’) applies to 

any transaction which is not subject to any of the 

other transaction fees applicable within a particular 

category. 

9The term ‘‘Common Ownership’’ shall mean 

Participants under 75% common ownership or 

control. Common Ownership shall apply to all 

pricing in Chapter XV, Section 2 for which a 

volume threshold or volume percentage is required 

to obtain the pricing. 

10 15 U.S.C. 78f. 

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). 

12 Id. [sic] at 539 (quoting Securities Exchange 

[sic] Release No. 59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 

74770 (December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21) 

at 73 FR at 74782–74783). 13Participants are required to add 1.30% of 

Customer, Professional, Firm, Broker-Dealer or NonNOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot 

Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of total 

industry customer equity and ETF option ADV 

contracts per day in a month and the Participant 

must be (i) both the buyer and seller or (ii) the 

Participant must remove liquidity from another 

Participant under Common Ownership. 

14 Id. 15Pursuant to Chapter VII (Market Participants), 

Section 5 (Obligations of Market Makers), in 

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 

Exchange included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change and discussed 

any comments it received on the 

proposed rule change. The text of these 

statements may be examined at the 

places specified in Item IV below. The 

Exchange has prepared summaries, set 

forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 

the most significant aspects of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes certain 

amendments to the NOM transaction 

fees set forth at Chapter XV, Section 2 

for executing and routing standardized 

equity and index options under the 

Penny Pilot Options program. The 

Exchange desires to continue to offer an 

incentive to NOM Participants to add an 

even greater amount of liquidity to 

NOM. Specifically, the Exchange 

proposes to continue to incentivize 

Participants by continuing to offer the 

opportunity to reduce the NOM Market 

Maker 3 and Non-NOM Market Maker 4

Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing 

Liquidity from $0.50 to $0.48 per 

contract, provided the Participant adds 

1.30% of Customer,5 Professional,6

Firm,7 Broker-Dealer 8 or Non-NOM 

Market Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot 

Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot 

Options of total industry customer 

equity and ETF option ADV contracts 

per day in a month and the Participant 

is (i) both the buyer and seller or (ii) the 

Participant removes liquidity from 

another Participant under Common 

Ownership.9

The Exchange is removing the current 

date range, January 11, 2016 through 

January 26 [sic], 2016, so the Exchange 

may continue to offer this incentive 

going forward. For purposes of clarity, 

the Exchange proposes to add rule text 

to make clear that Participants that add 

1.30% of Customer, Professional, Firm, 

Broker-Dealer or Non-NOM Market 

Maker liquidity in either Penny Pilot 

Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot 

Options may qualify for the incentive. 

Also, the Exchange proposes to clarify 

that the 1.30% applies to total industry 

customer equity and ETF option ADV 

contracts per day in a month. While the 

Exchange believes that there is no 

confusion among market participants as 

to the qualifying volume for this 

incentive, the Exchange proposes to add 

this rule text language for clarity. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6 of the Act,10 in general, and 

with Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the 

Act,11 in particular, in that it provides 

for the equitable allocation of reasonable 

dues, fees, and other charges among 

members and issuers and other persons 

using any facility or system which the 

Exchange operates or controls, and is 

not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. Attracting 

order flow to the Exchange benefits all 

Participants who have the opportunity 

to interact with this order flow. 

The Commission and the courts have 

repeatedly expressed their preference 

for competition over regulatory 

intervention in determining prices, 

products, and services in the securities 

markets. Further, ‘‘[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’. . . .’’ 12 Although the court 

and the SEC were discussing the cash 

equities markets, the Exchange believes 

that these views apply with equal force 

to the options markets and this proposal 

is consistent with those views in that it 

is a price cut driven by competition. 

The Exchange’s proposal to continue 

to incentivize Participants to send order 

flow to NOM by offering the 

opportunity to reduce the NOM Market 

Maker and Non-NOM Market Maker 

Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing 

Liquidity from $0.50 to $0.48 per 

contract, provided the Participant 

qualifies for the incentive,13 is 

reasonable because the Exchange 

believes NOM will continue to attract a 

greater amount of order flow by offering 

this discounted rate. The Exchange 

believes that this additional fee 

reduction for Non-NOM Market Makers 

and NOM Market Makers should further 

incentivize Participants to add liquidity 

in Penny Pilot Options on NOM to 

obtain the discounted rate going 

forward. 

The Exchange’s proposal to continue 

to incentivize Participants to send order 

flow to NOM by offering the 

opportunity to reduce the NOM Market 

Maker and Non-NOM Market Maker 

Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing 

Liquidity from $0.50 to $0.48 per 

contract, provided the Participant 

qualifies for the incentive,14 is equitable 

and not unfairly discriminatory for the 

reasons which follow. NOM Market 

Makers have obligations to the market 

and regulatory requirements, which 

normally do not apply to other market 

participants.15 A NOM Market Maker 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Notices 8321 

registering as a market maker, an Options 

Participant commits himself to various obligations. 

Transactions of a Market Maker in its market 

making capacity must constitute a course of 

dealings reasonably calculated to contribute to the 

maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and 

Market Makers should not make bids or offers or 

enter into transactions that are inconsistent with 

such course of dealings. Further, all Market Makers 

are designated as specialists on NOM for all 

purposes under the Act or rules thereunder. See 

Chapter VII, Section 5. 

16Each NOM Participant is assigned a firm code 

by the Exchange. 

17 In this example, the same Participant that 

added and removed the order would be entitled to 

the fee reduction because the NOM Participant was 

the buyer and seller on the transaction. 

18The Firm Floor Options Transaction Charges 

will be waived for members executing facilitation 

orders pursuant to Exchange Rule 1064 when such 

members are trading in their own proprietary 

account (including Cabinet Options Transaction 

Charges). The Firm Floor Options Transaction 

Charges will be waived for the buy side of a 

transaction if the same member or its affiliates 

under Common Ownership represents both sides of 

a Firm transaction when such members are trading 

in their own proprietary account. In addition, the 

Broker-Dealer Floor Options Transaction Charge 

(including Cabinet Options Transaction Charges) 

will be waived for members executing facilitation 

orders pursuant to Exchange Rule 1064 when such 

members would otherwise incur this charge for 

trading in their own proprietary account contra to 

a Customer (‘‘BD-Customer Facilitation’’), if the 

member’s BD-Customer Facilitation average daily 

volume (including both FLEX and non-FLEX 

transactions) exceeds 10,000 contracts per day in a 

given month. See Phlx’s Pricing Schedule. 

19See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494 

(May 13, 2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR– 

NASDAQ–2011–066) (‘‘Professional Filing’’). In this 

filing, the Exchange addressed the perceived 

favorable pricing of Professionals who were 

assessed fees and paid rebates like a Customer prior 

to the filing. The Exchange noted in that filing that 

a Professional, unlike a retail Customer, has access 

to sophisticated trading systems that contain 

functionality not available to retail Customers. 

20See Professional Filing. 

has the obligation, for example, to make 

continuous markets, engage in a course 

of dealings reasonably calculated to 

contribute to the maintenance of a fair 

and orderly market, and not make bids 

or offers or enter into transactions that 

are inconsistent with a [sic] course of 

dealings. The proposed differentiation 

as between NOM Market Makers and 

other market participants recognizes the 

differing contributions made to the 

trading environment on the Exchange by 

NOM Market Makers. For the above 

reasons, the Exchange believes that 

NOM Market Makers are entitled to 

discounted fees, provided they qualify 

for the discount. The Exchange believes 

it is equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory to offer the fee discount 

to Non-NOM Market Makers because the 

Exchange is offering Participants 

flexibility in the manner in which they 

are submitting their orders. Non-NOM 

Market Makers have obligations on 

other exchanges to qualify as a market 

maker. Also, the Exchange believes that 

market makers not registered on NOM 

will be encouraged to send orders to 

NOM as an away market maker (NonNOM Market Maker) with this 

incentive. Because the incentive is being 

offered to both market makers registered 

on NOM and those not registered on 

NOM, the Exchange believes that the 

proposal is equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because it encourages 

market makers to direct liquidity to 

NOM to the benefit of all Participants. 

This proposal recognizes the overall 

contributions made by market makers to 

a listed options market. 

The Exchange believes that it is 

reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory to only offer the fee 

reduction to NOM Market Makers and 

Non-NOM Market Makers because the 

Exchange is offering this $0.02 per 

contract fee discount to the Penny Pilot 

Options Fees for Removing Liquidity to 

continue to incentivize NOM 

Participants to select NOM as a venue 

to send Customer, Professional, Firm, 

Broker-Dealer or Non-NOM Market 

Maker order flow. Participants may send 

either Penny or Non-Penny Pilot 

Options to qualify for the discount. 

The Exchange believes that it is 

reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory to permit NOM 

Participants with 75 percent common 

ownership to aggregate their volume for 

purposes of obtaining the fee discount 

because certain NOM Participants chose 

to segregate their businesses into 

different legal entities for purposes of 

conducting business. The Exchange 

believes that these NOM Participants 

should be treated as one entity for 

purposes of qualifying for the 

discounted Fee for Removing Liquidity 

in Penny Pilot Options, as long as there 

is at least 75% Common Ownership or 

control among the NOM Participants. 

The Exchange also believes that it is 

reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory to offer a $0.02 per 

contract reduced Penny Pilot Option 

Fee for Removing Liquidity to NonNOM Market Makers and NOM Market 

Makers for transactions in which the 

same NOM Participant or a NOM 

Participant under Common Ownership 

is the buyer and the seller. NOM 

Participants that chose to segregate their 

businesses into different legal entities 

should still be afforded the opportunity 

to receive the discount as if they were 

the same NOM Participant on both sides 

of the transaction. 

It is important to note that NOM 

Participants are unaware at the time the 

order is entered of the identity of the 

contra-party. Because contra-parties are 

anonymous, the Exchange believes that 

NOM Participants would aggressively 

pursue order flow in order to receive the 

benefit of the reduction. NOM 

Participants would only receive the 

incentive if they interact with their own 

order flow, recognizing Common 

Ownership where applicable. Offering 

the additional fee reduction is 

reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because Participants 

would be entitled to receive the fee 

reduction only when the Participant is 

both the buyer and seller. By way of 

example, if a NOM Participant that is 

assigned the firm code 16 ‘‘ABC’’ by the 

Exchange posted an order utilizing its 

Customer order router, and the order 

was removed by an ABC NOM Market 

Maker order, the NOM Participant 

would receive the $0.02 per contract fee 

reduction for that trade ($0.50 to $0.48 

per contract). The Exchange proposes to 

utilize the Exchange assigned firm code 

to determine which NOM Participant 

executed an order and to apply the fee 

reduction to the Non-NOM Market 

Maker or NOM Market Maker Penny 

Pilot Option Fee for Removing Liquidity 

if the same NOM Participant was the 

buyer and the seller to a transaction.17

This concept is not novel. Today 

NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’) 

assesses a Firm Floor Options 

Transaction Charge based on which side 

of the transaction the member 

represents as well [sic] whether the 

same member or its affiliates under 

Common Ownership was represented.18

Finally, the Exchange’s proposal to 

count all order flow (Penny and NonPenny Pilot Options) toward the 1.30% 

requisite volume, except for NOM 

Market Maker order flow is reasonable, 

equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because NOM Market 

Makers are entitled to rebates today 

similar to Customers and Professionals. 

Customer volume is important because 

it continues to attract liquidity to the 

Exchange, which benefits all market 

participants. Further, with respect to 

Professional liquidity, the Exchange 

initially established Professional pricing 

in order to ‘‘. . . bring additional 

revenue to the Exchange.’’ 19 The 

Exchange noted in the Professional 

Filing that it believes ‘‘. . . that the 

increased revenue from the proposal 

would assist the Exchange to recoup 

fixed costs.’’ 20 Further, the Exchange 

noted in that filing that it believes that 

establishing separate pricing for a 

Professional, which ranges between that 

of a Customer and market maker, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

8322 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Notices 

21See Professional Filing. The Exchange also in 

[sic] the Professional Filing that it believes the role 

of the retail Customer in the marketplace is distinct 

from that of the Professional and the Exchange’s fee 

proposal at that time accounted for this distinction 

by pricing each market participant according to 

their roles and obligations. 

22See note 15. 23See note 15. 24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

accomplishes this objective.21 The 

Exchange offers NOM Market Makers 

rebates in acknowledgment of the 

obligations22 these Participants bear in 

the market. The Exchange believes that 

it is not necessary to count NOM Market 

Maker volume toward the volume to 

qualify for the fee reduction because 

that volume is counted toward the 

qualifiers for the NOM Market Maker 

rebates. 

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. In terms of 

inter-market competition, the Exchange 

notes that it operates in a highly 

competitive market in which market 

participants can readily favor competing 

venues if they deem fee levels at a 

particular venue to be excessive, or 

rebate opportunities available at other 

venues to be more favorable. In such an 

environment, the Exchange must 

continually adjust its fees to remain 

competitive with other exchanges and 

with alternative trading systems that 

have been exempted from compliance 

with the statutory standards applicable 

to exchanges. Because competitors are 

free to modify their own fees in 

response and because market 

participants may readily adjust their 

order routing practices, the Exchange 

believes that the degree to which fee 

changes in this market may impose any 

burden on competition is extremely 

limited. 

In this instance, the continuation of 

the proposed amendments to NOM 

Market Maker and Non-NOM Market 

Maker Penny Pilot Options Fees for 

Removing Liquidity do not impose an 

undue burden on inter-market 

competition because the Exchange’s 

execution services are completely 

voluntary and subject to extensive 

competition. 

The Exchange’s proposal to 

incentivize Participants by continuing 

to offer the opportunity to reduce the 

NOM Market Maker and Non-NOM 

Market Maker Penny Pilot Options Fees 

for Removing Liquidity from $0.50 to 

$0.48 per contract, provided the 

Participant adds 1.30% of Customer, 

Professional, Firm, Broker-Dealer or 

Non-NOM Market Maker liquidity in 

Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny 

Pilot Options of total industry customer 

equity and ETF option ADV contracts 

per day in a month and the Participant 

is (i) both the buyer and seller or (ii) the 

Participant removes liquidity from 

another Participant under Common 

Ownership does not create an undue 

burden on intra-market competition 

because NOM Market Makers have 

obligations to the market and regulatory 

requirements, which normally do not 

apply to other market participants.23

Offering the fee discount to Non-NOM 

Market Makers provides Participants 

with flexibility in the manner in which 

they are submitting their orders. NonNOM Market Makers have obligations 

on other exchanges to qualify as a 

market maker. Also, the Exchange 

believes that market makers not 

registered on NOM will be encouraged 

to send orders to NOM as an away 

market maker (Non-NOM Market Maker) 

with this incentive. Because the 

incentive is being offered to both market 

makers registered on NOM and those 

not registered on NOM, the Exchange 

believes that the proposal does not 

impose an undue burden on intramarket competition because it 

encourages market makers to direct 

liquidity to NOM to the benefit of all 

Participants. 

The Exchange believes that permitting 

NOM Participants with 75 percent 

common ownership to aggregate their 

volume for purposes of obtaining the fee 

discount does not create an undue 

burden on intra-market competition 

because certain NOM Participants chose 

to segregate their businesses into 

different legal entities for purposes of 

conducting business. NOM Participants 

that chose to segregate their businesses 

into different legal entities should still 

be afforded the opportunity to receive 

the discount as if they were the same 

NOM Participant on both sides of the 

transaction. 

Participants would be entitled to 

receive the fee reduction when the 

Participant is both the buyer and seller 

and therefore this qualifier does not 

create an undue burden on intra-market 

competition. NOM Participants are 

unaware at the time the order is entered 

of the identity of the contra-party, 

therefore, since contra-parties are 

anonymous, the Exchange believes that 

NOM Participants would aggressively 

pursue order flow in order to receive the 

benefit of the reduction, to the benefit 

of all Participants. 

The Exchange’s proposal to continue 

to count all order flow toward the 

1.30% requisite volume, except for 

NOM Market Maker order flow does not 

impose an undue burden on intramarket competition because the 

Exchange believes it is not necessary to 

count NOM Market Maker volume in 

qualifying for the fee discount as that 

volume is counted toward qualifying for 

NOM Market Maker rebates. 

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. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The foregoing rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.24

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: (i) Necessary or appropriate in 

the public interest; (ii) for the protection 

of investors; or (iii) otherwise in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

If the Commission takes such action, the 

Commission shall institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

should be approved or disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

NASDAQ–2016–012 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities 

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street 

NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–NASDAQ–2016–012. 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 32 / Thursday, February 18, 2016 / Notices 8323 

25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549 on official 

business days between the hours of 

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

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR– 

NASDAQ–2016–012, and should be 

submitted on or before March 10, 2016. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.25

Robert W. Errett, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03268 Filed 2–17–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

[Docket No: SSA–2016–0003] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Request and 

Comment Request 

The Social Security Administration 

(SSA) publishes a list of information 

collection packages requiring clearance 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) in compliance with 

Public Law 104–13, the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 

1, 1995. This notice includes revisions 

of OMB-approved information 

collections. 

SSA is soliciting comments on the 

accuracy of the agency’s burden 

estimate; the need for the information; 

its practical utility; ways to enhance its 

quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to 

minimize burden on respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. Mail, email, or 

fax your comments and 

recommendations on the information 

collection(s) to the OMB Desk Officer 

and SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 

the following addresses or fax numbers. 

(OMB) 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Attn: Desk Officer for SSA, Fax: 

202–395–6974, Email address: 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov. 

(SSA) 

Social Security Administration, 

OLCA, Attn: Reports Clearance 

Director, 3100 West High Rise, 6401 

Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 

21235, Fax: 410–966–2830, Email 

address: OR.Reports.Clearance@

ssa.gov, 

Or you may submit your comments 

online through www.regulations.gov, 

referencing Docket ID Number [SSA– 

2016–0003]. 

I. The information collections below 

are pending at SSA. SSA will submit 

them to OMB within 60 days from the 

date of this notice. To be sure we 

consider your comments, we must 

receive them no later than April 18, 

2016. Individuals can obtain copies of 

the collection instruments by writing to 

the above email address. 

1. Request to be Selected as a Payee— 

20 CFR 404.2010–404.2055, 416.601– 

416.665—0960–0014. SSA requires an 

individual applying to be a 

representative payee for a Social 

Security beneficiary or Supplemental 

Security Income (SSI) recipient to 

complete Form SSA–11–BK. SSA 

obtains information from applicant 

payees regarding their relationship to 

the beneficiary; personal qualifications; 

concern for the beneficiary’s well-being; 

and intended use of benefits if 

appointed as payee. The respondents 

are individuals; private sector 

businesses and institutions; and State 

and local government institutions and 

agencies applying to become 

representative payees. 

Type of Request: Revision of an OMB 

approved information collection. 

Individuals and Households (90%): 

Modality of completion Number of 

responses 

Frequency of 

response 

Average 

burden per 

response 

(minutes) 

Estimated total 

annual burden 

(hours) 

Representative Payee System (RPS) ............................................................. 1,438,200 1 11 263,670 

Paper Version .................................................................................................. 91,800 1 11 16,830 

Total .......................................................................................................... 1,530,000 ........................ ........................ 280,500 

Private Sector (9%): 

Modality of completion Number of 

responses 

Frequency of 

response 

Average 

burden per 

response 

(minutes) 

Estimated total 

annual burden 

(hours) 

Representative Payee System (RPS) ............................................................. 149,940 1 11 27,489 

Paper Version .................................................................................................. 3,060 1 11 561 

Total .......................................................................................................... 153,000 ........................ ........................ 28,050 

State/Local/Tribal Government (1%): 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES