2452 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Notices 

12Under Rule 0, references to the Exchange also 

refer to FINRA staff and FINRA departments acting 

on behalf of the Exchange pursuant to a Regulatory 

Services Agreement (‘‘RSA’’). FINRA currently 

provides member application proceedings services 

to the Exchange pursuant to an RSA. 

13 In approving the proposed rule change, the 

Commission has considered the proposed rule 

change’s impact on efficiency, competition, and 

capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

16 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). 

Rules 313.10 and 313.20.12 Similarly, 

the Exchange proposes to replace 

outdated references to ‘‘photostatic’’ 

copies in Rules 313.10 and 313.20 in 

connection with the submission of 

documents to the Exchange and replace 

them with ‘‘electronically or 

mechanically reproduced.’’ 

As noted above, the Commission 

received no comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Discussion and Commission 

Findings 

After carefully considering the 

proposal, the Commission finds that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the requirements of the Act and the 

rules and regulations thereunder 

applicable to a national securities 

exchange.13 In particular, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with Section 

6(b)(5) of the Act,14 which requires, 

among other things, that the rules of a 

national securities exchange be 

designed to prevent fraudulent and 

manipulative acts and practices, to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to remove impediments to and 

perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. 

The Commission agrees with the 

Exchange that adding LLCs to the list of 

eligible member organizations would 

remove impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system by 

expanding the types of organizational 

forms a member organization may take. 

The Exchange also believes that 

permitting LLCs to become member 

organizations subject to the same 

restrictions and requirements currently 

applicable to corporations and 

partnerships also protects investors and 

the public interest by holding LLCs to 

the same high standards. 

In addition, permitting non-United 

States-based registered broker-dealers 

that are members of FINRA or another 

registered securities exchange and that 

do not have their principal place of 

business in the United States to become 

Exchange member organizations would 

remove impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market by 

removing geographic restrictions on 

Exchange membership that are not 

required by FINRA or other exchanges. 

Broadening the Exchange membership 

pool by facilitating the participation of 

additional foreign-based U.S. registered 

broker-dealers would benefit investors 

and the public interest by increasing 

market participation and depth at the 

Exchange. Moreover, adoption of 

specific requirements for foreign 

members that do not maintain an office 

in the United States based on NASD 

Rule 1090 would further assure that 

foreign Exchange members, once 

approved, remain subject to regulatory 

examination and jurisdiction. 

In addition, updating the Exchange’s 

rules to remove requirements that the 

Exchange believes are redundant—that a 

member firm’s partnership articles 

provide that capital withdrawals by 

partners cannot be made without the 

prior written approval of the Exchange, 

that prospective member corporations 

submit an opinion of counsel reciting 

facts contained in its public filings, and 

that certain prohibitions have been 

made legally effective—would remove 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system by 

ensuring that potential member 

organizations, persons subject to the 

Exchange’s jurisdiction, regulators, and 

the public could more easily navigate 

the Exchange’s rulebook and better 

understand what obligations attach and 

when. Further, updating the Exchange’s 

rules to remove what the Exchange 

considers redundant requirements also 

would protect investors as well as the 

public interest by providing 

transparency and reducing potential 

confusion regarding the Exchange 

membership process that may result 

from having what the Exchange 

characterizes as obsolete rules and 

outdated guidelines in the Exchange’s 

rulebook. For the same reasons, 

updating the Exchange’s rules to remove 

requirements that the Exchange 

considers outdated would remove 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system and is 

equally designed to protect investors as 

well as the public interest. 

Based on the foregoing, the 

Commission finds the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

IV. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,15 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–NYSE–2014– 

63) be, and hereby is, approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.16

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00578 Filed 1–15–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 74033; File No. SR–FICC– 

2014–12] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed 

Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Modify the 

Fee Schedule in the Mortgage-Backed 

Securities Division Clearing Rules 

January 12, 2015. 

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 

30, 2014 the Fixed Income Clearing 

Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) 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 FICC. FICC filed the proposal 

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the 

Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder 4

so that the proposal was effective upon 

filing with the Commission. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the 

Terms of Substance of the Proposed 

Rule Change 

The proposed rule change is filed by 

FICC and consists of modifications to 

the fee schedule in the Mortgage-Backed 

Securities Division (‘‘MBSD’’) Clearing 

Rules (the ‘‘Clearing Rules’’). 

II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the 

Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the 

Proposed Rule Change 

In its filing with the Commission, 

FICC 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. FICC has prepared 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Notices 2453 

5Any such fee increase will be subject to rule 

filing approval by the Commission. 

6As defined in the MBSD Clearing Rules, the 

term ‘‘Notification of Settlement’’ means an 

instruction submitted to FICC by a purchasing or 

selling clearing member pursuant to the MBSD 

Clearing Rules reflecting settlement of a settlement 

balance order trade, trade-for-trade transaction or 

specified pool trade. The MBSD Clearing Rules are 

available on DTCC’s Web site, http://

www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.aspx. 

summaries, set forth in sections A, B, 

and C below, of the most significant 

aspects of such statements. 

(A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the 

Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the 

Proposed Rule Change 

(i) Purpose 

FICC is proposing to add a fee (the 

‘‘development fee’’) to the MBSD 

Clearing Rules to cover the development 

cost of the MBSD Novation Service. 

Clearing members will be assessed the 

development fee as of January 1, 2015 

and it will remain in effect for three (3) 

consecutive years. FICC will collect this 

fee on a monthly basis through the cash 

settlement process and the fee will be 

identified as line item ‘‘NOV’’ on each 

clearing member’s cash obligation 

settlement report. 

The cumulative amount of the 

development fees collected over the 

three (3) year period is expected to 

cover FICC’s estimated cost of 

developing the MBSD Novation Service. 

If the actual development cost is 

materially greater than estimated, then 

FICC may increase transaction fees in 

order to make up the difference,5 but 

will not increase the development fees. 

If the actual development cost is less 

than the estimated development cost, 

FICC will apportion the excess fees 

collected to other MBSD service 

enhancements and/or return excess fees 

to clearing members on a pro rata basis. 

The MBSD Novation Service will be 

the subject of a future FICC rule filing 

subject to the Commission’s review and 

approval. If FICC does not receive the 

Commission’s approval or materially 

modifies the proposed service for any 

reason, FICC will suspend monthly 

billing of the development fee and, 

following consultation with members, 

submit a new fee filing to the 

Commission that either terminates or 

modifies the fee structure to account for 

any changes in development costs 

associated with the change to the 

service. 

FICC has discussed the development 

fee with each of the clearing members. 

A. MBSD Novation Service—Overview 

of the Service for Which the 

Development Fee Is Proposed To Be 

Charged 

Through the MBSD Novation Service, 

FICC will provide MBSD clearing 

members an enhancement to the current 

processing of their transactions from an 

operational perspective. Specifically, 

FICC will step in as the counterparty to 

all subsequent trades resulting from the 

to-be-announced (‘‘TBA’’) netting 

process; and FICC will also step in as 

the counterparty to all pool allocations 

to complete each clearing member’s 

TBA trades in preparation for the pool 

netting process. This will allow FICC to 

eliminate the Notification of 

Settlement 6 (‘‘NOS’’) process. 

Currently, FICC is unaware of each 

clearing member’s allocation activities 

with respect to their settlement balance 

order trades, trade-for-trade transactions 

or specified pool trades. As a result of 

such activity settling away from FICC, 

FICC relies on each clearing member’s 

submission of NOS to inform FICC of 

when such member’s trades have 

settled. With the MBSD Novation 

Service, all clearing members will 

submit all trade activity showing FICC 

as the counterparty which will allow for 

the elimination of the NOS process. 

The MBSD Novation Service will 

provide further enhancements by 

allowing additional types of trades to 

settle with FICC as the counterparty, 

namely, trades carrying stipulations 

(referred to as ‘‘STIP trades’’) and 

specified pool trades. Additionally, the 

service will simplify the processing of 

specified pool trades by allowing 

clearing members to match specified 

pool trades based on pool number or 

pool CUSIP number without the need 

for inclusion of a reference to a TBA 

CUSIP. 

B. MBSD Novation Service— 

Development 

FICC will begin the development 

phase for this initiative during the 

second quarter of 2015. The overall 

development will include the following: 

1. Technical Specifications & System 

Build (Second Quarter 2015—Third 

Quarter 2015) 

The technical specifications for this 

service will include the design of new 

messaging specifications, the 

development of a new allocation engine, 

and the development of a new netting 

engine to process TBA transactions. 

Upon completion, FICC’s Technology 

team and Product Management team 

will confirm that the technical 

specifications are consistent with FICC’s 

internal business requirements for this 

service. Next, the Technology team will 

begin to build the components for the 

system. The technical specifications are 

expected to be completed during the 

second quarter of 2015 and the system 

build will commence shortly thereafter 

with completion by the end of the third 

quarter of 2015. 

2. Internal Testing (Fourth Quarter 

2015) 

The system build for the MBSD 

Novation Service may connect with 

DTCC’s other existing systems. As a 

result, each of the existing systems must 

be thoroughly tested to ensure that they 

continue to operate as expected. 

The existing systems that will be 

tested include the following: 

a. Real-Time Trade Matching 

(RTTM®), 

b. Electronic Pool Notification, 

c. Pool Netting, 

d. Billing system, and 

e. Report Center. 

Upon the completion of the system 

build, the internal testing of existing 

systems will commence. Internal testing 

is expected to begin during the fourth 

quarter of 2015 and continue for 

approximately 3 to 6 months. 

3. External Member Testing (Second 

Quarter 2016) 

During the external member testing 

phase, all clearing members and service 

bureaus will test the new processing, 

including the messaging aspects. 

Clearing members will be expected to 

complete their testing with FICC prior to 

the implementation of the MBSD 

Novation Service. External member 

testing is expected to begin during the 

second quarter of 2016 and continue for 

approximately 9 to 12 months. 

4. Production Phase (Second Quarter 

2017) 

It is expected that the MBSD Novation 

Service will be placed into production 

over a 6 month period. This will 

provide MBSD and its clearing members 

with an opportunity to adjust to the new 

processing. Initially, TBA CUSIPs with 

limited trade volumes will be processed 

through the service and TBA CUSIPs 

with the highest trade volumes will be 

the last to be processed through the 

service. 

C. Development Fee Calculation 

The development fees that FICC is 

proposing to charge clearing members 

are based upon the cost estimates for the 

design, build, testing and production of 

the MBSD Novation Service as 

discussed above. FICC has calculated 

the development fee for each clearing 

member as summarized below. 

FICC will assign each single entity 

clearing member and family of 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2454 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Notices 

7As used herein, ‘‘family of members’’ means 

collectively, each MBSD clearing member that 

controls or is controlled by another MBSD clearing 

member and each such member that is under the 

common control of any organization, entity or 

individual. ‘‘Control’’ for these purposes means the 

direct or indirect ownership of more than 50% of 

the voting securities or other voting interests of any 

organization, entity or person. 

8FICC selected January 1st through August 31st 

as the calculation period in order to give clearing 

members enough time to consider the fees as they 

assess their budget. 

9 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 

10Release No. 34–71699 (March 12, 2014), 79 FR 

16865 (March 26, 2014). 

11Release No. 34–68080 (October 22, 2012), 77 

FR 66219 (November 2, 2012). 

12 5 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(D). 

members 7 to one of four tiers based on 

the fees paid by such member or family 

of members, as applicable, during the 

period of January 1st through August 

31st of the previous year (the 

‘‘calculation period’’).8 FICC will then 

charge the tiered development fee to the 

single entity clearing member or 

calculate a portion of the tiered fee for 

each clearing member within the family 

of members. This portion will be based 

upon the fees generated by the clearing 

member during the calculation period. 

As noted above, the development fee 

will be collected as part of MBSD’s cash 

settlement process. 

The tiered development fee for 2015, 

2016 and 2017 will be set during 

October of the previous year for the 

calculation period. The 2015 

development fee was determined in 

October 2014 by calculating the amount 

of fees paid by clearing members from 

January 1, 2014 through August 31, 

2014; the 2016 development fee will be 

determined in October 2015 by 

calculating the amount of fees paid by 

clearing members from January 1, 2015 

through August 31, 2015; and the 2017 

development fee will be determined in 

October 2016 by calculating the amount 

of fees paid by clearing members from 

the period of January 1, 2016 through 

August 31, 2016. 

Below is the tiered development fee 

for 2015, 2016 and 2017 which is 

applicable to single entity clearing 

members and each family of members, 

as applicable. Tier 1 represents single 

entity clearing members and families of 

members, as applicable, that have 

generated fees over $1,000,000.00 

during the calculation period; Tier 2 

represents single entity clearing 

members and families of members, as 

applicable, that have generated fees in 

the amount of $250,000.00 to 

$999,999.99 during the calculation 

period; Tier 3 represents single entity 

clearing members and families of 

members, as applicable, that have 

generated fees in the amount of 

$100,000.00 to $249,999.99 during the 

calculation period; and Tier 4 represents 

single entity clearing members and 

families of members, as applicable, that 

have generated fees under $100,000.00 

during the calculation period. As noted 

above, once FICC has determined the 

appropriate tier development fee based 

on the single entity clearing members or 

families fees, FICC will charge as 

follows: 

1. Each single entity clearing member 

will be charged the entire amount of the 

tiered development fee; and 

2. each clearing member within a 

family will be charged a portion of the 

tiered development fee based upon such 

clearing member’s fees during the 

calculation period. 

As noted above, all MBSD clearing 

members will be billed once a month 

through FICC’s cash settlement process. 

2015 Monthly development fee 2016 Monthly development fee 2017 Monthly development fee 

Tier 1 $20,000/mo. .......................................... Tier 1 $18,000/mo. ......................................... Tier 1 $18,000/mo. 

Tier 2 $10,000/mo. .......................................... Tier 2 $8,000/mo. ........................................... Tier 2 $8,000/mo. 

Tier 3 $6,000/mo. ............................................ Tier 3 $4,000/mo. ........................................... Tier 3 $4,000/mo. 

Tier 4 $1,000/mo. ............................................ Tier 4 $1,000/mo. ........................................... Tier 4 $1,000/mo. 

The cumulative amount of the 

development fees collected over the 

three (3) year period is expected to 

cover the cost of developing the MBSD 

Novation Service. FICC believes that the 

development fees are reasonable 

because they are based on FICC’s 

estimates of the cost of the project 

which involves the stages referred to 

above (design, testing and moving into 

production). FICC believes that the 

development fees are proposed to be 

applied fairly because each clearing 

member will be charged an amount that 

is consistent with the previous year’s 

fees that such member has paid, which 

is directly correlated to the member’s (or 

its overall family’s) usage of MBSD’s 

clearing and settlement service. 

(ii) Statutory Basis 

FICC believes that the proposed rule 

changes are consistent with the 

requirements of Section 17A of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as 

amended (the ‘‘Act’’). 

The proposed development fee will 

facilitate the establishment of a service 

that will promote the prompt and 

accurate clearance and settlement of 

securities transactions; the MBSD 

Novation Service will result in more 

transactions settled with FICC as central 

counterparty and will provide 

operational efficiencies for MBSD 

securities transaction processing. 

In connection with Section 

17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 9 the 

Commission has stated that ‘‘continued 

and improved understanding of . . . 

costs associated with using a covered 

clearing agency’s services should 

promote confidence generally in the 

covered clearing agency’s ability to set 

and manage appropriately . . . costs.’’ 10

The proposed development fee 

improves the membership’s 

understanding of the associated costs 

and helps FICC manage the costs by (1) 

disclosing the specific amount that 

clearing members will be charged for 

the development of this service, (2) 

providing a discrete time period for the 

allocation of such charges and (3) 

providing members with the 

opportunity to budget in advance for the 

associated costs. 

The proposed prefunding fee enables 

FICC to maintain a certain level of 

financial resources in accordance with 

Rule 17Ad–22(c)(1) of the Clearing 

Agency Standards 11 while balancing 

the request of clearing members for 

services that are operationally beneficial 

for them. 

The development fee is also 

consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of 

the Act,12 which requires that the MBSD 

Rules provide for the equitable 

allocation of reasonable fees among its 

participants. As noted above, the 

development fee will be applied fairly 

among the clearing members because 

the charges are based upon the previous 

year’s activity, which is directly 

correlated to the member’s usage of 

MBSD’s clearing and settlement service. 

The proposed fee is reasonable as 

required by Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the 

Act because FICC intends to collect only 

the approximate cost of developing the 

service that clearing members have 

requested. Collecting this amount in 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Notices 2455 

13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

advance is reasonable because it allows 

FICC to use amounts collected in a 

targeted manner to develop this specific 

service, rather than raising overall fees, 

where the amount collected over any 

given period may vary based on 

transaction volumes and clearing 

members will have less certainty as to 

the amounts they will pay. 

(B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on 

Burden on Competition 

FICC does not believe that the 

proposed rule change will have any 

impact, or impose any burden, on 

competition. As noted above, the 

development fees will be applied fairly 

among the clearing members because 

each clearing member or family of 

members, as applicable, will be charged 

an amount that is consistent with the 

previous year’s fees, which is directly 

correlated to the member’s or family’s 

usage of MBSD’s clearing and settlement 

service. FICC does not believe that 

calculating the proposed development 

fee with respect to a family of members, 

where applicable, imposes a burden on 

competition. If FICC assessed the 

proposed development fee on an 

individual entity without regard to the 

activity of its family members, it is 

possible that the family of members 

would be charged a significantly higher 

fee for the same amount of activity 

conducted by a single firm with no 

family members in MBSD (which would 

result in the fee being cost prohibitive 

for the family). This aspect of the 

development fee has been discussed 

with the MBSD members and no 

member raised an issue in this regard. 

(C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on 

Comments on the Proposed Rule 

Change Received From Members, 

Participants, or Others 

Written comments relating to the 

proposed rule change have not yet been 

solicited or received. FICC will notify 

the Commission of any written 

comments received by FICC. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The forgoing rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 13 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(2) 14 thereunder. At any time 

within 60 days of the filing of the 

proposed rule change, the Commission 

summarily may temporarily suspend 

such rule change if it appears to the 

Commission that such action is 

necessary or appropriate in the public 

interest, for the protection of investors, 

or otherwise in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. 

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– 

FICC–2014–12 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–FICC–2014–12. 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 the 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of FICC and on its Web site 

(http://www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rulefilings.aspx). 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–FICC– 

2014–12 and should be submitted on or 

before February 6, 2015. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.15

Brent J. Fields, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00576 Filed 1–15–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74038; File No. SR–C2– 

2014–028] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 

Options Exchange, Incorporated; 

Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Amending Rule 

8.2(d) 

January 13, 2015. 

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 December 

31, 2014, C2 Options Exchange, 

Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘C2’’) 

filed with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the 

proposed rule change as described in 

Items I and II 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 is proposing to remove 

the registration cost of SPXPM from 

Exchange Rule 8.2(d) as this class of 

options is no longer listed or traded on 

the Exchange. The text of the proposed 

rule change is provided below. 

(additions are italicized; deletions are 

[bracketed]) 

* * * * * 

C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated 

Rules 

* * * * * 

Rule 8.2. Continuing Market-Maker 

Registration 

(a)–(c) No change. 

(d) Market-Maker Option Class 

Registration. Absent an exemption by 

the Exchange, an option class 

registration of a Market-maker confers 

the right to quote in that product. A 

Market-Maker may change its registered 

classes upon advance notification to the 

Exchange in a form and manner 

prescribed by the Exchange. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES