[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46104-46108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-17494]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 240

[Release No. 34-46169; File No. S7-14-02]
RIN 3235-AI49


Assessments on Security Futures Transactions and Fees on Sales of 
Securities Resulting from Physical Settlement of Security Futures 
Pursuant to Section 31 of the Exchange Act

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is 
adopting an amendment to a rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 (``Exchange Act'') to clarify how to calculate assessments that 
are required to be paid by national securities exchanges and national 
securities associations pursuant to section 31(d) of the Exchange Act 
for security futures transactions. In addition, the amendment will 
provide guidance on how to calculate fees that are required to be paid 
by national securities exchanges and national securities associations 
pursuant to sections 31(b) and (c) of the Exchange Act, respectively, 
for sales of securities that result from the physical settlement of 
security futures.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 12, 2002.

[[Page 46105]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Riley, Senior Special Counsel, 
at (202) 942-0752, Susie Cho, Special Counsel, at (202) 942-0748, and 
Geoffrey Pemble, Attorney, at (202) 942-0757, Division of Market 
Regulation, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW, 
Washington DC 20549-1001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 31 of the Exchange Act \1\ requires each national 
securities exchange and each national securities association to pay 
assessments and fees based on transactions in or sales of certain 
securities. On May 1, 2002, the Commission proposed an amendment to 
Rule 31-1\2\ to clarify how national securities exchanges and national 
securities associations should calculate: (1) Assessments for security 
futures transactions required to be paid pursuant to section 31(d) of 
the Exchange Act \3\ and (2) fees for sales of securities resulting 
from physical settlement of security futures required to be paid 
pursuant to either section 31(b) or (c) of the Exchange Act.\4\ The 
Commission received four comment letters in response to the Proposing 
Release.\5\ As discussed further below, the Commission is adopting the 
amendment to Rule 31-1 regarding payment of the Section 31 assessment 
as proposed. In addition, the Commission is adopting an amendment to 
Rule 31-1 regarding how Section 31 fees are to be calculated for sales 
of securities that result from physical settlement of security futures, 
which is modified from the amendment proposed in response to comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee.
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.31-1.
    \3\ Earlier this year, the Commission exempted futures on 
narrow-based security indexes from the assessment and fee 
requirements of section 31 of the Exchange Act. See Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 45371 (January 31, 2002), 67 FR 5199 
(February 5, 2002). Accordingly, assessments under Section 31(d) of 
the Exchange Act are required to be paid only on transactions in 
futures on single securities.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45854, 67 FR 30628 
(May 7, 2002) (``Proposing Release'').
    \5\ See letters to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, from 
Kathleen M. Hamm, Senior Vice President Regulation and Compliance, 
Nasdaq Liffe Markets, LLC, dated June 7, 2002 (``NQLX Letter''); C. 
Robert Paul, General Counsel, OneChicago, dated June 6, 2002 
(``OneChicago Letter''); W. Leo McBlain, Chairman, Financial 
Information Forum, dated June 5, 2002 (``FIF Letter''); and email to 
Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, from Franc Spinelli, Refco, 
dated May 16, 2002 (``Refco Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

A. Assessments Under Section 31(d) of the Exchange Act

    Section 31(d) of the Exchange Act provides that each national 
securities exchange and each national securities association shall pay 
an assessment ``for each round turn transaction (treated as including 
one purchase and one sale of a contract of sale for future delivery) on 
a security future traded on such national securities exchange or by or 
through any member of such association otherwise than on a national 
securities exchange.''\6\ The amendment to Rule 31-1 adopted by the 
Commission clarifies two issues with regard to the application of 
Section 31(d): (1) The meaning of ``round turn'' and (2) the unit of a 
``transaction'' on which the assessment is based. These issues are 
discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(d). For fiscal year 2002, the assessment is 
$0.009 for each round turn transaction on a security future. For 
fiscal year 2007 and each succeeding fiscal year, such assessment 
shall be equal to $0.0042 for each round turn transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Meaning of ``Round Turn''
    Section 31(d) clarifies that a ``round turn'' transaction on a 
security future is ``treated as including one purchase and one sale'' 
of a contract for future delivery. The Commission believes that the 
correct interpretation of this phrase is a completed trade involving 
the simultaneous purchase and sale of a contract for future delivery by 
the two parties to the trade.\7\ From the perspective of an exchange or 
association, there is, in fact, one purchase and one sale of a contract 
for future delivery in such a trade. Accordingly, this interpretation 
is consistent with the fact that it is the obligation of an exchange or 
association to pay an assessment on each round turn transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Commission received one comment letter addressing the 
interpretation of the term ``round turn''; the commenter agreed with 
the Commission's interpretation. See NQLX Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Meaning of ``Transaction''
    Exchanges and associations must pay Section 31(d) assessments for 
each ``round turn transaction (treated as including one purchase and 
one sale of a contract of sale for future delivery).'' The 
parenthetical makes clear that the assessment is applied on each 
purchase and sale of each contract for future delivery. Thus, the total 
Section 31 assessment an exchange or association must pay to the 
Commission will be the amount of the assessment--which is currently 
$0.009--multiplied by the number of contracts traded on such exchange 
or by or through a member of such association otherwise than on an 
exchange. The amendment to Preliminary Note to Rule 31-1 establishes 
this method of calculating the Section 31(d) assessment.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Commission received no comments on this aspect of the 
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Fees under Sections 31(b) and (c) of the Exchange Act

    In addition to the assessments paid by exchanges and associations 
pursuant to section 31(d) of the Exchange Act, section 31(b) of the 
Exchange Act requires each national securities exchange to pay a fee 
based on the aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities transacted 
on such exchange. Similarly, section 31(c) of the Exchange Act requires 
each national securities association to pay a fee based on the 
aggregate dollar amount of sales transacted by or through any member of 
such association otherwise than on a national securities exchange.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Sections 31(b) and (c) of the Exchange Act set forth initial 
rates of $15 per $1,000,000. The Commission, however, is required to 
make adjustments to these fee rates pursuant to section 31(j) of the 
Exchange Act. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45842 (April 
29, 2002) (Order making fiscal 2003 annual adjustments to the fee 
rates applicable under section 6(b) of the Securities Act of 1933, 
and sections 13(e), 14(g), 31(b) and 31(c) of the Exchange Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Section 31(b) and 31(c) Fees Payable Upon Physical Settlement
    Because at physical settlement of a security future a sale of the 
underlying security or securities occurs, each national securities 
exchange or national securities association is required to pay a fee to 
the Commission based on the dollar amount of such sale. Thus, as in the 
exercise of an option,\10\ the fees that are required pursuant to 
either section 31(b) or section 31(c) of the Exchange Act are payable 
to the Commission only if a security future is held until settlement 
and settlement results in the physical delivery of the underlying 
security or securities. The amendment to the Preliminary Note to Rule 
31-1 clarifies that the obligation to pay a Section 31(b) or (c) fee on 
a sale of a security underlying a physically-settled security future 
does not accrue until the time that physical settlement occurs.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Section 31 fees that are paid upon an option's exercise are 
paid only on options that are physically-settled, not options that 
are cash-settled, because, upon exercise, physically-settled options 
result in the actual sale and delivery of the underlying securities.
    \11\ One commenter agreed with the Commission's interpretation 
by noting that, because Congress specifically excluded security 
futures contracts from Section 31(b) and (c) fees, the commenter 
believed that Congress did not intend to levy fees at the time of 
the formation of the contract, but rather at physical delivery of 
the underlying security. See NQLX Letter.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 46106]]

2. Calculation of Aggregate Dollar Amount of Sales of Securities
    In the Proposing Release, the Commission proposed to amend the 
Preliminary Note to Rule 31-1 to clarify that the dollar amount of a 
sale of securities resulting from the physical settlement of a security 
future should be calculated based on the price at which the security 
future was entered into by the market participant effecting delivery of 
the underlying security at settlement. The Commission, however, sought 
comment on whether this was the appropriate price for determining the 
dollar amount of the sale.
    All of the commenters to the Proposing Release argued that the 
original trade price should not be used as the benchmark for 
calculating fees under Sections 31(b) and (c).\12\ Instead, the 
commenters recommended that the Commission adopt an alternative 
interpretation that would base the Section 31(b) and (c) fees on the 
final settlement price of the security futures contract. One commenter 
noted that its draft exchange rules define the settlement price as the 
price at which the securities underlying the futures contract are 
deliverable.\13\ Several commenters further noted that the initial 
trade price is not the price paid by the buyer, or received by the 
seller, for the underlying security at expiration.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; FIF Letter; and Refco 
Letter.
    \13\ See NQLX Letter.
    \14\ See NQLX Letter and Refco Letter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenters further argued that using the sales price of the 
security future would be complicated and burdensome to implement. All 
of the commenters noted that neither The Options Clearing Corporation 
(``OCC'') nor the exchanges retain original trade price information 
pertaining to open positions for more than one day.\15\ The commenters 
stated that using the sales price of the security future would require 
costly systems changes by market participants such as OCC because 
original trade price information is not readily tracked or available 
and would have to be obtained from the party making the delivery.\16\ 
One of the commenters estimated that its required systems modifications 
would take approximately three months to complete.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; FIF Letter; and Refco 
Letter
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ See NQLX Letter. FIF agreed with this argument by stating 
that the operational and technical challenges that would result from 
using the initial trade price as the basis upon which the Section 31 
fee calculation is made would require months of development work for 
multiple industry participants. See FIF Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the commenters argued that using the initial trade price 
as the price upon which Section 31 fees are assessed would create 
verification problems.\18\ Specifically, the commenters noted that 
because member firms are the only entities currently tracking the 
original transaction price, exchanges and associations that are subject 
to the obligation to pay the fee would not be able to verify the trade 
information received from the member firms.\19\ One commenter argued 
that additional audits and reviews would have to be implemented at 
additional costs.\20\ The commenters noted that verifying the accuracy 
of the information provided to a clearing organization would be 
impossible without extensive investigation and manual intervention 
involving multiple organizations.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; FIF Letter; and Refco 
Letter.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ See NQLX Letter.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Instead, a majority of the commenters recommended that the 
Commission use the settlement price at expiration as the basis upon 
which to calculate the dollar amount of a sale of securities resulting 
from the physical settlement of a security future.\22\ They believed 
that this approach would be less complicated and easier to implement 
because the relevant information is readily ascertainable by the 
exchanges and OCC, and no systems modifications would be needed for 
either calculation or verification of Section 31 fees.\23\ Further, as 
noted above, two commenters noted that the settlement price is the 
dollar amount the buyer pays and the seller receives for delivery of 
the underlying security.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; and Refco Letter.
    \23\ See NQLX Letter and OneChicago Letter.
    \24\ See supra note 14 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the commenters make compelling 
arguments as to why the Section 31(b) and (c) fees should be based on 
the final settlement price, rather than on the price at which the 
security future was entered into by the market participant effecting 
delivery, and has amended Rule 31-1 accordingly.
    A buyer and seller enter into a futures contract at the current 
futures price for delivery on a specified date of an underlying asset 
or instrument. At the close of trading, all futures contracts open on 
that day are marked-to-market. The mark-to-market is a risk reduction 
mechanism to reduce the clearinghouse's exposure to its members. The 
brokers for parties with long positions pay to (or receive from) the 
clearing agency any decrease (or increase) in the futures contract 
price since the trade. Similarly, the brokers for the parties with the 
short positions pay to (or receive from) the clearing agency any 
increase (or decrease) in the futures contract price since the trade. 
This exchange of mark-to-market payments is referred to as variation 
settlement. Thus, at expiration of a futures contract, any difference 
between the price at which a buyer and seller may have entered into 
their respective positions has been bridged by the intervening mark-to-
market variation settlement, i.e., each party will have received (or 
paid) the difference between the original sale price and the final 
settlement price of the contract. Accordingly, physical settlement 
pursuant to the terms of a futures contract takes place at an invoicing 
price based on the final settlement price.
    The amendment we are adopting to the Preliminary Note to Rule 31-1 
requires that the fees paid under Sections 31(b) and (c) when physical 
settlement of a security future occurs be based on the price received 
by the seller from the buyer in exchange for delivery of the security 
or securities underlying such security future--i.e., the final 
settlement price. A delivery against payment of the security or 
securities underlying a security future only occurs at expiration of a 
physically-settled contract, once the buyers electing to receive 
physical delivery and the sellers electing to make physical delivery 
have been identified. At physical delivery, the buyer pays and the 
seller receives the final settlement price of the underlying security. 
The Commission believes that this amendment specifying the price on 
which exchanges and associations must base Section 31(b) and (c) fees 
is responsive to commenters' concerns. Moreover, the Commission 
believes that the amount of fees collected under Sections 31(b) and (c) 
under this methodology will not alter the expected collection from that 
which would have been collected under the proposed methodology.

C. Payment of Section 31 Assessments and Fees

    The obligation to pay the Section 31(d) assessment on a security 
futures transaction rests with national securities exchanges and 
national securities associations. Similarly, national securities 
exchanges and national securities associations have the

[[Page 46107]]

obligation to pay Section 31(b) and (c) fees. The amendment to the 
Preliminary Note to Rule 31-1 provides that OCC may pay Section 31 
assessments on round turn transactions on security futures and fees for 
sales of securities that result from the physical settlement of 
security futures on behalf of national securities exchanges and 
national securities associations.
    If a national securities exchange or national securities 
association chooses to levy charges upon its members to cover the 
Section 31(d) assessments for security futures transactions, such 
exchange or association would need to adopt rules requiring its members 
to pay such assessments.\25\ In addition, national securities exchanges 
and national securities associations could adopt new or amend current 
rules to require their members to pay fees to cover the fees owed by 
such exchanges or associations under Section 31(b) or (c) of the 
Exchange Act to clarify the application of such fees to sales of 
securities that result from the physical settlement of security 
futures.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Currently, national securities exchanges and the National 
Association of Securities Dealers (``NASD'') charge their members 
fees to cover the fees owed by them to the Commission under sections 
31(b) and (c) of the Exchange Act. See, e.g., Schedule A to the NASD 
By-Laws, Section 8; New York Stock Exchange Rule 440H.
    \26\ National securities exchanges registered under section 6(g) 
of the Exchange Act would not be required to file such rules with 
the Commission. See Exchange Act Section 6(g)(4)(B), 15 U.S.C. 
78f(g)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act is not applicable to the amendment 
because it does not impose any collection of information requirements 
that would require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget.

IV. Costs and Benefits of Amendment to Rule 31-1

A. Comments

    In the Proposing Release, the Commission considered preliminarily 
the costs and benefits of the amendment to Rule 31-1 and requested 
comment on all aspects of its cost-benefit analysis, including 
identification of any additional costs or benefits of the proposed 
amendment to Rule 31-1. None of the commenters provided dollar-based 
estimates regarding the overall costs and benefits of the proposed 
amendment to Rule 31-1. However, several commenters discussed issues 
related to the costs and benefits of the proposed amendment.
    Specifically, commenters raised concerns with the proposal that 
fees on sales of securities that result from the physical settlement of 
security futures be calculated based on the original sale price of the 
security future.\27\ According to some commenters, this requirement 
would cause operational and technical challenges, which could result in 
undue costs and burdens for multiple market participants including 
exchanges, firms, service bureaus, and clearing organizations.\28\ 
Several commenters noted that the futures exchanges and clearing 
organizations do not track initial trade price information for more 
than one day.\29\ One commenter noted that such data would have to be 
obtained from the party making the delivery.\30\ In addition, one 
commenter noted that market participants would need mechanisms to keep 
track of which futures transactions result in physical delivery as 
differentiated from those that do not.\31\ Thus, a majority of the 
commenters suggested using the final settlement price as the basis for 
fee calculation.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; FIF Letter; and Refco 
Letter.
    \28\ See NQLX Letter and FIF Letter.
    \29\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; and FIF Letter.
    \30\ See OneChicago Letter.
    \31\ See FIF Letter.
    \32\ See NQLX Letter; OneChicago Letter; and Refco Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Costs

    The amendment to Rule 31-1 is for the purpose of providing guidance 
on how Section 31 assessments and fees are to be calculated for 
transactions in security futures and sales of securities resulting from 
physical settlement of security futures. Specifically, the amendment is 
intended to clarify: (1) The method by which assessments required 
pursuant to section 31(d) of the Exchange Act are calculated for round 
turn transactions on security futures traded on national securities 
exchanges or by members of national securities associations; and (2) 
the manner in which fees required pursuant to sections 31(b) and (c) of 
the Exchange Act are calculated for sales of securities resulting from 
physical settlement of security futures.
    As noted above, the Commission has modified its proposal in 
response to comments and is adopting an amendment to Rule 31-1 
requiring that the payment of the Section 31(b) or (c) fee be based 
upon the price received by the seller in exchange for delivery of the 
security or securities underlying such security future--i.e., the final 
settlement price. The Commission believes that this method should 
address the cost concerns raised by the commenters.
    In addition, because the amendment to Rule 31-1 does not give rise 
to additional obligations on national securities exchanges, 
associations, or other market participants, but rather merely provides 
guidance on complying with existing statutory obligations, the 
Commission has concluded that there would be no costs imposed on market 
participants by the amendment to the rule.

C. Benefits

    The Commission has concluded that the amendment to Rule 31-1 will 
benefit exchanges and associations by providing clarification on the 
assessments and fees payable under sections 31(b), (c) and (d) of the 
Exchange Act. Although these sections of the Exchange Act set forth 
generally the obligations of national securities exchanges and national 
securities associations to pay assessments and fees on security futures 
transactions and sales of securities resulting from physical settlement 
of such futures, the Commission has concluded that guidance is 
necessary to clarify the mechanics of the assessment and fee 
calculation and collection process for security futures. The 
Commission's guidance in the amendment to Rule 31-1 will remove any 
potential ambiguity in the statute about, for example, the meaning of 
``round turn transaction'' and the price on which fees for sales of 
securities that result from the physical settlement of security futures 
will be based.

V. Consideration of Burden on Competition and Promotion of 
Efficiency, Competition, and Capital Formation

    Section 23(a)(2) of the Exchange Act requires the Commission, when 
adopting rules under the Exchange Act, to consider the impact of such 
rules on competition.\33\ In addition, section 3(f) of the Exchange Act 
requires the Commission, when engaging in rulemaking that requires it 
to consider or determine whether an action is necessary or appropriate 
in the public interest, to consider whether the action will promote 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78w(a)(2).
    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has considered the amendment to the rule in light of 
these standards and has concluded that it will not impose a burden on 
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the 
purposes of the Exchange Act. As noted above, in amending Rule 31-1 the 
Commission is

[[Page 46108]]

merely providing guidance in the rule to clarify recent amendments to 
section 31 of the Exchange Act. Likewise, the Commission has concluded 
that the amendment to the rule will not have an impact on capital 
formation. To the extent the amendment to the rule reduces any 
ambiguity regarding the application of Section 31 to security futures 
transactions and the physical settlement of security futures, the 
amendment to Rule 31-1 promotes efficiency.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,\35\ 
the Chairman of the Commission certified that the amendment to the rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. This certification was attached to the Proposing 
Release as Appendix A.\36\ The Commission received no comments 
concerning the impact on small entities or the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act Certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    \36\ See Proposing Release, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Statutory Authority

    For the reasons set forth above, the Commission amends Rule 31-1 
under the Exchange Act pursuant to its authority under Exchange Act 
Sections 3(b), 23(a), and 31.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 240

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Text of Final Rule

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Commission is amending 
Part 240 of Chapter II, Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations as 
follows.

PART 240--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 
1934

    1. The authority citation for part 240 continues to read in part as 
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77c, 77d, 77g, 77j, 77s, 77z-2, 77z-3, 
77eee, 77ggg, 77nnn, 77sss, 77ttt, 78c, 78d, 78e, 78f, 78g, 78i, 
78j, 78j-1, 78k, 78k-1, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78p, 78q, 78s, 78u-5, 
78w, 78x, 78ll, 78mm, 79q, 79t, 80a-20, 80a-23, 80a-29, 80a-37, 80b-
3, 80b-4 and 80b-11, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

    2. Amend Sec. 240.31-1 by:
    a. Removing the Preliminary Note;
    b. Adding Preliminary Notes 1 and 2; and
    c. Adding introductory text to Sec. 240.31-1.
    The additions read as follows:


Sec. 240.31-1  Securities transactions exempt from transaction fees.

Preliminary Notes

    1. The section 31 fee for options transactions occurring on a 
national securities exchange, or transactions in options subject to 
prompt last sale reporting occurring otherwise than on an exchange 
(with the exception of sales of options on securities indexes) is to be 
paid by the exchange or the national securities association itself, 
respectively, or by The Options Clearing Corporation on behalf of the 
exchange or association, and such fee is to be computed on the basis of 
the option premium (market price) for the sale of the option. In the 
event of the exercise of an option, whether such option is traded on an 
exchange or otherwise, a section 31 fee is to be paid by the exchange 
or the national securities association itself, or The Options Clearing 
Corporation on behalf of the exchange or association, and such fee is 
to be computed on the basis of the exercise price of the option.
    2. The section 31(d) assessment on a round turn transaction on a 
security future traded on a national securities exchange, or by or 
through a member of a national securities association otherwise than on 
a national securities exchange, is to be paid by the exchange or the 
national securities association itself, respectively, or by The Options 
Clearing Corporation on behalf of the exchange or association, and such 
assessment is to be computed on the basis of the number of contracts of 
sale for future delivery traded on such exchange or by or through any 
member of such association otherwise than on an exchange. In the event 
of the physical settlement of a security future, a section 31 fee is to 
be paid by the exchange on which the round turn transaction on the 
security future was traded, or, if the round turn transaction on the 
security future was traded by or through a member of a national 
securities association otherwise than on a national securities 
exchange, by the association, or by The Options Clearing Corporation on 
behalf of such exchange or association. Such fee, whether paid under 
section 31(b) or section 31(c), is to be computed on the basis of the 
price received by the seller in exchange for delivery of the security 
or securities underlying the security future. The obligation to pay 
fees under section 31(b) or (c) does not accrue until the time that 
physical delivery occurs.
    The following shall be exempt from section 31 of the Act:
* * * * *

    Dated: July 8, 2002.

    By the Commission.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-17494 Filed 7-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P