[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 56 (Friday, March 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17736-17738]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06627]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69158; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-034]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Market-Maker Continuous Quoting
Obligations

March 18, 2013.
    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 March 8, 2013, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    [The Exchange] [sic] proposes to delay the implementation date of
changes to Market-Makers' continuous quoting obligations. There is no
proposed rule language.

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
    On July 5, 2012, the Exchange submitted a rule change filing, which
became effective on that date, to amend Rule 1.1(ccc), ``Continuous
Electronic Quotes,'' to reduce to 90% the percentage of time for which
a Market-Maker is required to provide continuous electronic quotes in
an appointed option class on a given trading day. That filing also
included a proposed rule change to amend Rules 8.13, 8.15A, 8.85, and
8.93 to increase to the lesser of 99% or 100% minus one call-put pair
the percentage of series in each class in which Preferred Market-
Makers, Lead Market-Makers, Designated Primary Market-Makers, and
Electronic Designated Primary Market-Makers, respectively
(collectively, ``Market-Makers''), must provide continuous electronic
quotes.\3\ The proposed rule changes in that filing were set to become
operative on August 4, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-67410 (July 11,
2012), 77 FR 42040 (July 17, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-064).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submitted another rule change filing on August 3,
2012, which became effective and operative upon filing, to delay
implementation of these quoting obligation changes to provide Market-
Makers with additional time to make necessary system changes to comply
with the new quoting obligations. The filing indicated that the
Exchange would announce the implementation date of the proposed rule
change in a Regulatory Circular to be published no later than 90 days
following the effective date of that rule change, which implementation
date would be no later than 150 days following the effective date.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-67644 (August 13,
2012), 77 FR 49846 (August 17, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-077).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the Exchange submitted a rule change filing on November
1, 2012, which became effective and operative upon filing, to further
delay implementation of these quoting obligation changes to provide
Market-Makers with additional time to make necessary system changes to
comply with the new quoting obligations. The filing indicated that the
Exchange would announce the implementation date of the proposed rule
change in a Regulatory Circular to be published no later than 120 days
following the effective date of that rule change, which implementation
date would be no later than 180 days following the effective date.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 68218 (November 13,
2012), 77 FR 69667 (November 20, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-106).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the filing of that last rule change to delay the
implementation date of the changes to quoting obligations, the Exchange
has filed two additional rule changes that modify the continuous
quoting obligations of Market-Makers. First, the Exchange filed a rule
change proposing to exclude series that have a time to expiration of
nine months or more from Preferred Market Maker's continuous quoting
obligation (LEAPS).\6\ That rule change was effective on filing but has
not yet been implemented by the Exchange. Second, the Exchange filed a
rule change proposing to exclude intra-day add-on [sic] on the day
during which such series are added for trading from Market-Makers'
quoting obligations.\7\ That rule change is pending approval by the
Commission. Both of those rule filings provided that the Exchange will
implement those rule changes in conjunction with the implementation of
the rule changes in filing SR-CBOE-2012-064 and would announce an
implementation date for all of the Market-Maker quoting obligation
changes via Regulatory Circular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 68691 (January 18,
2013), 78 FR 5548 [sic] (January 25, 2013) (SRCBOE-2013-008).
    \7\ Securities and Exchange Act Release No 68944 (February 15,
2013), 78 FR 12377 (February 22, 2013) (SR-CBOE-2013-019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this rule change filing is to again delay
implementation of the quoting obligation changes in filing SR-CBOE-
2012-064 so that the Exchange

may implement the changes in that filing at the same time as the
changes in filings SR-CBOE-2013-008 and SR-CBOE-2013-01 [sic], which
implementation date would be after receiving Commission approval of the
rule change related to intra-day add-on series. The Exchange believes
that implementing these various quoting obligations at the same time
would benefit Market-Makers, because it would allow them to make all
necessary adjustments to their systems at one time as opposed to
continuously, which would otherwise occur with a piecemeal
implementation of these rule changes.
    The Exchange will announce the implementation date of the proposed
rule change in rule filing SR-CBOE-2012-064 (and the other rule changes
discussed above) in a Regulatory Circular to be published no later than
120 days following the effective date of this rule filing. The
implementation date will be no later than 180 days following the
effective date.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\8\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitation transactions in securities, 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.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes that delaying the
implementation date of these changes to Market-Makers' continuous
quoting obligations so that the Exchange may implement them at the same
time as other changes to the quoting obligations will allow Market-
Makers to adjust their systems at one time rather than multiple times
to be consistent with the new quoting obligations. This will provide
efficiencies that will benefit investors and the public interest and
encourage more efficient order entry practices by Market-Makers. The
Exchange believes that this will also promote compliance by Market-
Makers with the new quoting obligations, which fosters cooperation
between the Market-Makers and the Exchange, which monitors Market-
Makers' compliance with quoting obligations. Additionally, the proposed
rule change will allow the Exchange to announce an implementation
schedule for all of the quoting obligations changes in a fair and
orderly manner.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
the proposed rule change will cause any burden on intramarket
competition because it applies to a group of similarly situated market
participants--Market-Makers. The Exchange also does not believe the
proposed rule change to delay implementation of the quoting obligation
changes will cause any burden on intermarket competition, because the
result of the proposed rule change is that Market-Makers will continue
to be subject to the same continuous quoting obligations for an
additional period of time.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). The Exchange has requested
that the Commission waive the requirement that the Exchange provide
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date on which
the Exchange filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii). The Commission hereby grants this request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay.\15\ The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change does not
present any new, unique, or substantive issues, but rather is merely
delaying the implementation date of an already effective rule change,
and that waiver of the 30-day operative delay will allow the Exchange
to announce an implementation schedule in an efficient manner.
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposal operative upon
filing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. 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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2013-034 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2013-034. 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 such 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-CBOE-2013-034 and should be
submitted on or before April 12, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary
[FR Doc. 2013-06627 Filed 3-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 235 (Monday, December 8, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72745-72747]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28642]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73715; File No. SR-OC-2014-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; OneChicago, LLC; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Bilateral Block and Bilateral EFP
Reporting Guidance

December 2, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on November 20, 2014,
OneChicago, LLC (``OneChicago,'' ``OCX,'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons. OneChicago has also filed
this rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(``CFTC''). OneChicago filed a written certification with the CFTC
under Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') on November
20, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule
Change

    OCX is proposing to issue Notice to Members (``NTM'') 2014-33,
which provides guidance to market participants regarding bilateral
block and bilateral Exchange of Future for Physical (``EFP'')
reporting. NTM 2014-33 provides guidance relating to four aspects of
bilateral block and bilateral EFP reporting.
    First, NTM 2014-33 defines the completion time of certain types of
block trades. Specifically, the NTM relates to block trades in which a
liquidity provider pre-hedges the customer's futures block order by
executing in a related product, such as the underlying equity. OCX is
clarifying that those types of block trades must be reported upon
completion of the customer's full futures order quantity, and are not
required to be reported in partial portions throughout the day.
    The second topic on which NTM 2014-33 provides guidance is the
order in which market participants may report a block trade.
Specifically, for block trades that involve an order originator or
customer on one side and a liquidity provider on the other, OCX is
clarifying that it is acceptable for the liquidity provider to inform
the order originator that the trade is complete, and for the order
originator to then post the trade to the Exchange (after which time the
liquidity provider would then accept the trade details in the
OneChicago System). Previous OCX guidance was silent on this issue.
    Furthermore, OneChicago is proposing to update its reporting time
requirements to account for the dual-party posting guidance described
above. Generally, OCX requires the posting party of a block trade to
post the trade within five minutes of execution, and the accepting
party to accept the reported trade details within five minutes from the
time it was posted. OCX is proposing to modify this requirement for
pre-hedged blocks for two reasons. First, OCX has become aware that
market participants may be unable to comply with a strict five minute
deadline when executing a block that involves a hedge in a related
market. Second, OCX is tailoring the reporting requirements imposed on
each side of a block trade to allow the side with greater reporting
requirements more time to meet those obligations.
    Finally, NTM 2014-33 states that block and EFP trades may be
reported outside the time parameters described in the NTM only in
extenuating circumstances. The NTM then provides a non-exhaustive list
of scenarios that OCX may consider to constitute an extenuating
circumstance.

Block Trade Completion

    Generally, block trades in OCX's products occur with one party (the
order originator or customer) seeking directional exposure to a single
stock future. The counterparty (the liquidity provider) hedges in a
related product, such as the underlying equity, and then buys/sells the
equivalent number of single stock futures from/to the order originator/
customer. OCX considers this type of ``pre-hedged'' block trade to be
complete when the liquidity provider hedges in the related market and
then calculates the futures price by adding or subtracting the agreed
upon basis from the hedge price.
    Under this interpretation, a block trade may be considered complete
before the customer's entire order quantity is filled. This
interpretation has led to concerns among market participants regarding
how to appropriately report amounts that meet the block trade minimum
quantity threshold, but that do not satisfy the customer's full order
quantity. These situations generally arise when a liquidity provider
has completed a blockable amount, but can no longer execute the
remaining customer order due to the customer's limit price being
crossed, or because of a lack of liquidity in the hedge product.
    OCX is now clarifying in NTM 2014-33 that market participants are
not required to report these ``partial fill'' amounts throughout the
day. Rather, a block trade of this type is considered complete when the
liquidity provider has completed the hedge for the customer's full
futures block order quantity. The NTM then lists certain requirements
relating to the reporting of block trades pursuant to the NTM. First,
if the liquidity provider is unable to complete the customer's entire
futures order quantity equivalent by the end of the day, the reporting
firm should report the amount that the liquidity provider was able to
complete, so long as that amount meets the minimum block trade quantity
threshold. Second, if the liquidity provider was not able to hedge an
amount at least equal to the minimum block trade quantity threshold, a
futures block was not created, and thus no block trade may be reported.
In such a situation, the liquidity provider may offset or maintain its
long or short position in the hedge product. For example, a liquidity
provider that bought stock to hedge its sale of futures may sell the
stock if it was unable to hedge enough shares of stock to reach the
minimum block trade quantity threshold.
    The NTM then describes a customer's obligation to accept a pre-
hedged amount greater than or equal to the minimum block trade quantity
threshold. A customer is required to accept a futures block that the
liquidity provider has completed by pre-hedging. In other words, once a
liquidity

provider has pre-hedged an amount in a related market, the customer may
not refuse to accept the futures equivalent of that pre-hedge.
Nonetheless, a customer may permissibly cancel the unexecuted balance
of its order that has not been pre-hedged. In such a case, the firms
simply report the futures equivalent of the completed pre-hedge amount,
so long as that amount meets the minimum block trade quantity
threshold.

Dual Party Posting

    The OneChicago System requires dual-party posting. Specifically,
one party to the block trade must report the details of the trade,
while the counterparty must then accept the reported details of the
trade. In the case of a block trade described above in which one party
seeks directional exposure and the counterparty provides liquidity by
pre-hedging in a related market, NTM 2014-33 proposes to allow either
side to the trade (the customer/order originator or the liquidity
provider) to initially post the trade. Previous Exchange block trading
guidance was silent on this issue.
    OCX recognizes that for business or operational purposes, market
participants may prefer in certain instances for the order originator/
customer to initially report the trade and for the liquidity provider
to then accept the trade details. Therefore, NTM 2014-33 expressly
permits market participants to report bilateral blocks in this manner.

Updated Reporting Time Requirements

    OCX Rule 417 (Block Trading) requires that block trades be reported
to the Exchange ``without delay.'' The term ``without delay'' is
interpreted by NTM 2012-25 to mean within five minutes of completion of
the hedge or, if there is no hedge involved, within five minutes of
agreement to the terms of the trade. NTM 2012-25 clarifies that each
party to the trade has five minutes to report the trade; that is, the
party inserting the trade is required to enter the trade into the
OneChicago System within five minutes of execution and the other party
is required to accept the trade within five minutes of it being entered
into the OneChicago System.
    OCX has determined that five minutes per side is not sufficient to
allow parties enough time to accurately report their block trades when
the block trade is of the type that involves a liquidity provider pre-
hedging in a related market, because a trade of this type does not
involve a single point of execution during which parties agree to the
terms of a trade then immediately report the trade details to the
Exchange. Rather, these block trades involve multiple steps. Also,
because the point of execution depends on executions in a related
market, parties to a block trade need time to respond to their block
execution and report the trade to the Exchange.
    Accordingly, NTM 2014-33 proposes two alternative reporting time
requirements depending on whether the liquidity provider or the
customer/order originator is posting the block trade. The proposed
reporting times have been made more flexible to account for: (1) The
amount of time required for the liquidity provider to calculate the
futures price based on its hedge price; (2) the amount of time required
for the posting party to enter the trade details into the OneChicago
System; and (3) the time it may take for a party not on notice to react
to an inbound message or alert from a counterparty or the OneChicago
System.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For example, when an order originator sends an order to a
liquidity provider, the order originator is not on notice as to when
it will receive a message from the liquidity provider that the hedge
is complete (or, alternatively, receive a message from the
OneChicago System that the liquidity provider has inserted the trade
details into the OneChicago System and that such details must now be
accepted or rejected). Accordingly, requiring a ``non-notice party''
(such as the order originator in this example) to accept or post a
trade within five minutes may be unreasonably burdensome, as the
non-notice party may receive this message at any time in the trading
day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under NTM 2014-33, in cases where the liquidity provider is
initially posting the block trade to the Exchange, the liquidity
provider has fifteen minutes from the final execution of its hedge in
the related market to calculate the futures price and then insert the
trade details into the OneChicago System. The liquidity provider in
this case has fifteen minutes rather than the standard five because the
liquidity provider must calculate the futures price from its hedge
price and manually enter the details of the trade into the OneChicago
System. The order originator then has ten minutes to accept the trade
in the OneChicago System. The order originator in this case has ten
minutes rather than the standard five because it is considered a non-
notice party in that it will not become aware that its obligation to
post its side of the trade is running until it receives a trade report
from the OneChicago System.
    Conversely, when the order originator will be posting the block
trade, the liquidity provider has ten minutes to calculate the futures
price based on the hedge price and then inform the order originator of
the futures price. The order originator then has fifteen minutes to
insert the details of the trade into the OneChicago System. The
liquidity provider then has five additional minutes to accept the trade
in the OneChicago System. In this case, the liquidity provider
initially has ten minutes rather than the standard five in order to
calculate the futures price. The liquidity provider here does not
receive the full fifteen minutes, however, because it is not also
entering the trade details into the OneChicago System, as was the case
in the previous example. The order originator has fifteen minutes
rather than the standard five because it is considered a non-notice
party that also needs to insert the details of the trade into the
OneChicago System. Finally, the liquidity provider then has the
standard five minutes to accept the inserted trade because it is on
notice that the trade will soon be posted and simply has to review the
trade details and accept the trade, and therefore, does not require any
additional time.
    NTM 2014-33 clarifies that for block trades where there is no hedge
in a related market (both parties simply agree to a block trade then
post to the Exchange), NTM 2012-25 controls, and the parties must
report the block without delay. As such, the reporting party has five
minutes to insert the trade details into the OneChicago System and the
accepting party then has five minutes to accept the trade. OCX is also
clarifying that the standard five minute reporting and five minute
accepting requirements are also applicable to bilateral EFP trades,
because those trades do not involve a pre-hedge like the block trades
described in NTM 2014-33.

Delayed EFP and Block Trade Reporting

    OCX recognizes that in some instances parties to a block trade may
be unable to report their blocks and EFPs within the timelines required
by the Exchange. Accordingly, OCX is permitting market participants to
report block or EFP trades outside the reporting requirements in
certain situations that the Exchange considers extenuating
circumstances. NTM 2014-33 provides a non-exhaustive list of scenarios
that the Exchange may consider to be extenuating circumstances,
including (1) a technical malfunction or systems outage; (2)
disagreement between reporting parties on price or some other material
term of the trade; (3) a firm is reporting or accepting multiple block
trades within short time period; and (4) unusual or abnormal market
conditions.
    The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4 to
the filing submitted by the Exchange but is not

attached to the published notice of the filing.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OneChicago 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 self-regulatory organization 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 purpose of OneChicago's filing is to provide its market
participants with guidance regarding the method by which bilateral
blocks and bilateral EFPs may be reported to the Exchange.
Specifically, market participants have raised questions regarding
various aspects of bilateral block and bilateral EFP reporting,
including how to deal with partial fills and remainders when reporting
a bilateral block, which party to a bilateral block must report the
trade first, how much time parties have to report a block trade to the
Exchange, and under what circumstances, if any, OCX would allow parties
to a bilateral block or bilateral EFP trade to exceed the reporting
time requirements. OCX is updating its guidance in NTM 2014-33 to
account for these questions that have been raised by market
participants.
2. Statutory Basis
    OneChicago believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\3\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ in particular, in that it
is designed to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in facilitating transactions in securities, and remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and national market
system. OneChicago believes that providing guidance to its market
participants regarding the reporting of bilateral trades allows market
participants to engage in these types of trades with regulatory
certainty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OneChicago does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, in that the
NTM simply provides guidance regarding how to comply with OCX's
bilateral block and bilateral EFP reporting rules. The rule change
furthers competition by updating its bilateral block and bilateral EFP
guidance to account for the various ways market participants engage in
such trades. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all of the amended
rules apply equally to all market participants.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The rule change will become operative on December 10, 2014.
    At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the
proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC,
may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the
proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OC-2014-06 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-OC-2014-06. 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 such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices 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-OC-2014-06,
and should be submitted on or before December 29, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28642 Filed 12-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 27, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2002-12503

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of ATLAS AIR, INC. (ATLAS), filed 1/26/05 for:

XX  Waiver of startup deadline in Order 2004-3-16 for U.S.-Ecuador
all-cargo services

Background:

By Order 2004-3-16, the Department, among other things, granted to Atlas
six available frequencies to conduct scheduled U.S.-Ecuador all-cargo
air transportation services.  These awards were subject to the condition
that the carriers commence service with the frequencies no later than
June 14, 2004.  By Notices of Action Taken dated June 14, 2004,
September 15, 2004, November 30, 2004, and January 14, 2005, in the
above-captioned docket, the Department granted the requests of Atlas to
extend the startup deadline for the subject U.S.-Ecuador all-cargo
frequencies.  The most recent extension was granted through January 31,
2005.

Application for Waiver of the Startup Condition:

On January 26, 2005, Atlas filed an application in the captioned docket
for a waiver of the startup condition imposed by Order 2004-3-16, and
asked that the startup period be extended for an additional period
through March 31, 2005.  Atlas states that, earlier in the month when it
filed its last waiver request, it believed the Ecuadorian licensing
process would be completed within two weeks.  Atlas explains that its
legal counsel in Quito recently has advised that completion of the
process now requires Ecuadorian Consejo Nacional de Aviacion Civil
(CNAC) and Direccion General de Aviacion Civil review and approval of
Atlas’ bank warranty, and issuance of a CNAC resolution of final
approval.  Atlas states that these steps should be completed within 30
days, but it is seeking an additional month extension to account for
further unexpected delays.

Atlas maintains that this situation is unlike the normal startup waiver
situation where a carrier seeks to postpone commencement of new flights
in a new market.  Atlas states that it is already operating a regular
pattern of Ecuador charter flights and plans to upgrade those to
scheduled flights as soon as Ecuador grants the final license for such
service.

Applicant rep.: Russell E. Pommer<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst:  Linda L.
Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

												2

Disposition:

We grant the application filed by Atlas Air for a waiver of the startup
deadline imposed by Order 2004-3-16 in the 2002 U.S.-Ecuador All-Cargo
Service Case, and extend, through March 31, 2005, the startup deadline
for the frequencies allocated to Atlas Air.  In taking this action, we
find that grant of the requested waiver is in the public interest in the
circumstances presented; namely, that the carrier has indicated on the
record that it continues to work diligently to complete the Ecuadorian
licensing process, and that no party opposed the waiver request here.

We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of the answer
period with the consent of all parties served with the application.

The above action was effective when taken: January 27, 2005.

XX  Action taken by:	Paul L. Gretch, Director

			Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
______

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy, and (2) grant of the request was consistent with the public
interest.  To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

  Extension of the startup deadline is effective through March 31, 2005,
or until the date on which Atlas begins service with its allocated
U.S.-Ecuador frequencies, whichever occurs earlier.  As to any frequency
with which Atlas does not begin service by March 31, 2005, the
allocation with respect to that frequency will expire automatically and
revert to the Department for reallocation.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 54882]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21733]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Docket Numbers: EC13-128-000.
    Applicants: Silver Merger Sub, Inc., Nevada Power Company, Sierra
Pacific Power Company, NV Energy, Inc.
    Description: Supplemental Informational Filing of Silver Merger
Sub, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 8/27/13.
    Accession Number: 20130827-5144.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/10/13.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER10-2609-005; ER10-2604-003; ER10-2603-003; ER10-
2602-006; ER10-2606-005.
    Applicants: Escanaba Paper Company, Luke Paper Company, Rumford
Paper Company, NewPage Energy Services, LLC, Consolidated Water Power
Company.
    Description: Supplement to July 8, 2013 Notice of non-material
change status of NewPage Corporation, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2267-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 2045R2 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be
effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5090.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2268-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 1978R2 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be
effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2269-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 1897R2 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be
effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5101.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2270-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 2066R2 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be
effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    .Docket Numbers: ER13-2271-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits 2390R1 Westar
Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2272-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits 2166R2 Westar
Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be effective 8/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2273-000.
    Applicants: Sky River LLC.
    Description: Sky River LLC submits Sky River LLC Revisions to
Attachment C of its OATT to be effective 10/7/2011.
    Filed Date: 8/28/13.
    Accession Number: 20130828-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 28, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-21733 Filed 9-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P