38730 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 15, 2017 / Notices 

change, or such shorter time as designated by the 

Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 

requirement. 

13For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 

operative delay, the Commission has also 

considered the proposed rule’s impact on 

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 

15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

In its filing, MRX requests that the 

Commission waive the 30-day operative 

delay in order to enable the Exchange to 

coordinate the implementation of the 

proposed rule changes with its planned 

migration to the INET platform, which 

will commence in Q3 of 2017. Although 

the Exchange proposes certain technical 

changes to how the risk parameters will 

operate (e.g., limiting the Specified 

Time Period to 30 seconds), the 

proposed changes are largely intended 

to provide more detail about the 

operation of the existing risk 

parameters. Accordingly, the 

Commission believes that granting a 

waiver of the operative delay is 

consistent with the protection of 

investors and the public interest and 

therefore designates the proposed rule 

change to be operative upon filing.13

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– 

MRX–2017–14 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–MRX–2017–14. 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 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–MRX– 

2017–14, and should be submitted on or 

before September 5, 2017. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.14

Eduardo A. Aleman, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17167 Filed 8–14–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–81362; File No. SR–Phlx– 

2017–61] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing 

and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Amend the 

Exchange’s Pricing Schedule 

August 9, 2017. 

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 July 31, 

2017 NASDAQ PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or 

‘‘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 the 

Exchange’s Pricing Schedule to: (i) 

Increase the Options Transaction Charge 

for Specialists and Market Makers who 

engage in NDX transactions on the 

Exchange Floor; (ii) exclude NDX 

transactions from the Exchange’s 

Monthly Firm Fee Cap that otherwise 

applies to the monthly transaction fees 

that market participants incur when 

trading on the Exchange; and (iii) 

exempt NDX transactions from the 

Exchange’s waiver of Options 

Transaction Charges for certain 

facilitation orders. 

While these amendments are effective 

upon filing, the Exchange has 

designated the proposed amendments to 

be operative on August 1, 2017. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s Web site 

at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet. 

com/, at the principal office of the 

Exchange, and at the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

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 to make three 

changes to Section II of its Pricing 

Schedule. First, the Exchange proposes 

to increase its Options Transaction 

Charge for Specialists and Market 

Makers that engage in NDX transactions 

on the Exchange Floor. Last March, the 

Exchange increased its Options 

Transaction Charges from $0.25 to $0.75 

per contract for all categories of market 

participants transacting in NDX, except 

for Specialists and Market Makers 

which transact in NDX on the Floor and 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 15, 2017 / Notices 38731 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34– 

80244 (March 13, 2017), 82 FR 14388 (March 20, 

2017). The categories of market participants that 

incur an Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per 

contract when they transact in NDX include 

Professionals (both electronic and Floor trading), 

Specialists and Market Makers (electronic trading 

only), Broker-Dealers (both electronic and Floor 

Trading), and Firms (both electronic and Floor 

trading). 

4See Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., Fees 

Schedule (July 11, 2017), at n.22 (‘‘For all nonfacilitation business executed in AIM or open 

outcry, or as a QCC or FLEX transaction, transaction 

fees for Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary 

and/or their Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliates 

(as defined in footnote 11) in all products except 

Underlying Symbol List A (34), excluding binary 

options, in the aggregate, are capped at $75,000 per 

month per Clearing Trading Permit Holder. As 

CBOE assesses no Clearing Trading Permit Holder 

Proprietary transaction fees for facilitation orders 

(other than Underlying Symbol List A (34), 

excluding binary options) (as described in footnote 

11), such trades will not count towards the cap. 

Surcharge fees do not count towards the cap.’’); id. 

at n.34 (defining ‘‘Underlying Symbol List A’’ to 

include SPX and VIX). 

5See id. (noting that CBOE excludes its 

proprietary products from its $0.00 charge for 

facilitation orders). 

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). 

8Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) 

(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’). 

9NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 

2010). 

10See NetCoalition, at 534–535. 

11 Id. at 537. 

12 Id. at 539 (quoting Securities Exchange Act 

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

74770, 74782–83 (December 9, 2008) (SR– 

NYSEArca–2006–21)). 

Customers.3 At that time, the Exchange 

decided not to raise its $0.35 per 

contract Option Transaction Charge for 

Specialists and Market Makers 

transacting in NDX on the Floor because 

it sought to incentivize Specialists and 

Market Makers to continue to make 

markets in the NDX product on the 

Floor. However, the Exchange has 

decided to discontinue this incentive 

program and, as such, the Exchange 

now seeks to increase the Transaction 

Charge to $0.75 per contract. This 

proposal will harmonize the schedule of 

NDX Options Transaction Charges for 

all non-Customer market participants in 

all circumstances in which they trade in 

NDX on the Exchange in that it will 

charge them the same per contract fee 

and will do so for both Floor-based and 

electronic transactions (except that the 

Exchange will continue to refrain from 

imposing an Options Transaction 

Charge on Customers that engage in 

NDX transactions). Moreover, the fee 

increase will permit the Exchange to 

recoup its operational costs for listing 

NDX, which is a proprietary product of 

the Exchange. 

Second, the Exchange proposes to 

exempt NDX Options Transaction 

Charges from the $75,000 Monthly Firm 

Fee Cap that it otherwise applies to 

member organizations that trade on the 

Exchange in their own proprietary 

accounts. The Exchange bases this 

proposal upon a similar exemption that 

CBOE applies from its $75,000 monthly 

transaction fee cap for its proprietary 

options index products, including VIX 

and SPX.4

Third, the Exchange proposes to 

exclude NDX Options Transactions from 

several waivers that it otherwise grants 

to certain categories of market 

participants of its Floor Options 

Transaction Charges. Specifically, the 

Exchange will not waive Firm Floor 

Options Transaction Charges for 

members that execute NDX facilitation 

orders when such members trade in 

their own proprietary account 

(including Cabinet Options Transaction 

Charges). Also, the Exchange will not 

waive Firm Floor Options Transaction 

Charges for the buy side of an NDX 

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. Lastly, the Exchange will not 

waive the Broker-Dealer Floor Options 

Transaction Charge (including Cabinet 

Options Transaction Charges) for 

members that execute NDX facilitation 

in their own proprietary account contra 

to a Customer (‘‘BD-Customer 

Facilitation’’), where the member’s BDCustomer Facilitation average daily 

volume (including both FLEX and nonFLEX transactions) exceeds 10,000 

contracts per day in a given month. The 

Exchange intends for these exclusions to 

help it recoup its costs of developing 

and maintaining NDX as a proprietary 

product. Again, moreover, this proposal 

is consistent with an exclusion for 

proprietary products that CBOE applies 

to fee waivers involving facilitation 

orders.5

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) 

of the Act,6 in general, and furthers the 

objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) 

of the Act,7 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, and is not 

designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

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. In Regulation NMS, while 

adopting a series of steps to improve the 

current market model, the Commission 

highlighted the importance of market 

forces in determining prices and SRO 

revenues and, also, recognized that 

current regulation of the market system 

‘‘has been remarkably successful in 

promoting market competition in its 

broader forms that are most important to 

investors and listed companies.’’ 8

Likewise, in NetCoalition v. Securities 

and Exchange Commission 9

(‘‘NetCoalition’’) the D.C. Circuit upheld 

the Commission’s use of a market-based 

approach in evaluating the fairness of 

market data fees against a challenge 

claiming that Congress mandated a costbased approach.10 As the court 

emphasized, the Commission ‘‘intended 

in Regulation NMS that ‘market forces, 

rather than regulatory requirements’ 

play a role in determining the market 

data . . . to be made available to 

investors and at what cost.’’ 11

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. 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal to increase its Option 

Transaction Charges for Specialists and 

Market Makers transacting in NDX on 

the Floor is reasonable because the 

Exchange already charges Specialists 

and Market Makers $0.75 per contract 

for electronic transactions involving 

NDX as well the same amount for 

Professionals, Broker-Dealers, and Firms 

that engage in NDX transactions both 

electronically and on the Floor. The 

proposal, in other words, will bring the 

Exchange’s Pricing Schedule for Option 

Transaction Charges into harmony, 

except for Customers. The Exchange 

also believes that its proposal is an 

equitable allocation and is not unfairly 

discriminatory because the Exchange 

will apply the same Options 

Transaction Charges to all similarly 

situated market participants, except for 

Customers. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

38732 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 15, 2017 / Notices 

13See Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 

Fees Schedule, supra. 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

The Exchange believes that its 

decision to refrain from assessing to 

Customers Options Transaction Charges 

for NDX is equitable and not unfairly 

discriminatory because Customer orders 

bring valuable liquidity to the market, 

which benefits other market 

participants. Customer liquidity benefits 

all market participants by providing 

more trading opportunities, which 

attracts Specialists and Market Makers. 

An increase in these in the activity of 

these market participants, in turn, 

facilitates tighter spreads, which may 

cause an additional corresponding 

increase in order flow from other market 

participants. 

The Exchange also believes that its 

proposal to exempt NDX from the 

Monthly Firm Fee Cap on Options 

Transaction Charges is reasonable 

because CBOE employs a similar 

exemption from its monthly option 

transaction fee cap for transactions in its 

proprietary products.13 This proposal is 

an equitable allocation and is not 

unfairly discriminatory because the 

Exchange will apply the same fee to all 

similarly situated members. 

Finally, the Exchange believes that its 

proposal is reasonable to exclude NDX 

from the waivers of Options Transaction 

Charges that it otherwise grants in 

certain circumstances involving the 

execution of facilitation orders. Again, 

the Exchange’s proposal is similar to 

that which CBOE employs with respect 

to facilitation orders involving its 

proprietary products. The Exchange also 

believes this proposal is reasonable 

insofar as the Exchange incurs costs 

associated with the development and 

maintenance of NDX as a proprietary 

product and the exclusion from the fee 

waiver will help it to recoup those costs. 

Furthermore, the Exchange believes that 

this proposal is an equitable allocation 

and is not unfairly discriminatory 

because the Exchange will apply the 

same fee waiver exclusion to all 

similarly situated members. 

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 proposed increase 

to the Options Transaction Charge for 

Specialists and Market Makers engaging 

in Floor-based MDX transactions does 

not impose a burden on competition 

because the increase will result in the 

Exchange uniformly assessing a $0.75 

per contract Options Transaction charge 

for all market participants, except 

Customers, regardless of whether the 

transaction is submitted electronically 

or on the Floor. 

The Exchange believes that assessing 

Customers no transaction fees for NDX 

does not impose an undue burden on 

intramarket competition because 

Customer orders bring valuable liquidity 

to the market, which benefits other 

market participants. Customer liquidity 

benefits all market participants by 

providing more trading opportunities, 

which attracts Specialists and Market 

Makers. An increase in these in the 

activity of these market participants, in 

turn, facilitates tighter spreads, which 

may cause an additional corresponding 

increase in order flow from other market 

participants. 

The Exchange does not believe that its 

proposals to exempt NDX from its 

Monthly Firm Fee Cap and to exclude 

NDX transactions from its fee waivers 

for certain facilitation transactions will 

impose a burden competition. These 

proposals are similar to CBOE’s 

practices with respect to its proprietary 

products. 

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.14

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– 

Phlx–2017–61 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–Phlx–2017–61. 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 the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 15, 2017 / Notices 38733 

15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 17 CFR 242.612(c). 

2See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68303 

(November 27, 2012), 77 FR 71652 (December 3, 

2012) (‘‘RPI Approval Order’’) (SR–BXY–2012–019). 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 71249 

(January 7, 2014), 79 FR 2229 (January 13, 2012) 

(SR–BYX–2014–001) (Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change 

to Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 71250 

(January 7, 2014), 79 FR 2234 (January 13, 2012) 

(Order Granting an Extension to Limited Exemption 

From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection 

With the Exchange’s Retail Price Improvement 

Program); 74111 (January 22, 2015), 80 FR 4598 

(January 28, 2015) (SR–BYX–2015–05) (Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change to Extend the Pilot Period for the RPI); 

and 74115 (January 22, 2015), 80 FR 4324 (January 

27, 2015) (Order Granting an Extension to Limited 

Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in 

Connection With the Exchange’s Retail Price 

Improvement Program); 76965 (January 22, 2016), 

81 FR 4682 (January 27, 2016) (SR–BYX–2016– 

01)(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

a Proposed Rule Change to Extend the Pilot Period 

for the RPI); 76953 (January 21, 2016), 81 FR 4728 

(January 27, 2016)(Order Granting an Extension to 

Limited Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation 

NMS in Connection With the Exchange’s Retail 

Price Improvement Program); 78180 (June 28, 2016), 

81 FR 43306 (July 1, 2016) (SR–BYX–2016–15) 

(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a 

Proposed Rule Change to Extend the Pilot Period for 

the RPI); 78178 (July 5, 2016), 81 FR 43689 (July 

5, 2016)(Order Granting an Extension to Limited 

Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in 

Connection With the Exchange’s Retail Price 

Improvement Program). 

4See letter from Anders Franzon, Senior Vice 

President and Associate General Counsel, BYX, to 

Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated 

August 7, 2017. 

5See SR-BatsBYX–2017–18. 

6See RPI Approval Order, supra note 2, at 77 FR 

at 71657. 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(83). 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–Phlx– 

2017–61 and should be submitted on or 

before September 5, 2017. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.15

Eduardo A. Aleman, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17170 Filed 8–14–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–81364; File No. SR–BYX– 

2012–019] 

Self-Regulatory Organization; BATS 

BYX-Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting an 

Extension to Limited Exemption From 

Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in 

Connection With the Exchange’s Retail 

Price Improvement Program 

August 9, 2017. 

On November 27, 2012, the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) issued an order 

pursuant to its authority under Rule 

612(c) of Regulation NMS (‘‘Sub-Penny 

Rule) 1 that granted the BATS BYXExchange, Inc. (‘‘BYX’’ or the 

‘‘Exchange’’) a limited exemption from 

the Sub-Penny Rule in connection with 

the operation of the Exchange’s Retail 

Price Improvement (‘‘RPI’’) Program (the 

‘‘Program’’). The limited exemption was 

granted concurrently with the 

Commission’s approval of the 

Exchange’s proposal to adopt the 

Program for a one-year pilot term.2 The 

exemption was granted coterminous 

with the effectiveness of the pilot 

Program and has been extended four 

times; 3 both the pilot Program and 

exemption are scheduled to expired on 

July 31, 2017. 

The Exchange now seeks to extend 

the exemption until July 31, 2018.4 The 

Exchange’s request was made in 

conjunction with an immediately 

effective filing that extends the 

operation of the Program until July 31, 

2018.5 In its request to extend the 

exemption, the Exchange notes that the 

Program was implemented gradually 

over time. Accordingly, the Exchange 

has asked for additional time to allow 

itself and the Commission to analyze 

data concerning the Program, which the 

Exchange committed to provide to the 

Commission, as well as to allow 

additional opportunities for greater 

participation in the Program.6 For this 

reason and the reasons stated in the 

Order originally granting the limited 

exemption, the Commission finds that 

extending the exemption, pursuant to its 

authority under Rule 612(c) of 

Regulation NMS, is appropriate in the 

public interest and consistent with the 

protection of investors. 

Therefore, it is hereby ordered, that, 

pursuant to Rule 612(c) of Regulation 

NMS, the Exchange is granted a limited 

exemption from Rule 612(c) of 

Regulation NMS that allows it to accept 

and rank orders priced equal to or 

greater than $1.00 per share in 

increments of $0.001, in connection 

with the operation of its RPI Program. 

The limited and temporary exemption 

extended by this Order is subject to 

modification or revocation if at any time 

the Commission determines that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

Responsibility for compliance with any 

applicable provisions of the federal 

securities laws must rest with the 

persons relying on the exemptions that 

are the subject of this Order. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.7

Eduardo A. Aleman, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17162 Filed 8–14–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–81358; File No. 265–29] 

Equity Market Structure Advisory 

Committee 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory 

Committee Renewal. 

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

announce that the Chairman of the 

Commission, with the concurrence of 

the other Commissioners, has approved 

the renewal of the Securities and 

Exchange Commission Equity Market 

Structure Advisory Committee. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Arisa Kettig, Senior Special Counsel, 

Division of Trading and Markets, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 

20549, (202) 551–5676. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 

U.S.C. App., the Commission is 

publishing this notice that the Chairman 

of the Commission, with the 

concurrence of the other 

Commissioners, has approved the 

renewal of the Securities and Exchange 

Commission Equity Market Structure 

Advisory Committee (the ‘‘Committee’’). 

The Chairman of the Commission 

affirms that the renewal of the 

Committee is necessary and in the 

public interest. 

The Committee’s objective is to 

provide the Commission with diverse 

perspectives on the structure and 

operations of the U.S. equities markets, 

as well as advice and recommendations 

on matters related to equity market 

structure. 

No more than seventeen voting 

members will be appointed to the 

Committee, representing a cross-section 

of those directly affected by, interested 

in, and/or qualified to provide advice to 

the Commission on matters related to 

equity market structure. The 

Committee’s membership will continue 

to be balanced fairly in terms of points 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES