[Federal Register: July 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 141)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36608-36610]
[DOCID:fr24jy09-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0456]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Naval Training August and September, San Clemente
Island, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on the navigable
waters of the Pacific Ocean at the north end of San Clemente Island in
support of Naval Live Fire Training. This safety zone is necessary to
ensure non-authorized personnel and vessels remain safe by keeping
clear of the hazardous area during the training activity. Persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port (COTP) or his designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from August 1, 2009 through September 30,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0456 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0456
in the Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in
the Docket ID column. They are also available for inspection or copying
at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Kristen Beer, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7262, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because immediate action is necessary to
ensure the safety of commercial and recreational vessels in the
vicinity of any live fire training on the dates and times this rule
will be in effect and delay would be contrary to the public interest.
    For the same reasons, the Coast Guard also finds that good cause
exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for making this rule effective less
than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Any delay in
the effective date of this rule would expose mariners to the dangers
posed by the training.

Background and Purpose

    U.S. Naval forces will be conducting intermittent training
involving live fire exercises throughout August and September 2009.
This safety zone is necessary to ensure non-authorized personnel and
vessels remain safe by keeping clear of the hazardous area during the
training activity.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that will be enforced
from August 1, 2009 through September 30, 2009. The limits of the
safety zone will be the navigable waters of the Pacific Ocean at the
north end of San Clemente Island bounded by lines connecting the
following coordinates: Beginning at 33[deg]01.09[min] N,
118[deg]36.34[min] W; thence to 32[deg]59.95[min] N, 118[deg]39.77[min]
W; thence running parallel to the shoreline at a distance of
approximately 3 NM to 33[deg]02.81[min] N, 118[deg]30.65[min] W; thence
to 33[deg]01.29[min] N, 118[deg]33.88[min] W; thence along the
shoreline returning to 33[deg]01.09[min] N, 118[deg]36.34[min] W (NAD
83).
    This safety zone is necessary to ensure non-authorized personnel
and vessels remain safe by keeping clear of the hazardous area during
the training

activities. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based
on the size and location of the safety zone. Commercial and
recreational vessels will not be allowed to transit through the
designated safety zone during specified times of training.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in a portion of the Pacific Ocean on the north end of San
Clemente Island from August 1, 2009 until September 30, 2009.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
rule will be enforced only during naval training exercises. Vessel
traffic can pass safely around the zone. Traffic will be allowed to
pass through the zone with the permission of the U.S. Navy or U.S.
Coast Guard. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue
broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) alerts.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or

adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction because this rule establishes a safety
zone.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Public Law 107-295; 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a new temporary section Sec.  165.T11-224 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-224  Safety Zone; Naval Training August and September,
San Clemente Island, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Pacific Ocean, from surface to bottom, at the north end
of San Clemente Island bounded by lines connecting the following
points: Beginning at 33[deg]01.09' N, 118[deg]36.34' W; thence to
32[deg]59.95' N, 118[deg]39.77' W; thence running parallel to the
shoreline at a distance of approximately 3 NM to 33[deg]02.81' N,
118[deg]30.65' W; thence to 33[deg]01.29' N, 118[deg]33.88' W; thence
along the shoreline returning to 33[deg]01.09' N, 118[deg]36.34' W.
These coordinates are based on NAD 83.
    (b) Effective Period. This section is effective from August 1, 2009
through September 30, 2009 during naval training exercises. If training
is concluded prior to the scheduled termination time, the COTP will
cease enforcement of this safety zone and will announce that fact via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
Designated representative, means any Commissioned, Warrant, or Petty
Officers of the Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, or local, state,
and federal law enforcement vessels who have been authorized to act on
the behalf of the COTP; non-authorized personnel and vessels, means any
civilian boats, fishermen, divers, and swimmers.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP San
Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Non-authorized personnel and vessels requesting permission to
transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from
the COTP San Diego or his designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16, or at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Naval units involved in the exercise are allowed in confines of
the established safety zone.
    (4) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard COTP or his designated representative.
    (5) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard or other official
personnel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator
of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (6) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies including the U.S. Navy.

    Dated: June 15, 2009.
T.H. Farris,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. E9-17746 Filed 7-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: October 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 203)]
[Notices]
[Page 59523-59524]
[DOCID:fr22oc07-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12886-000]

BPUS Generation Development, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments

October 12, 2007.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No.: 12886-000.
    c. Date filed: July 30, 2007.
    d. Applicant: BPUS Generation Development, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Fulton Lock & Dam Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Tombigbee River in Itawamba County, Mississippi. It
would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fulton Lock & Dam.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Jeffrey M. Auser, P.E., BPUS Generation
Development, LLC, 225 Greenfield Parkway, Suite 201, Liverpool, NY
13088,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene
60 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. Comments, protests, and interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12886-000) on
any comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in 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.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed project using the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers' Fulton Lock & Dam and operated in a run-of-river
mode would consist of: (1) A new 200-foot long, 250-foot wide, 50-foot
high concrete powerhouse; (2) a new intake channel and tailrace channel
on the west side of the river; (3) two turbine/generator units with a
combined installed capacity of 18 megawatts; (4) a new 10,500-foot
above ground transmission line extending from the switchyard near the
powerhouse to an interconnection point with an existing transmission
north of the powerhouse; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The proposed
Fulton Lock & Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 96
gigawatt-hours.
    l. This filing 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, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy
is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in
item h above.
    m. Competing Preliminary Permit--Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30
and 4.36.
    n. Competing Development Application--Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36.
    o. Notice of Intent--A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    p. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit--A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    r. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``NOTICE OF INTENT
TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'',
``PROTEST'', and ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the
Project Number of the particular application to which the filing
refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the
original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's
regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be
sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A
copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to
intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant
specified in the particular application.
    s. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-20710 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14929-14931]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05738]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80267; File No. SR-ISE-2017-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees To Modify the Member Order Routing
Program

March 17, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 10, 2017, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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 proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees to allow
members to opt in to MORP for specific sessions rather than on a
member-wide basis, and to increase MORP rebates for members that
participate in the program.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On April 1, 2015, the Exchange launched the Member Order Routing
Program (``MORP''),\3\ which is a program that provides enhanced
rebates to order routing firms that select the Exchange as the default
routing destination for unsolicited Crossing Orders.\4\ The purpose of
the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of Fees to allow
members to opt in to MORP for specific sessions rather than on a
member-wide basis, and to increase MORP rebates for members that
participate in the program. The Exchange believes that these changes
will encourage members to participate in MORP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74706 (April 10,
2016), 80 FR 20522 (April 16, 2016) (SR-ISE-2015-11).
    \4\ A ``Crossing Order'' is an order executed in the Exchange's
Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, Price Improvement
Mechanism (``PIM'') or submitted as a Qualified Contingent Cross
(``QCC'') order. For purposes of the fee schedule, orders executed
in the Block Order Mechanism are also considered Crossing Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

MORP Qualifications
    Currently, to be eligible to participate in MORP, an Electronic
Access Member (``EAM'') must: (1) Provide to its clients, systems that
enable the electronic routing of option orders to all of the U.S.
options exchanges, including ISE; (2) interface with ISE to access the
Exchange's electronic options trading platform; (3) offer to its
clients a customized interface and routing functionality such that ISE
will be the default destination for all unsolicited

Crossing Orders entered by the EAM,\5\ provided that market conditions
allow the Crossing Order to be executed on ISE; (4) configure its own
option order routing functionality such that ISE will be the default
destination for all unsolicited Crossing Orders, provided that market
conditions allow the Crossing Order to be executed on ISE, with respect
to all option orders as to which the EAM has routing discretion; and
(5) ensure that the default routing functionality permits users
submitting option orders through such system to manually override the
ISE as the default destination on an order-by-order basis.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ An unsolicited Crossing Order is a Crossing Order entered by
a member that has not solicited the contra side of the trade.
    \6\ EAMs that wish to participate in the program must certify
that they meet the above MORP requirements, in writing, on a monthly
basis and in a form to be determined by the Exchange. The relevant
notice must be provided by the last business day of the month for
members to be eligible to participate in the MORP effective the
first business day of the following month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Importantly, today an EAM must opt in to MORP for all of its
business, and cannot segment its business to be eligible for MORP for
only specific portion of its order flow. This means that EAMs that
would otherwise have a MORP qualifying business would be prohibited
from participating in the program if certain segments of its business
are not eligible for the program. The Exchange therefore proposes to
increase the scope of MORP. In particular, the Exchange proposes to
allow EAMs to opt in to MORP for specific sessions so that firms can
appropriately segment their order flow such that sessions designated as
MORP eligible can benefit from the program even though the firm may not
qualify on a member-wide basis.\7\ As proposed, a member may designate
one or more sessions to be eligible for MORP. If a session is
designated as eligible for MORP all requirements for the program must
be met for that session. In addition, to be eligible to participate in
MORP an EAM must designate, in writing, to the Exchange which sessions
are MORP eligible according to the criteria discussed above. Only
designated sessions that are opted in to MORP will receive the benefits
provided under the program. The Exchange believes that this change will
make it easier for firms to participate in the program, thereby
increasing volume executed in the Exchange's crossing mechanisms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ A session is connection to the exchange over which a member
submits orders. See Section V.C. of the Schedule of Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rebate for Unsolicited Crossing Orders
    Currently, an EAM that is MORP eligible receives a rebate for all
unsolicited Crossing Orders of $0.05 per originating contract side,
provided that the member executes a minimum average daily volume
(``ADV'') in unsolicited Crossing Orders of at least 30,000 originating
contract sides. This rebate is increased to $0.07 per originating
contract side, provided that the member executes a higher ADV in
unsolicited Crossing Orders of 100,000 originating contract sides.\8\
The Exchange proposes to increase the MORP rebate for eligible members
that execute from 30,000 to 99,999 originating contract sides to $0.065
per originating contract side. The MORP rebate for eligible members
that execute 100,000 or more originating contract sides will remain
$0.07 per originating contract side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The rebate for the highest tier achieved is applied
retroactively to all eligible contracts traded in a given month. For
purposes of determining whether the member meets the above ADV
thresholds, any day that the Exchange is not open for the entire
trading day or the Exchange instructs members in writing to route
their orders to other markets may be excluded from such calculation;
provided that the Exchange will only remove the day for members that
would have a lower ADV with the day included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Facilitation and Solicitation Break-Up Rebate
    In addition, any EAM that qualifies for the MORP rebate by
executing an ADV of 30,000 originating contract sides or more is also
eligible for increased Facilitation and Solicitation break-up rebates
\9\ for their Non-ISE Market Maker,\10\ Firm Proprietary,\11\ Broker-
Dealer,\12\ Professional Customer,\13\ and Priority Customer
orders.\14\ Currently, MORP eligible members that execute a qualifying
ADV in unsolicited Crossing Orders of at least 30,000 originating
contract sides, receive a Facilitation and Solicitation break-up rebate
that is $0.35 per contract for regular and complex orders in Select
Symbols,\15\ $0.15 per contract for regular orders in Non-Select
Symbols,\16\ $0.80 per contract for complex orders in Non-Select
Symbols, and $0.15 per contract for regular and complex orders in
foreign exchange option classes (``FX Options''). The Exchange proposes
to increase these Facilitation and Solicitation break-up rebates for
MORP-eligible members to $0.42 per contract for regular and complex
orders in Select Symbols, $0.20 per contract for regular orders in Non-
Select Symbols, $1.08 per contract for complex orders in Non-Select
Symbols. Regular and complex orders in FX Options will continue to
receive a Facilitation and Solicitation break-up rebate of $0.15 per
contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Break-up rebates are provided for contracts that are
submitted to the Facilitation and Solicited Order Mechanisms that do
not trade with their contra order except when those contracts trade
against pre-existing orders and quotes on the Exchange's orderbooks.
The applicable fee for Crossing Orders is applied to any contracts
for which a rebate is provided.
    \10\ A ``Non-ISE Market Maker'' is a market maker as defined in
Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
registered in the same options class on another options exchange.
    \11\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \12\ A ``Broker-Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a member
for a broker-dealer account that is not its own proprietary account.
    \13\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
    \14\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(37A).
    \15\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \16\ ``Non-Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols
excluding Select Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\17\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\18\ in particular, in that it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed change to the MORP
qualifications is reasonable and equitable because it is designed to
make it easier for EAMs to participate in the program. Currently, an
EAM that wishes to participate in MORP must be eligible to participate
across the entire firm. Thus, firms that have business segments that
are not MORP-eligible cannot participate with respect to those business
segments that are. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
will allow firms to participate in the program if they meet the
requirements with respect to any segment of their order flow. This will
encourage order routing firms to execute additional unsolicited
Crossing Order volume on the Exchange, and will benefit all market
participants on ISE by creating additional liquidity and increased
opportunity to trade. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory as it would make it
easier for firms to participate in the program, thus potentially
sharing the

rewards of the program with additional EAMs that may not otherwise
qualify. With the proposed changes, any qualifying EAM with designated
sessions that meet the requirements of the program by offering
appropriate market access and connectivity to the Exchange will be able
to participate in MORP on an equal and non-discriminatory basis.
    The Exchange believes the proposed increases to MORP rebates,
including the rebate for unsolicited Crossing Orders, and the
Facilitation and Solicitation break-up rebate, are reasonable and
equitable because these changes are designed to incentivize additional
participation in the program. Under MORP the Exchange currently
provides enhanced rebates to EAMs that connect directly to the Exchange
and provide their clients with order routing functionality that
includes all U.S. options exchanges, including ISE. The Exchange
proposes to increase the rebates to incentivize additional firms to
participate in the program, and to encourage firms to send additional
order flow to the Exchange in order to benefit from the increased
rebates. The Exchange believes that the proposed rebates will be
attractive to members to opt in to MORP, and are competitive with
rebates provided on other options exchanges. In addition, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rebates are not unfairly discriminatory as
they apply to all EAMs that meet the program requirements and opt in to
the program. Any EAM that participates in the program will be provided
the increased rebates on an equal and non-discriminatory basis based on
the order flow executed on the Exchange. While MORP is targeted towards
unsolicited Crossing Order flow, the Exchange offers other incentive
programs to promote and encourage growth in other business areas. For
example, solicited Crossing Orders benefit from the QCC and
Solicitation Rebate, which applies to all QCC and/or other solicited
Crossing Orders, including solicited orders executed in the
Solicitation, Facilitation or Price Improvement Mechanisms. The
Exchange believes that MORP is appropriately tailored to the order flow
that the Exchange is seeking to attract, and will benefit all market
participants that trade on ISE by encouraging additional liquidity.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\19\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
rule change is designed to make it easier for firms to participate in
MORP and increases incentives for doing so, in order to remain
competitive with other options exchanges. The Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct their order flow to competing venues. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees
and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes
reflect this competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\20\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public
interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-ISE-2017-24 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-24. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-24 and should be
submitted on or before April 13, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05738 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P