Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 6537 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(3). 

5Specifically, FINRA is updating its Internet 

address and the title of the Tracking Form generated 

by the System. 

consequences of any accident previously 

evaluated are not significantly increased. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

Criterion 2—The Proposed Change Does Not 

Create the Possibility of a New or Different 

Kind of Accident From Any Previously 

Evaluated 

The proposed changes revise the 

Completion Times for restoring an inoperable 

containment isolation valve (or isolating the 

affected penetration) within the scope of 

Topical Report BAW–2461–A, ‘‘RiskInformed Justification for Containment 

Isolation Valve Allowed Outage Time 

Change.’’ The proposed changes do not 

change the design, configuration, or method 

of operation of the plant. The proposed 

changes do not involve a physical alteration 

of the plant (no new or different kind of 

equipment will be installed). Therefore, the 

proposed changes do not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated. 

Criterion 3—The Proposed Change Does Not 

Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin 

of Safety 

The proposed changes revise the 

Completion Times for restoring an inoperable 

containment isolation valve (or isolating the 

affected penetration) within the scope of 

Topical Report BAW–2461–A, ‘‘RiskInformed Justification for Containment 

Isolation Valve Allowed Outage Time 

Change.’’ In order to evaluate the proposed 

Completion Time extensions, a probabilistic 

risk evaluation was performed as 

documented in Topical Report BAW–2461–

A. The risk evaluation concluded that the 

proposed increase in the Completion Times 

does not result in an unacceptable 

incremental conditional core damage 

probability or incremental conditional large 

early release probability according to the 

guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.177. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

Based upon the reasoning presented 

above and the previous discussion of 

the amendment request, the requested 

change does not involve a significant 

hazards consideration as set forth in 10 

CFR 50.92(c). 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day 

of January, 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Gerald Waig, 

Acting Chief, Technical Specifications 

Branch, Division of Inspection & Regional 

Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E8–1943 Filed 2–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–57225; File No. SR–FINRA–

2007–042] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 

Rule Change Relating to Amendments 

to the Codes of Arbitration Procedure 

To Remove the Page Limit on 

Statements of Claim Filed Through the 

Online Arbitration Claim Filing System 

January 29, 2008. 

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 December 

27, 2007, Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) (f/k/a 

National Association of Securities 

Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’)) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I, II, and 

III below, which Items have been 

substantially prepared by FINRA. 

FINRA has designated the proposed rule 

change as concerned solely with the 

administration of the self-regulatory 

organization under section 

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

19b–4(f)(3) thereunder,4 which renders 

the proposal effective upon receipt of 

this filing by the Commission. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 

12302 of the Code of Arbitration 

Procedure for Customer Disputes 

(‘‘Customer Code’’) and Rule 13302 of 

the Code of Arbitration Procedure for 

Industry Disputes (‘‘Industry Code’’) to 

remove the 50-page limit on Statements 

of Claim filed through the Online 

Arbitration Claim Filing System (‘‘the 

System’’), to allow parties to submit 

exhibits to Statements of Claim through 

the System, and to reflect the new 

FINRA name.5 Below is the text of the 

proposed rule change. Proposed new 

language is in italics; proposed 

deletions are in brackets. 

* * * * * 

12302. Filing an Initial Statement of 

Claim 

(a) Filing Claim with the Director 

(1) To initiate an arbitration, a 

claimant must file the following with 

the Director: 

• Signed and dated Uniform 

Submission Agreement; and 

• A statement of claim specifying the 

relevant facts and remedies requested. 

The claimant may include any 

additional documents supporting the 

statement of claim. 

(2) A claimant may use the online 

claim notification and filing procedure 

to complete part of the arbitration claim 

filing process through the Internet. To 

commence this process, a claimant may 

complete a Claim Information Form that 

can be accessed through [http:// 

www.nasd.com] http://www.finra.org. In 

completing the Claim Information Form, 

the claimant may attach an electronic 

version of the statement of claim, and 

any additional documents supporting 

the statement of claim, to the form[, 

provided it does not exceed 50 pages]. 

Once this online form has been 

completed, [an NASD] a FINRA Dispute 

Resolution Tracking Form will be 

generated and displayed for the 

claimant to reproduce as necessary. The 

claimant shall then file with the 

Director the rest of the materials 

required in subparagraph (1) of the rule, 

along with a hard copy of the [NASD] 

FINRA Dispute Resolution Tracking 

Form. 

(b)–(d) No change. 

13302. Filing an Initial Statement of 

Claim 

(a) Filing Claim with the Director 

(1) To initiate an arbitration, a 

claimant must file the following with 

the Director: 

• Signed and dated Uniform 

Submission Agreement; and 

• A statement of claim specifying the 

relevant facts and remedies requested. 

The claimant may include any 

additional documents supporting the 

statement of claim. 

(2) A claimant may use the online 

claim notification and filing procedure 

to complete part of the arbitration claim 

filing process through the Internet. To 

commence this process, a claimant may 

complete a Claim Information Form that 

can be accessed through [http:// 

www.nasd.com] http://www.finra.org. In 

completing the Claim Information Form, 

the claimant may attach an electronic 

version of the statement of claim, and 

any additional documents supporting 

the statement of claim, to the form[, 

provided it does not exceed 50 pages]. 

Once this online form has been 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
6538 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 

6 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

8 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(3). 

9The applicability of Rule 19b–4(f)(3) is limited 

to matters concerned solely with the administration 

of a self-regulatory organization. Because this 

narrowly tailored rule change is limited to relaxing 

administrative restrictions on the length of 

documents solely for claims processed online and 

updating FINRA’s name and Internet address for 

purposes of these claims, it meets the Rule 19b–

4(f)(3) standard. 

completed, [an NASD] a FINRA Dispute 

Resolution Tracking Form will be 

generated and displayed for the 

claimant to reproduce as necessary. The 

claimant shall then file with the 

Director the rest of the materials 

required in subparagraph (1) of the rule, 

along with a hard copy of the [NASD] 

FINRA Dispute Resolution Tracking 

Form. 

(b)–(d) No change. 

* * * * * 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, 

FINRA 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. FINRA 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 

FINRA is amending its Customer 

Code and Industry Code to remove the 

50-page limit on Statements of Claim 

filed through the System, to allow 

parties to submit exhibits to Statements 

of Claim through the System, and to 

reflect the new FINRA name. The 

proposed rule change is intended to 

encourage more claimants to use online 

filing. The System will not have any 

limitation on the number of pages 

submitted so long as they are submitted 

as a single document. 

To begin an arbitration, a claimant 

submits a signed and dated Uniform 

Submission Agreement, a Statement of 

Claim specifying the relevant facts and 

remedies requested, any exhibits 

supporting the Statement of Claim, and 

the required fees. When a claim is filed 

in hard copy, the claimant is required to 

submit sufficient copies of the 

Statement of Claim for the forum, each 

arbitrator and each other party. 

Since August 2004, FINRA has 

allowed claimants to file an electronic 

version of the Statement of Claim so 

long as the submission does not exceed 

50 pages. The Statement of Claim may 

include exhibits if they are part of the 

same document and the total number of 

pages is no more than 50. Claimants 

who file online also complete an online 

Claim Information Form containing 

details about the names and addresses 

of the parties and their counsel, the 

issues in controversy, and so forth. Once 

the Claim Information Form is 

completed, a Dispute Resolution 

Tracking Form is generated by the 

System. Claimants then mail in a signed 

and dated Uniform Submission 

Agreement, a copy of the Dispute 

Resolution Tracking Form, the required 

fees, and any exhibits. The case is 

deemed to be filed when all such 

materials are received. 

With electronically filed claims, 

FINRA staff prints the required copies 

for the arbitrators and the other parties. 

The 50-page limit was originally 

imposed to ensure that FINRA had 

sufficient resources to process electronic 

claims efficiently. Having gained 

experience with electronic filing, FINRA 

is prepared to process efficiently the 

additional volume associated with 

longer Statements of Claim and exhibits. 

2. Statutory Basis 

FINRA believes that the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the provisions 

of section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,6 which 

requires, among other things, that 

FINRA rules must be designed to 

prevent fraudulent and manipulative 

acts and practices, to promote just and 

equitable principles of trade, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the 

public interest. By removing the page 

limitation on submissions through the 

System, the proposed rule change will 

provide investors, and other claimants, 

with expanded access to the System and 

will make claim processing more 

efficient. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

FINRA does not believe that the 

proposed rule change will result in 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 

Written comments were neither 

solicited nor 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) 

of the Act 7 and paragraph (f)(3) of Rule 

19b–4 thereunder 8 because it is 

concerned solely with the 

administration of FINRA.9 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–FINRA–2007–042 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–FINRA–2007–042. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

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

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for inspection and copying in 

the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 6539 

10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57058 

(December 28, 2007), 73 FR 903 (January 4, 2008) 

(SR–NYSE–2007–102). 

6See NYSE Rule 1500 (NYSE MatchPointSM), 

subparagraph (b)(2)(D): ‘‘’NYSE MatchPoint Internal 

Match Constraint’ or ’internal match constraint’

shall mean an optional order constraint that limits 

the execution of portfolios and single orders by 

directing the portfolio and single orders to first 

trade with other portfolios or single orders of the 

same User before trading with other orders in a 

particular matching session. If, after an internal 

match occurs and residual orders remain, the 

residual orders will be available to trade with all 

other orders. These constraints are only active for 

a single matching session.’’

7Because orders are entered by a ‘‘mnemonic’’

(i.e., member identifier and/or account identifier) 

and because mnemonics are categorized as either 

‘‘agency’’ or ‘‘proprietary,’’ agency and proprietary 

orders cannot be entered under the same 

mnemonic. Thus, agency and proprietary orders 

cannot match and execute against each other in an 

internal match. 

8 15 U.S.C. 78f. 

9 15 U.S.C. 78a. 

10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

DC 20549, on official business days 

between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. 

Copies of such filing also will be 

available for inspection and copying at 

the principal office of FINRA. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change; the Commission does 

not edit personal identifying 

information from submissions. You 

should submit only information that 

you wish to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–FINRA–2007–042 and 

should be submitted on or before 

February 25, 2008. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.10

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–1960 Filed 2–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–57216; File No. SR–NYSE–

2008–06] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New 

York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Implement 

Transaction Fees for NYSE MatchPoint 

January 28, 2008. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on January 

22, 2008, the New York Stock Exchange 

LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the 

proposed rule change as described in 

Items I, II, and III below, which Items 

have been prepared by the NYSE. The 

NYSE has designated this proposal as 

one establishing or changing a due, fee, 

or other charge imposed by the NYSE 

under section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,3

and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4 which 

renders the proposal effective upon 

filing with the Commission. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

NYSE proposes to implement an 

equity transaction fee effective January 

22, 2008, for shares executed on the new 

NYSE MatchPointSM (‘‘NYSE 

MatchPoint’’ or ‘‘MatchPoint’’) 5 system. 

The Exchange will charge each Member 

Organization $.0015 per share executed 

on the MatchPoint system, with the 

exception of MatchPoint executions that 

are effectuated through an optional 

‘‘internal match’’ process. The text of 

the proposed rule change is available at 

the Exchange, the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, and http:// 

www.nyse.com. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

NYSE 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 NYSE 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 to implement 

an equity transaction fee for executions 

on the NYSE MatchPoint system to take 

effect with the scheduled launch of 

MatchPoint on January 22, 2008. The 

MatchPoint system is an electronic 

facility of the Exchange that matches 

aggregated orders at predetermined, 

one-minute sessions throughout regular 

hours and after hours of the Exchange. 

The proposed transactional fee of $.0015 

per executed share, for single and 

portfolio orders, will be charged to both 

the buyer(s) and seller(s) of the executed 

shares, with the exception of 

MatchPoint executions that are 

effectuated through an optional 

‘‘internal match’’ process.6 More 

specifically, when the same user enters 

different orders into MatchPoint for 

internal matching purposes under the 

same mnemonic and for the same 

matching session, any resulting 

executions will not be subject to this 

transaction fee.7 Only NYSE members, 

member organizations and sponsoring 

member organizations will be charged 

this transaction fee. Transaction fees for 

executions of orders entered by 

sponsored participants (who are nonmembers) will be charged to the 

sponsoring member organization. 

The following examples will 

demonstrate how the proposed 

MatchPoint transactional fee will be 

charged: 

Example 1: User A enters a buy order into 

MatchPoint for 1,000 shares of XYZ security 

and designates the order for the 11 a.m. 

matching session. User B enters a sell order 

into MatchPoint for 1,000 shares of XYZ 

security and designates the order for the 11 

a.m. matching session. During the 11 a.m. 

matching session, User A’s buy order for 

1,000 shares of XYZ security and User B’s 

sell order for 1,000 shares of XYZ security 

match and execute. User A is charged $.0015 

per executed share (1,000 shares × $.0015 = 

$1.50). User B is also charged $.0015 per 

executed share (1,000 shares × $.0015 = 

$1.50). 

Example 2: User A enters a portfolio order 

into MatchPoint for a customer to buy 1,000 

shares of XYZ security with an internal 

match constraint under the mnemonic ‘‘Q’’

for the 2 p.m. matching session. User A then 

enters another portfolio order into 

MatchPoint for a second customer to sell 

1,000 shares of XYZ security with an internal 

match constraint under the same mnemonic 

(‘‘Q’’) for the 2 p.m. matching session. During 

the 2 p.m. matching session, the above 

described portfolio orders entered by User A 

internally match and execute. Thus, User A’s 

customers both receive executions of 1,000 

shares of XYZ security, but no transaction fee 

is charged to A for these internally matched 

executions. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the provisions of section 6 8 of the Act 9

in general, and section 6(b)(4) of the 

Act 10 in particular, in that it is designed 

to provide for the equitable allocation of 

reasonable dues, fees and other charges 

among its members and other persons 

using its facilities. Specifically, the 

proposed transaction fee is reasonable 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES