[Federal Register: November 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 229)]
[Notices]
[Page 74030-74033]
[DOCID:fr30no10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

November 17, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC11-18-000.
    Applicants: Ameren Illinois Company.
    Description: Ameren Illinois Company's Request for Approval
Pursuant to Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and for Expedited
Consideration and a Shortened Notice Period.
    Filed Date: 11/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101110-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 1, 2010.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER00-2529-004.
    Applicants: Dow Pipeline Company.
    Description: Dow Pipeline Company's Amendment to Updated Market
Power Analysis.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2068-004.
    Applicants: Delaware City Refining Company LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Delaware
City Refining Company LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2077-003.
    Applicants: PBF Power Marketing LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of PBF Power
Marketing LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2710-005.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits an errata to their
RAA baseline filing to make technical corrections, to be effective 9/
17/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 24, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2990-001.
    Applicants: Potomac Power Resources, Inc.
    Description: Potomac Power Resources, Inc. submits tariff filing
per 35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2992-001.
    Applicants: Pepco Energy Services, Inc.
    Description: Pepco Energy Services, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 9/
27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2997-001.
    Applicants: Atlantic City Electric Company.
    Description: Atlantic City Electric Company submits tariff filing
per 35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5195.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3003-001.
    Applicants: Bethlehem Renewable Energy, LLC.
    Description: Bethlehem Renewable Energy, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5172.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3012-001.
    Applicants: Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc.
    Description: Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 9/
27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5166.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3015-001.

    Applicants: Eastern Landfill Gas, LLC.
    Description: Eastern Landfill Gas, LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 9/
27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3016-001.
    Applicants: Fauquier Landfill Gas, LLC.
    Description: Fauquier Landfill Gas, LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be effective 9/
27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5139.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3030-001.
    Applicants: Potomac Electric Power Company.
    Description: Potomac Electric Power Company submits tariff filing
per 35: Compliance Filing to Correct MBR Baseline Filing to be
effective 9/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5214.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3149-001.
    Applicants: Galt Power, Inc.
    Description: Galt Power, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35: Galt
Power Inc Baseline Filing to be effective 11/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3189-001.
    Applicants: CCES LLC.
    Description: CCES LLC submits tariff filing per 35: CCES LLC
Baseline Filing to be effective 11/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3234-001.
    Applicants: Energy Cooperative Association of Pennsylvania.
    Description: Energy Cooperative Association of Pennsylvania submits
tariff filing per 35: Energy Cooperative Association of Pennsylvania
Baseline Filing to be effective 11/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-18-002.
    Applicants: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation.
    Description: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation submits
tariff filing per 35: CHG&E Rate Schedule 31--Refile to be effective
10/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5187.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1881-001.
    Applicants: Burley Butte Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Burley Butte Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Burley Butte Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1882-001.
    Applicants: Golden Valley Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Golden Valley Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Golden Valley Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5137.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1883-001.
    Applicants: Milner Dam Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Milner Dam Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Milner Dam Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1885-001.
    Applicants: Oregon Trail Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Oregon Trail Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Oregon Trail Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5140.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1886-001.
    Applicants: Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park, LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.17(b): Pilgrim Stage Station Wind Park Supplement No.1 to
Market Based Rate Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5144.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1887-001.
    Applicants: Thousand Springs Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Thousand Springs Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.17(b): Thousand Springs Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market
Based Rate Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5149.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1889-001.
    Applicants: Tuana Gulch Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Tuana Gulch Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Tuana Gulch Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5155.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1890-001.
    Applicants: Camp Reed Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Camp Reed Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Camp Reed Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5133.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1892-001.
    Applicants: Payne's Ferry Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Payne's Ferry Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Payne's Ferry Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5142.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1893-001.
    Applicants: Salmon Falls Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Salmon Falls Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Salmon Falls Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1894-001.
    Applicants: Yahoo Creek Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Yahoo Creek Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Yahoo Creek Wind Park Supplement No. 1 to Market Based Rate
Application to be effective 11/5/2010.

    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5160.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1939-000.
    Applicants: AP Gas & Electric (PA), LLC.
    Description: AP Gas & Electric, LLC submits amendment to October
29th Petition etc.
    Filed Date: 11/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101110-0015.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2089-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: MidAmerican Energy Company submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Rate Schedule No. 116--Initial Filing to be effective
1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 11/04/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101104-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, November 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2122-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35.12: Service Schedule No. 307 to be effective 10/15/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/15/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101115-5090.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 6, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2130-000.
    Applicants: Ontario Power Generation Energy Trading, Inc.
    Description: Ontario Power Generation Energy Trading, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35: OPGET ASM Filing to be effective 1/15/2011.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2131-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: MSS-3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be effective 11/
16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5069.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2132-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C.
    Description: Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C. submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: MSS-3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be
effective 11/16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2133-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
    Description: Entergy Louisiana, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: MSS-3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be effective 11/
16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2134-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Mississippi, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: MSS-3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be effective 11/
16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2135-000.
    Applicants: Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
    Description: Entergy New Orleans, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: MSS-3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be effective 11/
16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2136-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Texas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Texas, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35: MSS-
3 Spindletop Compliance Filing to be effective 11/16/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5080.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2137-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35: G809 Compliance to be effective 12/31/
9998.
    Filed Date: 11/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101116-5106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, December 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2138-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: ISA No. 2699, Queue V4-068, Solar Star North Carolina
II, LLC & VEPCO to be effective 10/18/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5087.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2139-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2010-11-17 CAISO's LGIA for
Manzana Wind Project with SCE to be effective 1/10/2011.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5090.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2140-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: PJM submits amendments to Schedule 12-Appendix to
update RTEP to be effective 2/15/2011.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2141-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: ISA 2697, Queue No. R49, Paulding Wind Farm II, LLC &
Ohio Power Company to be effective 10/18/2010.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101117-5198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be

listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an
eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30059 Filed 11-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 72 (Monday, April 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18199-18202]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07636]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80430; File No. SR-C2-2017-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Complex Order Price Protections

April 11, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 5, 2017, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``C2'') 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 filed the proposal 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

    The Exchange proposes to amend a current price protection related
to complex orders. The text of the proposed rule change is provided
below.
(additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *

C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated

Rules

* * * * *

Rule 6.13. Complex Order Execution

    (a)-(c) No change.

. . . Interpretations and Policies:

    .01-.03 No change.
    .04 Price Check Parameters: On a class-by-class basis, the Exchange
may determine (and announce via Regulatory Circular) which of the
following price check parameters will apply to eligible complex orders.
Paragraphs (b) and (g) will not be applicable to stock-option orders.
    For purposes of this Interpretation and Policy .04:
    Vertical Spread. A ``vertical'' spread is a two-legged complex
order with one

leg to buy a number of calls (puts) and one leg to sell the same number
of calls (puts) with the same expiration date but different exercise
prices.
    Butterfly Spread. A ``butterfly'' spread is a three-legged complex
order with two legs to buy (sell) the same number of calls (puts) and
one leg to sell (buy) twice as many calls (puts), all with the same
expiration date but different exercise prices, and the exercise price
of the middle leg is between the exercise prices of the other legs. If
the exercise price of the middle leg is halfway between the exercise
prices of the other legs, it is a ``true'' butterfly; otherwise, it is
a ``skewed'' butterfly.
    Box Spread. A ``box'' spread is a four-legged complex order with
one leg to buy calls and one leg to sell puts with one strike price,
and one leg to sell calls and one leg to buy puts with another strike
price, all of which have the same expiration date and are for the same
number of contracts.
    To the extent a price check parameter is applicable, the Exchange
will not automatically execute an eligible complex order that is:
    (a)-(d) No change.
    (e) Acceptable Percentage Range Parameter:
    (i) An incoming complex order (including a stock-option order)
after [all leg]the series for all legs of the complex order are open
for trading that is marketable and would execute immediately upon
submission to the COB or following a COA if the execution would be at a
price outside an acceptable percentage range. The ``acceptable
percentage range'' is the national spread market (or Exchange spread
market if the NBBO in any leg is locked, crossed or unavailable and for
pairs of orders submitted to AIM or SAM) that existed when the System
received the order or at the start of COA, as applicable, plus/minus:
    (A) the amount equal to a percentage (which may not be less than
3%) of the national spread market (the ``percentage amount'') if that
amount is not less than a minimum amount or greater than a maximum
amount (the Exchange will determine the percentage and minimum and
maximum amounts on a class-by-class basis and announce them to Trading
Permit Holders by Regulatory Circular);
    (B) the minimum amount, if the percentage amount is less than the
minimum amount; or
    (C) the maximum amount, if the percentage amount is greater than
the maximum amount.
    (ii) The System cancels an order (or any remaining size after
partial execution of the order) that would execute or rest in the COB
at a price outside the acceptable price range.
    (iii) If the System rejects either order in a pair of orders
submitted to AIM or SAM pursuant to this parameter, then the System
also cancels the paired order. Notwithstanding the foregoing, with
respect to an AIM Retained (``A:AIR'') order as defined in
Interpretation and Policy .10 to Rule 6.51, if the System rejects the
Agency Order pursuant to this check, then the System also rejects the
contra-side order; however, if the System rejects the contra-side order
pursuant to this check, the System still accepts the Agency Order if it
satisfies the check. [To the extent a contra-side order or response is
marketable against the Agency Order, the execution price will be capped
at the opposite side of the acceptable price range.]
    (iv) This parameter applies to auction responses in the same manner
as it does orders.
    (f)-(h) No change.
    .06-.07 No change.
* * * * *
    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 its acceptable percentage range
parameter for complex orders. In general, pursuant to the acceptable
percentage range parameter in Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy
.04(e), the System cancels an incoming order \5\ that is marketable and
would execute immediately upon submission to the complex order book
(``COB'') or following a COA if the execution would be at a price
outside an acceptable percentage range, which is the national spread
market that existed when the System received the order or at the start
of COA, as applicable, plus/minus:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The current rule states this price protection applies to an
incoming order after all leg series are open for trading. The
proposed rule change makes a nonsubstantive change to this provision
to clarify this means the protection applies to an incoming order
after the series for all legs of the complex order are open for
trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The amount equal to a percentage (which may not be less
than 3%) of the national spread market (the ``percentage amount'') if
that amount is not less than a minimum amount or greater than a maximum
amount (the Exchange will determine the percentage and minimum and
maximum amounts and announce them to Trading Permit Holders by
Regulatory Circular);
     the minimum amount, if the percentage amount is less than
the minimum amount; or
     the maximum amount, if the percentage amount is greater
than the maximum amount.
    First, the proposed rule change amends Rule 6.13, Interpretation
and Policy .04(e)(i)(A) to provide the Exchange may determine the
percentage and the minimum and maximum amounts on a class-by-class
basis. Currently, the rule states the percentage and minimum and
maximum amounts will be the same for all classes. Because of class
differences such as the minimum increment and option prices, the
Exchange believes it may be appropriate to set different amounts so the
outside of the range is not too close or too far away from the market
price for a class and ensure the range creates an effective check for
all classes. Therefore, the proposed rule change adds this flexibility
to the Rule. Other price protections have similar flexibility.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy .04(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the proposed rule change adds Rule 6.13, Interpretation and
Policy .04(e)(iv) to provide this parameter will apply to auction
responses in the same manner as it does orders. The current parameter
does not apply to auction responses. As noted in a recent rule filing
enhancing this parameter, even if the parameter does not apply to
auction responses, this protection will prevent an order from executing
outside the acceptable price range (including against an auction
response), and thus responses will not execute against an order outside
the

acceptable price range.\7\ However, cancelling an auction response
prior to the end of an auction that would execute outside the
acceptable price range may give the submitting Trading Permit Holder an
opportunity to submit a new response within the acceptable price range
prior to the end of the auction, and thus increase execution
opportunities. Therefore, the proposed rule change applies this
parameter to auction response. An auction response at a price outside
the acceptable price range will not execute regardless of whether this
parameter applies to the auction response; applying the parameter to
auction responses merely changes the timing of when the response is
cancelled.\8\ Other price protections similarly apply to auction
responses.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-80281 (March 20,
2017), 82 FR 15074, note 24 (March 44, 2017) (SR-C2-2017-010).
    \8\ Paragraph (e)(iii) currently states to the extent a contra-
side order or response is marketable against the Agency Order, the
execution price will be capped at the opposite side of the
acceptable price range. The proposed rule change deletes this rule
language, as it is redundant. The price protection will, as
proposed, cancel orders and responses (or remaining size after
partial execution) that would execute outside the acceptable price
range. There [sic] is effectively the same as capping an execute
[sic] price no wider than the acceptable price range, as no order or
response will be able to execute at a price outside the range.
    \9\ See, e.g., Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy .04(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\10\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \11\ 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) \12\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change to
provide the Exchange with flexibility to determine settings for the
acceptable percentage range parameter on a class-by-class manner will
permit the Exchange to ensure the range is not too close or too far
away from the market price for a class based on factors such as minimum
increment and premium, and thus ensure the range creates an effective
check for all classes. This will protect investors from potentially
erroneous executions while removing impediments to and perfecting the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
ensuring orders are not inadvertently cancelled due to a range that is
too narrow. Other price protections have similar flexibility.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy .04(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to apply the acceptable percentage range
parameter to auction responses merely changes the time at which
responses outside the acceptable price range is cancelled. However,
application of the acceptable percentage range parameter to auction
responses may permit the submitting Trading Permit Holder to enter a
new auction response at a price within the range prior to the end of
the auction, which improves execution opportunities and thus protects
investors. Other price protections similarly apply to auction
responses.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy .04(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    C2 does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change will
apply to all complex orders submitted to C2 in the same manner. The
enhancements to the acceptable percentage range parameter applicable to
all incoming orders will help further prevent potentially erroneous
executions, which benefits all market participants. Additionally, the
proposed rule change is substantially similar to other price
protections.\15\ The proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
intermarket competition, as it applies only to C2 price protection
mechanisms that prevent erroneous executions on C2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See, e.g., Rule 6.13, Interpretation and Policy .04(c)(4)
and (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Because the foregoing 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 from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule 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-C2-2017-013 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-C2-2017-013. 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; 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-C2-2017-013 and should be
submitted on or before May 8, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-07636 Filed 4-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 50344]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17550]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4655-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]

Montana; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Montana (FEMA-4655-DR), dated June 16, 2022, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued July 22, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Montana is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of June 16, 2022.

    Flathead County for Public Assistance.
    Yellowstone County for Individual Assistance (already designated
for Public Assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared
Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and
Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard
Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-17550 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 153 (Thursday, August 10, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54233-54234]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16968]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0735; Airspace Docket No. 23-ASW-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Ruston, LA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace at Ruston, LA. This
action is the result of an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Ruston non-directional beacon (NDB). The
geographic coordinates of the airport are also being updated to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, November 30, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the FAA Docket number.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Ruston Regional Airport, Ruston, LA, to support
instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published an NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2023-0735 in the
Federal Register (88 FR 36979; June 6, 2023) amending the Class E
airspace at Ruston, LA. Interested parties were invited to participate
in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the
proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO
7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. FAA
Order Jo 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document. These amendments will be published in the
next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 modifies the Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.5-mile
radius of Ruston Regional Airport, Ruston, LA, and updates the
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASW LA E5 Ruston, LA [Amended]

Ruston Regional Airport, LA
    (Lat 32[deg]30'48'' N, long 92[deg]35'18'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Ruston Regional Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 3, 2023.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-16968 Filed 8-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79063-79068]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27153]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79244; File No. SR-CBOE-2016-053]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, Relating to Price Protection Mechanisms and Risk
Controls

November 4, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On September 1, 2016, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend current and adopt new
price protection mechanisms and risk controls for orders and quotes.
The Commission published the proposed rule change for comment in the
Federal Register on September 20, 2016.\3\ On September 21, 2016, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\4\ The
Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order provides
notice of filing of Amendment No. 1 and approves the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78839 (September 14,
2016), 81 FR 64521 (September 20, 2016) (``Notice'').
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange conformed the text of
proposed Rule 6.13(b)(v)(B) to CBOE's description in the Notice of
the drill through price check parameter. Specifically, the amendment
added detail into the rule to reflect that, pursuant to the drill
through price check parameter, CBOE will expose the unexecuted
portion of an order via HAL at the better of the NBBO and the drill
through price. In addition, CBOE also proposed to amend its
discussion of existing quote risk monitor functionality to
accurately match the existing rule text (which involved background
discussion of functionality that CBOE did not propose to amend in
the current proposal). To promote transparency of its proposed
amendment, when CBOE filed Amendment No. 1 with the Commission, it
also submitted Amendment No. 1 as a comment letter to the file,
which the Commission posted on its Web site and placed in the public
comment file for SR-CBOE-2016-053 (available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2016-053/cboe2016053-1.pdf). The Exchange also
posted a copy of its Amendment No. 1 on its Web site (http://www.cboe.com/aboutcboe/legal/submittedsecfilings.aspx) when it filed
the amendment with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A more detailed description of the proposed rule change
appears in the Notice. See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently has in place various price check mechanisms
and risk controls that are designed to prevent incoming orders and
quotes from automatically executing at potentially erroneous prices or
to assist TPHs with managing their risk.\6\ The Exchange proposed to
amend CBOE Rules 6.12(a)(3), 6.13(b)(v), 6.14 and 8.18 to add new, as
well as amend current, price protection mechanisms and risk controls to
further assist brokers in their efforts to prevent errors and avoid
trading activity that could potentially be unwanted or even disruptive
to the market.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., CBOE Rules 6.12(a)(3) through (5) (limit order
price parameters), 6.13(b)(v) (market-width and drill through price
check parameters), 6.14 (price protections), 6.53C, Interpretation
and Policy .08 (price check parameters for complex orders), and 8.18
(QRM Mechanism).
    \7\ The proposed rule change also made conforming changes to
CBOE Rules 6.2B, 6.13A, and 6.14A. A full discussion of those
changes may be found in the Notice. See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Limit Order Price Parameter for Simple Orders

    The Exchange proposed to amend the limit order price parameter for
simple orders in Rule 6.12(a)(3). Currently, a simple limit order is
routed directly from an order entry firm to an order management
terminal (``OMT'') designated by the order entry firm if a limit order
to buy (sell) is more than an acceptable tick distance (``ATD'') \8\
above (below): (i) The Exchange's previous day's closing price prior to
the opening of a series, or (ii) the disseminated Exchange offer (bid)
once a series has opened.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Currently, the Exchange determines the ATD, which may be no
less than 5 minimum increment ticks, on a series-by-series and
premium basis. Under the proposed rule change, the ATD, which may be
no less than two minimum increment ticks, will be determined on a
class-by-class and premium basis. In addition, different ATDs may be
applied to orders entered during the pre-opening, a trading
rotation, a trading halt, or Extended Trading Hours. See proposed
CBOE Rule 6.12(a)(3) and Notice, supra note 3, at 64523 n. 8
    \9\ See CBOE Rule 6.12(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has now proposed to amend CBOE Rule 6.12(a)(3) to
reject a simple limit order to buy (sell) generally when it is more
than an ATD above (below) the last disseminated national best offer
(``NBO'') (national best bid (``NBB'')).\10\ According to the Exchange,
using the NBBO or NBO (NBB), if available, will more accurately reflect
the then current market, rather than the previous day's closing price
or Exchange BBO.\11\ The Exchange, however, will continue to use the
previous day's closing price or Exchange BBO in certain instances, such
as when the NBBO is locked or crossed, or when there is no NBO (NBB)
and the closing price does not cross the disseminated NBB (NBO).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Specifically, CBOE will reject the order if it is more than
the ATD above (below): (i) prior to the opening of a series, (A) the
last disseminated national best offer (``NBO'') (national best bid
(``NBB'')), if a series is open on another exchange, or (B) the
Exchange's previous day's closing price, if a series is not yet open
on any other exchange; if the NBBO is locked, crossed, or
unavailable; or if there is no NBO (NBB) and the previous day's
closing price is greater (less) than or equal to the NBB (NBO); (ii)
intraday, the last disseminated NBO (NBB), or the Exchange's best
offer (bid) if the NBBO is locked, crossed or unavailable; or (iii)
during a trading halt, the last disseminated NBO (NBB).
    \11\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 64522.
    \12\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE also proposed to apply the limit order price parameter to
immediate-or-cancel orders. According to the Exchange, such orders also
are at risk of execution at extreme and potentially erroneous prices
and thus will benefit from applicability of these checks.\13\ However,
the limit order price parameter will not apply to orders routed from a
PAR workstation or OMT. According to the Exchange, orders routed from a
PAR workstation or OMT are subject to manual handling, and therefore,
the Exchange believes the PAR or OMT operator will have evaluated the
price of an order based on then-existing market conditions prior to
submitting the order for electronic execution.\14\ Thus, there is
minimal risk of execution at an erroneous price. The limit order price
parameter also will not apply to orders with a stop contingency.\15\
According to the Exchange, buy orders with a stop contingency are
generally submitted at a triggering price that is above the NBO, and
sell orders with a stop contingency are generally submitted at a
triggering price that is below the NBB.\16\ As a result, the Exchange
believes these orders are expected to be priced outside the NBBO.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See id. at 64523.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See CBOE Rule 6.53. A stop contingency is triggered for a
buy order if there is a last sale or bid at or above the stop price
and for a sell order if there is a last sale or offer at or below
the stop price.
    \16\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 64523.
    \17\ See id.

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

B. Drill Through Price Check Parameter

    The Exchange proposed to amend the drill through price check
parameter in CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v). Currently, the Exchange's trading
system (``System'') will not automatically execute a market or
marketable limit order\18\ if the execution would follow an initial
partial execution on the Exchange at a price not within an ATD\19\ from
the initial execution. Instead, the remaining unexecuted portion of a
HAL-eligible order will be exposed pursuant to the HAL process in CBOE
Rule 6.14A using the ATD as the exposure price and any remainder will
route via the order handling system pursuant to CBOE Rule 6.12.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Currently, the Exchange applies the market-width check to
market orders and the drill through check to market and marketable
limit orders. The Exchange proposed to codify this current practice
into the rules. See Notice, supra note 3, at 64523 n. 12.
    \19\ Currently, the ATD is determined by the Exchange on a
series-by-series and premium basis for market orders and/or
marketable limit orders and may be no less than two minimum
increment ticks. Under the proposed rule change, the Exchange will
determine the ATD on a class and premium basis (which may be no less
than two minimum increment ticks), which the Exchange will announce
via Regulatory Circular. See proposed CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v)(B)(I).
    \20\ See CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now has proposed to amend CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v) to add
detail to the rule describing how the System will handle orders that
were not exposed prior to trading up to the drill through price and
orders that traded up to the drill through price following exposure. In
particular, orders not previously exposed would be exposed via HAL and
orders previously exposed via HAL or SAL would rest in the book for a
period of time and thereafter be cancelled if they do not execute.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Specifically, if a buy (sell) order not yet exposed via HAL
partially executes, and the System determines the unexecuted portion
would execute at a price higher (lower) than the price that is an
ATD above (below) the NBO (NBB) (``drill through price''), the
System will not automatically execute the remaining portion but will
instead expose it via HAL at the better of the NBBO and the drill
through price (if eligible for HAL). If a buy (sell) order exposed
via HAL (other than pursuant to the previous sentence) or the
Solicitation Auction Mechanism (``SAL'') would, following the
exposure period, execute at a price higher (lower) than the drill
through price, the System will not automatically execute the order
(or unexecuted portion). These orders (or unexecuted portions) will
rest in the book (based on the time at which they enter the book for
priority purposes) for a time period in milliseconds (which the
Exchange will determine and announce via Regulatory Circular and
will not exceed three seconds--the Exchange will initially set the
time at two seconds) with a price equal to the drill through price.
If the order (or any unexecuted portion) does not execute during
that time period, the System cancels it. In classes in which SAL is
activated, an order eligible for SAL will be exposed immediately and
would not partially execute prior to being exposed via SAL. For this
reason, SAL is not included in proposed CBOE Rule 6.13(v)(B)(I). See
Notice, supra note 3, at 64523 n. 15. Any order (or unexecuted
portion) that by its terms cancels if it does not execute
immediately (including immediate-or-cancel, fill-or-kill,
intermarket sweep, and market-maker trade prevention orders) will be
cancelled rather than rest in the book for this time period in
accordance with the definition of those order types. See proposed
CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v)(B)(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Buy (sell) orders (or any unexecuted portion) that are not eligible
for HAL or SAL and do not otherwise cancel by their terms will route
via the order handling system pursuant to Rule 6.12. In addition, the
drill through price check parameter at the open will be handled
pursuant to the separate process set forth in Rule 6.2B, Interpretation
and Policy .03.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The proposed rule change also amended the market width
price check parameter in CBOE Rule 6.13(b)(v) (proposed CBOE Rule
6.13(b)(v)(A)) to be determined on a class-by-class basis rather
than series-by-series, as well as made additional non-substantive
changes to Rule 6.13(b)(v), such as separating the provisions
regarding the market-width price check parameter from those
regarding the drill through price check parameter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. TPH-Designated Risk Settings

    The Exchange proposed to amend CBOE Rule 6.14 to authorize it to
share TPH-designated risk settings with a TPH's Clearing TPH. The risk
settings that the Exchange may share with Clearing TPHs include, but
are not limited to, settings under Rule 8.18 (related to QRM) and
proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(d) (related to order entry and execution rate
checks) and (e) (related to maximum contract size). The Exchange
represented that other options exchanges have similar rules permitting
them to share member-designated risk settings with other members that
clear transactions on the member's behalf.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 64525. See also, e.g., Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX'') Rule 500; NASDAQ
OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'') Chapter VI, Section 20; NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``Arca'') Rule 6.2A(a); NYSE MKT LLC (``MKT'') Rule 902.1NY(a); and
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``PHLX'') Rule 1016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Put Strike Price/Call Underlying Value Checks

    The Exchange proposed to amend the put strike price and call
underlying value checks in CBOE Rule 6.14(a). Currently, the System
rejects back to the TPH a quote or buy limit order for (i) a put if the
price of the quote bid or order is greater than or equal to the strike
price of the option, or (ii) a call if the price of the quote bid or
order is greater than or equal to the consolidated last sale price of
the underlying security, with respect to equity and exchange-traded
fund options, or the last disseminated value of the underlying index,
with respect to index options. The Exchange proposed to extend this
check to apply to market orders (and any remaining size after a partial
execution).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Exchange will not apply these checks to market orders
that execute during the opening process, however, in order to avoid
impacting the determination of the opening price. According to the
Exchange, separate price protections apply during the opening
process, including the drill through protection in CBOE Rule 6.2B.
See Notice, supra note 3, at 64525. The Exchange also proposed to
amend CBOE Rule 6.14(a) to eliminate discretion afforded to the
Exchange to determine to apply the call check to a class during
Extended Trading Hours. The Exchange represented that it currently
does not apply the check during Extended Trading Hours and is
eliminating its ability to do so in the future. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Quote Inverting NBBO Check

    The Exchange proposed to amend Rule CBOE 6.14(b) regarding the
quote inverting NBBO check. Currently, if the Exchange is at the NBO
(NBB), the System rejects a quote back to a Market-Maker if the quote
bid (offer) crosses the NBO (NBB) by more than a number of ticks
specified by the Exchange. If CBOE is not at the NBO (NBB), the System
rejects a quote back to a Market-Maker if the quote bid (offer) locks
or crosses the NBO (NBB). If the NBBO is unavailable, locked, or
crossed, then this check compares the quote to the BBO (if available).
The rule is currently silent on what happens if the BBO is unavailable.
    The Exchange has now proposed to amend Rule 6.14(b) to not apply
this check to incoming quotes when the BBO is unavailable. The Exchange
also proposed to amend the rule to state that it will not apply the
check to incoming quotes prior to the opening of a series if the series
is not open on another exchange, as well as during a trading halt.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(ii) and (iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Execution of Quotes That Lock or Cross NBBO

    The Exchange further proposed to amend the provision concerning the
execution of quotes that lock or cross the NBBO.\26\ The rule currently
states that if the System accepts a quote that locks or crosses the
NBBO, it executes the quote and either (i) cancels any remainder or
(ii) books any remainder if the price of the quote does not lock or
cross the price of an away exchange.\27\ Further, CBOE currently will
not disseminate an internally crossed market, and if a Market-Maker
submits a quote that would invert an existing quote, the System will
change the

incoming quote so it locks the existing quote.\28\ The Exchange then
disseminates the locked market, and both quotes will be deemed firm.
When the market locks, a counting period will begin during which
Market-Makers may update those quotes (provided a Market-Maker will be
obligated to execute orders eligible for automatic execution at its
disseminated quote). If at the end of the counting period the quotes
remain locked, the locked quotes will automatically execute against
each other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The Exchange proposed to move this provision from current
CBOE Rule 6.14(b)(iii) to proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(c).
    \27\ If a quote inverts another quote, it is subject to CBOE
Rules 6.45A(d)(ii) or 6.45B(d)(ii).
    \28\ See CBOE Rules 6.45A(d)(ii) and 6.45B(d)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under current CBOE Rule 6.14(b)(iii), any counting period under the
quote lock rule may cause the Exchange to disseminate a quote that
locks that of an away exchange. The Exchange has now proposed to amend
the rule to no longer disseminate a lock, and instead will reject an
incoming Market-Maker quote (or unexecuted portion thereof) that locks
or crosses a resting Market-Maker quote at the NBBO.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The Exchange also proposed to amend the rule to not apply
the check when the NBBO is locked, crossed, or unavailable. In
addition, the Exchange proposed to authorize a senior official at
the Exchange's Help Desk to determine not to apply this check in the
interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market. For example, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to disable this check in
response to a market event or market volatility to avoid
inadvertently cancelling quotes not erroneously priced but rather
priced to reflect potentially rapidly changing prices. See Notice,
supra note 3, at 64526. The Exchange represented that, pursuant to
Exchange procedures, any decision to not apply the check and the
reason for such decision will be documented, retained, and
periodically reviewed. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Order Entry, Execution, and Price Parameter Checks

    The Exchange proposed to adopt the following four mandatory
activity-based risk protections under proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(d):\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Other exchanges maintain similar activity-based risk
protections. See, e.g., International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'') Rule 714(d) and MIAX Rule 519A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) the total number of orders (of all order types) and auction
responses entered and accepted by the System (``orders entered'');
    (ii) the total number of contracts (from orders and auction
responses) executed on the System, which does not count executed
contracts from orders submitted from a PAR workstation or an OMT or
stock contracts executed as part of stock-option orders (``contracts
executed'');
    (iii) the total number of orders the System books or routes via the
order handling system \31\ pursuant to the drill through price check
parameter (as amended by this proposed rule change) in proposed Rule
6.13(b)(v)(B) (``drill through events''); and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ As discussed above, orders (or unexecuted portions) that by
their terms cancel if they do not execute immediately will be
cancelled rather than rest in the book for a period of time (as
proposed in this filing) pursuant to the drill through price check
parameter if triggered. According to the Exchange, because these
orders will not book or route pursuant to the drill through price
check parameter, these orders will not be included in the count for
the drill through event check. See Notice, supra note 3, at 64527 n.
33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iv) the total number of orders the System cancels or routes via
the order handling system pursuant to the limit order price parameter
in Rule 6.12(a)(3) through (5) (``price reasonability events'').
    When a TPH exceeds a parameter within one of the time intervals set
by CBOE, the System will (i) reject all subsequent incoming orders and
quotes, (ii) cancel all resting quotes, and (iii) for the orders
entered and contracts executed checks, if the TPH requests, cancel
resting orders in the manner specified by the TPH (either all orders,
orders with time-in-force of day, or orders entered on that trading
day).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Exchange expects the initial time intervals for all
these checks to be set at one and five minutes. The time intervals
set by the Exchange will apply to all TPHs, who will not be able to
change these time intervals. See Notice, supra note 3, at 64527 n.
34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The System will not accept new orders or quotes from a restricted
acronym or login until the Exchange receives the TPH's manual
notification to reactivate its ability to send orders and quotes. While
an acronym or login is restricted, a TPH may continue to interact with
any resting orders (i.e., orders not cancelled pursuant to this
protection) entered prior to its acronym or login becoming restricted,
including receiving trade execution reports and canceling resting
orders.

H. Maximum Contract Size

    The Exchange proposed to adopt a maximum contact size risk control
pursuant to which the System will reject a TPH's incoming order or
quote (including both sides of a two-sided quote) if its size exceeds
the TPH's designated maximum contract size parameter.\33\ Each TPH must
provide a maximum contract size for each of simple orders, complex
orders, and quotes applicable to an acronym or, if the TPH requests, a
login.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(e). The Exchange represented
that other options exchanges have adopted similar functionality. See
Notice, supra note 3, at 64528 n. 40; MIAX Rule 519(b).
    \34\ For purposes of determining the contract size of an
incoming order or quote, the proposed rule states the contract size
of a complex order will equal the contract size of the largest
option leg of the order (i.e., if the order is a stock-option order,
this check will not apply to the stock leg of the order). See
proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(e). If a TPH enters an order or quote to
replace a resting order or update a resting quote, and the System
rejects the incoming order or quote because it exceeds the
applicable maximum contract size, the System also will cancel the
resting order or any resting quote in the same series. In addition,
the Exchange proposed to apply this check to paired orders submitted
to AIM, SAM or as a QCC order. Further, the Exchange proposed that
for an A:AIR order, if the System rejects the agency order, then the
System rejects the contra-side order; however, if the System rejects
the contra-side order, the System still accepts the agency order.
See proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(e)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Kill Switch

    The Exchange further proposed to adopt a kill switch, which will be
on optional tool allowing a TPH to send a message to the System to, or
contact the Exchange Help Desk to request that, the Exchange cancel all
its resting quotes, resting orders (either all orders, orders with
time-in-force of day, or orders entered on that trading day), or both,
and thereafter reject all subsequent incoming quotes and/or orders.\35\
The System will send a TPH an automated message when it has processed a
kill switch request and thereafter will not accept new orders or quotes
from a restricted acronym or login until the Exchange receives the
TPH's manual notification to reactivate its ability to send orders and
quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See proposed CBOE Rule 6.14(f). The Exchange represented
that other options exchanges have adopted similar kill switches. See
Notice, supra note 3, at 64529; BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX'')
Rule 7280 and PHLX Rule 1019(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, the kill switch message will be accepted
by the System in the order of receipt in the queue and will be
processed in that order so that interest already in the System will be
processed prior to the kill switch message.\36\ Moreover, a Market-
Maker's utilization of the kill switch, and subsequent removal of its
quotes, will not diminish or relieve the Market-Maker of its obligation
to provide continuous two-sided quotes. Market-Makers will continue to
be required to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis,
and a Market-Maker's utilization of the kill switch will not prohibit
the Exchange from taking disciplinary action against the Market-Maker
for failing to meet the continuing quoting obligation each trading
day.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 64532.
    \37\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Quote Risk Monitor Mechanism

    Lastly, the Exchange proposed to amend the QRM Mechanism in CBOE
Rule 8.18. Pursuant to the QRM mechanism, a Market-Maker may establish
a (i) maximum number of contracts, (ii) a maximum cumulative percentage
of the original quoted size of

each side of each series, and (iii) the maximum number of series for
which either side of its quote is fully traded, that may trade within a
rolling time period in milliseconds also established by the Market-
Maker. When these parameters are exceeded within the time interval, the
System cancels the Market-Maker's quotes in the class and other classes
with the same underlying on the same trading platform. In addition,
CBOE Rule 8.18 allows Market-Makers or TPH organizations to specify a
maximum number of QRM incidents across all classes on an Exchange-wide
basis. When the Exchange determines that a Market-Maker or TPH
organization has reached its QRM incident limit during the rolling time
interval, the System will cancel all of the Market-Maker's electronic
quotes and Market-Maker orders resting in the book in all option
classes on the Exchange and prevent the Market-Maker or TPH
organization from sending additional quotes or orders to the Exchange
until the Market-Maker reactivates its ability to send quotes or
orders.
    Currently, use of the QRM is optional. The Exchange proposed to
amend CBOE Rule 8.18 to make it mandatory for Market-Makers to enter
values for each parameter for all classes in which they quote.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ The Exchange represented that other options exchanges have
made similar functionality mandatory for all Market-Makers. See
Notice, supra note 3, at 64529; ISE Rule 804(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act \39\
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange.\40\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \41\ 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. The Commission believes that
the proposed rule change is designed to mitigate the likelihood of
orders trading at potentially erroneous prices, clarify when certain
price/risk controls will apply, avoid locking an away market, and
assist TPHs in managing their risk exposure to avoid potentially
harmful and disruptive trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \40\ In approving these proposed rule changes, the Commission
has considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, CBOE is proposing to amend its limit order
price parameter for simple orders to use the NBBO when available in
lieu of the Exchange's previous day's closing price or BBO. To the
extent that the use of the NBBO, when available, rather than the
Exchange's previous day's closing price or BBO, may better reflect the
then current market, it should provide a suitable measure for purposes
of determining the reasonability of the prices of orders. Moreover, the
Commission believes that it is reasonable for CBOE to exclude orders
with a stop contingency or orders routed from a PAR workstation or OMT
from the limit order price check parameter. In particular, application
of the limit order price check parameter to stop contingency orders may
interfere with the application of the stop contingency, and orders
routed from a PAR workstation or OMT may be less likely to execute at
an erroneous price since they are manually reviewed and processed.
    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change to expand the
applicability of the put strike price and call underlying value checks
to market orders \42\ may help TPHs mitigate risks associated with
orders trading at prices that exceed a corresponding benchmark, which
may indicate an execution at a price that is potentially erroneous.
Furthermore, the Commission believes the proposed rule change to
eliminate the flexibility to not apply this check to orders entered
during Extended Trading Hours will provide market participants with
increased certainty regarding the inapplicability of this check.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The checks will not apply to market orders during an
opening rotation since separate price protections will apply during
the opening process. See Notice, supra note 3, at 64525.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes to the drill through price checks provide
additional detail to the rule regarding how the System handles certain
orders that were not exposed prior to trading up to the drill through
price and orders that traded up to the drill through price following
exposure. In addition, allowing the remainder of orders to rest in the
book for a brief time period at the drill through price may benefit
investors by providing an additional opportunity for execution of their
orders. Furthermore, clarifying that an order exposed via HAL pursuant
to the drill through price check will not be exposed at a price worse
than the NBBO is consistent with the current treatment of other orders
exposed via HAL at the NBBO.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See current and proposed CBOE Rule 6.14A(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also believes that the proposed amendments to the
quote inverting NBBO check will provide market participants with
greater clarity that CBOE will not apply the check in the absence of an
NBBO and BBO. In addition, the proposed rule change eliminates the
Exchange's flexibility to apply the check prior to the opening of a
series as well as during a trading halt. Removing this flexibility and
clearly stating when CBOE will not apply the check considerably
enhances the transparency of the functionality.
    With respect to CBOE's proposed changes regarding the execution of
quotes that lock or cross the NBBO (Proposed Rule 6.14(c)), the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act as it is reasonably designed to prevent the dissemination of a
quote that locks or crosses an away market. Moreover, to the extent the
Exchange determines to temporarily deactivate the check in the interest
of maintaining a fair and orderly market, CBOE has represented that all
such decisions by CBOE will be adequately justified, documented,
retained, and periodically reviewed.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See supra note 29 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed risk
protection parameters and mechanisms for orders and quotes are
reasonably designed to provide TPHs with additional tools to assist
them in managing their risk exposure. Specifically, the order entry,
execution, and price parameter rate checks, maximum contract size risk
control, and mandatory use of the QRM may help TPHs to mitigate the
potential risks associated with entering too many orders or quotes,
executing too many contracts, having too many orders rejected because
of price protection parameters, and entering orders or quotes with size
that may be potentially erroneous that may result from, for example,
technology issues with the broker's electronic trading system. To this
extent, these TPH-customizable settings may help act as a backstop to
the TPH's own controls and provide an additional layer of protection
customized to the TPH's self-selected parameters. Moreover, the
Commission notes that other exchanges have

established similar risk protection mechanisms.\45\ The Commission
notes that the proposed functionality, including the cancellation of
any resting interest, must be processed in sequence with other interest
in the System and comply with the firm quote obligations in Rule 602 of
Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See ISE Rules 714(d) & 804(g); MIAX Rules 519(b) & 519A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE will require TPHs and Market-Makers to utilize these risk
protection parameters and mechanisms. However, TPHs and Market-Makers
will have discretion to customize the parameters in accordance with
their respective risk management needs. In light of this flexibility,
the Commission reminds TPHs to be mindful of their obligations, to
among others, seek best execution of orders they handle on an agency
basis and consider their best execution obligations when establishing
parameters for the order entry, execution, price parameter rate checks,
maximum contract size risk control, and QRM.\46\ For example, an
abnormally low order entry parameter should be carefully scrutinized,
particularly if a TPH's order flow to the Exchange contains agency
orders. To the extent that a TPH chooses sensitive parameters and those
parameters apply to connections over which it transmits customer orders
to the Exchange, a TPH should consider the effect of its chosen
settings on its ability to receive a timely execution on marketable
agency orders that it sends to the Exchange in various market
conditions. The Commission cautions brokers considering their best
execution obligations to be aware that an agency order they represent
may be rejected as a result of these risk protections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37619A
(September 6, 1996), 61 FR 48290 (September 12, 1996) (Order
Handling Rules adopting release); 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496,
37537-8 (June 29, 2005) (Regulation NMS adopting release).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, in light of the Exchange's decision not to set maximum
or minimum values, or default values, the Commission expects CBOE to
periodically assess whether these risk protection measures are
operating in a manner that is consistent with the promotion of fair and
orderly markets, including whether not utilizing maximum and minimum
parameters or default values continues to be appropriate and in
accordance with the Act and the rules thereunder.
    Further, the Commission believes that Proposed Rule 6.14(f), which
creates an optional kill switch mechanism, is consistent with the Act
as it may further enhance risk management capabilities of TPHs by
providing them with the ability to manage their risk exposure if they
experience a significant system failure. To the extent that the kill
switch mechanism provides TPHs with an appropriate backstop in this
manner, it may encourage firms to provide liquidity on CBOE and thus
contribute to fair and orderly markets in a manner that protects
investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that the
Exchange represented in its proposal that the kill switch will operate
consistently with a broker-dealer's firm quote obligations pursuant to
Rule 602 of Regulation NMS,\47\ and that the kill switch does not
diminish or relieve a Market-Maker of its obligation to provide
continuous two-sided quotes.\48\ The Exchange also represented that the
kill switch message will be accepted by the System in the order of
receipt in the queue and will be processed in such order. As such, the
System will process interest already in the System prior to receipt of
the kill switch message prior to processing the kill switch
message.\49\ Based on these representations, the Commission believes
that the kill switch is reasonably designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market. Lastly, the Commission notes that other exchanges have
established kill switches that operate in a manner similar to that
proposed by CBOE.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 64532.
    \48\ See id.
    \49\ See id.
    \50\ See, e.g., BOX Rule 7280(b) and PHLX Rule 1019(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission believes that the proposal to authorize
CBOE to share with Clearing TPHs the risk mitigation settings selected
by a TPH for whom the Clearing TPH clears may assist Clearing TPHs
manage their clearing risk exposure. The Commission notes that other
exchanges have adopted similar rules authorizing the sharing of similar
risk settings with clearing members.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See, e.g., MIAX Rule 500; BX Chapter VI, Section 20; NYSE
Arca Rule 6.2A(a); NYSE MKT Rule 902.1NY(a); and PHLX Rule 1016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule
Change

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 1
to 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-2016-053 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-2016-053. 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-CBOE-2016-053, and should be
submitted on or before December 1, 2016.

V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the amended proposal in the
Federal Register. In Amendment No. 1,\52\ CBOE clarified in its drill
through rule text the exposure price of an order via HAL as CBOE had
described it in the Notice. Amendment

No. 1 further clarified CBOE's background discussion of how quotes and
orders are cancelled pursuant to the QRM Mechanism in order to
harmonize the description of the existing rule with the text of Rule
8.18. Both of these changes are consistent with the proposal as
initially filed, and simply add detail to the filing to resolve
internal inconsistencies. The changes do not introduce material, new,
or novel concepts. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\53\ to approve the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 4.
    \53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\54\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2016-053), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See id.
    \55\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\55\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-27153 Filed 11-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13831-13832]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010]

Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Committee management; request for applicants for appointment to
the Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy.

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

SUMMARY: The National Fire Academy (Academy) is requesting individuals
who are interested in serving on the Board of Visitors for the National
Fire Academy (Board) to apply for appointment as identified in this
notice. Pursuant to the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of
1974, the Board shall review annually the programs of the Academy and
shall make recommendations to the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Administrator, through the United States Fire Administrator,
regarding the operation of the Academy and any improvements that the
Board deems appropriate. The Board is composed of eight (8) members,
all of whom are experts and leaders in the fields of fire safety, fire
prevention, fire control, research and development in fire protection,
treatment and rehabilitation of fire victims, or local government
services management, which includes emergency medical services. The
Academy seeks to appoint individuals to four (4) positions on the Board
that will be open due to term expiration. If other positions are
vacated during the application process, candidates may be selected from
the pool of applicants to fill the vacated positions.

DATES: Applications will be accepted until 11:59 p.m. EST March 30,
2017.

ADDRESSES: The preferred method of submission is via email. However,
applications may also be submitted by mail. Please only submit by ONE
of the following methods:
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: National Fire Academy, U.S. Fire Administration,
Attention: Ruth MacPhail, 16825 South Seton Avenue, Emmitsburg,
Maryland 21727-8998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirby Kiefer, Alternate Designated
Federal Officer, National Fire Academy, 16825 South Seton Avenue,
Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727-8998; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; and email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board is an advisory committee
established in accordance with the provision of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. Appendix. The purpose of the Board is to
review annually the programs of the Academy and advise the FEMA
Administrator on the operation of the Academy and any improvements
therein that the Board deems appropriate. In carrying out its
responsibilities, the Board examines Academy programs to determine
whether these programs further the basic missions that are approved by
the FEMA Administrator, examines the physical plant of the Academy to
determine the adequacy of the Academy's facilities, and examines the
funding levels for Academy programs. The Board submits a written annual
report through the United States Fire Administrator to the FEMA
Administrator. The report provides detailed comments and
recommendations regarding the operation of the Academy.
    Individuals who are interested in serving on the Board are invited
to apply for consideration for

appointment. There is no application form; however, a current resume
will be required. The appointment shall be for a term of up to three
years. Individuals selected for appointment shall serve as Special
Government Employees (SGEs), defined in section 202(a) of title 18,
United States Code. Candidates selected for appointment will be
required to complete a Confidential Financial Disclosure Form (Office
of Government Ethics (OGE) Form 450).
    The Board shall meet as often as needed to fulfill its mission, but
not less than twice each fiscal year to address its objectives and
duties. The Board will meet in person at least once each fiscal year
with additional meetings held via teleconference. Board members may be
reimbursed for travel and per diem incurred in the performance of their
duties as members of the Board. All travel for Board business must be
approved in advance by the Designated Federal Officer. To the extent
practical, Board members shall serve on any subcommittee that is
established.
    FEMA does not discriminate in employment on the basis of race,
color, religion, sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual
orientation, gender identity, marital status, disability and genetic
information, age, membership in an employee organization, or other non-
merit factor. FEMA strives to achieve a diverse candidate pool for all
its recruitment actions.
    Current DHS employees, contractors, and potential contractors will
not be considered for membership. Federally registered lobbyists will
not be considered for membership.

    Dated: March 7, 2017.
Kirby E. Kiefer,
Acting Superintendent, National Fire Academy, United States Fire
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-05158 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-45-P