[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 160 (Monday, August 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56917-56918]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17942]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0355; FMCSA-2011-0089; FMCSA-2014-0382; FMCSA-
2015-0323; FMCSA-2018-0057; FMCSA-2019-0028; FMCSA-2019-0029; FMCSA-
2021-0025]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 10
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided
below

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Dockets
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number (FMCSA-2008-0355, FMCSA-2011-0089, FMCSA-2014-0382, FMCSA-2015-
0323, FMCSA-2018-0057, FMCSA-2019-0028, FMCSA-2019-0029, or FMCSA-2021-
0025) in the keyword box and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the results
by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed, and click
``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the internet, you may
view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations on the ground
floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets
Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption request. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov. As described in the system of records
notice DOT/ALL 14 (Federal Docket Management System), which can be
reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices, the comments are searchable by the name of
the submitter.

II. Background

    On June 30, 2023, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision
to renew exemptions for 10 individuals from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (88 FR
42417). The public comment period ended on July 31, 2023, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would likely achieve a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would
be achieved by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in Appendix A to Part 391--
Medical Advisory Criteria, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8),
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5, which is available on the internet at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.

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

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the 10 renewal exemption applications
and comments received, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the
following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition
in Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    As of July 5, 2023, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (88 FR
42417):
    Alan Finlayson (AL); and Stephen Harmon (WV).
    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0323 or
FMCSA-2019-0029. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 5, 2023 and
will expire on July 5, 2025.
    As of July 12, 2023, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the following seven individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (88 FR
42417):

Prince Austin, Jr. (OH)
Frank Cekovic (PA)
Martin Ford (MS)
David Johnston (MN)
Enrico Mucci (PA)
Charles Skelton (AL)
Kevin Wiggins (KY)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2008-0355, FMCSA-
2011-0089, FMCSA-2014-0382, FMCSA-2018-0057, or FMCSA-2019-0028. Their
exemptions are applicable as of July 12, 2023 and will expire on July
12, 2025.
    As of July 30, 2023, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the Charles Anthony (ND) has satisfied the renewal conditions
for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders
prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (88 FR 42417).
    The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2021-0025. Their
exemption is applicable as of July 30, 2023 and will expire on July 30,
2025.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) the person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-17942 Filed 8-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 62 (Friday, April 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17428-17432]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06776]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91431; File No. SR-CBOE-2021-018]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 5.34 Relating to Its Fat Finger Check in Connection With Multi-
Class Spread Orders

March 29, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 17, 2021, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of

the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend Rule 5.34 in connection with its fat finger check in
connection with Multi-Class Spread Orders. The text of the proposed
rule change is provided below.
(additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *

Rules of Cboe Exchange, Inc.

* * * * *

Rule 5.34. Order and Quote Price Protection Mechanisms and Risk
Controls

    (a)-(b) No change.
    (c) All Orders.
    (1) Limit Order Fat Finger Check. If a User submits a buy (sell)
limit order to the System with a price that is more than a buffer
amount above (below) the NBO (NBB) for simple orders or the SNBO
(SNBB) for complex orders, the System cancels or rejects the order.
The Exchange determines a default buffer amount on a class-by-class
basis; however, a User may establish a higher or lower amount than
the Exchange default for a class.
    (A)-(D) No change.
    (E) This check does not apply to Multi-Class Spread Orders.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (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 Rule 5.34(c)(1), which governs its
fat finger check, to provide that the check will not apply to Multi-
Class Spread Orders.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rules 5.6(c) and 5.85(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Rule 5.34 provides for a fat finger check applicable to
both simple and complex orders, including those that are routed to PAR.
Specifically, Rule 5.34(c)(1) provides that, if a User submits a buy
(sell) limit order to the System with a price that is more than a
buffer amount above (below) the NBO (NBB) for simple orders or the SNBO
(SNBB) for complex orders,\6\ the System cancels or rejects the order.
The Exchange determines a default buffer amount on a class-by-class
basis; however, a User may establish a higher or lower amount than the
Exchange default for a class. Pursuant to Rule 5.34(c)(1)(B) through
(D), the check currently does not apply to complex orders prior to the
conclusion of the Opening Process, when no NBBO or SNBBO, as
applicable, is available, or to bulk messages or Stop-Limit orders. The
Exchange proposes to adopt subparagraph (c)(1)(E) which adds Multi-
Class Spread Orders as additional orders to which the fat finger check
does not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The SNBBO is the national best bid and offer for a complex
strategy calculated using the NBBO for each component of a complex
strategy. See Rule 5.33(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, a Multi-Class Spread Order is an order or quote to
buy a stated number of contracts of a Broad-Based Index Option \7\ and
to sell an equal number, or an equivalent number, of contracts of a
related Broad-Based Index Option. For example, a Multi-Class Spread
Order could be composed of a leg to buy 10 contracts in iShares Russell
2000 ETF (``IWM'') options and a leg to sell one contract in Russell
2000 Index (``RUT'') options, as IWM is an exchange-traded fund
(``ETF'') that tracks the performance of the RUT Index and is 1/10th
the value of the RUT Index. Therefore, a spread order with a 10:1 ratio
in IWM and RUT options creates an equivalent number of contracts of
related Broad-Based Index Options and constitutes a Multi-Class Spread
Order pursuant to the Exchange Rules. Multi-Class Spread Orders may
only execute on the Exchange's trading floor and are therefore routed
to PAR for manual handling (and open outcry trading).\8\ Specifically,
Rule 5.34 provides that the System's acceptance and execution of
orders, quotes, and bulk messages, as applicable, pursuant to the
Rules, including Rules 5.31 through 5.33, and orders routed to PAR
pursuant to Rule 5.82 are subject to the price protection mechanisms
and risk controls (provided in Rule 5.34), as applicable. As such, the
price protections and risk mechanisms under Rule 5.34, including the
fat finger check, currently apply to Multi-Class Spread Orders upon
routing to PAR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For the purposes of a Multi-Class Spread Order, a Broad-
Based Index Option includes Broad-Based Indexes, ETF and ETNs. See
Rule 5.6(c).
    \8\ Like any other order submitted for open outcry execution, a
Multi-Class Spread Order is systematized and submitted to PAR (and
the applicable price protection mechanisms and risk controls are
applied upon submission to PAR). Once on a PAR workstation, a Floor
Broker or PAR Official, as applicable, may then represent the order
to a trading crowd. The trading crowd provides a range of the prices
at which they are willing to trade. Specifically, a Multi-Class
Spread Order may be represented at a trading station at which one of
the applicable classes trades (i.e., a primary trading station).
Immediately after (or concurrent with) the announcement of the order
at the primary trading station, the representing TPH must contact
the Designated Primary Market-Maker (DPM), Lead Market-Maker (LMM)
or appropriate Exchange staff at the trading station where the other
applicable class trades to announce the order to the other trading
crowd. See Rule 5.85(d). The Floor Broker may then execute the
Multi-Class Spread Order against quotes provided from the crowd, in
accordance with priority principles set forth in Rule 5.85(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, separate servers (i.e., match engines) in the System
have direct access to and are able to process market information for
individual classes and orders in those classes. For example, one match
engine has direct access to the Exchange's BBO \9\ for RUT options and
sends that BBO information to the Options Price Reporting Authority
(``OPRA'') for consolidation into and dissemination of the NBBO, and
also processes incoming orders (including complex orders) in RUT
options, while another match engine does the same for IWM options. Each
single-class match engine also continuously intakes away market pricing
information (i.e. the ABBO) \10\ from OPRA applicable to the class that
resides on it. As such, the pricing information regarding the NBBO
(that is, the BBO and the ABBO) necessary to calculate the SNBBO
applicable to a complex order in an individual class essentially
``lives'' on a particular match engine, thereby allowing that
particular match engine to continuously calculate the SNBBO for

complex orders in that individual class without delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``BBO'' means the best bid or offer disseminated on
the Exchange. See Rule 1.1.
    \10\ The term ``ABBO'' means the best bid(s) or offer(s)
disseminated by other Eligible Exchanges (as defined in Rule 5.65)
and calculated by the Exchange based on market information the
Exchange receives from OPRA. See Rule 1.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is also a separate match engine in the System that is
specifically dedicated to cross-class orders. This match engine would
process, for example, an incoming RUT/IWM Multi-Class Spread Order.
Unlike the single-class match engines, the pricing information
regarding the NBBOs that are necessary to calculate the SNBBOs
applicable to Multi-Class Spread Orders do not ``live'' on the cross-
class match engine. That is, the cross-class match engine does not have
direct access to the BBOs that reside on the Exchange's single class
match engines, nor does it continuously stream the necessary away
market ABBO pricing information from OPRA, for each class that could
possibly comprise the legs of a Multi-Class Spread Order.\11\ The
Exchange notes that technical limitations prevent the different,
single-class match engines from directly sending the Exchange's BBO
information to the cross-class match engine, or the cross-class match
engine from continuously receiving ABBO pricing information from OPRA
that may be applicable to the leg markets of a Multi-Class Spread Order
given the significant amount of ABBO leg market information from OPRA
that would be necessary to apply the fat finger check to all possible
leg combinations for Multi-Class Spread Orders.\12\ As a result, the
cross-class match engine does not receive all of the necessary pricing
information regarding the NBBOs from OPRA for each leg of an incoming
Multi-Class Spread Order to generate an SNBBO for that order. Because
the cross-class match engine has no NBBOs for the leg markets of an
incoming Multi-Class Spread Order at the time it receives the order, it
assumes that the NBBOs applicable to the leg markets of an incoming
Multi-Class Spread Order are zero. As such, when the cross-class match
engine receives a Multi-Class Spread Order, it then attempts to
calculate the SNBBO for the legs of a Multi-Class Spread Order pursuant
to Rule 5.33(h)(3). Rule 5.33(h)(3) provides that, in relevant part, if
there is a zero NBB and zero NBO, the System replaces the zero NBB with
a price equal to one minimum increment and replaces the zero NBO with a
price equal to two minimum increments. Such a resulting SNBBO is
unlikely to represent the actual market for a Multi-Class Spread Order.
Therefore, the cross-class match engine is currently unable to
determine an SNBBO that accurately reflects leg market prices that
comprise Multi-Class Spread Orders. As a result, this match engine
regularly rejects Multi-Class Spread Orders that may otherwise be
appropriately priced around the current leg market NBBOs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The only NBBO information that the cross-class match engine
streams directly from OPRA is for SPX/SPXW. The match engine
dedicated to SPX/SPXW first sends to OPRA the SPX/SPXW BBOs from
that match engine, and OPRA then disseminates to the wider market
the NBBO pricing information for SPX/SPXW (which are also the BBOs
for SPX/SPXW) at which point the cross-class match engine then
receives the SPX/SPXW NBBO information from OPRA.
    \12\ The Exchange notes that the substantial possible
combinations of classes that may comprise Multi-Class Spread Orders
results in a significant amount of market information that must be
funneled into the one match engine dedicated to cross-class orders.
The System does not have unlimited capacity and is unable to
directly feed all leg market prices that could potentially comprise
a Multi-Class Spread Order into the single cross-class match engine
without potentially creating a delay in the cross-class match
engine's processing capacity. The Exchange notes that there are
currently 32 different classes eligible to comprise the legs of a
Multi-Class Spread Order. The Exchange believes it would be an
inefficient use of capacity to stream data for all classes into the
cross-class match engine, as most of that information would not be
used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has received feedback from Users that the current
application of the fat finger check to Multi-Class Spread Orders (which
are floor-only) is too limited.\13\ Indeed, the primary purpose of the
fat finger check is to prevent limit orders from executing at
potentially erroneous prices upon entry if the limit prices are too far
away from the then-current SNBBO. As stated, the System is unable to
calculate the SNBBO for the fat finger check in a manner that
accurately reflects current leg market prices for Multi-Class Spread
Orders due to the technical limitations that prevent the cross-class
match engine from receiving all possible NBBOs necessary to calculate
the SNBBOs applicable to Multi-Class Spread Orders. As a result, the
cross-class match engine calculates SNBBOs for the fat finger check
applicable an incoming Multi-Class Spread Order under the assumption
that the NBBO values for the orders' leg markets are zero. That is, it
attempts to substitute the minimum increment spread for each leg market
of the Multi-Class Spread Order to calculate an SNBBO for the fat
finger check and, therefore, the fat finger check applied may not
provide the most accurate reflection of the best prices currently
available in those leg markets. As a result, the System may reject
Multi-Class Spread Orders for being too far away from the substitute
SNBBO, even though such orders may otherwise be legitimately priced
around the leg markets at the time those orders were entered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Exchange notes that such instances and, consequently,
User feedback given to the Exchange regarding the fat finger
limitations in connection with their Multi-Class Spread Orders, have
occurred as a result of the Exchange's technology migration
completed in October 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that a User's Multi-Class Spread Orders would
still be subject to other price protections already in place on the
Exchange. Particularly, all Multi-Class Spread Orders are always
subject to manual handling, which permits opportunities for brokers to
evaluate the prices of orders based on then-existing market conditions
and, thus, creates minimal risk of executions at erroneous prices.
Additionally, the System applies various price checks for complex
orders, such as: A debit/credit reasonability check (which rejects a
complex order that is a limit order for a debit (credit) strategy with
a net credit (debit) price that exceeds a pre-set buffer or a market
order for a credit strategy that would execute at a net debit price
that exceeds a pre-set buffer); \14\ and a maximum value acceptable
price range check (which rejects an order that is a vertical, true
butterfly, or box spread and is a limit order with, or a market order
that would execute at, a price that is outside of an acceptable price
range, set by the minimum and maximum possible value of the spread,
subject to an additional buffer amount).\15\ Overall, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change will provide additional execution
opportunities for Multi-Class Spread Orders while continuing to provide
protection against executions at prices that may be erroneous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Rule 5.34(b)(3).
    \15\ See Rule 5.34(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\16\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \17\ 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) \18\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change to
exclude Multi-Class Spread Orders from the fat finger check removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, protects investors and the
public interest by providing additional execution opportunities for
cross-class orders that may be appropriately priced in connection with
current leg market prices. The proposed change is intended to benefit
investors, from which the Exchange has received feedback regarding the
current limitations of the fat finger check for Multi-Class Spread
Orders. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will permit the
System to accept these investors' orders that may be submitted with
prices that accurately reflect current leg markets instead of rejecting
them because of the fat finger check's substitution of NBBO information
to calculate an applicable SNBBO due to technical limitations that
prevent the cross-class match engine from receiving the pricing
information regarding the NBBOs for the applicable leg markets of an
incoming Multi-Class Spread Order, as it cannot directly access and
continuously intake the same information through the System. As a
result, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change may increase
execution opportunities for investors by allowing their floor-based
orders an opportunity to be manually represented in open outcry instead
of being rejected by the System before even arriving at PAR for manual
handling.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the general protection of investors because, pursuant
to Rule 5.34(c)(1)(C), the System currently does not apply the fat
finger check in instances in which the SNBBO is not available and the
System therefore cannot apply an appropriate buffer. Similarly, due to
technical limitations, the SNBBO is not available for Multi-Class
Spread Orders and while the System uses an available substitute, this
may not accurately reflect current leg market prices. Therefore, the
proposed rule change excludes such orders from the fat finger for
essentially the same reasons as Rule 5.34(c)(1)(C)--that the SNBBO may
not be available in order to provide the System with an accurate
measure to which it may apply an appropriate fat finger buffer.
Additionally, other price protections and safeguards, such as real-time
broker evaluation of floor-based pricing and other System-applied price
checks, will continue to apply to Multi-Class Spread Orders, and
thereby will continue to provide protection against executions at
prices that may be erroneous.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because all Users' Multi-Class
Spread Orders will be excluded from the fat finger check in the same
manner. The Exchange notes that the Rules currently exclude other types
of orders from the fat finger check. Also, as described above, all
Users' Multi-Class Spread Orders will continue to be subject to other
specific price controls or safeguards, such as real-time broker
evaluation of floor-based pricing and other System-applied price
checks, which provide protection against executions at prices that may
be erroneous.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it
relates solely to whether the System will accept certain orders for
execution on the Exchange [sic] The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change would provide all market participants with additional execution
opportunities in connection with their Multi-Class Spread Orders while
still providing protection from anomalous or erroneous executions. To
the extent that market participants find the proposed exclusion of the
fat finger check to their complex strategies more favorable for
execution of such orders, other exchanges may adopt functionality to
similarly handle such complex strategies.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \22\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\23\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange states that
waiver of the operative delay will allow the Exchange to mitigate as
soon as practicable the limitations associated with the fat finger
check by permitting the System to accept legitimately priced Multi-
Class Spreads Orders that the System currently rejects inappropriately
because it uses an SNBBO calculated with substitute NBBO information.
The System's acceptance of these Multi-Class Spread Orders will allow
additional execution opportunities for these orders. The Exchange notes
that Multi-Class Spread Orders will continue to be subject to other
price protections and safeguards that serve to protect against
executions at prices that may be erroneous. The Commission believes
that excluding Multi-Class Spread Orders from the fat finger check will
benefit investors by providing execution opportunities for Multi-Class
Spread Orders that are priced accurately based on current leg market
prices but that the System currently rejects because, as described
above, the System determines the SNBBO required by the price check
using a substitute NBBO calculation, as provided in Cboe Rule
5.33(h)(3), as a result of system limitations that prevent

the cross-class server from receiving BBO and ABBO information for the
classes that could be components of a Multi-Class Spread Order. The
proposal will allow accurately priced Multi-Class Spread Orders to be
represented in open outcry rather than being rejected inappropriately
when they are submitted to PAR. The Commission notes that the Exchange
has received feedback from investors indicating that the current
application of the fat finger check to Multi-Class Spread Orders is too
limited. In addition, the Commission notes that Multi-Class Spread
Orders, which trade only on the Exchange's floor, will continue to be
subject to other safeguards, including real-time broker evaluation of
floor-based pricing and other System-applied price checks that are
designed to provide protection against executions at prices that may be
erroneous. The Commission also notes that the Exchange will announce
the implementation of the proposal to Trading Permit Holders in advance
via Trade Desk Notice. For these reasons, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission
hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \24\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \25\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2021-018 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-CBOE-2021-018. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2021-018, and should be submitted
on or before April 23, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-06776 Filed 4-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 97 (Friday, May 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29718-29721]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12033]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66982; File No. SR-BOX-2012-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Update Rules Based on the Boston Options Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX
Group'') Rules and Recent BOX Group Rule Filings

May 14, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on May 9, 2012, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated
the proposed rule change as constituting a non-controversial rule
change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ which renders the
proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') proposes to update its
rules based on the Boston Options Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX Group'')
rules and recent BOX Group rule filings. The text of the proposed rule
change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's Internet
Web site at http://boxexchange.com.

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 27, 2012, the Exchange became registered as a national
securities exchange under Section 6 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Exchange Act'').\4\ The automated electronic trading system
that is currently operated by BOX Group as a facility of NASDAQ OMX BX,
Inc. will, upon the commencement of the Exchange's operations as a
national securities exchange, be operated by BOX Market LLC as a
facility of the Exchange. As such, the operation and functionalities of
the system are the same as are in effect under the rules of the BOX
Group facility. The anticipated launch of the system as a facility of
the Exchange is May 14, 2012. The purpose of this filing is to update
the Exchange rules with the same changes as were recently adopted by
NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. for the BOX Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66871 (April 27,
2012) (File No. 10-206).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7150(f)(1) to reduce the duration
of the Price Improvement Period (``PIP'') from one second to one
hundred milliseconds. The PIP allows BOX Options Participants to
designate certain customer orders for price improvement and submit such
orders to the PIP (``PIP Order'') with a matching contra order
(``Primary Improvement Order''). Once such an order is submitted, BOX
commences a PIP by broadcasting a message to Options Participants that
(1) states that a Primary Improvement Order has been processed; (2)
contains information concerning series, size, PIP Start Price and side
of the market of the order; and (3) states when the PIP will conclude
(``PIP Broadcast''). Further, responses within a PIP (i.e., Improvement
Orders), are also broadcast to BOX Options Participants. This proposed
rule change would reduce the duration of the PIP from one second to 100
milliseconds. The approval order for the BOX Group facility rule change
stated that the Commission believes that, given advances in the
electronic trading environment, reducing the duration of the PIP from
one second to one hundred milliseconds could facilitate the prompt
execution of orders while continuing to provide market participants
with an opportunity to compete for bids and/or offers without
compromising the ability for adequate exposure and participation in
PIP.\5\ Additionally, BOX believes the proposed rule change could
provide more customer orders an opportunity for price improvement
because it will reduce the market risk for all Participants executing
trades in the PIP. This proposed amendment is based on the recent
amendment to Chapter V, Section 18(e)(i) of the BOX Group rules.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66306 (Feb. 2,
2012), 77 FR 6608 (Feb. 8, 2012) (SR-BX-2011-084).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66306 (Feb. 2,
2012), 77 FR 6608 (Feb. 8, 2012) (SR-BX-2011-084).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, BOX proposes to amend IM-5050-6(a) and IM-6090-2(a) to
expand the Short Term Option Series Program (``Weeklys Program'').
Currently, BOX may select up to 25 currently listed option classes on
which Weekly options may be opened in the Weeklys Program. BOX proposes
to increase this to thirty option classes to participate in the Weeklys
Program. BOX also proposes to amend the BOX Rules to allow BOX to open
short term option series that are opened by other securities exchanges
in

options classes selected by other exchanges under their respective
short term option rules. This change is being proposed notwithstanding
the proposed cap of thirty series per class under the Weeklys
Program.\7\ With regard to the impact of this proposal on system
capacity, BOX has analyzed its capacity and represents that it and the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary systems
capacity to handle the potential additional traffic associated with
trading of an expanded number of classes that participate in the
Weeklys Program. The proposed increase to the number of classes and
number of series per classes eligible to participate in the Weekly
Program is required for competitive purposes as well as to ensure
consistency and uniformity among the competing options exchanges that
have adopted similar Weeklys Programs. This proposed amendment is based
on recent amendments to Supplementary Material .07 to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV, Section 10 of
the BOX Group rules.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This was a competitive filing and based on recently approved
filings and existing rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC for the
NASDAQ Options Market and NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 65775 (Nov. 17, 2011), 76 FR 72473 (Nov.
23, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-138) and 65776 (Nov. 17, 2011), 76 FR
72482 (Nov. 23, 2011) (SR-PHLX-2011-131).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66238 (Jan. 25,
2012), 77 FR 4850 (Jan. 31, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-005); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 66705 (Mar. 30, 2012), 77 FR 20684 (Apr. 5,
2012) (SR-BX-2012-024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7110(c)(6) to amend the
definition of Order Entry to include Customer Cross Orders. In
particular, BOX proposes to add the definition of a Customer Cross
Order, specifying that a Customer Cross Order is comprised of a non-
Professional, Public Customer Order to buy and a non-Professional,
Public Customer Order to sell at the same price and for the same
quantity. BOX also proposes to specify that Customer Cross Orders be
automatically executed upon entry provided that the execution is
between the best bid and offer on BOX (``BBO'') and will not trade-
through the national best bid or offer (``NBBO''). Customer Cross
Orders entered at a price that is outside the BBO or the NBBO will be
automatically cancelled, and Customer Cross Orders may only be entered
in the regular trading increments applicable to the options class. BOX
also proposes to amend IM-7140-1, which prohibits an Options
Participant from being a party to any arrangement designed to
circumvent the requirements applicable to executing agency orders as
principal, to specifically reference affiliates of Options
Participants. This proposed amendment is based on recent amendments to
Chapter V, Section 14(c) and Supplementary Material .01 to Chapter V,
Section 17 of the BOX Group rules.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66356 (Feb. 8,
2012), 77 FR 8321 (Feb. 14, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7110(c)(5) and Rule 7130(b)(1)
to correct cross references to the definition of Intermarket Sweep
Order (``ISO'') in subsection (h) of Rule 15000 and not (g) as
currently reflected.
    Fifth, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7230 to (1) clarify certain
provisions within Rule 7230(a) regarding to whom the liability
limitation applies; (2) codify provisions within the BOX Rules to
permit BOX to compensate Participants for losses under certain
circumstances; and (3) establish the maximum amount of such
compensation that BOX may provide during a calendar month. BOX Rule
7230 provides, in general, that neither the Exchange, BOX, nor any of
their respective affiliates with regard to BOX will be liable to BOX
Options Participants for any losses arising from the use of BOX or the
BOX Trading Host. The Exchange is proposing to codify provisions within
the BOX Rules that permit BOX, for customer service reasons, to
compensate an Options Participant, within specified limits as proposed,
for certain identified losses. Additionally, the Exchange is proposing
to clarify certain provisions within Rule 7230 regarding to whom it is
applicable. BOX represents that the determination to compensate a BOX
Options Participant will be made on an equitable and non-discriminatory
basis without regard to whether the Participant is a Market Maker or
Order Flow Provider on BOX, and that such determinations will be made
pursuant to procedures of BOX Market Operations Center with regulatory
oversight established by BOX. Additionally, BOX represents that BOX
will maintain a record of Participant claims including documentation
detailing its findings and details for approving or denying claims in
accordance with its obligations under Section 17 of the Act. This
proposed amendment is based on recent amendments to Chapter V, Section
26 of the BOX Group rules.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66512 (Mar. 5,
2012), 77 FR 14452 (Mar. 9, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sixth, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7130(a) to specify the name and
content of the BOX market trading data feed containing information that
BOX makes available to BOX Options Participants without charge and to
restructure the current subsection to provide more clarity. BOX
provides the BOX High Speed Vendor Feed (``HSVF'') as an alternative
for BOX Options Participants to receive BOX market data directly from
BOX rather than via a commercial data vendor (which receives data from
OPRA). The HSVF is available to all BOX Participants. The proposed rule
change identifies the BOX proprietary data feed containing market
information that BOX makes available to its Options Participants and
sets forth in the BOX Rules that the HSVF is provided at no charge. The
rule will specify that the HSVF contains the following information:
    (i) Trades and trade cancellation information;
    (ii) Best-ranked price level to buy and the best ranked price level
to sell;
    (iii) Instrument summaries (including information such as high,
low, and last trade price and traded volume);
    (iv) The five best limit prices for each option instrument;
    (v) Request for Quote messages (see Rule 100(a)(57), Rule 7070(h),
and Rule 8050);
    (vi) PIP Order, Improvement Order and Block Trade Order
(Facilitation and Solicitation) information (as set forth in Rule 7150
and 7270, respectively);
    (vii) Orders exposed at NBBO (as set forth in this Rule 7130(b)(3)
and Rule 8040(d)(6) of the BOX Rules, respectively);
    (viii) Instrument dictionary (e.g. strike price, expiration date,
underlying symbol, price threshold, and minimum trading increment for
instruments traded on BOX);
    (ix) Options class and instrument status change notices (e.g.,
whether an instrument or class is in pre-opening, continuous trading,
closed, halted, or whether prohibited from trading); and
    (x) Options class opening time.
    All orders and executions displayed through the HSVF are anonymous
and do not contain the identity of the party submitting the order.
Additionally, the Exchange is making a voluntary decision to make this
data available, unlike the best bid and offer which must be made
available under the Act. The Exchange chooses to make the data
available as proposed in order to improve market quality, to attract
order flow, and to increase transparency. Once this proposed change
becomes effective, the Exchange will continue making the data available
until such time as the Exchange changes its rule. This proposed
amendment is based on

recent amendments to Chapter V, Section 16(a) of the BOX Group
rules.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66526 (Mar. 7,
2012), 77 FR 14845 (Mar. 13, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, BOX proposes to amend Rule 7130(b)(1) to address how
inbound orders are processed when the BOX best price on the same side
of the market locks, or is locked by the opposite side NBBO. Currently,
Rule 7130 sets forth that inbound orders on BOX are filtered prior to
their entry on the BOX Book to ensure such orders will not Trade-
Through the NBBO in accordance with the Options Order Protection and
Locked/Crossed Market Plan (the ``Plan''). The rule provides that all
of the filtering rules described are independent of whether the NBBO is
locked or crossed, except where the BOX best price on the same side of
the market as the inbound order has crossed, or is crossed by the
opposite side NBBO, the order will be routed, if eligible, or rejected
immediately. The Exchange proposes to amend the rule so that, in
addition, where the BOX best price on the same side of the market as
the inbound order has locked, or is locked by, the opposite side NBBO,
the order will also be routed, if eligible, or rejected immediately. As
such, the BOX trading engine is systematically either routing to an
Away Exchange \12\ or immediately rejecting such an order. Immediately
rejecting such an order, which is not eligible for routing, prevents
that order from being exposed,\13\ and thereby removes the potential
that such order could join the pre-existing locked market. The BOX NBBO
filtering process set forth in Rule 7130 continues to be designed in a
manner to prevent a sell order from being executed on BOX at a price
inferior to the best bid available at any Away Exchange; similarly, any
order to buy would not be executed on BOX at a price worse than the
best offer available at any Away Exchange. The Exchange believes
handling the order as described above is consistent with the objectives
of the Plan and assists BOX Options Participants in that it
systematically removes the potential that such an order could join a
pre-existing locked market. This proposed amendment is based on recent
amendments to Chapter V, Section 16 of the BOX Group rules.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 15030, providing in pertinent part, ``[o]nly
orders that are specifically designated by Options Participants as
eligible for routing will be routed to an Away Exchange (``Eligible
Orders'').''
    \13\ See Rule 7130(b)(4), providing that where an order is
received which is executable against the NBBO and there is not a
quote on BOX that is equal to the NBBO, that the order is exposed on
the BOX Book at the NBBO for a period of one second. If the order is
not executed during the one second exposure period, then the order
is either routed or cancelled.
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66792 (Apr. 12,
2012), 77 FR 23316 (Apr. 18, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') \15\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder and, in particular, the requirements
of Section 6(b) of the Act.\16\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \17\
requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts, to remove impediments to and to perfect the
mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The automated electronic trading system that is currently operated
by BOX Group as a facility of NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. will, upon the
commencement of the Exchange's operations as a national securities
exchange, be operated by BOX Market LLC as a facility of the Exchange.
As such, the operation and functionalities of the system are the same
as are in effect under the rules of the BOX Group facility. With the
exception of a technical amendment to correct an incorrect citation,
all of the proposed amendments herein are the same as were recently
adopted by the BOX Group. Updating the BOX rules to keep them in line
with those that were previously a part of the BOX Group rules provides
for consistency in rules.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The statutory basis for this proposed rule filing is the
same as that contained in each of the BOX Group rule filings cited
herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.

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 Effectiveness

    Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
under the Act, the Exchange is required to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest. The Commission notes that (with the exception of a technical
amendment to correct an incorrect citation) all of the proposed
amendments are the same as were recently adopted by the BOX Group.
Further, the operation and functionalities of the automated trading
system that will be operated by BOX Market LLC as a facility of the
Exchange are the same as are currently operated by BOX Group as a
facility of NASDAQ OMX BX. Updating the Exchange rules to keep them in
line with those that were previously a part of the BOX Group rules will
provide for consistency in rules. Additionally, the Exchange
anticipates that the facility will begin operations on May 14, 2012.
Waiver of the operative delay period will allow the Exchange to have
the amended rules in place as soon as options trading on the BOX
facility commences. Therefore, the Commission designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings

to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2012-001 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2012-001. 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-BOX-2012-001 and should be
submitted on or before June 8, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-12033 Filed 5-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 12103]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4964]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2713-082]

Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P; Notice of Settlement Agreement
and Soliciting Comments

    Take notice that the following Settlement Agreement has been filed
with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Comprehensive Settlement Agreement
(Settlement) for the relicensing of the Oswegatchie River Hydroelectric
Project.
    b. Project No.: P-2713-082.
    c. Date Filed: February 18, 2011.
    d. Applicant: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.
    e. Location: The existing multi-development project is located on
the Oswegatchie River in St. Lawrence County, New York. The project
does not affect Federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to Rule 602 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.602 Federal Power Act 16 USC 791 (a)-825(r)
    h. Applicant Contact: Daniel Daoust, Erie Boulevard Hydropower, 33
West 1st Street, South, Fulton, NY, 13069;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: John Baummer<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments on the Settlement: March 20, 2011.
Reply comments are due March 30, 2011. Comments and reply comments
should be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    k. Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P. (Erie) filed a Settlement signed
by the Adirondack Mountain Club, Adirondack Park Agency, Clifton-Fine
Economic Development Group, 5 Ponds Subcommittee, St. Lawrence County,
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York State
Council of Trout Unlimited, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
National Park Service and Erie (collectively, the Parties). The
Settlement resolves among the Parties issues related to project
operations, fisheries, wildlife, water quality, recreation, and
cultural resources. The Parties request that the Commission accept and
incorporate, without material modification, Sections 3.1 through 3.9 of
the Settlement as numbered license articles.
    l. A copy of the Settlement 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.
    m. 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

    Dated: February 28, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4964 Filed 3-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 119 (Thursday, June 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33396-33399]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13288]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92186; File No. SR-MIAX-2021-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee Schedule for the Complex PRIME
(``cPRIME'') Agency Order Credit

June 15, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 9, 2021, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a 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 is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Options Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings, at MIAX's principal
office, 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 the Fee Schedule to modify one of
the conditions for Members \3\ to receive the alternative complex PRIME
(``cPRIME'') \4\ Agency Order Credit amount for cPRIME Agency Orders in
Tier 4 of the Priority Customer Rebate Program (``PCRP'') \5\ that
applies instead of the credit otherwise applicable to such orders, if a
certain threshold is satisfied. The Exchange initially filed this
proposal on May 28, 2021 (SR-MIAX-2021-24) and withdrew such filing on
June 9, 2021. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective June 9, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \4\ ``cPRIME'' is the process by which a Member may
electronically submit a ``cPRIME Order'' (as defined in Rule
518(b)(7)) it represents as agent (a ``cPRIME Agency Order'')
against principal or solicited interest for execution (a ``cPRIME
Auction''), subject to the restrictions set forth in Exchange Rule
515A, Interpretation and Policy .12. See Exchange Rule 515A.
    \5\ Under the PCRP, MIAX Options credits each Member the per
contract amount resulting from each Priority Customer order
transmitted by that Member which is executed electronically on the
Exchange in all multiply-listed option classes (excluding, in simple
or complex as applicable, QCC and cQCC Orders, mini-options,
Priority Customer-to-Priority Customer Orders, C2C and cC2C Orders,
PRIME and cPRIME AOC Responses, PRIME and cPRIME Contra-side Orders,
PRIME and cPRIME Orders for which both the Agency and Contra-side
Order are Priority Customers, and executions related to contracts
that are routed to one or more exchanges in connection with the
Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan referenced
in Exchange Rule 1400), provided the Member meets certain percentage
thresholds in a month as described in the Priority Customer Rebate
Program table. See Fee Schedule, Section 1)a)iii.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Exchange Rule 518(b)(7) defines a cPRIME Order as a type of complex
order \6\ that is submitted for participation in a cPRIME Auction and
trading of cPRIME Orders is governed by Rule 515A, Interpretation and
Policies .12.\7\ cPRIME Orders are processed and executed in the
Exchange's PRIME mechanism, the same mechanism that the Exchange uses
to process and execute simple PRIME orders, pursuant to Exchange Rule
515A.\8\ PRIME is a process by which a Member may electronically submit
for execution an order it represents as agent (an ``Agency Order'')
against principal interest and/or solicited interest. The Member that
submits the Agency Order (``Initiating Member'') agrees to guarantee
the execution of the Agency Order by submitting a contra-side order
representing principal interest or solicited interest (``Contra-Side
Order''). When the Exchange receives a properly designated Agency Order
for Auction processing, a request for response (``RFR'') detailing the
option, side, size and initiating price is broadcasted to MIAX
participants up to an optional designated limit price. Members may
submit responses to the RFR, which can be either an Auction or Cancel
(``AOC'')

order or an AOC eQuote. A cPRIME Auction is the price-improvement
mechanism of the Exchange's System pursuant to which an Initiating
Member electronically submits a complex Agency Order into a cPRIME
Auction. The Initiating Member, in submitting an Agency Order, must be
willing to either (i) cross the Agency Order at a single price against
principal or solicited interest, or (ii) automatically match against
principal or solicited interest, the price and size of a RFR that is
broadcast to MIAX participants up to an optional designated limit
price. Such responses are defined as cPRIME AOC Responses or cPRIME
eQuotes. The PRIME mechanism is used for orders on the Exchange's
Simple Order Book.\9\ The cPRIME mechanism is used for Complex Orders
\10\ on the Exchange's Strategy Book,\11\ with the cPRIME mechanism
operating in the same manner for processing and execution of cPRIME
Orders that is used for PRIME Orders on the Simple Order Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A ``complex order'' is any order involving the concurrent
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options in the same
underlying security (the ``legs'' or ``components'' of the complex
order), for the same account, in a ratio that is equal to or greater
than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one
(3.00) and for the purposes of executing a particular investment
strategy. A complex order can also be a ``stock-option'' order,
which is an order to buy or sell a stated number of units of an
underlying security coupled with the purchase or sale of options
contract(s) on the opposite side of the market, subject to certain
contingencies set forth in the proposed rules governing complex
orders. For a complete definition of a ``complex order,'' see
Exchange Rule 518(a)(5). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 78620 (August 18, 2016), 81 FR 58770 (August 25, 2016) (SR-MIAX-
2016-26).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81131 (July 12,
2017), 82 FR 32900 (July 18, 2017) (SR-MIAX-2017-19) (Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change to Amend MIAX Options Rules 515,
Execution of Orders and Quotes; 515A, MIAX Price Improvement
Mechanism (``PRIME'') and PRIME Solicitation Mechanism; and 518,
Complex Orders).
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ The ``Simple Order Book'' is the Exchange's regular
electronic book of orders and quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(15).
    \10\ See supra note 6. Mini-options may only be part of a
complex order that includes other mini-options. Only those complex
orders in the classes designated by the Exchange and communicated to
Members via Regulatory Circular with no more than the applicable
number of legs, as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class
basis and communicated to Members via Regulatory Circular, are
eligible for processing. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(5).
    \11\ The ``Strategy Book'' is the Exchange's electronic book of
complex orders and complex quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 28, 2019, the Exchange filed its proposal to, among
other things, establish the alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit
amount for cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the PCRP that would apply
instead of the credit otherwise applicable to such orders, if a certain
threshold was satisfied by the Member.\12\ With that filing, the
Exchange adopted footnote ``**'' below the PCRP table in Section
1)a)iii) of the Fee Schedule, which described the alternative cPRIME
Agency Order Credit amount for cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the
PCRP. On February 28, 2020, the Exchange filed its proposal to, among
other things, lower the alternative cPRIME Agency Order rebate for PCRP
Members in Tier 4 that execute Priority Customer standard non-paired
complex volume at least equal to or greater than their Priority
Customer cPRIME agency volume from $0.22 per contract to $0.12 per
contract.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85301 (March 13,
2019), 84 FR 10166 (March 19, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-09).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88349 (March 10,
2020), 85 FR 14995 (March 16, 2020) (SR-MIAX-2020-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, under the PCRP, the Exchange provides a higher credit of
$0.12 per contract for cPRIME Agency Orders if any Member or its
Affiliate \14\ qualifies for PCRP Tier 4 and executes Priority Customer
standard, non-paired complex volume at least equal to or greater than
their Priority Customer cPRIME Agency Order volume on a monthly basis,
instead of the $0.10 credit otherwise applicable for Tier 4.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For purposes of the MIAX Options Fee Schedule, the term
``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at least 75%
common ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's Form
BD, Schedule A, (``Affiliate''), or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker
of an Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an
Appointed Market Maker). An ``Appointed Market Maker'' is a MIAX
Market Maker (who does not otherwise have a corporate affiliation
based upon common ownership with an EEM) that has been appointed by
an EEM and an ``Appointed EEM'' is an EEM (who does not otherwise
have a corporate affiliation based upon common ownership with a MIAX
Market Maker) that has been appointed by a MIAX Market Maker,
pursuant to the following process. A MIAX Market Maker appoints an
EEM and an EEM appoints a MIAX Market Maker, for the purposes of the
Fee Schedule, by each completing and sending an executed Volume
Aggregation Request Form by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>no
later than 2 business days prior to the first business day of the
month in which the designation is to become effective. Transmittal
of a validly completed and executed form to the Exchange along with
the Exchange's acknowledgement of the effective designation to each
of the Market Maker and EEM will be viewed as acceptance of the
appointment. The Exchange will only recognize one designation per
Member. A Member may make a designation not more than once every 12
months (from the date of its most recent designation), which
designation shall remain in effect unless or until the Exchange
receives written notice submitted 2 business days prior to the first
business day of the month from either Member indicating that the
appointment has been terminated. Designations will become operative
on the first business day of the effective month and may not be
terminated prior to the end of the month. Execution data and reports
will be provided to both parties.
    \15\ The Exchange notes that other exchanges offer comparable
rebates in their middle to highest tiers for similar transactions.
See, generally, Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Options 7, Pricing Schedule
(highest tier rebate of $0.14 per contract for similar
transactions); Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. Fee Schedule (mid-tier
rebate of $0.11 per contract, up to $0.14 per contract in the
highest tier for similar transactions); NYSE American LLC Fee
Schedule (rebate of $0.10 per contract for similar transactions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to modify one of the conditions in order
for a Member to receive the alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit
amount for cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the PCRP that applies
instead of the credit otherwise applicable to such orders. With the
proposed change, any Member or its Affiliate that qualifies for PCRP
Tier 4 and executes Priority Customer standard, non-paired complex
volume at least equal to or greater than three (3) times their Priority
Customer cPRIME Agency Order volume on a monthly basis, will receive a
credit of $0.12 per contract for cPRIME Agency Orders instead of the
credit otherwise applicable to such orders in Tier 4. The Exchange
proposes to make the corresponding change to footnote ``**'' below the
PCRP table in Section 1)a)iii) of the Fee Schedule. The purpose of the
proposed change is for business and competitive reasons. As the amount
and type of volume that is executed on the Exchange has shifted since
it first established the alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit amount
for cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the PCRP, provided that the
Member meets certain Priority Customer standard, non-paired complex
volume,\16\ the Exchange has determined to level-set the threshold to
achieve the alternative rebate by requiring Members to execute an
increased amount of Priority Customer standard, non-paired complex
volume. With the proposed change, the Exchange believes the higher
credit of $0.12 per contract for cPRIME Agency Orders will continue to
be attractive and reflective of the amount and type of volume executed
on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra notes 12 and 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \17\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \18\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using
its facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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 and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues and fees and is not unfairly
discriminatory for the following reasons. The Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and self-regulatory

organization (``SRO'') revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \19\ There are currently
16 registered options exchanges competing for order flow. Based on
publicly-available information, and excluding index-based options, no
single exchange has more than approximately 13-14% of the market share
of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and exchange-traded fund
(``ETF'') options trades as of June 9, 2021, for the month of June
2021.\20\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow.
More specifically, as of June 9, 2021, the Exchange has a total market
share of 6.73% of all equity options volume, for the month of June
2021.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \20\ See https://www.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market shares among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow (as further described below), or discontinue or
reduce use of certain categories of products, in response to
transaction and non-transaction fee changes. For example, in February
2019, the Exchange filed with the Commission an immediately effective
filing to decrease certain credits assessable to Members pursuant to
the PCRP, with the fee change effective for March 1, 2019.\22\ The
Exchange experienced a decrease in total market share between the
months of February and March of 2019. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the February 2019 fee change may have contributed to the
decrease in the Exchange's market share and, as such, the Exchange
believes competitive forces constrain options exchange transaction
fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to modify the amount of Priority
Customer standard, non-paired complex volume in order for Members to
achieve the higher alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit amount for
cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the PCRP is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act \23\ because it applies equally to all participants.
The proposal is based on the amount and type of complex and cPRIME
business transacted on the Exchange and Members are not obligated to
try to achieve the higher alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit amount
for cPRIME Agency Orders in Tier 4 of the PCRP, nor are they obligated
to execute any cPRIME transactions. Rather, the proposal is designed to
level-set the volume threshold to Exchange volume in these segments to
achieve the higher alternative rebate by requiring Members to execute
an increased amount of Priority Customer standard, non-paired complex
volume. The Exchange believes that by encouraging market participants
to execute Priority Customer standard, non-paired complex volume at
least equal to or greater than three times their Priority Customer
cPRIME Agency Order volume in order to receive a higher alternative
credit instead of the credit otherwise applicable to such orders in
Tier 4 of the PCRP is reasonable, equitably allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because it is more reflective of the amount and type of
volume executed on the Exchange since the Exchange first established
the alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that this proposal continues to
encourage increased volume of Priority Customer standard, non-paired
complex orders and Priority Customer cPRIME orders, which will continue
to result in increased complex and cPRIME liquidity that benefits all
Exchange participants by providing more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads. The Exchange also believes the PCRP is reasonably
designed because it incentivizes providers of Priority Customer order
flow to send that Priority Customer order flow to the Exchange in order
to obtain the highest volume threshold and receive a credit in a manner
that enables the Exchange to improve its overall competitiveness and
strengthen its market quality for all market participants.
    In addition, the proposal is also consistent with Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act \24\ because it perfects the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system and protects investors and the
public interest because, while only certain Priority Customer order
flow qualifies for the rebate program under the PCRP and, specifically,
only order flow by Members in Tier 4 of the PCRP that meet the
additional threshold will continue to receive the higher alternative
cPRIME Agency Order rebate, an increase in Priority Customer order flow
will bring greater volume and liquidity, which benefits all market
participants by providing more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads. To the extent Priority Customer order flow continues to
increase by the proposal, market participants will increasingly compete
for the opportunity to trade on the Exchange including sending more
orders and providing narrower and larger-sized quotations in the effort
to trade with such Priority Customer order flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and (b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\25\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that are not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intra-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to modify the condition for
the alternative cPRIME Agency Order Credit will not impose any undue
burden on intra-market competition. The Exchange believes that this
proposal will continue to encourage Members to submit both Priority
Customer standard, non-paired complex orders and Priority Customer
cPRIME orders, which will increase liquidity and benefit all market
participants by providing more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it will
continue to encourage order flow, which provides greater volume and
liquidity, benefiting all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads.
Inter-Market Competition
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee
levels at a particular venue to be excessive. There are currently 16
registered options exchanges competing for order flow. Based on
publicly-available information, and excluding index-based options, no
single exchange has more than approximately 13-14% of the market share
of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades as
of June 9, 2021, for the month of June 2021.\26\ Therefore, no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options order flow. More

specifically, as of June 9, 2021, the Exchange has a total market share
of 6.73% of all equity options volume, for the month of June 2021.\27\
In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its
transaction and non-transaction fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment because it
will modify the Exchange's rebates in a manner that encourages market
participants to continue to provide and send order flow to the
Exchange. To the extent this is achieved, all the Exchange's market
participants should benefit from the improved market quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See supra note 20.
    \27\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor 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,\28\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \29\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-MIAX-2021-26 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-MIAX-2021-26. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2021-26 and should be submitted on
or before July 15, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-13288 Filed 6-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6839-6840]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2827]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

ActiveCore Technologies, Inc., Battery Technologies, Inc., China
Media1 Corp., Dura Products International, Inc. (n/k/a Dexx Corp.),
Global Mainframe Corp., GrandeTel Technologies, Inc., Magna
Entertainment Corp. (n/k/a Reorganized Magna Entertainment Corp.), and
649 Com, Inc. (n/k/a Infinite Holdings Group, Inc.), Order of
Suspension of Trading

February 4, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
ActiveCore Technologies, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 2006.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Battery Technologies, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended December 31, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
China Media1 Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2006.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Dura Products International, Inc. (n/k/a Dexx Corp.) because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the period ended December 31, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Global Mainframe Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended April 30, 2007.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
GrandeTel Technologies, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended January 31, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Magna Entertainment Corp. (n/k/a Reorganized Magna Entertainment Corp.)
because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended
September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
649 Com, Inc. (n/k/a Infinite Holdings Group, Inc.) because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the period ended March 31, 2006.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies. Therefore, it is ordered,
pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended
for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on February 4, 2011, through 11:59
p.m. EST on February 17, 2011.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-2827 Filed 2-4-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P