30 Day Notice

17222

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 61 / Thursday, April 1, 2021 / Notices

eVS Unmanifested Fee

[FR Doc. 2021–06674 Filed 3–31–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–C

POSTAL SERVICE
Transfer of Bound Printed Matter
Parcels to Competitive Product List
Postal ServiceTM.
Notice.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

The Postal Service is
providing notice that it has filed a
request with the Postal Regulatory
Commission to transfer Bound Printed
Matter Parcels from the Market
Dominant Product List to the
Competitive Product List.
DATES: April 1, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Markes Lucius at (202) 268–6170 or
Garry Rodriguez at (202) 268–7281.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March
26, 2021, the United States Postal
Service® filed with the Postal
Regulatory Commission a request to
transfer Bound Printed Matter Parcels
from the Market Dominant Product List
to the Competitive Product List,
pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642. Documents
pertinent to this request are available at
http://www.prc.gov, Docket No.
MC2021–78.
SUMMARY:

Ruth B. Stevenson,
Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021–06650 Filed 3–31–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[SEC File No. 270–139, OMB Control No.
3235–0128]

Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES

Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549–2736
Extension: Rule 12f–1

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:02 Mar 31, 2021

Jkt 253001

Office of Management and Budget
(‘‘OMB’’) a request for approval of
extension of the previously approved
collection of information provided for in
Rule 12f–1 (17 CFR 240.12f–1) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
Rule 12f–1 (‘‘Rule’’), originally
adopted in 1979 pursuant to Sections
12(f) and 23(a) of the Act, and as further
modified in 1995 and 2005, sets forth
the requirements for filing an exchange
application to reinstate unlisted trading
privileges (‘‘UTP’’) in a security in
which UTP has been suspended by the
Commission pursuant to Section
12(f)(2)(A) of the Act. Under Rule 12f–
1, an exchange must submit one copy of
an application for reinstatement of UTP
to the Commission that contains
specified information, as set forth in the
Rule. The application for reinstatement,
pursuant to the Rule, must provide the
name of the issuer, the title of the
security, the name of each national
securities exchange, if any, on which
the security is listed or admitted to
unlisted trading privileges, whether
transaction information concerning the
security is reported pursuant to an
effective transaction reporting plan
contemplated by Rule 601 of Regulation
NMS, the date of the Commission’s
suspension of unlisted trading
privileges in the security on the
exchange, and any other pertinent
information related to whether the
reinstatement of UTP in the subject
security is consistent with the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets
and the protection of investors. Rule
12f–1 further requires a national
securities exchange seeking to reinstate
its ability to extend unlisted trading
privileges in a security to indicate that
it has provided a copy of such
application to the issuer of the security,
as well as to any other national
securities exchange on which the
security is listed or admitted to unlisted
trading privileges.
The information required by Rule
12f–1 enables the Commission to make
the necessary findings under the Act
prior to granting applications to
reinstate unlisted trading privileges.
This information is also made available
to members of the public who may wish
to comment upon the applications.
Without the Rule, the Commission

PO 00000

Frm 00111

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

would be unable to fulfill these
statutory responsibilities.
There are currently 24 national
securities exchanges subject to Rule
12f–1. The burden of complying with
Rule 12f–1 arises when a potential
respondent seeks to reinstate its ability
to extend unlisted trading privileges to
any security for which unlisted trading
privileges have been suspended by the
Commission, pursuant to Section
12(f)(2)(A) of the Act. The staff estimates
that each application would require
approximately one hour to complete.
Thus each potential respondent would
incur on average one burden hour in
complying with the Rule.
The Commission staff estimates that
there could be as many as 24 responses
annually for an aggregate annual hour
burden for all respondents of
approximately 24 hours (24 responses ×
1 hour per response). Each respondent’s
related internal cost of compliance for
Rule 12f–1 would be approximately
$221.00, or, the cost of one hour of
professional work of a paralegal needed
to complete the application. The total
annual cost of compliance for all
potential respondents, therefore, is
approximately $5,304 (24 responses ×
$221.00 per response).
Compliance with Rule 12f–1 is
mandatory. Rule 12f–1 does not have a
record retention requirement per se.
However, responses made pursuant to
Rule 12f–1 are subject to the
recordkeeping requirements of Rules
17a–3 and 17a–4 of the Act. Information
received in response to Rule 12f–1 shall
not be kept confidential; the information
collected is public information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
under the PRA unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
The public may view background
documentation for this information
collection at the following website:
www.reginfo.gov. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function. Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer,

E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM

01APN1

EN01AP21.006

Add $0.25 for each unmanifested parcel paying commercial prices,
unless the IMpb Noncompliance Fee was already assessed on that
parcel.

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 61 / Thursday, April 1, 2021 / Notices
Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an
email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: March 29, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–06732 Filed 3–31–21; 8:45 am]

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION

1. Purpose

[Release No. 34–91420; File No. SR–ISE–
2021–04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend ISE’s Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, Section 9, Part
C To Reduce the Options Regulatory
Fee
March 26, 2021.

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 March 16,
2021, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘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.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
ISE’s Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
Section 9, Part C to reduce the Options
Regulatory Fee or ‘‘ORF’’.
While the changes proposed herein
are effective upon filing, the Exchange
has designated the amendments become
operative on April 1, 2021.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/ise/rules, 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
1 15
2 17

U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:02 Mar 31, 2021

Jkt 253001

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.

Currently, ISE assesses an ORF of
$0.0020 per contract side as specified in
ISE’s Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
Section 9, Part C. The Exchange
proposes to reduce the ORF from
$0.0020 per contract side to $0.0018 per
contract side as of April 1, 2021, in
order to help ensure that revenue
collected from the ORF, in combination
with other regulatory fees and fines,
does not exceed the Exchange’s total
regulatory costs.
Collection of ORF
Currently, ISE assesses its ORF for
each customer option transaction that is
either: (1) Executed by a member on ISE;
or (2) cleared by an ISE member at The
Options Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’)
in the customer range,3 even if the
transaction was executed by a nonmember of ISE, regardless of the
exchange on which the transaction
occurs.4 If the OCC clearing member is
an ISE member, ORF is assessed and
collected on all cleared customer
contracts (after adjustment for CMTA 5);
and (2) if the OCC clearing member is
not an ISE member, ORF is collected
only on the cleared customer contracts
executed at ISE, taking into account any
CMTA instructions which may result in
collecting the ORF from a non-member.6
3 Participants must record the appropriate
account origin code on all orders at the time of
entry in order. The Exchange represents that it has
surveillances in place to verify that members mark
orders with the correct account origin code.
4 The Exchange uses reports from OCC when
assessing and collecting the ORF.
5 CMTA or Clearing Member Trade Assignment is
a form of ‘‘give-up’’ whereby the position will be
assigned to a specific clearing firm at OCC.
6 By way of example, if Broker A, an ISE member,
routes a customer order to CBOE and the
transaction executes on CBOE and clears in Broker
A’s OCC Clearing account, ORF will be collected by
ISE from Broker A’s clearing account at OCC via
direct debit. While this transaction was executed on
a market other than ISE, it was cleared by an ISE
member in the member’s OCC clearing account in
the customer range, therefore there is a regulatory
nexus between ISE and the transaction. If Broker A
was not an ISE member, then no ORF should be
assessed and collected because there is no nexus;
the transaction did not execute on ISE nor was it
cleared by an ISE member.

PO 00000

Frm 00112

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

17223

In the case where a member both
executes a transaction and clears the
transaction, the ORF is assessed to and
collected from that member. In the case
where a member executes a transaction
and a different member clears the
transaction, the ORF is assessed to and
collected from the member who clears
the transaction and not the member who
executes the transaction. In the case
where a non-member executes a
transaction at an away market and a
member clears the transaction, the ORF
is assessed to and collected from the
member who clears the transaction. In
the case where a member executes a
transaction on ISE and a non-member
clears the transaction, the ORF is
assessed to the member that executed
the transaction on ISE and collected
from the non-member who cleared the
transaction. In the case where a member
executes a transaction at an away
market and a non-member clears the
transaction, the ORF is not assessed to
the member who executed the
transaction or collected from the nonmember who cleared the transaction
because the Exchange does not have
access to the data to make absolutely
certain that ORF should apply. Further,
the data does not allow the Exchange to
identify the member executing the trade
at an away market.
ORF Revenue and Monitoring of ORF
The Exchange monitors the amount of
revenue collected from the ORF to
ensure that it, in combination with other
regulatory fees and fines, does not
exceed regulatory costs. In determining
whether an expense is considered a
regulatory cost, the Exchange reviews
all costs and makes determinations if
there is a nexus between the expense
and a regulatory function. The Exchange
notes that fines collected by the
Exchange in connection with a
disciplinary matter offset ORF.
Revenue generated from ORF, when
combined with all of the Exchange’s
other regulatory fees and fines, is
designed to recover a material portion of
the regulatory costs to the Exchange of
the supervision and regulation of
member customer options business
including performing routine
surveillances, investigations,
examinations, financial monitoring, and
policy, rulemaking, interpretive, and
enforcement activities. Regulatory costs
include direct regulatory expenses and
certain indirect expenses in support of
the regulatory function. The direct
expenses include in-house and third
party service provider costs to support
the day to day regulatory work such as
surveillances, investigations and
examinations. The indirect expenses

E:\FR\FM\01APN1.SGM

01APN1