[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 29700]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12475]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 4827-003]

Mill Shoals Hydro Company, Inc.; High Shoals, LLC; Notice of
Transfer of Exemption

    1. By letter filed April 24, 2015,\1\ William B. Conway, Jr.,
Counsel for Enel Green Power North America, Inc. (EGPNA),\2\ informed
the Commission that the exemption from licensing for the High Shoals
Project, FERC No. 4827, originally issued November 10, 1981,\3\ has
been transferred to High Shoals, LLC, an affiliate of Enel Green Power.
The project is located on the Catawba River in Gaston County, North
Carolina. The transfer of an exemption does not require Commission
approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Seventeen other exempted projects which are to be
transferred were included in the April 24, 2015 letter. These
exemptions will be handled under separate proceedings.
    \2\ Enel Green Power North America, Inc. is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Enel Green Power. Enel Green Power is a well-
capitalized publicly traded company.
    \3\ 17 FERC ] 62,224, Order Granting Exemption from Licensing of
a Small Hydroelectric Project of 5 Megawatts or Less and Denying
Application for Preliminary Permit (1981).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. High Shoals, LLC is now the exemptee of the High Shoals Project,
FERC No. 4827. All correspondence should be forwarded to: High Shoals,
LLC, c/o Enel Green Power North America, Inc., Attn: General Counsel, 1
Tech Drive, Suite 220, Andover, MA 01810.

    Dated: May 18, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12475 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 96 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28719-28721]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12016]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74948; File No. SR-EDGA-2015-18]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related To
Fees for Use of EDGA Exchange, Inc.

May 13, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 30, 2015, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend its fees and rebates
applicable to Members \5\ of the Exchange pursuant to EDGA Rule 15.1(a)
and (c) (``Fee Schedule'') to: (i) Decrease the rebate for orders
yielding Flag BY, which routes to the BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'')
and removes liquidity using routing strategies Destination Specific
(``DIRC''), ROUC, ROUE, ROBB, or ROCO; \6\ (ii) amend the criteria for
the MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier; and (iii) make an
immaterial, non-substantive change. Changes to the fee schedule
pursuant to this proposal are effective upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer, or any person associated with a registered broker or dealer
[sic], that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A
Member will have the status of a ``member'' of the Exchange as that
term is defined in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act.'' See Exchange Rule
1.5(n).
    \6\ The DIRC, ROUC, ROUE, ROBB, or ROCO routing strategies are
set forth in Exchange Rule 11.11(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts 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: (i) Decrease the rebate for orders
yielding Flag BY, which routes to BYX and removes liquidity using
routing strategies DIRC, ROUC, ROUE, ROBB, or ROCO; (ii) amend the
criteria for the MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier; and
(iii) make an immaterial, non-substantive change.
Flag BY
    In securities priced at or above $1.00, the Exchange currently
provides a rebate of $0.00160 per share for Members' orders that yield
Flag BY, which routes to BYX and removes

liquidity using routing strategies DIRC, ROUC, ROUE, ROBB, or ROCO. The
Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to decrease the rebate for
orders that yield Flag BY to $0.00150 per share in securities priced at
or above $1.00.\7\ The proposed change represents a pass through of the
rate BATS Trading, Inc. (``BATS Trading''), the Exchange's affiliated
routing broker-dealer, is provided for routing orders to BYX that
remove liquidity. The proposed change is in response to BYX's May 2015
fee change where BYX decreased its rebate from $0.00160 per share to
$0.00150 per share for orders in securities priced at or above
$1.00.\8\ When BATS Trading routes to and removes liquidity from BYX,
it will now receive a standard rebate of $0.00150 per share. BATS
Trading will pass through the rebate provided by BYX to the Exchange
and the Exchange, in turn, will pass through this rate to its Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange does not propose to amend its fee for orders
that yield Flag BY in securities priced below $1.00.
    \8\ See BYX Exchange Fee Schedule Changes Effective May 1, 2015
available at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/fee_schedule/2015/BATS-BYX-Exchange-BZX-Exchange-EDGA-Exchange-and-EDGX-Exchange-Fee-Schedule-Changes-Effective-May-1-2015.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier
    The Exchange proposes to amend the criteria for the MidPoint
Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier. Under the tier, a Member qualifies
for a reduced fee of $0.0003 per share where that Member: (i) Adds an
ADV of at least 0.25% of the TCV including non-displayed orders that
add liquidity; and (ii) adds or removes an ADV of at least 1,500,000
shares yielding fee codes DM or DT. Fee code DM is applied to Non-
Displayed orders that add liquidity using MidPoint Discretionary orders
\9\ and fee code DT is applied to Non-Displayed orders that remove
liquidity using MidPoint Discretionary Orders. Orders that yield fee
code DM or fee code DT that do not meet to the criteria of the MidPoint
Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier are charged a fee of $0.00050 per
share. The Exchange now proposes to decrease the ADV requirement to
require that a Member add or remove an ADV of at least 500,000 shares
yielding fee codes DM or DT. Easing the criteria of the MidPoint
Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier is intended to further incentive
Members to submit an increased number of MidPoint Discretionary orders
to the Exchange, thereby increasing the liquidity on the Exchange at
the midpoint of the National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Exchange Rule 11.8(e) for a description of MidPoint
Discretionary orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-Substantive Changes
    The Exchange also proposes to make an immaterial, non-substantive
change to its Fee Schedule by removing ``, Inc.'' from the reference to
the Exchange in the heading of the Fee Schedule. This non-substantive
change is intended to make the reference to the Exchange in the heading
of the Fee Schedule consistent with the manner in which its affiliated
exchanges \10\ are referenced in their respective fee schedules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange's affiliated exchanges are BATS Exchange,
Inc., BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., and EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''). The
Exchange understands that EDGX also intends to file a proposed rule
change with the Commission making a similar change to how EDGX is
referenced in the heading of its fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its Fee
Schedule on May 1, 2015.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\12\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly-
competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive
pricing structure designed to incent [sic] market participants to
direct their order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rates are equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply
uniformly to all Members. The Exchange believes the fees and credits
remain competitive with those charged by other venues and therefore
continue to be reasonable and equitably allocated to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flag BY
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to decrease the rebate for
orders that yield Flag BY represents an equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Members and other
persons using its facilities. Prior to the BYX's May 2015 fee change,
BYX provided BATS Trading a rebate of $0.00160 per share to remove
liquidity in securities priced at or above $1.00, which BATS Trading
passed through to the Exchange and the Exchange provided its Members.
When BATS Trading routes to BYX, it will now be provided a rebate of
$0.00150 per share. The Exchange does not levy additional fees or offer
additional rebates for orders that it routes to BYX through BATS
Trading. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the proposed change to
Flag BY is equitable and reasonable because it accounts for the pricing
changes on BYX, which enables the Exchange to provide its Members the
applicable pass-through rebate. Lastly, the Exchange notes that routing
through BATS Trading is voluntary and believes that the proposed change
is non-discriminatory because it applies uniformly to all Members.
MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier
    The Exchange believes amending the criteria for the MidPoint
Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier represents an equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Members and other
persons using its facilities because it is designed to further
incentivize Members to increase their use of MidPoint Discretionary
orders on EDGA. MidPoint Discretionary Orders increase displayed
liquidity on the Exchange while also enhancing execution opportunities
at the mid-point of the NBBO. Promotion of displayed liquidity at the
NBBO enhances market quality for all Members. Members utilizing
MidPoint Discretionary orders provide liquidity at the midpoint of the
NBBO increasing the potential for an order to receive price
improvement, and easing the tier's criteria so that Members may be
eligible for a decreased fee is a reasonable means by which to
encourage the use of such orders. In addition, the Exchange believes
that by encouraging the use of MidPoint Discretionary orders by easing
the tier's criteria, Members seeking price improvement would be more
motivated to direct their orders to EDGA because they would have a
heightened expectation of the availability of liquidity at the midpoint
of the NBBO. The Exchange also believes that the proposed addition of
the MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier is non-discriminatory
because it will be available to all Members.
Non-Substantive Changes
    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to its Fee
Schedule is reasonable because it is not designed to amend any fee, nor
alter the manner in which it assesses fees or calculates rebates. This
non-substantive change to

the Fee Schedule is intended to make the reference to the Exchange in
the heading of the Fee Schedule consistent with the manner in which its
affiliated exchanges are referenced in their respective fee schedules,
thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protecting investors and the public interest.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange believes its proposed amendments to its Fee Schedule
would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
does not believe that the proposed change represents a significant
departure from previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing
offered by the Exchange's competitors. Additionally, Members may opt to
disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that alternatives offer
them better value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed change will impair the ability of Members or competing venues
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
Fee Code BY
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to pass through the amended
rebate for orders that yield Flags BY would increase intermarket
competition because it offers customers an alternative means to route
to BYX for the same rebate that they would be provided if they entered
orders on that trading center directly. The Exchange believes that its
proposal would not burden intramarket competition because the proposed
rebate would apply uniformly to all Members.
MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to ease the criteria for
the MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier would increase
intermarket competition because it would further incentivize Members to
send an increased amount MidPoint Discretionary orders to the Exchange
in order to qualify for the tier's decreased fee. The Exchange believes
that its proposal would neither increase nor decrease intramarket
competition because the MidPoint Discretionary Order Add Volume Tier
would apply uniformly to all Members and the ability of some Members to
meet the tier would only benefit other Members by contributing to
increased liquidity at the midpoint of the NBBO and better market
quality at the Exchange.
Non-Substantive Changes
    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to the Fee
Schedule will not affect intermarket nor intramarket competition
because the change is not designed to amend any fee or alter the manner
in which the Exchange assesses fees or calculates rebates.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-EDGA-2015-18 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-EDGA-2015-18. 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 will also 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-EDGA-2015-18 and should be
submitted on or before June 9, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12016 Filed 5-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58368-58373]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18304]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98182; File No. SR-ISE-2023-18]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 3,
Section 15 (Simple Order Risk Protections) To Adopt an Active Quote
Protection

August 21, 2023.
    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 August 11, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 15 (Risk
Protections) to adopt an active quote protection.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/ise/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adopt an active risk
counter functionality called active quote protection (``Active Quote
Protection'') in Options 3, Section 15. The Exchange intends to
introduce the foregoing changes with its upcoming technology migration
to enhanced Nasdaq, Inc. (``Nasdaq'') functionality, and intends to
begin implementation prior to December 20, 2024.\3\ The Exchange will
announce the initial migration date and symbol rollout schedule to
Members in an Options Trader Alert at a later date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97605 (May 26,
2023), 88 FR 36350 (June 2, 2023) (SR-ISE-2023-10) (delaying the
implementation of all ISE technology migration rule filings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to offer an optional active risk counter
functionality called Active Quote Protection, which will be available
to Market Makers as an alternative to existing passive risk counter
functionality described in Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B) (i.e.,
``Automated Quotation Adjustments'').\4\ The proposed Active Quote
Protection functionality will be similar to existing active risk
counter functionality on another options exchange, which currently
allows exchange users to actively decrement the risk counter by a
specified amount at any time, rather than waiting until a risk limit is
reached or the user otherwise sends a specific instruction to the
exchange to completely reset the counting program.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As described below, the Exchange will specifically define
this passive risk counter functionality as ``Rapid Fire'' within
this Rule.
    \5\ See MEMX LLC (``MEMX'') Rule 21.16(b) (Active Risk Counter).
See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95445 (August 8, 2022),
87 FR 49894 (August 12, 2022) (SR-MEMX-2022-10). Similar to the
proposed Active Quote Protection, the active risk counter on MEMX is
voluntary and offers a way for users to proactively manage their
risk. The MEMX risk protection, however, allows the user to actively
manage all the risk limits specified in MEMX's rule (e.g., executed
contracts, notional value, etc.) whereas the Exchange's proposal
would allow Market Makers to actively manage executed contracts
only, as discussed later in this filing. In addition, the Exchange's
proposal will only apply to quotes whereas MEMX's functionality
applies to both orders and quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, the Exchange requires Market Makers to configure risk
exposure thresholds based on various metrics for each options class,
including percentage of executed quotes (``Percentage Threshold''),
total number of executed contracts (``Volume Threshold''), absolute
value of the difference between long and short positions (``Delta
Threshold''), and absolute value of the difference between contracts
bought and contracts sold (``Vega Threshold'') (collectively,
``Thresholds'').\6\ As set forth in Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(i),
the System tracks each Threshold with a corresponding risk counter over
a Market Maker-specified rolling time period not to exceed 30 seconds.
Furthermore, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(i) and (ii) describes that when a risk
counter exceeds the corresponding Threshold during the specified time
period, the System would automatically remove the Market Maker's quotes
in all series of the applicable options class (each, a ``Purge
Event''). As a result of a Purge Event, the corresponding risk counter
and Threshold would reset upon such removal. The Exchange also notes
that pursuant to Section 15(a)(3)(B)(iii) today, the Thresholds and
risk counters can be completely reset if the Market Maker specifically
requests the System to remove quotes in all series of an options class.
This risk protection is passive in that the risk counters wait to reset
until the expiry of a specified time period, a Purge Event, or when the
Market Maker otherwise sends a specific instruction to the Exchange to
remove quotes to completely reset the counters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Thresholds are described in detail in Options 3, Section
15(a)(3)(B)(i)(a)-(d). If a Market Maker does not provide a
parameter for each Threshold, the Exchange will apply default
parameters announced to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to introduce a new risk protection called
Active Quote Protection that would enable Market Makers to actively
manage their executed contract limit (``Contract Limit'') by sending an
electronic instruction to the Exchange to decrement their executed
contract limit counter (``Limit Counter'') by a specified amount at any
time, rather than waiting until the expiry of a defined time period,
when the risk limit is exceeded (like a Purge Event), or when the
Market Maker otherwise sends a specific instruction to purge quotes to
completely reset the risk counter. The Contract Limit, as set by the
Market Maker, would apply for the duration of the trading day. Once the
Market Maker's Limit Counter exceeds the Contract Limit set by the
Market Maker, the System would automatically remove quotes in all
series of the applicable options class submitted through the Exchange's
Specialized Quote Feed protocol,\7\ identical to how the quote removal
mechanism works for a Purge Event today.\8\ Today, Purge Events are
triggered under the existing Automated Quotation Adjustments on the
first execution that exceeds the applicable Threshold. Once an
execution occurs, the System checks all Thresholds to see if they have
been exceeded. If exceeded, the Market Maker's quote would be purged
pursuant to Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(iii). In order to remain
consistent with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer pursuant
to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS, any marketable orders or quotes that are
executable against a Market Maker's quotes that are received \9\ prior
to the time the applicable Threshold is triggered will be automatically
executed up to the size of the Market Maker's quote, regardless of
whether the execution would cause the Market Maker to exceed their pre-
set Percentage Threshold, Volume Threshold, Delta Threshold, or Vega
Threshold.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Specialized Quote Feed or ``SQF'' is an interface that only
Market Makers may use to submit quotes to the Exchange. See
Supplementary Material .03(c) to Options 3, Section 7.
    \8\ See Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(ii) (renumbered as
Section 15(a)(3)(B)(iii) under this proposal, as noted below).
    \9\ The time of receipt for an order or quote is the time such
message is processed by the Exchange's order book.
    \10\ See current Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(ii)(b). The
Exchange will renumber this as Section 15(a)(3)(B)(iii)(b) and
clarify this provision in the manner described later in this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Active Quote Protection, the System would similarly handle
the Market Maker's quote in that the quote could be filled one
execution over the Contract Limit before the Market Maker's remaining
quotes are cancelled by the System in order to be consistent with the
firm quote obligations under Rule 602 of Regulation NMS. Specifically,
the Exchange notes that any marketable orders or quotes that are
executable against a Market Maker's

quotes that are received \11\ prior to the time the Contract Limit is
triggered will be automatically executed up to the size of the Market
Maker's quote, regardless of whether the execution would cause the
Market Maker to exceed the Contract Limit.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See supra note 9.
    \12\ For both the current Automated Quotation Adjustments and
proposed Active Quote Protection, the System will execute marketable
interest up to the size of the Market Maker's quote, but cannot
guarantee interest will be fully executed, as is the case with any
execution in the Exchange's order book. There is always the
possibility that the Market Maker's quote size (and/or Market
Maker's quote plus other interest on the order book) may not be
sufficient volume to fill the incoming interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, under Active Quote Protection, Market Makers will be
able to submit a request (i) to decrement their Limit Counter by a
specified number of contracts, or (ii) to fully decrement their Limit
Counter to zero.\13\ Market Makers that elect to use the proposed
Active Quote Protection on a badge \14\ will not be able to use the
existing Threshold risk protections described above on the same badge
(i.e., the active and passive risk counter functionality would be
mutually exclusive per badge) given that it would be unnecessarily
complex to implement from a technology standpoint. Market Makers may be
associated with multiple badges today, so if they want to use both risk
protections for their activity on the Exchange, they will be able to
set either the active or passive risk counter functionality on each
one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ As discussed later in this filing, in order to re-enter the
System after their quotes are purged pursuant to the Active Quote
Protection, Market Makers will need to submit the same request to
fully decrement their Limit Counter to zero.
    \14\ A ``badge'' shall mean an account number, which may contain
letters and/or numbers, assigned to Market Makers. A Market Maker
account may be associated with multiple badges. See Options 1,
Section 1(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To effectuate the foregoing changes, the Exchange proposes to set
forth the new risk protection in subparagraph (B)(ii) of Options 3,
Section 15(a)(3), as follows: \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ As a result, the Exchange will also renumber existing
subparagraphs (B)(ii)-(vi) as proposed subparagraphs (B)(iii)-(vii).

    In lieu of Rapid Fire, a Market Maker may provide an executed
contract limit (``Contract Limit'') that, if exceeded, the System
will automatically remove the Market Maker's quotes in all series of
an options class submitted through SQF. The System will apply the
Contract Limit for the duration of the trading day. For each class
of options, the System will maintain an active limit counter that
will track the current number of contracts executed through the
Market Maker's quotes (``Limit Counter''). If the Limit Counter
exceeds the Contract Limit established by the Market Maker, the
System will automatically remove the Market Maker's quotes as
described in Section 15(a)(3)(B)(iii). Market Makers may submit a
request (i) to decrement their Limit Counter by a specified number
of contracts, or (ii) to fully decrement their Limit Counter to
zero, including to re-enter the System as described in Section
15(a)(3)(B)(v). For Market Makers that elect to utilize the Contract
Limit, the Percentage Threshold, Volume Threshold, Delta Threshold,
and Vega Threshold will not be available for use on the Market
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maker's badge.

    As described above, once the Limit Counter exceeds the Contract
Limit set by the Market Maker under the proposed Active Quote
Protection, the System would automatically remove quotes in the same
manner as currently specified for a Purge Event in proposed
subparagraph (B)(iii) of Options 3, Section 15(a)(3). Accordingly, the
Exchange proposes to add Active Quote Protection's Contract Limit
throughout this Rule. Specifically, proposed subparagraph (B)(iii) will
provide that the System will automatically remove quotes in all series
of an options class when the Percentage Threshold, Volume Threshold,
Delta Threshold, Vega Threshold, or Contract Limit has been exceeded.
The System will send a Purge Notification Message to the Market Maker
for all affected series when the above thresholds have been exceeded.
Proposed subparagraph (B)(iii)(a) will provide that the Percentage
Threshold, Volume Threshold, Delta Threshold, Vega Threshold, and
Contract Limit are considered independently of each other.
    Further, as discussed above, any marketable orders or quotes that
are executable against a Market Maker's quotes that are received \16\
prior to the time the applicable Threshold or Contract Limit is
triggered will be automatically executed up to the size of the Market
Maker's quote, even if such execution would cause the Market Maker to
exceed any of their pre-set risk limits with respect to any of the
foregoing risk parameters. The Exchange notes that the current related
Rule in sub-paragraph (B)(ii)(b)(3) only mentions that quotes will
execute up to the Market Maker's size, and is silent on marketable
orders. In addition, the current Rule does not specify the time of
receipt of such marketable interest that is executable against the size
of the Market Maker's quote. As such, the Exchange proposes to add this
specificity in proposed sub-paragraph (B)(iii)(b)(3) to better describe
how the System operates today for Automated Quotation Adjustments and
how the System will operate for proposed Active Quote Protection. In
particular, sub-paragraph (B)(iii)(b)(3) will provide:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 9.

    The System will execute any marketable orders or quotes that are
executable against a Market Maker's quote and received prior to the
time the Percentage Threshold, Volume Threshold, Delta Threshold,
Vega Threshold, or Contract Limit is triggered up to the size of the
Market Maker's quote, even if such execution results in executions
in excess of the Market Maker's applicable Threshold or Contract
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit with respect to any parameter.

    In addition, when the System removes quotes as a result of
exceeding the Contract Limit under Active Quote Protection, the
Exchange proposes to require the Market Maker to submit a request to
re-enter the System. This request will be the same type of message as
the request described in proposed subparagraph (B)(ii) where the Market
Maker must request to fully decrement their Limit Counter back to zero
in order to re-enter the System. This requirement will be added in
proposed subparagraph (B)(v) of Options 3, Section 15(a)(3), and will
be similar to how the existing quote purge mechanism works for the
Thresholds today, except the Market Maker needs to send a separate
message (i.e., a re-entry indicator) to re-enter the System when their
quotes are purged as a result of exceeding any of the existing
Thresholds.
    Similar to how default parameters are currently applied for each of
the existing Thresholds described above, the Exchange proposes to apply
a default parameter for the Active Quote Protection Contract Limit
(which would be announced to Members) if the Market Maker opting to use
Active Quote Protection does not provide a Contract Limit at the
outset.\17\ Accordingly, proposed subparagraph (B)(vi) will provide
that if a Market Maker does not provide a parameter for each of the
automated quotation removal protections described in (B)(i)(a)-(d) and
(B)(ii) above, the Exchange will apply default parameters, which are
announced to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The Exchange will initially set the default Contract Limit
at 100 contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes that the new Active Quote Protection
would leverage the existing market-wide speed bump (``MWSB'')
functionality currently set forth in Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(vi)
(renumbered as Section 15(a)(3)(B)(vii) under this proposal). Today,
MWSB is a risk protection offered alongside the current Automated
Quotation Adjustments and triggers when, during a time period
established by the Market Maker, the total number of Purge Events
exceeds a market-wide parameter provided to the Exchange by

the Market Maker.\18\ When MWSB is triggered, the Exchange
automatically purges the Market Maker's quotes in all classes, and the
Market Maker must request re-entry to the System by contacting the
Exchange's Operations Department. Today, MWSB is meant to provide
Market Makers with protection from the risk of multiple executions
across multiple series of an option or across multiple options. This
risk protection recognizes that risk to Market Makers is not limited to
a single series in an option or even to all series in an option; Market
Makers that quote in multiple series of multiple options have
significant exposure, requiring them to offset or hedge their overall
positions. Market Makers are required to continuously quote in assigned
options, and quoting across many series in an option or multiple
options creates the possibility of executions that can create large,
unintended principal positions that could expose Market Makers to
unnecessary risk. MWSB is therefore intended to assist Market Makers in
managing their market risk by tracking the number of Purge Events
relative to the market-wide parameter set by the Market Maker. The
Exchange believes that tracking the number of Active Quote Protection
Purge Events for a Market Maker against its MWSB market-wide parameter
would be similarly useful for managing market risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Market Makers may request the Exchange to set the market
wide parameter to apply to just Nasdaq ISE or across Nasdaq ISE and
Nasdaq GEMX. The Exchange notes that the MWSB rule currently refers
to Supplementary Material .04 to Options 3, Section 14, which will
be deleted as an obsolete reference, as described later in this
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To that end, the Exchange proposes to update MWSB to add purge
events under Active Quote Protection to the MWSB counter such that
Active Quote Protection purge events and Purge Events under the current
Automated Quotation Adjustments will be aggregated together as counting
toward the specified market-wide parameter. Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to add references to the Active Quote Protection rule (i.e.,
proposed subparagraph (B)(ii) of Options 3, Section 15(a)(3))
throughout the MWSB rule in proposed subparagraph (B)(vii),
specifically:

    In addition to the automated quotation removal protections
described in (B)(i)(a)-(d) and (B)(ii) above, a Market Maker must
provide a market wide parameter by which the Exchange will
automatically remove a Market Maker's quotes in all classes when,
during a time period established by the Market Maker, the total
number of quote removal events specified in (B)(i)(a)-(d) and
(B)(ii) above exceeds the market wide parameter provided to the
Exchange by the Market Maker. Market Makers may request the Exchange
to set the market wide parameter to apply to just Nasdaq ISE or
across Nasdaq ISE and Nasdaq GEMX. Market Makers must request the
Exchange enable re-entry by contacting the Exchange's Operations
Department.

    The following example illustrates the proposed behavior of the
Active Quote Protection risk protection:

Market Maker AAPL

    Contract Limit: 100.
     Market Maker trades a transaction for 10 contracts in
AAPL; Limit Counter goes from 0 to 10.
     Market Maker sends a request to decrement its Limit
Counter in AAPL for 10 contracts; Limit Counter goes from 10 to 0.
     Market Maker trades a transaction for 20 contracts in
AAPL; Limit Counter goes from 0 to 20.
     Market Maker trades a transaction for 50 contracts in
AAPL; Limit Counter goes from 20 to 70.
     Market Maker sends a request to decrement its Limit
Counter in AAPL for 20 contracts; Limit Counter goes from 70 to 50.
     Market Maker trades a transaction for 60 contracts in
AAPL; Limit Counter goes from 50 to 110 and all Market Maker quotes in
AAPL are automatically purged after the execution because the Limit
Counter exceeded the Market Maker's Contract Limit of 100 executed
contracts.
     At this point, the Market Maker must send a request to
fully decrement its Limit Counter in AAPL back to zero in order to
begin quoting again.
    The following example illustrates how MWSB will work with the
proposed Active Quote Protection functionality:
     Assume Market Maker in AAPL and SPY has Automated
Quotation Adjustments set for AAPL and Active QP set for SPY.
     Market Maker sets its MWSB market-wide parameter so that
it is triggered at 25 purge events within a 20 second time period.
     On a given trading day, if an Active Quote Protection
Purge Event is triggered 15 times in SPY and an Automated Quotation
Adjustment Purge Event is triggered 10 times in AAPL, all within 20
seconds, then the Exchange will automatically remove all of the Market
Maker's quotes AAPL and SPY.
Technical Amendments
    The Exchange proposes a few technical, non-substantive amendments
in Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B). With the addition of the new Active
Quote Protection rule in proposed subparagraph (B)(ii), the Exchange
proposes to renumber existing subparagraphs (B)(ii)-(vi) as proposed
subparagraphs (B)(iii)-(vii) and make related changes to update
existing cross-cites within Section 15(a)(3)(B). The Exchange also
proposes to title subparagraph (B)(i) as ``Rapid Fire'' and
subparagraph (B)(vii) as ``Market-Wide Speed Bump'' to more clearly
identify which rules apply to which risk protections.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes in the MWSB rule (i.e., proposed
Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B)(vii)) to delete the reference to
Supplementary Material .04 to Options 3, Section 14. When the Exchange
originally adopted the MWSB rule, the intent was for the MWSB risk
protection to cover curtailment events under Supplementary Material .04
to Rule 722.\19\ Supplementary Material .04 to Rule 722 previously
governed Automated Spread Quotation Adjustments for complex quotes. The
Exchange subsequently removed complex quoting and all related
functionality (including Automated Spread Quotation Adjustments), but
did not remove the cross-cite to Supplementary Material .04 to Rule 722
in the MWSB rule.\20\ As a result, this cross-cite was ported over to
the Exchange's relocated Rulebook in 2019 and updated to Supplementary
Material .04 to Options 3, Section 14,\21\ when it should have been
deleted as an obsolete reference at the time the Exchange removed
complex quoting functionality.\22\ The Exchange now proposes to
eliminate this cross-cite in the MWSB rule as an obsolete reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71446 (January 30,
2014), 79 FR 6951 (February 5, 2014) (SR-ISE-2014-04). The MWSB rule
was originally set forth in Rule 804, relocated to Rule 714, and
finally relocated to its current place in Options 3, Section 15. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 84237 (September 20, 2018), 83
FR 48660 (September 26, 2018) (SR-ISE-2018-80); and 86138 (June 18,
2019), 84 FR 29567 (June 24, 2019) (SR-ISE-2019-17).
    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85308 (March 13,
2019), 84 FR 10136 (March 19, 2019) (SR-ISE-2019-05).
    \21\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86138 (June 18,
2019), 84 FR 29567 (June 24, 2019) (SR-ISE-2019-17).
    \22\ See supra note 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\23\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\24\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and

open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Active Quote Protection
risk protection is consistent with the Act because it will enhance the
risk protection tools available to Market Makers by introducing a new
method of establishing and monitoring for risk parameters that will be
offered as an alternative to existing Rapid Fire risk parameters,
thereby supporting a Market Maker's ability to manage their risk on the
Exchange, and also providing them with flexibility to use additional
tools to manage risk. As noted above, while the passive (Rapid Fire)
and active (Active QP) risk counter functionality will be mutually
exclusive on each badge, Market Makers will still be able to use both
to cover their activity on the Exchange by getting multiple badges and
setting each risk counter by badge. The Exchange believes that offering
more risk management tools to Market Makers would mitigate their
exposure to excessive risk. The Exchange further believes that having
the new Active Quote Protection functionality leverage the existing
MWSB functionality will similarly support a Market Maker's ability to
manage their risk on the Exchange by including Active Quote Protection
purge events to the MWSB counter. As noted above, the risk to Market
Makers is not limited to a single series in an option or even multiple
series in an option as Market Makers that quote in multiple series of
multiple options have significant exposure, requiring them to offset or
hedge their overall positions. Market Makers are required to
continuously quote in assigned options, and quoting across many series
in an option or multiple options creates the possibility of executions
that can create large, unintended principal positions that could expose
Market Makers to unnecessary risk. Today, MWSB is designed to assist
Market Makers in managing their market risk by tracking the number of
Purge Events relative to the market-wide parameter set by the Market
Maker. The Exchange therefore believes that tracking the number of
Active Quote Protection purge events for a Market Maker against its
MWSB market-wide parameter would be similarly useful for managing
market risk so that they can provide deep and liquid markets to the
benefit of all investors. Ultimately, the Exchange believes that
providing Market Makers with additional tools in the manner described
above to manage their risk parameters serves to perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general
to protect investors and the public interest because Market Makers will
be better able to manage risks with these tools.
    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the
Exchange notes that it has analyzed its capacity and represents that it
and the Options Price Reporting Authority have the necessary systems
capacity to handle any potential additional traffic associated with the
proposed rule change. The Exchange believes that its members will not
have a capacity issue as a result of this proposal.
    The Exchange further represents that its proposal will continue to
operate consistently with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer
pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS. Specifically, any marketable
interest that is executable against a Market Maker's quotes that are
received \25\ by the Exchange prior to the time this functionality is
triggered will be automatically executed at the price up to the Market
Maker's size, regardless of whether such execution results in
executions in excess of the Market Maker's pre-set Contract Limit.\26\
As discussed above, this is also in line with how current Rapid Fire
operates today. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes in
proposed sub-paragraph (B)(iii)(b) to specify that this Rule will apply
to marketable orders and quotes (currently silent on marketable
orders), and to specify the time of receipt of such marketable interest
that is executable against the size of the Market Maker's quote, will
promote clarity in how the System currently operates for Rapid Fire and
will operate for Active Quote Protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See supra note 9.
    \26\ See proposed subparagraph (B)(iii)(b) of Options 3, Section
15(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the proposed Active Quote Protection functionality
is similar to existing active risk counter functionality on another
options exchange, which currently allows users to actively decrement
the risk counter by a specified amount at any time, rather than waiting
until a risk limit is reached or the user otherwise sends a specific
instruction to the exchange to completely reset the counting
program.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical Amendments
    The Exchange believes that the technical amendments in Options 3,
Section 15(a)(3)(B) described above are consistent with the Act because
they will promote clarity in the rules and make the Rulebook easier to
navigate for market participants by updating rule numbering and
existing cross-cites as described above. Furthermore, the Exchange also
believes that adding the defined terms for Rapid Fire and MWSB in the
rule text will promote clarity so that Members can more easily locate
the relevant functionalities in the Rulebook. Lastly, the Exchange
believes that the proposed changes to remove the cross-cite to
Supplementary Material .04 to Options 3, Section 14 from the MWSB rule
is consistent with the Act because it will eliminate an obsolete
reference to functionality that no longer exists on the Exchange, which
will promote clarity in the Rulebook and avoid any potential confusion.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed Active Quote
Protection functionality will impose any undue burden on intra-market
competition as it is aimed at mitigating exposure to excessive risk
when trading on the Exchange. While the Exchange will offer the
proposed functionality to Market Makers only, the proposed risk
protection is intended to provide Market Makers with an additional tool
to manage their risk parameters in a manner they deem appropriate. As
such, the Exchange believes that the proposed functionality may
facilitate Market Makers' provision of liquidity on the Exchange,
thereby benefitting all market participants through additional
execution opportunities at potentially improved prices.
    The Exchange also believes that its Active Quote Protection
proposal does not impose an undue burden on inter-market competition as
the proposed risk protection is similar to an existing risk protection
on MEMX \28\ as described above, and any options market could adopt
similar rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed technical
amendments in Options 3, Section 15(a)(3)(B) will impose an undue
burden on competition as these are non-substantive changes to promote
clarity in the rules and make the Rulebook easier to navigate for
market participants.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    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)(iii) of the Act \29\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-ISE-2023-18 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-18. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-18 and should be
submitted on or before September 15, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-18304 Filed 8-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 16, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63260-63262]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25428]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1088; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-005-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Robinson Helicopter Company Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) Model R44 and R44 II helicopters
equipped with emergency floats, which would require replacing the
inflation valve assembly. The proposed AD is prompted by failure of the
emergency floats to deploy during a factory test because a needle was
binding within the inflation valve assembly. The proposed actions are
intended to prevent the failure of the floats to inflate during an
emergency landing.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 17,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Robinson

Helicopter Company, 2901 Airport Drive, Torrance, CA 90505; telephone
(310) 539-0508; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.robinsonheli.com.
You may review a copy of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,
Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Venessa Stiger, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety/Mechanical & Environmental Systems, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    We propose to adopt a new AD for Robinson Model R44 and Model R44
II helicopters equipped with emergency floats. The AD proposes
replacing the inflation valve assembly. The needle that releases helium
from a cylinder was binding within the float inflation valve assembly.
These helicopters often transport people and goods over water.
Consequently, this unsafe condition presents risks to a crew and its
passengers should the helicopter need to land in water during an
emergency.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type
designs.

Related Service Information

    We have reviewed Robinson R44 Service Bulletin SB-80, dated
September 7, 2011 (SB), which describes procedures for upgrading
certain valve assemblies within the next 250 flight hours or by June
30, 2012, whichever occurs first. The SB reports that during a factory
test of pop-out emergency floats the floats failed to inflate because
of a stuck cylinder valve.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This AD would require, within 1 year or 500 hours time-in-service
(TIS), whichever occurs first, replacing the inflation valve assembly.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    This proposed AD would require replacing the inflation valve
assembly within 1 year or 500 hours TIS, whichever occurs first. The SB
specifies replacing the assembly within 250 flight hours or by June 30,
2012, whichever occurs first. We used the Monitor Safety/Analyze Data
(MSAD) process and were able to predict when the next occurrence would
likely occur if no repairs were completed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 165 helicopters of
U.S. Registry and that the labor cost would average $85 per work-hour.
Based on these assumptions, we estimate that replacing the inflation
valve assembly would take 2.5 work-hours for a labor cost of about
$213. Parts would cost $850 to $955 for a total cost per helicopter of
$1,063 to $1,168.
    According to Robinson's service information, some or all of the
costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby
reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control
warranty coverage. Accordingly, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

Robinson Helicopter Company: Docket No. FAA-2012-1088; Directorate
Identifier 2012-SW-005-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) Model
R44 and R44 II helicopters with emergency floats equipped with an
inflation valve assembly, part number (P/N) D757-1, not engraved
with ``D758-4'' or modified with modification B900-8, and containing
a housing assembly, P/N D758-1, Revision C or prior, certificated in
any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as binding of the needle
within the float inflation valve assembly, which has resulted in the
emergency floats failing to inflate.

 (c) Comments Due Date

    Comments are due December 17, 2012.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Action

    Within 1 year or 500 hours time-in-service (TIS), whichever
occurs first, replace the inflation valve assembly with an airworthy
inflation valve assembly, P/N D757-1R.

 (f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Venessa
Stiger, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety/Mechanical & Environmental
Systems, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-
4137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    Robinson R44 Service Bulletin SB-80, dated September 7, 2011,
which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional
information about the subject of this AD. For service information
identified in this AD, contact Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901
Airport Drive, Torrance, CA 90505; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(310) 539-5198; or at http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm. You
may review a copy of information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

 (h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 3212, Emergency
Flotation Section.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 2, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-25428 Filed 10-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 89)]
[Notices]
[Page 21839]
[DOCID:fr11my09-592]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Wednesday, May 13,
2009 at 10 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002.
    The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:
    The Commission will hear oral argument in an appeal by Thomas C.
Bridge, James D. Edge, and Jeffrey K. Robles from the decision of an
administrative law judge. The law judge found that Bridge, a registered
representative formerly associated with A.G. Edwards, and Charles
Sacco, another former A.G. Edwards registered representative who
settled a related Commission proceeding against him, willfully violated
Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 by taking
action to ``continue market timing after they had been restricted from
doing so'' by registered investment companies. The law judge further
found that Edge, Bridge's supervisor, failed reasonably to supervise
Bridge with a view to preventing his antifraud violations, and that
Robles, Sacco's supervisor, failed reasonably to supervise Sacco.
    For these violations, the law judge imposed the following
sanctions: Bridge was ordered to cease and desist from violating or
causing violations of the antifraud provisions, to disgorge
approximately $40,000 plus prejudgment interest, to pay a $250,000
civil penalty, and to serve a one-year suspension from associating with
a broker or dealer. Edge and Robles were both ordered to pay a $250,000
civil penalty, were barred from associating with a broker or dealer in
a supervisory capacity, and were suspended from associating with a
broker or dealer in any capacity for thirty days.
    Among the issues likely to be argued are whether Bridge's and
Sacco's conduct in connection with their market timing activity was
fraudulent, whether Edge and Robles provided reasonable supervision
under the circumstances, and, if so, whether and to what extent
sanctions should be imposed on them.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, determined that no earlier
notice thereof was possible.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 7, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11015 Filed 5-7-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: November 10, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 216)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 57973-57974]
[DOCID:fr10no09-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 4

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0435]

Current Good Manufacturing Practice Requirements for Combination
Products; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending to
February 5, 2010, the comment period for the proposed rule that
appeared in the Federal Register of September 23, 2009. In the proposed
rule, FDA requested comments on current good manufacturing practice
(CGMP) requirements applicable to combination products. The agency is
taking this action in response to requests for an extension to allow
interested persons additional time to submit comments.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule publishied September
23, 2009 (74 FR 48423), is extended. Submit electronic or written
comments by February 5, 2010.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2009-
N-0435, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    To ensure more timely processing of comments, FDA is no longer
accepting comments submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages
you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, as described previously, in the ADDRESSES portion
of this document under Electronic Submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received may be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Barlow Weiner, Office of
Combination Products (HFG-3), Food and Drug Administration, 15800
Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 200, Rockville, MD 20855<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of September 23, 2009 (74 FR 48423), FDA
published a proposed rule with a 90-day comment period to request
comments on CGMP requirements applicable to combination products.
Comments on the proposed rule will inform FDA's rulemaking to establish
regulations for current good manufacturing practices for combination
products.

    The agency has received requests for a 45-day extension of the
comment period for the proposed rule. Each request conveyed concern
that the current 90-day comment period does not allow sufficient time
to develop a meaningful or thoughtful response to the proposed rule.
    FDA has considered the requests and is extending the comment period
for the proposed rule for 45 days, until February 5, 2010. The agency
believes that a 45-day extension allows adequate time for interested
persons to submit comments without significantly delaying rulemaking on
these important issues.

II. Request for Comments

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) electronic or written comments on this document. Submit
a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed
comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments
are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: November 4, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-26966 Filed 11-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S