[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29131-29136]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12143]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74963; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-012]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Trading Permit Holder Qualifications

May 14, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 4, 2015, 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, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 proposed to amend its rules related to Trading Permit
Holder requirements and direct access to the Exchange's Hybrid Trading
System (the ``System''). The text of the proposed rule change is
provided below.
(Additions Are Italicized; Deletions Are [Bracketed])
* * * * *

Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated Rules

* * * * *

Rule 3.4. Foreign Trading Permit Holders

    [(a) ]A Trading Permit Holder that does not maintain an office in
the United States responsible for preparing and maintaining financial
and other reports required to be filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the Exchange must:
    ([i]a) prepare all such reports, and maintain a general ledger
chart of account and any description thereof, in English and U.S.
dollars;
    ([ii]b) reimburse the Exchange for any expense incurred in
connection with examination of the Trading Permit Holder to the extent
that such expenses exceed the cost of examining a Trading Permit Holder
located within the continental United States; and
    ([iii]c) ensure the availability of an individual fluent in English
knowledgeable in securities and financial matters to assist the
representatives of the Exchange during examinations.

Rule 3.4A. Additional Trading Permit Holder Qualifications

    (a) In addition to the qualifications set forth in Rules 3.2
through 3.4, a Trading Permit Holder applicant:
    (i) must be domiciled in (with respect to individuals), or
organized under the laws of (with respect to organizations), a
jurisdiction expressly approved by the Exchange. When determining
whether to approve a jurisdiction, the Exchange will consider whether:
    (A) The applicant will be able to supply the Exchange with such
information with respect to its dealings with the Exchange as set forth
in the Rules;
    (B) the Exchange will be able to examine the applicant's books and
records to verify the accuracy of any information so supplied;
    (C) approval of the applicant as a Trading Permit Holder will
comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations; and
    (D) other factors that the Exchange reasonably and objectively
determines may impact the applicant's ability to comply with the Rules
and the Act or the Exchange's ability to accept Trading Permit Holders
from the applicable jurisdiction.
    This approval may be limited to one or more specified categories of
Trading Permit Holders or Trading Permit Holder activities in a
jurisdiction or be contingent upon the satisfaction of specified
conditions by all applicants from a jurisdiction to the extent such
limits or conditions are necessary to satisfy clauses (A) through (D);
    (ii) will be subject to the jurisdiction of the federal courts of
the United States and the courts of the state of Illinois; and
    (iii) prior to acting as agent for a customer, must be able to
provide information regarding the customer and the customer's trading
activities to the Exchange in response to a regulatory request for
information pursuant to the Rules. To the extent an individual or
organization is required by an applicable law, rule or regulation to
obtain written consent from a customer to permit the provision of this
information to the Exchange, the applicant must obtain such consent.
    (b) The Exchange may at any time determine that a Trading Permit
Holder can no longer comply with this Rule 3.4A. In that event, the
Trading Permit Holder will have three months following the date of that
determination to come into compliance with this Rule 3.4A. If a Trading
Permit Holder does not come into compliance during that time period,
the Exchange may terminate the Trading Permit Holder's status as a
Trading Permit Holder.
* * * * *

Rule 6.20A. Sponsored Users

    (a)-(b) No change.
    (c) A Sponsoring Trading Permit Holder must ensure that a Sponsored
User satisfies the requirements set forth in Rule 3.4A(a) and only
directly accesses the System from an approved jurisdiction as set forth
in Rule 6.23A(d).

. . . Interpretations and Policies:

    .01 No change.
* * * * *

Rule 6.23A. Trading Permit Holder Connectivity

    (a)-(c) No change.
    (d) The Hybrid Trading System shall be available for entry and
execution of orders only to Trading Permit Holders, [and ]persons
associated with Trading Permit Holders, and Sponsored Users (pursuant
to Rule 6.20A) with authorized access. Such persons may only directly
access the System from a jurisdiction expressly approved by the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 3.4A(a). The Exchange will require a Trading
Permit Holder to enter into a software user or license agreement with
the Exchange in such form or forms as the Exchange may prescribe in
order to obtain authorized access to the Hybrid Trading System, if the
Trading Permit Holder elects to use an API for which the Exchange has
determined such an agreement is necessary.
    (e)-(f) No change.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, 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 amend its rules related to Trading Permit
Holder requirements and direct access to the System. The Exchange
recently launched Extended Trading Hours.\3\ To accommodate the
potential interest of non-U.S. persons or organizations to become
Trading Permit Holders or Trading Permits Holders to access the System
from other jurisdictions in connection with the launch of Extended
Trading Hours, the proposed rule change adds Rule 3.4A to set forth
additional qualifications applicable to all Trading Permit Holder
applicants, amends Rule 6.20A to add a requirement regarding access by
Sponsored Users and amends Rule 6.23A to add a requirement regarding
access to the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-73704 (November
28, 2014), 79 FR 72044 (December 4, 2014) (SR-CBOE-2014-062)
(approval of rules adopting Extended Trading Hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rules 3.2 and 3.3 set forth qualifications for individuals and
organizations, respectively, to become Trading Permit Holders. For an
individual to be a Trading Permit Holder, Rule 3.2 requires the
individual to (i) be at least 21 years of age, (ii) be registered as a
broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act or be associated
with a Trading Permit Holder organization that is registered as a
broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, and (iii) meet the
other qualification requirements for being a Trading Permit Holder
under the Exchange's bylaws and rules. Similarly, for an organization
to be a Trading Permit Holder, Rule 3.3 requires the organization to
(i) be a corporation, partnership, or limited liability company, (ii)
be registered as a broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act,
and (iii) meet the other qualification requirements for being a Trading
Permit Holder under the Exchange's bylaws and rules. Each individual
and organization must be approved to engage in an authorized trading
function.
    Rule 3.4 imposes additional qualifications on Trading Permit
Holders that do not maintain an office in the United States responsible
for preparing and maintaining financial and other reports required to
be filed with the Commission and the Exchange. Under Rule 3.4, these
foreign Trading Permit Holders must (i) prepare all such reports, and
maintain a general ledger chart of account and any description thereof,
in English and U.S. dollars, (ii) reimburse the Exchange for any
expense incurred in connection with examination of the Trading Permit
Holder to the extent that such expenses exceed the cost of examining a
Trading Permit Holder located within the United States, and (iii)
ensure the availability of an individual fluent in English
knowledgeable in securities and financial matters to assist the
representatives of the Exchange during examinations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The proposed rule change makes nonsubstantive changes to
Rule 3.4. It deletes the paragraph letter (a) from the introductory
paragraph, as there is no paragraph (b). The proposed rule change
then revises the paragraph markings of subparagraphs (i) through
(iii) to (a) through (c) to be consistent with the lettering and
numbering system generally used throughout the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 3.4A(a) provides that in addition to the
qualifications set forth in Rules 3.2 through 3.4, a Trading Permit
Holder applicant:
     Must be domiciled in (with respect to individuals), or
organized under the laws of (with respect to organizations), a
jurisdiction expressly approved by the Exchange.\5\ When determining
whether to approve a jurisdiction, the Exchange will consider whether:
(i) The applicant will be able to supply the Exchange with such
information with respect to the applicant's dealings with the Exchange
as set forth in the Rules,\6\ (ii) the Exchange will be able to examine
the applicant's books and records to verify the accuracy of any
information so supplied, (iii) approval of such application will comply
with all applicable laws, rules and regulations, and (iv) other factors
that the Exchange reasonably and objectively determines may impact the
applicant's ability to comply with the Rules and the Act or the
Exchange's ability to accept Trading Permit Holders from the applicable
jurisdiction. This approval may be limited to one or more specified
categories of Trading Permit Holders or Trading Permit Holder
activities in a jurisdiction or be contingent upon the satisfaction of
specified conditions by all applicants from a jurisdiction to the
extent such limits or conditions are necessary to satisfy clauses (i)
through (iv);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Proposed Rule 3.4A(b) allows the Exchange to determine at
any time that a Trading Permit Holder can no longer comply with
proposed Rule 3.4A (for example, if the laws in an applicable
jurisdiction change). In that event, the Trading Permit Holder will
have three months following the date of this determination to come
into compliance with Rule 3.4A. If the Trading Permit Holder does
not come into compliance during that time period, the Exchange may
terminate the Trading Permit Holder's status as a Trading Permit
Holder. This proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 3.5(d),
which, among other things, permits the Exchange to determine not to
permit a Trading Permit Holder to continue being a Trading Permit
Holder if it fails to meet any qualification requirements for being
a Trading Permit Holder after approval as a Trading Permit Holder.
    \6\ Rule 1.1(c) defines the term ``Rules'' to mean the Rules of
CBOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     will be subject to the jurisdiction of the federal courts
of the United States and the courts of the state of Illinois; and
     prior to acting as agent for a customer, must be able to
provide information regarding the customer and the customer's trading
activities to the Exchange in response to a regulatory request for
information pursuant to the Rules. To the extent an individual or
organization is required by an applicable law, rule or regulation to
obtain written consent from a customer to permit the provision of this
information to the Exchange, the applicant must obtain such consent.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The proposed rule change makes a corresponding change to
Rule 6.20A to provide that Sponsoring Trading Permit Holders must
ensure that Sponsored Users also satisfy these requirements, as
Sponsored Users may enter orders, and the Exchange would similarly
need the same information from Sponsored Users as it would from
Trading Permit Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE intends to initially notify market participants of approved
jurisdictions by Regulatory Circular (which are publicly available on
CBOE's Web site). CBOE also intends to have a Web page that lists then-
currently approved jurisdictions. To the extent CBOE no longer intends
to issue Regulatory Circulars to announce changes to the list of
approved jurisdictions and only update the Web page, CBOE will issue a
Regulatory Circular stating that fact.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Regulatory Circular RG15-014 (question #5 includes a
current list of approved jurisdictions (British Virgin Islands,
Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Ireland, Isle of Jersey, Luxembourg,
Poland, United Kingdom and United States), subject to approval of
this proposed rule change).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed Trading Permit Holder
qualifications in

proposed Rule 3.4A are reasonable for the following reasons:
     Proposed Rule 3.4A(a)(i) is intended to ensure that the
Exchange can comply with applicable regulatory requirements in
jurisdictions in which Trading Permit Holders are located and obtain
the information necessary to perform its self-regulatory obligations.
With respect to the factors the Exchange will consider when determining
whether to approve a jurisdiction, the Exchange needs sufficient
information to monitor Trading Permit Holders' compliance with the
Rules and the Act.
    [cir] The Exchange understands that laws in certain jurisdictions
may limit market participants' ability to share, or a foreign entity's
ability to access, certain information. In order to perform its self-
regulatory obligations, CBOE needs to ensure it has a complete audit
trail and sufficient access to information with respect to all Trading
Permit Holders. Proposed paragraphs (a)(i)(A) and (B) are intended to
ensure that CBOE will be able to obtain this information regarding a
Trading Permit Holder to properly conduct its surveillances and other
regulatory functions.
    [cir] Additionally, the Exchange understands that certain
jurisdictions require a foreign exchange to receive certain
authorization to permit direct access (including exchange membership)
to an exchange. Proposed paragraph (a)(i)(C) is intended to ensure
CBOE's compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations,
including such restrictions on exchange membership.
    [cir] Legal and regulatory requirements related to the securities
industry, including exchanges, and international business relationships
are constantly changing, which changes could impact a Trading Permit
Holder applicant's ability to comply with the Rules and the Act or the
Exchange's ability to permit Trading Permit Holders from a particular
jurisdiction. For example, a country may adopt telecommunication laws
that restrict market participants from complying with Exchange system
requirements to establish a connection. A jurisdiction may also impose
obligations on CBOE as a foreign exchange that may conflict with its
self-regulatory obligations under the Act or may not have a regulatory
framework in place that the Exchange believes provides sufficient local
oversight and protection over market participants. Additionally, the
Exchange believes it may be reasonable to consider other factors when
determining whether to approve a jurisdiction, such as if necessary to
maintain a fair and orderly market or to address other circumstances.
For example, the U.S. government may restrict U.S. businesses from
doing business in a jurisdiction, or may not officially recognize the
government of another jurisdiction. CBOE believes it is reasonable to
comply with these governmental restrictions and not approve any such
jurisdiction. Proposed paragraph (a)(i)(D) provides CBOE with the
flexibility to consider these changes or circumstances when determining
whether to approve a jurisdiction.
    [cir] The proposed rule change that permits CBOE to limit the
categories or activities of a Trading Permit Holder from a jurisdiction
or impose conditions will allow the Exchange to comply with any laws,
rules or regulations in a jurisdiction that may permit only certain
activities on the Exchange by market participants in that jurisdiction.
For example, local laws or regulations may restrict market participants
from quoting as market-makers or from submitting orders as agent for
customers. In such a case, this rule change permits the Exchange to
comply with such laws or regulations while permitting Trading Permit
Holders from a jurisdiction on a restricted basis.
     Proposed Rule 3.4A(a)(ii) will ensure CBOE can enforce the
Rules and any agreements it has with Trading Permit Holders in U.S. and
Illinois courts.
     The Exchange understands that certain jurisdictions have
privacy laws that restrict broker-dealers from sharing certain
information regarding their customers. CBOE believes such information
is necessary to regulate its market. Similar to proposed Rule
3.4A(a)(i)(A) and (B), proposed Rule 3.4A(a)(iii) is intended to ensure
CBOE has a complete audit trail and sufficient access to information
with respect to all Trading Permit Holders and the orders they
represent on the Exchange (including those from customers) in order to
properly conduct its surveillances and other regulatory functions.

These requirements will ultimately enhance the Exchange's regulatory
oversight of its Trading Permit Holders' trading activity.
    The Exchange also believes these additional requirements for all
Trading Permit Holders are objective and nondiscriminatory. Proposed
Rule 3.4A(a) sets forth explicit requirements that all Trading Permit
Holder applicants must satisfy. With respect to approved jurisdictions,
the Exchange will consider all of the factors included in proposed Rule
3.4A(a)(i) for all jurisdictions in the same manner. The Exchange's
consideration of the factors in subparagraph (A) through (C) generally
will include reviews of the applicable laws, rules and regulations of a
jurisdiction in consideration to determine whether those factors can be
satisfied in that jurisdiction. Proposed Rule 3.4A(a)(i)(D) explicitly
states that the Exchange will determine ``other factors'' objectively,
and CBOE will consider them in the same manner for all jurisdictions it
considers. The proposed rule change that indicates the Exchange may
limit approval to categories of Trading Permit Holders or activities in
a jurisdiction or impose other conditions specifies that such limits or
conditions will be imposed on all applicants from the same
jurisdiction, and the Exchange represents it will determine in the same
manner for all jurisdictions whether to impose any such limits or
conditions on Trading Permit Holders from a jurisdiction.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange notes that this does not prevent the Exchange
from imposing conditions or restrictions on individual Trading
Permit Holders pursuant to other Rules. See, e.g., Rules 3.5(c)
(permits the Exchange to condition a person from becoming a Trading
Permit Holder on satisfaction of requirements set forth in that
paragraph); Rule 8.2(b) (permits the Exchange to suspend or
terminate a Trading Permit Holder's registration as a Market-Maker);
and Rule 8.90 (permits the Exchange to terminate, place conditions
upon or otherwise limit a TPH organization's approval to act as
Designated Primary Market-Maker under certain circumstances).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change to Rule 6.23A provides that persons with
authorized access to the System (Trading Permit Holders, persons
associated with Trading Permit Holders and Sponsored Users) \10\ only
directly access the System from an approved jurisdiction. The Exchange
has determined that laws, rules and regulations related to exchange
membership (that may restrict persons or entities domiciled in or
organized under the laws of, as applicable, a specific jurisdiction
from, for example, supplying an exchange with certain trading
information or providing an exchange with access to its books and
records) apply in the same manner to persons or entities accessing an
exchange from the applicable jurisdiction.\11\ For example, if an
office

of a Trading Permit Holder organization that is organized in the United
States is located in a foreign jurisdiction, as a Trading Permit Holder
(organized in an approved jurisdiction) it is authorized to directly
access the System for trading purposes. However, the laws of that
jurisdiction may prevent the Exchange from obtaining necessary
information related to the trading activity on the Exchange originating
in such office (in accordance with proposed Rule 3.4A(a)). Therefore,
the Exchange would not permit this direct System access from such
jurisdiction for the same purposes as it would not approve a Trading
Permit Holder applicant domiciled in or organized under the laws of
such jurisdiction. Currently, the Exchange has authority under Rule
6.23A(e) to prescribe technical specifications regarding the
establishment of an electronic connection to the System. While the
proposed rule change is not a technical, system specification, the
Exchange believes that imposing requirements on the location of the
connection is similar to a ``specification,'' because this location
requirement will be part of the same process that otherwise imposes
these technical specifications with which the Trading Permit Holder
must comply when establishing a connection with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Rule 6.20A provides that Sponsored Users may be authorized
to electronically access the System subject to the requirements set
forth in that Rule. The proposed rule change adds Sponsored Users to
the list of persons that may have authorized access to the System
pursuant to Rule 6.23A to be consistent with Rule 6.20A, which were
inadvertently omitted from that list.
    \11\ The proposed rule change makes a corresponding change to
Rule 6.20A to provide that Sponsoring Trading Permit Holders must
ensure that Sponsored Users directly access the System only from an
approved jurisdiction, as these laws, rules and regulations apply to
any persons that directly access the Exchange from the applicable
jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\12\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \13\ 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
facilitating 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) \14\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, proposed Rule 3.4A, which imposes additional
qualifications on Trading Permit Holder applicants, including the
requirement that the Exchange may determine in which jurisdiction
Trading Permit Holder applicants may be domiciled in or organized under
(and the ability of the Exchange to determine that a Trading Permit
Holder no longer complies with this proposed requirement), is similar
to Section 6(c)(3)(C) of the Act. That section of the Act allows the
Exchange to deny persons from becoming associated with Trading Permit
Holders if they are unable to supply the Exchange with such information
with respect to its relationship and dealings with such persons or
entities and unable to permit the Exchange to examine their books and
records due to the jurisdiction (and any applicable laws, rules and
regulations of that jurisdiction) in which they are domiciled or under
the laws of which they are organized. While that Section of the Act
applies to associated persons and not Trading Permit Holders, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to impose those requirements on
Trading Permit Holders as well to ensure it has access to sufficient
information to perform its self-regulatory obligations. Additionally,
the Rules (which have been approved by the Commission and deemed to be
in accordance with the Act) currently provide that an applicant must
meet the qualification requirements under the Exchange's Bylaws and
Rules (including obtaining a Trading Permit) \15\ and deny a person
from becoming (or condition being) a Trading Permit Holder for such
other cause as the Exchange reasonably may decide.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Rules 3.2(a)(iii) and 3.3(a)(iii).
    \16\ See Rule 3.5(c)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the additional qualifications set forth in
proposed Rule 3.4A are reasonable and consistent with these current
rules. Please see the ``Purpose'' section above (beginning on page 29)
for a discussion regarding the reasonability of these qualifications.
The Exchange notes that the membership qualifications, and reasons an
exchange may deny membership to a party, set forth in Section 6(b) and
(c) of the Act are not meant to be exhaustive, and that it is
reasonable for an Exchange to have requirements for exchange membership
beyond those contained in the Act.\17\ The Commission has previously
approved rules that impose additional membership requirements,
including additional qualifications for foreign organizations.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-71513
(February 7, 2014), 79 FR 8771 (February 13, 2014) (SR-CBOE-2013-
100) (order approving proposed rule change to require Trading Permit
Holders of the CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC (CBSX), a stock trading
facility of CBOE, to be members of a national securities
association). In that approval order, the Commission stated that
``the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(2) and
Section 6(c) of the Act. While Section 6(c) specifies certain bases
upon which a national securities exchange can deny membership to,
among other entities, a broker or a dealer, Section 6(c) is not
intended to provide an exclusive list of reasons a national
securities exchange can deny membership to a party. National
securities exchanges may have requirements for exchange membership
beyond those contained in the Act so long as they are consistent
with the Act.'' Id. at 8772.
    \18\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-43056
(July 19, 2000), 65 FR 46524 (July 28, 2000) (SR-CBOE-1999-15)
(order approving proposed rule change to, among other things, impose
additional membership qualifications on foreign organizations
(including that such organizations must be organized under laws of a
country that satisfies certain criteria set forth by the Exchange in
the proposed rule)). In that approval order, the Commission stated
that it ``believes that it is reasonable for the CBOE to clarify
that, in addition to satisfying the requirements of CBOE Rule 3.4, a
foreign organization must satisfy the other membership qualification
requirements under the CBOE's rules and Constitution, as well [as]
any additional requirements that the CBOE reasonably deems
appropriate. The Commission believes that these provisions will
clarify that a foreign organization, like a U.S. applicant for
membership, must satisfy all of the CBOE's membership qualification
requirements and provide the CBOE with flexibility to impose
additional requirements that the CBOE reasonably believes are
necessary with respect to foreign members.'' Id. at 46534. The
Exchange notes that SR-CBOE-1999-15 imposed more restrictive
membership requirements on foreign organizations than the proposed
rule change in this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes to Rules 6.20A and 6.23A regarding access are
similar to current Rule 6.23A(e) (previously approved by the Commission
as consistent with the Act), which permits the Exchange to impose
specific requirements related to connectivity to the Exchange. As
discussed above, while the proposed rule change is not a technical
specification, the access location requirement is part of the entire
process a Trading Permit Holder must satisfy in order to establish a
connection with the Exchange. Additionally, requiring Sponsored Users
to satisfy the requirements in proposed Rule 3.4A(a) is consistent with
Rule 6.20A(b)(1)(C), which provides that a Sponsored User will be bound
by and comply with Exchange Rules as if the Sponsored User were a
Trading Permit Holder. The proposed rule change makes explicit in the
Rules that proposed Rule 3.4A(a) is one of those rules to which the
Sponsored User must agree to be bound. Additionally, the proposed rule
change to require the Sponsoring Trading

Permit Holder to ensure the Sponsored Users satisfaction of the
proposed jurisdiction requirements is consistent with Rule 6.20A, which
generally makes the Sponsoring Trading Permit Holder responsible for
the Sponsored User's actions. Rule 6.20A currently sets forth a number
of requirements with respect to the Sponsoring Trading Permit Holder/
Sponsored User relationship, and this rule filing imposes proposed
requirements applicable to all Trading Permit Holders on that
relationship as well.
    This proposed rule change will promote compliance by the Exchange
with regulatory requirements of governments and regulatory authorities
outside of the United States related to exchange memberships and
access, which promotes just and equitable principles of trade and
fosters cooperation and coordinates with other regulatory authorities.
The proposed rule change enhances the Exchange's ability to satisfy its
self-regulatory obligations by ensuring it is able to receive
sufficient information to conduct its surveillances and investigations,
which prevents fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, which ultimately protects
investors.
    Additionally, this proposed rule change is not unfairly
discriminatory, as the proposed additional qualifications and access
requirements will apply to all Trading Permit Holders and applicants.
When determining whether to approve a jurisdiction, the Exchange will
consider the proposed factors in the same manner for each jurisdiction.
The Exchange believes that individuals or organizations within a
specific jurisdiction are similarly situated, and thus it may allow
individuals or organizations from one jurisdiction to become Trading
Permit Holders but not from another based on the objective criteria set
forth in the proposed rule. The objective criteria will ensure that the
Exchange determines approved jurisdictions in a fair, reasonable manner
that is not unfairly discriminatory. Please see the ``Purpose'' section
above (beginning on page 32) for additional discussion regarding how
the proposed qualifications, including factors to be considered when
the Exchange is determining whether to approve a jurisdiction, will be
applied in an objective and nondiscriminatory manner.
    The proposed changes to Rule 3.4 are nonsubstantive and merely
intended to eliminate any potential confusion resulting from the
mislettering of the paragraphs of that rule.

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 proposed rule change
imposes additional Trading Permit Holder qualifications and access
requirements for CBOE, and thus does not raise any competitive issues.
The proposed Trading Permit Holder qualifications and access
requirements apply equally to all Trading Permit Holders and
individuals and organizations seeking to become Trading Permit Holders.
As discussed above, the Exchange will consider all factors in an
objective and nondiscriminatory manner. The proposed rule change is
intended to promote compliance by the Exchange with regulatory
requirements of governments and regulatory authorities outside of the
United States and enhance the Exchange's ability to satisfy its self-
regulatory obligations and regulate its markets.
    The Exchange notes that current Trading Permit Holders are all
domiciled in or organized under the laws of the United States and
satisfy these requirements (and thus need to take no additional
action). Any potential burden that these qualifications and
requirements may impose on Trading Permit Holders and applicants are
far outweighed the Exchange's need to receive sufficient information to
conduct its surveillances and investigations in order to ensure it can
continue to effectively regulate its markets, which enhanced regulation
will ultimately benefit all market participants. Please see the
``Purpose'' and ``Statutory Basis'' sections above (beginning on pages
29 and 35, respectively) for additional discussion regarding the
reasonableness and objectivity of the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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-2015-012 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.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-012. 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-2015-012 and should be submitted on or before June 10, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12143 Filed 5-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 31860]
[DOCID:fr04jn08-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-864-000]

Montgomery L'Energia Power Partners LP; Supplemental Notice that
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

May 29, 2008.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Montgomery L'Energia Power Partners LP's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is June 18, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-12443 Filed 6-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 52343]
[DOCID:fr09se08-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12551-001]

Salvatore and Michelle Shifrin; Notice of Application Ready for
Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Terms and Conditions,
Recommendations, and Prescriptions

September 3, 2008.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Exemption from Licensing.
    b. Project No.: 12551-001.
    c. Date filed: January 25, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Salvatore and Michelle Shifrin.
    e. Name of Project: Mansfield Hollow Hydro Power Project.
    f. Location: On the Natchaug River in Tolland County, Connecticut.
The project would occupy United States land managed by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of
1978, 16 U.S.C. 2705 and 2708.
    h. Applicant Contact: Salvatore Shifrin, 78 Bricktop Road, Windham,
CT 06280,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Tom Dean,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and
conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this
notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this
notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person whose name appears on the official service list for the project.
Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    Comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions
may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``eFiling'' link.
    k. This application has been accepted and is now ready for
environmental analysis at this time.
    l. Description of Project: The Mansfield Hollow Hydro Power Project
would consist of: (1) The existing 80-foot-long, 10-foot-high Kirby
Mill Dam; (2) the existing 1.6-acre reservoir; (3) the existing
headgate structure; (4) the existing 12-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 330-
foot-long head race channel; (5) a new powerhouse containing five
generating units with a total installed capacity of 500 kilowatts; (6)
the existing 5-foot-wide, 7-foot-high, 100-foot-long conduit and 75-
foot-long open tailrace; and (7) appurtenant facilities. The project
would have an average annual generation of about 2,500 megawatt-hours.
    In addition to a new powerhouse, project restoration would consist
of: (1) A new 12-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 330-foot-long head race
channel; (2) a new 20-foot-wide, 8-foot-high, 20-foot-long box culvert
connected to a new 25-foot-wide, 4-foot-high, 153-foot-long open
channel tail race; and (3) a new 480-V/23-kV, 275-foot-long underground
transmission cable.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h. above.
    All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``REPLY COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND
CONDITIONS,'' or ``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person submitting the filing; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be
accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service
list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with
18 CFR 4.34(b), and 385.2010.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Procedural schedule: The Commission staff proposes to issue a
single Environmental Assessment (EA) rather than issuing a draft and
final EA. Staff intends to allow 30 days for entities to comment on the
EA, and will take into consideration all comments received on the EA
before final action is taken on the exemption application. The
application will be processed according to the schedule, but revisions
to the schedule may be made as appropriate:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Action                                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of the availability of the EA..................     February 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-20862 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Using Fatality Data for Action

Fatal injury surveillance is the ongoing and systematic collection,
analysis, interpretation and dissemination of fatal injury information.
Ideally, a surveillance system produces data that describe the size and
characteristics of the fatality problem, the populations at risk, risk
factors, and trends.  Using this information it is possible to design
interventions to prevent fatal injuries and to evaluate the impact of
the interventions.

For the past year, the MACOSH Committee has been discussing the need to
understand where the fatal injuries are occurring in the various Marine
Industries so that we can understand where we should place our focus to
have the largest impact during our tenure on the committee.

Review of National Surveillance Data

 MACOSH requested a presentation from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) to review the injuries and fatalities experienced by the Marine
Cargo Handling and Ship Building and Repair Industry sectors.  In
January 2010, BLS presented fatality data from the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries (CFOI).

CFOI includes all work-related injury fatalities that occur in the
United States, including the 200-mile offshore economic zone.  The
census is collected on the state level and includes self-employed,
public and private sector, all industries and volunteer workers.
Fatalities are coded for industry, occupation, general characteristics.
See Table 1.

Table 1:  Variables of the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

Variable name	Coding System	More Specifics

Industry	North America Industry Classification System (NAICS)	NAICS
336611 and NAICS 488320

Occupation	Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)

	Characteristics	Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System
(OIICS)	Nature of Injury

Part of Body

Event/Exposure

Source of Injury

Results

Ship Building and Repair

From 2003-2008 the Ship Building and Repair sector experienced 42
fatalities.  Each year, the industry suffered from 3-12 fatalities with
and average of 7 fatalities a year.  Information was then presented
regarding the manner in which the fatality occurred (Table 2).  Data
from CFOI is first divided into broad categories of Transportation,
Contact with Objects and Equipment, Falls, Harmful Substances and
Environments.  Then these categories are broken down further to get more
specific.  The middle row of Table 2 has more details of what types of
fatalities were experienced.  The leading causes in the table were Falls
from Ship 19%, Other Falls 14%, and being struck by falling objects 14%.

Table 2:  Manner in which the Ship Building and Repairing fatalities
occurred, 2003-2008, n=42.

General Categories of Fatalities	Sub-categories	Number*, Percent of all
fatalities

Transportation	Falls from Ship	8, 19%

	Other transportation	1, 2%

Contact with Objects and Equipment	Struck by falling objects	6, 14%

	Caught in or between	5, 12%

	Other contact w/ objects and equipment	3, 7%

Falls	Falls	6, 14%

Harmful Substances/ Environments	Electrocution	3, 7%

	Drowning	3, 7%

	Other harmful substances/ environments	2, 3%

Other	Other	6, 15%

*The numbers should be checked by BLS to get correct numbers for the
final document.

Marine Cargo Handling

From 2003-2008 the Marine Cargo Handling industry sector experienced 69
fatalities.  Each year, the industry suffered from 7-16 fatalities with
an average of 12 fatalities a year.  Information can then be broken down
into the manner in which the fatality occurred (Table 3).  Data from
CFOI is first divided into broad categories of Transportation, Contact
with Objects and Equipment, Harmful Substances and Environments.  Then
these categories are broken down further to get more specific.  The
middle row of Table 3 has more details of what types of fatalities were
experienced.  The leading types of fatal events were Worker struck by
vehicle 25%, Stuck by falling objects 19% and Falls on or from ship 12%.

Table 3:  Manner in which the Marine Cargo Handling fatalities occurred,
2003-2008, n=69.

General Categories of Fatalities	Sub-categories	Number*, Percent of all
fatalities

Transportation	Worker struck by vehicle	17, 25%

	Fall on or from ship	8, 12%

	Non-highway transportation	6, 9%

	Other transportation	1, 2%

Contact with Objects and Equipment	Struck by falling objects	13, 19%

	Other struck by	7, 10%

	Other contact	6, 9%

Harmful Substances/ Environments

5, 7%

Other

5, 7%

*The numbers should be checked by BLS to get correct numbers for the
final document.

What do the data mean and how can the committee use them?

Although CFOI is a national surveillance system and does not answer all
of the questions we would like, there are some things we can learn from
just these two tables.

What the data tell us…

For the Ship Building and Repairing industry sector note that 33% of the
fatalities are due to falls (19% from the ship and 14% other falls).  So
1/3 of the fatality problem is due to falls.  In addition, another 1/3
or 33% of the fatalities are due to Contact with Objects and Equipment.
Understanding how these events occur, when, to whom and from what cause
is the next step in understanding how to prevent them.  The Committee
can ask for more data from BLS as well as looking into other data
sources that may not be national, but regional in scope.  The committee
can also learn from scientists working in the area of fall prevention
and doing any research in avoiding contact with objects and equipment.
What resources or tools exist that can be adapted or modified to the
workers at risk that we are concerned with.

For the Marine Cargo Handling sector note that 25% of the fatalities are
due to being struck by a vehicle and another 9% are from some
non-highway transportation source.  There should be a continued effort
to understand these fatalities.  Like the Ship Building and Repairing
industry sector, many fatalities (38%) are due to Contact with Objects
and Equipment.  Reviewing the source of these injuries may reveal areas
to focus interventions.

Commercial Fishing as an example

The United States has not had a comprehensive surveillance system for
fatalities in the commercial fishing industry,, until now.  Although the
US Coast Guard does enter information about cases they investigate into
a tracking system and CFOI has limited information about all fishing
fatalities, there was a need for more in depth information to figure out
where the problems are in the fishing industry and what to do about
them.  NIOSH developed the Commercial Fishing Incident Database (CFID)
to collect and analyze data on fatalities in the entire US commercial
fishing industry since 2000.  The purpose of this surveillance system is
to identify high risk fisheries in the US and to identify the risk
factors that contribute to fatal incidents.

Data for CFID are collected from multiple sources, including the US
Coast Guard, law enforcement agencies, and state-based occupational
fatality surveillance programs.  CFID includes information specific to
each incident including vessel characteristics, environmental factors,
and victim characteristics.  Using data from this new surveillance
system, a descriptive analysis of fatalities for most areas of the
country has been completed.

Each region and fishery of the US examined had different risk factors
for fatalities, for which different prevention efforts must be tailored.
 On the West Coast, there were 66 fatalities during 2000-2007.  These
fatalities resulted from vessel loss (74%) and falls overboard (19%).
The Dungeness crab fishery had the highest number of fatalities, almost
all due to vessels sinking and capsizing.  In New England, 80 fatalities
occurred during 2000-2007.  In the lobster fishery, 56% of fatalities
were caused by falls overboard.  By contrast, in the scallop fishery,
only 11% were due to falls overboard.

Detailed fatality surveillance can reveal unique risk factors in
different fisheries of a country, and identify the worst problems.
Interventions should be tailored to various fisheries and should be
based on a sound scientific assessment.  Other industries may be able to
implement surveillance systems similar to CFID to better understand the
safety problems in their unique work settings.

Each year data from CFOI reminds us that fishermen have the highest
occupational fatality rate of any occupation in the country.  Now we
have CFID and NIOSH is working with partners, including fishermen,
across the country on tailored solutions to improve safety regionally.
These partners are the experts in their industry or fishery.  Particular
pieces of the project, interventions, or the way data are presented are
adjusted to address the needs of the partners.  The data identify the
hazard and together we figure out what to do.

Ideal System to Identify and Mitigate Hazards based on surveillance
data

The use of CFOI statistics provides broad based and reliable data for
tracking these industry sector fatalities.  However, more information is
needed that cannot be found in a national system that is collecting
information for all work-place fatalities.  Systems looking at specific
industries (like CFID for the commercial fishing industry) are necessary
to understand the intervention points.  On-site investigations also
allow for more specific recommendations and better understanding of the
industry hazards.  A working knowledge of the industry is also
important.  Safety experts are invaluable in identifying problems or
emerging problems.  The data also provides a check to see if these
problems truly exist.  There is a role for both processes in our work as
a committee as well.

Figure 1:  An Illustration of how the Census of Fatal Occupational
Injuries, specific surveillance systems, and Industry Safety and Health
Professionals can be used together to understand hazards and
intervention points.

How do we move forward?

Based on the most recent 6 years of data,  MACOSH, in conjunction with
the agency should start to learn more about why these fatalities and
hazards associated with falls, contact with objects and equipment, and
being struck by vehicles occur.

Recommendations

Obtain more information from BLS regarding the primary and secondary
source for contact with objects and equipment.

Seek other data sources as well to understand in greater detail what
these patterns of injuries are.

Invite experts who are working in the area of safety research
investigating the causes and intervention points regarding falls,
contact with objects and equipment, and being struck by vehicles in
these industries or similar industries to see what can be applied.

Understand what the committee can do to offer tools to the industry

Review injury data in a similar way as we have reviewed the fatality
data