[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65258-65263]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27086]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76203; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-088]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Disaster Recovery

October 20, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 8, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed
rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.18 relating to disaster
recovery. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.18 relating to disaster
recovery. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to update Rule 6.18 to
further describe the Exchange's back-up systems, the circumstances
under which they may be used, and the testing that the Exchange may
conduct to ensure the availability, functionality and performance of
such systems. Additionally, the Exchange proposes certain updates to
Rule 6.18 in response to new disaster recovery regulations and business
resumption standards recently adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') as promulgated in Regulation
Systems Compliance and Integrity (``Regulation SCI'') under the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR 72252 (December 5, 2014) (Regulation Systems Compliance
and Integrity) (File No. S7-01-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    The Exchange adopted Rule 6.18 in 2006 for the limited purpose of
providing alternative means of operation in the event of a physical
disaster. In particular, Rule 6.18, as originally adopted, was intended
to deal with trading floor closures, providing for the operation of a
``Disaster Recovery Facility'' (``DRF'') in the event that a disaster
or other unusual circumstance rendered the trading floor inoperable.\6\

Under original Rule 6.18, if the Exchange were forced to halt trading
due to a disaster or other physical impairment of its trading floor,
the Exchange and its members \7\ could operate remotely in a screen-
based only environment from the DRF while the trading floor was
unavailable. While operating from the DRF, open outcry trading would be
suspended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54171 (July 19,
2006), 71 FR 42427 (July 26, 2006) (Order Approving Proposed Rule
Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Regarding a Disaster Recovery
Facility) (SR-CBOE-2006-001[sic]).
    \7\ Prior to its demutualization in 2010, the Exchange was a
member-owned organization. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
62382 (June 25, 2010), 75 FR 38164 (July 1, 2010) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Conforming Changes in Connection With Demutualization) (SR-CBOE-
2010-058).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2012, Rule 6.18 was amended in connection with the Exchange's
relocation of its primary data center to the East Coast and the
consequent conversion of its former primary data center to a back-up
data center in Chicago.\8\ Specifically, Rule 6.18 was amended to deal
with newly possible situations in which the primary data center could
continue to operate despite the trading floor being rendered inoperable
or in which the back-up data center might be used despite the trading
floor being operational. Specifically, as amended, Rule 6.18 provided
that in the event that the Exchange were forced to switch operations to
the back-up data center, the Exchange's trading floor could still be
used and that in the event that the trading floor were inoperable, the
Exchange could still operate using a floorless configuration or screen-
based only environment on the Exchange's primary data center.
References to the DRF and other irrelevant portions of the original
rule were eliminated or replaced with references to [sic] Exchange's
primary and back-up data centers as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68301 (November 27,
2012), 77 FR 71650 (December 3, 2012) (Notice of Filing and Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Amend CBOE
Rule 6.18 Concerning the Exchange's Disaster Recovery Facility) (SR-
CBOE-2012-111).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to adding greater detail to the Exchange's disaster
recovery rules in Rule 6.18, the Exchange proposes to make updates to
Rule 6.18 to harmonize its disaster recovery rules with the newly
implemented disaster recovery-related regulatory imperatives of
Regulation SCI. Regulation SCI supersedes and replaces the SEC's
voluntary Automation Review Policy (``ARP''), established by the
Commission's two policy statements each titled ``Automated Systems of
Self-Regulatory Organizations,'' issued in 1989 and 1991, expanding
existing practices and making them mandatory.\9\ As part of Regulation
SCI, the Exchange is required to maintain back-up and recovery
capabilities with sufficient resiliency and geographical diversity and
that are reasonably designed to achieve next business-day resumption of
trading and two-hour resumption of critical systems following a wide-
scale disruption.\10\ The Exchange must also participate in at least
annual testing of its business continuity and disaster recovery plans
and, to that end, develop and adopt standards to designate which of its
TPHs must participate in testing in order to reasonably ensure the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market if the Exchange's disaster
recovery plan must be activated.\11\ Although the Exchange's current
Rules provide the Exchange sufficient authority to meet its disaster
recovery-related obligations under Regulation SCI, the Exchange
believes that certain clarifying updates to the Rules are warranted in
light of Regulation SCI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR at 72252 (December 5, 2014) (Regulation Systems
Compliance and Integrity) (File No. S7-01-13).
    \10\ 17 CFR 242.1001(a)(2)(v).
    \11\ Id. at 242.1004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Changes
    The Exchange proposes to make changes to Rule 6.18 to provide
additional details regarding the Exchange's back-up trading systems and
business continuity and disaster recovery plans activation and testing.
As discussed above, the Exchange also seeks to update its disaster
recovery rules to ensure consistency with Regulation SCI.
    Current Rule 6.18 is divided into five sections, (a) through (e).
Rule 6.18(a) authorizes the Exchange to maintain a back-up data center
to preserve the Exchange's ability to trade options in the event the
Exchange's primary data center becomes inoperable or otherwise
unavailable for use. Rule 6.18(a) also authorizes the Exchange to
operate in a screen-based only environment using a floorless
configuration in the event that the trading floor becomes inoperable.
Rule 6.18(b) describes the notice that must be given prior to
commencing trading on back-up data center systems. Rule 6.18(c)
describes the rules that would be in effect if the Exchange were to
switch its trading operations to the back-up data center and the rules
that would be suspended if the Exchange were to operate in a screen-
based only environment using a floorless configuration in the event
that the trading floor becomes inoperable. Rule 6.18(d), prescribes
that TPHs are required to take appropriate actions as instructed by the
Exchange to accommodate the Exchange's ability to trade options via the
back-up data center. Finally, current Rule 6.18(e) provides that
nothing in 6.18 precludes the Exchange from entering into agreements to
trade options elsewhere in accordance with Rule 6.16 (Back-up Trading
Arrangements) in the event that the Exchange's trading floor is
rendered inoperable.
    The Exchange proposes to make rule changes to Rule 6.18 that would
leave the current rule largely intact, but reorganized with detail
added to each section of the current rule. Under proposed Rule 6.18(a)
(General), rather than explaining the Exchange's back-up data center
and alternative disaster-related trading configurations in the
introductory section, the Exchange would adopt a general statement
regarding the purpose of its disaster recovery rules, providing that
the Exchange maintains business continuity and disaster recovery plans
that may be effected in the interests of the continued operation of
fair and orderly markets in the event of a systems failure, disaster,
or other unusual circumstances that might threaten the ability to
conduct business on the Exchange. The content of current Rule 6.18(a)
would be moved from the general section of Rule 6.18(a) to proposed
Rule 6.18(b) regarding the Exchange's back-up data center.
    Proposed Rule 6.18(b) (Back-up Data Center), would mirror current
Rule 6.18(a), but would include a definitive statement that the
Exchange maintains a back-up data center in order to preserve the
Exchange's ability to conduct business in the event the Exchange's
primary data center becomes inoperable or otherwise unavailable for
use, rather than providing that the Exchange may maintain such back-up
facilities. The Exchange also proposes to change the text of current
Rule 6.18(a) in proposed Rule 6.18(b) to provide that the Exchange
maintains a back-up data center in order to preserve the Exchange's
ability to conduct business in the event the Exchange's primary data
center becomes inoperable or otherwise unavailable for use, rather than
to preserve only the Exchange's ability to trade options. This proposed
rule change reflects the fact that the Exchange is engaged in business
activities other than just the trading of options, including, but not
limited to providing market data services and conducting regulatory
functions.
    Whereas the Exchange's current rules provide that the Exchange may
determine to switch operations from the primary data center to the
back-up data

center due to a disaster or other unusual circumstances, proposed Rule
6.18(b) would add the scenario of a significant systems failure to the
list of causes that may trigger an operational switch to the Exchange's
back-up data center. The proposed addition of significant systems
failures to the list of scenarios that may trigger an operational
switch to the Exchange's back-up data center is intended to more
acutely reflect the realities of electronic trading environments and
contemporary threats posed to the operation of fair and orderly
markets. The statements in current Rule 6.18(a) regarding contingent
alternative plans in the event that the Exchange's trading floor
becomes inoperable would be removed from the section and relocated to
proposed Rule 6.18(c) (Loss of Trading Floor), which would be dedicated
to the details of the Exchange's authority in the event that the
Exchange trading floor becomes inoperable. In addition to the
reformulation of the description of the Exchange's back-up data center
in proposed Rule 6.18(b), proposed Rule 6.18(b) would also contain
subsections setting forth the notice, applicable rules, and Trading
Permit Holder (``TPH'') preparations provisions currently contained in
Rules 6.18(b) through (d).
    Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(i) (Back-up Data Center Functionality), would
make clear the functional and performance standards that the back-up
data center must be reasonably designed to achieve. Specifically,
proposed Rule 6.18(b)(i) would provide that the Exchange maintains a
back-up data center that the Exchange has determined is reasonably
designed to achieve prompt resumption of systems in [sic] manner
consistent with the Exchange's obligations under Regulation SCI.\12\
Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(i) would also provide that nothing in the
provisions of proposed Rule 6.18(b) shall be interpreted to require the
Exchange to develop or maintain a back-up data center designed to fully
replicate the capacity, latency, and other features of the primary data
center. This statement attempts to make clear that in order to preserve
the Exchange's ability to conduct business in the event the Exchange's
primary data center becomes inoperable or otherwise unavailable for
use, the Exchange must maintain a back-up data center that is
reasonably designed achieve resumption of systems in a manner
consistent with Regulation SCI during a significant systems failure,
disaster or other unusual circumstances, rather than replicate the
Exchange's primary data center systems. The Exchange believes that the
standards set forth in proposed Rule 6.18(b)(i) are reasonable to help
ensure the maintenance of fair and orderly markets in the event of a
significant systems failure, disaster or other unusual circumstances
and are consistent with provisions in the release language of
Regulation SCI.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Among other things, Regulation SCI requires that the
Exchange ``establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to ensure that its SCI systems . . .
have levels of capacity, integrity, resiliency, availability, and
security, adequate to maintain . . . [sic] [the Exchange's]
operational capability and promote the maintenance of fair and
orderly markets.'' See 17 CFR 242.1001(a)(1). With respect to
business continuity and disaster recovery plans, such standards mean
that, at a minimum, the Exchange shall maintain ``backup and
recovery capabilities sufficiently resilient and geographically
diverse [sic] that they [sic] are reasonably designed to achieve
next business day resumption of trading and two-hour resumption of
critical SCI systems following a wide-scale disruption.'' See id. at
Sec.  242.1001(a)(2)(v).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR at 72353 (December 5, 2014) (Regulation Systems
Compliance and Integrity) (File No. S7-01-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(ii) (Notice), would be the same as current
Rule 6.18(b) and provide that prior to commencing trading on the back-
up data center, the Exchange shall announce publicly the classes that
will be available for trading. Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iii) (Applicable
Rules) would be the same as current Rule 6.18(c) and provide that the
same rules that apply to trading using primary data center systems
would be applicable to trading on back-up data center systems. The
applicable rule exceptions with respect to the suspension of open
outcry trading on the floor, however, would be removed from proposed
Rule 6.18(b)(iii) and relocated to proposed Rule 6.18(c) (Loss of
Trading Floor). Accordingly, proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iii) would provide
that in the event the primary data center becomes inoperable, trading
will continue using the back-up data center and all trading rules will
remain in effect. Consistent with current Rule 6.18(c), the proposed
rule would also contain the provisions that only conduct permissible
pursuant to trading rules that are in force shall be allowed via the
back-up data center and that all non-trading rules of the Exchange
shall continue to apply.
    Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv) (Trading Permit Holder Participation)
regarding testing of the Exchange's back-up data center would contain
provisions similar to current Rule 6.18(d) (Trading Permit Holder
Preparations), but add subparagraphs to more clearly articulate the
Exchange's authority to conduct testing of its back-up data center
systems. Thus, similar to current Rule 6.18(d), proposed Rule
6.18(b)(iv) would provide that TPHs are required to take appropriate
actions as instructed by the Exchange to accommodate the Exchange's
ability to trade options via the back-up data center. Similar to the
proposed changes to the text of current Rule 6.18(a) with respect to
the purpose for which the Exchange maintains a back-up data center, for
the reasons discussed above, the Exchange also proposes changing the
rule text in proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv) to provide that TPHs are
required to take appropriate actions as instructed by the Exchange to
accommodate the Exchange's ability to conduct business via the back-up
data center, rather than solely to accommodate the Exchange's ability
to conduct business [sic]. Under the proposed rule change, the title of
current Rule 6.18(d) (Trading Permit Holder Preparations) would also be
changed in proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv) (Trading Permit Holder
Participation) to better describe the purpose of the rule provisions.
    Subsections (A) through (C) of proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv) are
designed to harmonize the Exchange's back-up data center testing rules
with certain provisions of Regulation SCI. Under proposed Rule
6.18(b)(iv)(A) (Designated BCP/DR Participants), the Exchange shall
designate those Trading Permit Holders that the Exchange determines
are, as a whole, necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets in the event of the activation of the Exchange's business
continuity and disaster recovery plans (``Designated BCP/DR
Participants''). Under proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(A)(1), Designated BCP/
DR Participants will be identified based on criteria determined by the
Exchange and announced via Regulatory Circular, which may include
whether the Trading Permit Holder (``TPH'') is an appointed Designated
Primary Market-Maker (``DPM''), Lead Market-Maker (``LMM'') or Market-
Maker in a class and the quality of markets provided by the DPM, LMM,
or Market-Maker,\14\ the amount of volume transacted by the market
participant in a class or on the Exchange in general, operational
capacity, trading experience, and historical contribution to fair and
orderly markets on the Exchange. Under proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(A)(2),
Designated BCP/DR Participants shall include, at a minimum, all Market-
Makers in option

classes exclusively listed on the Exchange that stream quotes in such
classes and all DPMs in multiply listed option classes. Although under
the proposed rule, Designated BCP/DR Participants would definitively
include all Market-Makers in option classes exclusively listed on the
Exchange that stream quotes in such classes and all DPMs in multiply
listed option classes, the proposed rule would leave open the
possibility that other market participants might be designated by the
Exchange as Designated BCP/DR Participants based on certain of the
criteria listed in proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(A)(1) and announced via
Regulatory Circular. Any changes to the standards by which a market
participant might be determined to be a Designated BCP/DR Participant
would be applied prospectively with reasonable advance notice as
announced via Regulatory Circular. The Exchange would first announce
the criteria by which market participants would be determined to be
Designated BCP/DR Participants by November 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Among other things, quality of markets provided refers to
the average size quoted in a class, percentage quoting on NBBO, how
many series are quoted in a class, and how many calendar months out
from present day a participant normally quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has attempted to model the provisions of proposed Rule
6.18(b)(iv)(A) based on provisions of Regulation SCI, which require the
Exchange to establish standards for the designation of those members or
participants that the Exchange reasonably determines are, taken as a
whole, the minimum number of members or participants necessary for the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets in the event of the activation
of its business continuity and disaster recovery plans.\15\ Also
consistent with Regulation SCI, proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(B) (Fair and
Orderly Market Conditions) would make clear that nothing in proposed
Rule 6.18(b) would require the Exchange to assume that average levels
of liquidity, depth, or other characteristics of a usual trading
session must be present in order to achieve a fair and orderly market
in the event of the activation of the Exchange's business continuity
and disaster recovery plans.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 17 CFR 242.1004(a)-(b).
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR at 72353 (December 5, 2014) (Regulation Systems
Compliance and Integrity) (File No. S7-01-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(C) (Business Continuity and Disaster
Recovery Plans Testing), would provide that The [sic] Exchange shall
require Designated BCP/DR Participants and may require other market
participants to participate in scheduled business continuity and
disaster recovery plans tests in the manner and frequency prescribed by
the Exchange. Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(C) would set forth the
Exchange's authority to conduct testing of business continuity and
disaster recovery plans and obtain assistance from Designated BCP/DR
Participants and other market participants in conducting such tests.
The Exchange notes that the provisions of proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(C)
are consistent with the Exchange's current rules \17\ as well as
provisions of Regulation SCI pertaining to business continuity and
disaster recovery plan testing.\18\ Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(C)(1)
(Documentation and Reports), would provide that the Exchange may
require Designated BCP/DR Participants and/or other market participants
to provide documentation and reports regarding tests conducted pursuant
to Rule 6.18, including related data and information, as may be
requested by the Exchange, and in the manner and frequency prescribed
by the Exchange. Proposed Rule 6.18(b)(iv)(C)(2) (Notice), would
provide that the Exchange will provide reasonable prior notice of
scheduled business continuity and disaster recovery plans tests to
Trading Permit Holders, which notice shall describe the general nature
of the test(s) and identify the Trading Permit Holders required to
participate and shall be announced via Regulatory Circular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Rules 6.23A (Trading Permit Holder Connectivity);
6.18(d) (Trading Permit Holder Preparations).
    \18\ See 17 CFR 242.1004(a)-(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.18(c) (Loss of Trading Floor), would be
substantially similar to provisions in current Rule 6.18(a) (General),
regarding loss of the trading floor, which would be removed from
proposed Rule 6.18(b) (Back-up Data Center) and more appropriately
placed in a separate section regarding the Exchange's trading floor
facilities. Under proposed Rule 6.18(c), if the Exchange trading floor
were to become inoperable, the Exchange would have the authority to
continue to operate in a screen-based only environment using a
floorless configuration of the Hybrid Trading System located in the
primary data center that is operational while the trading floor is
inoperable. The Exchange would operate using this configuration only
until the Exchange's trading floor facility is operational and open
outcry trading would not be available in the event the trading floor
becomes inoperable, except in accordance with Rule 6.16 (Back-up
Trading Arrangements), as applicable.
    Proposed Rule 6.18(c)(i) (Applicable Rules), would mirror current
Rule 6.18(c) (Applicable Rules), except that the current rule would be
updated in proposed Rule 6.18(c)(i) to include additional rules
pertaining to open outcry trading, including, but not limited to Rule
6.12A (Public Automated Routing System (PAR)) and Rule 7.12 (PAR
Official). Thus, under proposed Rule 6.18(c)(i), in the event that the
trading floor becomes inoperable, trading would be conducted pursuant
to all applicable Hybrid System rules, except that open-outcry rules
would not be in force. In these circumstances, a non-exclusive list of
open outcry trading rules that would not apply would include either
all, or some portion of, Rules 6.2, 6.2A, 6.8, 6.8B, 6.9, 6.12; 6.12A,
6.13A, 6.20, 6.22, 6.23, 6.45, 6.47, 6.54, 6.74, 7.12, 8.15, and
8.17.\19\ Proposed Rule 6.18(c)(ii) (Other Back-up Trading
Arrangements), would be similar to current Rule 6.18(e), making clear
that proposed Rule 6.18 would not preclude the Exchange from conducting
business on the floor of another exchange pursuant to Rule 6.16 (Back-
up Trading Arrangements), in the event the trading floor is rendered
inoperable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In an effort to shorten and simply [sic] the Exchange's
disaster recovery rule, the Exchange proposes to eliminate redundant
parenthetical information referencing the titles of each of the
rules cited in Rule 6.18. The rules and respective titles of the
rules cited in proposed Rule 6.18(c)(i) include the following: 6.2
(Trading Rotations); 6.2A (Rapid Opening System); 6.8 (RAES
Operations); 6.8B (Automatic ORS Order Execution Against Booked
Orders); 6.9 (Solicited Transactions); 6.12 (CBOE Hybrid Order
Handling System); 6.12A (Public Automated Routing System (PAR));
6.13A (Simple Auction Liaison (SAL)); 6.20 (Admission to and Conduct
on the Trading Floor; Trading Permit Holder Education); 6.22
(Trading by Trading Permit Holders on the Floor); 6.23 (Trading
Permit Holder Wires from Floor [sic]); 6.45 (Priority of Bids and
Offers--Allocation of Trades); 6.47 (Priority on Split-Price
Transactions Occurring in Open Outcry); 6.54 (Accommodation
Liquidations (Cabinet Trades)); 6.74 (Crossing Orders); 7.12 (PAR
Official); 8.15 (Lead Market-Makers and Supplemental Market-Makers
in Hybrid 3.0 Classes); and 8.17 (Stopping of Option Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \20\ and Regulation SCI.\21\ Specifically, the Exchange believes
the proposed rule change is consistent with the section 6(b)(5) \22\
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) \23\ requirement that the rules
of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ See 17 CFR 242.1001(a) and 1004.
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change is designed to promote the
Exchange's ability to ensure the continued operation of a fair and
orderly market in the event of a systems failure, disaster, or other
unusual circumstances that might threaten the ability to conduct
business on the Exchange. The Exchange recognizes that switching
operations to the back-up data center may occur in times of uncertainty
or great volatility in the markets. It is at these times that the
investors may have the greatest need for viable, trustworthy
marketplaces. The proposed rule changes seek to ensure that such a
marketplace will exist when most needed. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule protects investors in the most
fundamental sense by helping to ensure that a fair and orderly market
will exist at a time when such a market may be most needed.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change promotes
just and equitable principles of trade by adding detail and clarity to
the Rules. The proposed rule change seeks to provide additional clarity
to the Exchange's disaster recovery rules, putting all market
participants on notice as to how the Exchange will function in case of
significant systems disruption or other disaster situation. The
Exchange is continuously updating the Rules to provide additional
detail, clarity, and transparency regarding its operations and trading
systems and regulatory authority. The Exchange believes that the
adoption of detailed, clear, and transparent rules reduces burdens on
competition and promotes just and equitable principles of trade. The
Exchange also believes that adding greater detail to the Rules
regarding the Exchange's ability to ensure the continuous operation of
the market and preserve the ability to conduct business on the Exchange
will increase confidence in the markets and encourage wider
participation in the markets and greater investment. Finally, the
Exchange notes that proposed Rule 6.18 is designed to harmonize the
Exchange's disaster recovery rules with Regulation SCI under the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the proposed rule
change will help ensure that competitive markets remain operative in
the event of a systems failure or other disaster event. The Exchange
notes that the proposed rule change is designed to clarify the
Exchange's authority to require market participants to participate in,
and provide necessary liquidity to ensure fair and orderly markets. The
Exchange further notes that the proposed rule change is designed to
ensure competitive markets in that it is designed around the mandates
of Regulation SCI, which each of the national securities exchanges is
required to satisfy.

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 written comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Commission deems this requirement to have been met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \26\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \27\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. According to the Exchange, the proposed rule change does not
present any novel or controversial issues. Rather, the Exchange is
merely reorganizing its existing rule, updating cross-references to
incorporate previously adopted rules, or adding provisions that are
consistent with or required by Regulation SCI. In addition, the
Exchange has represented that much of the proposed rule change is
already permitted under the Exchange's existing rule. Accordingly, the
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest as
it will allow the Exchange to incorporate changes required under
Regulation SCI, such as establishing standards for designating BCP/DR
Participants, prior to the November 3, 2015 compliance date. Therefore,
the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon
filing.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2015-088 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities

and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-088. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-088, and should be
submitted on or before November 16, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-27086 Filed 10-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Sir,

Presently, judicial probate review before the U S Supreme Courts of the matter of the probate of the Benjamin and George Story Estates accounts for concerns of the to be determined assets that comprise of small medical devices.

A formal Notice of Application towards a Stay of Execution of Judgment has been filed with the U S Supreme Court towards formal transfer of assets within the city of New Orleans, Louisiana.  A judgment entered by the Eastern Civil District of Louisiana 72-1695 accounts for said land assets and other assets where the terms "unknown owners" of land and the term estate is articulated within said federal filing.

Additionally, filed before the Federal Communications Commission is that of a Fortfeiture, Notice of Violations that accounts for practices of the defendants of the U S Supreme Court Case Citation 04M76 that illustrates misuse of small medical devices employed within broadcast facilities possibly due to the March 13, 2001 Memorandum issued by the FCC that permits select broadcasting the capacity to employ the use of small medical devices.

Hopes exist a general assessment of all assets comprised of medical devices of any kind shall be prepared prior to the end of the year.

Baroness, Lady Sonia Marie McMorris d.b.a. Tigris Blanca Viscountess of the Charge D'Affair Blanca Maison D'Ecole