[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69788-69792]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27345]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87742; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-112]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Amend Its Fees Schedule

December 13, 2019.
    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 December 2, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the

places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fees schedule in connection with
the fees related to orders and auction responses executed in the
Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'') and Solicitation Auction
Mechanism (``SAM'') Auctions, effective December 2, 2019.
    The Exchange first 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 or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Based on publicly available information,
no single options exchange has more than 21% of the market share.\3\
Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no
single options exchange possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of option order flow. The Exchange believes that the ever-
shifting market share among the exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants can shift order flow, or
discontinue use of certain categories of products, in response to fee
changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain the Exchange's
transaction fees, and market participants can readily trade on
competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other venues to
be more favorable. In response to the competitive environment, the
Exchange offers specific rates and credits in its fees schedule, like
that of other options exchanges' fees schedules, which the Exchange
believes provide incentive to Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs'') to
increase order flow of certain qualifying orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(November 26, 2019), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AIM and SAM include functionality in which a Trading Permit Holder
(``TPH'') (an ``Initiating TPH'') may electronically submit for
execution an order it represents as agent on behalf of a customer,\4\
broker dealer, or any other person or entity (``Agency Order'') against
any other order it represents as agent, as well as against principal
interest in AIM only, (an ``Initiating Order'') provided it submits the
Agency Order for electronic execution into the AIM or SAM Auctions.\5\
The Exchange may designate any class of options traded on Cboe Options
as eligible for AIM or SAM. The Exchange notes that all Users, other
than the Initiating TPH, may submit responses to an Auction (``AIM
Responses'').\6\ AIM and SAM Auctions take into account AIM Responses
to the applicable Auction as well as contra interest resting on the
Cboe Options Book at the conclusion of the Auction (``unrelated
orders''), regardless of whether such unrelated orders were already
present on the Book when the Agency Order was received by the Exchange
or were received after the Exchange commenced the applicable Auction.
If contracts remain from one or more unrelated orders at the time the
Auction ends, they are considered for participation in the AIM or SAM
order allocation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``customer'' means a Public Customer or a broker-
dealer. The term ``Public Customer'' means a person that is not a
broker-dealer. See Rule 1.1.
    \5\ See Rule 5.37 (AIM); Rule 5.39 (SAM); Rule 5.38 (Complex
AIM); Rule 5.40 (Complex SAM); Rule 5.73 (FLEX AIM); and Rule 5.74
(FLEX SAM).
    \6\ For purposes of this filing and the proposed fee, the term
``AIM Response'' will include responses submitted to AIM and SAM
Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it recently updated its rules in connection
with the AIM and SAM Auctions to permit all Users to respond to such
Auctions; AIM responses were previously restricted to Market-Makers
with an appointment in the applicable class and TPHs representing
orders at the top of the Book, and SAM responses were previously
available to all TPHs, except responses could not be submitted for the
account of an away market-maker.\7\ Because AIM Responses were limited
to certain market participants, the Exchange did not impose separate
fees on Auction responders (as it did for the Auction Agency and Contra
orders). As a result, the Exchange now proposes to adopt fee codes for
certain AIM Responses (the ``AIM Response'' fee as proposed in the fees
schedule, which is consistent with other AIM-specific headings and fee
codes in the fees schedule that also encompass orders in SAM).
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add: (1) Fee code ``NB'', which
would be appended to non-Customer, non-Market-Maker AIM Responses in
penny classes and assessed a fee of $0.50 per contract; and (2) and fee
code ``NC'', which would be appended to Non-Customer, Non-Market-Maker
AIM Responses in non-penny classes and assessed a fee of $1.05. Non-
Customer, non-Market-Maker orders include: Clearing Trading Permit
Holder (``F'' Capacity Code); non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliate
(``L'' Capacity Code); Broker-Dealer (``B'' Capacity Code); Non-Trading
Permit Holder Market-Maker (``N'' Capacity Code); Join Back-Office
(``J'' Capacity Code); and Professional (``U'' Capacity Code) orders.
The Exchange also proposes to add footnote 20, which clarifies that the
AIM Responder fee applies to AIM Responses of the aforementioned
capacities in all products, except Sector Indexes \8\ and Underlying
Symbol List A,\9\ executed in AIM, SAM, FLEX AIM, and FLEX SAM
Auctions. The Exchange notes that the same FLEX AIM and FLEX SAM
responses will be assessed the same fee, which is consistent with the
structure of the Exchange's current fees for AIM Agency/Primary and AIM
Contra orders, which apply uniformly to qualifying orders in AIM, SAM,
FLEX AIM, and FLEX SAM.\10\ Also, in light of the proposed fee, the
Exchange also proposes to exclude non-Customer, non-Market-Maker AIM
Responses from the Complex Surcharge, described in footnote 35. The
Complex Surcharge is assessed per contract per side for non-customer
complex order executions that remove liquidity from the Complex Order
Book (``COB'') and auction responses in the Complex Order Auction
(``COA'') and AIM in all classes except Sector Indexes and Underlying
Symbol List A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87072 (September 24,
2019), 84 FR 51673 (September 30, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-045); and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87192 (October 1, 2019), 84 FR
53525 (October 7, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-063).
    \8\ See Cboe Exchange, Inc. Fees Schedule, footnote 47.
    \9\ See Cboe Exchange, Inc. Fees Schedule, footnote 34.
    \10\ See Cboe Exchange, Inc. Fees Schedule, footnotes 18 and 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to adopt Break-Up Credits, applicable to
Customer Agency orders when traded against a qualifying AIM response
(yielding fee code NB or NC, as proposed). Specifically, the Exchange
proposes a Break-Up Credit of $0.25 per contract with respect to a
Customer Agency order in a Penny Pilot Class and a Break-Up Credit of
$0.60 per contract with respect to a Customer Agency order in a Non-
Penny Pilot Class.
    The proposed AIM Responder fees for non-Customer, non-Market-Maker
AIM Responses, which covers the market

participants recently permitted to respond to Auctions, are designed as
an additional incentive for Market-Makers to increase their responses
to AIM and SAM Auctions. Prior to opening up the Auctions to all market
participants, Market-Makers were naturally incentivized to respond to
Auctions as they were the exclusive (or among the exclusive) market
participants permitted to submit responses. Therefore, the Exchange
believes the proposed AIM Responder fees for non-Customer, non-Market-
Maker responses will encourage Market-Makers to continue to respond to
Auctions and compete to provide price improvement in a competitive
auction process, thus contributing to a deeper, more liquid auction
process with additional execution opportunities which benefits all
market participants. Likewise, the Exchange believes the proposed
Break-Up Credits will encourage Customer order flow to Auctions.
Increased Customer order flow benefits all market participants because
it continues to attract liquidity to the Exchange by providing more
trading opportunities. This attracts Market-Makers and other liquidity
providers, thus, facilitating price improvement in the auction process,
signaling additional corresponding increase in order flow from other
market participants, and, as a result, contributing towards a robust,
well-balanced market ecosystem.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the
requirements 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 facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. As stated above, the
Exchange 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 or incentives to
be insufficient. The proposed fee changes reflect a competitive pricing
structure designed to incentivize market participants to direct their
order flow to the Exchange's price improvement Auctions, which the
Exchange believes would enhance market quality to the benefit of all
TPHs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that its proposed adoption of fees for non-
Customer, non-Market-Maker responses and Break-Up Credits for Customer
Agency orders is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act in that the
proposal is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory.
Also, as noted above, the Exchange operates in highly competitive
market. The Exchange is only one of several options venues to which
market participants may direct their order flow, and it represents a
small percentage of the overall market. The Exchange believes that the
proposed fees are reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory in that competing options exchanges,\13\ including the
Exchange's affiliated options exchanges,\14\ offer substantially the
same fees and credits in connection with similar price improvement
auctions, as the Exchange now proposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Section 1(a)(v), ``MIAX
Price Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME'') Fees, which assesses a fee
of $0.50 (Penny Classes) and $0.99 (non-Penny Classes) for PRIME
responses, and offers a break-up credit of $0.25 (Penny Classes) and
$0.60 (non-Penny Classes) for PRIME Agency orders; see also NYSE
American Options Fee Schedule, Section I(G), ``CUBE Auction Fees and
Credits'', which assesses a fee of $0.50 (Penny Classes) and $0.99
(non-Penny Classes) for CUBE (its Customer Best Execution Auction)
responses, and offers a break-up credit of $0.25 (Penny Classes) and
$0.60 (non-Penny Classes) for PRIME Agency orders, and an Initiating
Participant Credit (akin to an Agency Order) of $0.30 (Penny Pilot)
and $0.70 (non-Penny Pilot).
    \14\ See EDGX Options Exchange Fee Schedule, ``Fee Codes and
Associated Fees'', fee code BD is appended to AIM Responder Penny
Pilot orders and is assessed a fee of $0.50 per share, and fee code
BE is appended to AIM Responder Non-Penny Pilot orders and is
assessed a fee of $1.05 per share; and ``AIM Break-Up Credits'',
which offers a credit of $0.25 for AIM Agency Orders in Penny Pilot
securities and $0.60 for such orders in non-Penny Pilot securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to assess a fee for
non-Customer, non-Market-Maker AIM Responses because it is reasonably
designed to incentivize Market-Makers to continue to respond, and
potentially increase their responses, to AIM and SAM Auctions in light
of the recent opening of the Auctions to other market participants not
previously permitted to respond to such Auctions. The Exchange believes
that encouraging increased Market-Maker order flow will increase
liquidity and Auction execution and price improvement opportunities to
the benefit of all participants. Deepening the Exchange's liquidity
pool and offering additional opportunities enables all investors to
enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price discovery,
promoting market transparency and improving investor protection. The
Exchange believes excluding non-Customer, non-Market-Maker AIM Reponses
from the Complex Surcharge is reasonable as such market participants
will not be assessed the extra surcharge. The Exchange also notes that
auction responses in COA and AIM are currently capped at $0.50 per
contract for non-customer complex orders in Penny classes (which
includes the applicable transaction fee, Complex Surcharge and
Marketing Fee (if applicable)).\15\ As such, given the proposed fee for
AIM Responses is $0.50 per contract, the Complex Surcharge would, in
effect, not be assessed for non-customer, non-Market-Maker complex
orders in Penny classes. The Exchange also notes that other types of
orders are currently excluded from the Complex Surcharge.\16\
Similarly, the Exchange believes that applying a Break-Up Credit to
Customer Agency orders is a reasonable means to encourage Customer
order flow to Exchange Auctions. As stated, increased Customer order
flow provides continued liquidity to the Exchange, in that it provides
additional transaction opportunities which attract Market-Makers and
other liquidity providers (by means of both unrelated orders and
responses in connection with the Auctions), thus facilitating price
improvement and signals an increase in additional order flow from other
market participants. In turn, these increases benefit all market
participants by contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market
ecosystem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 35.
    \16\ See e.g. Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 35. Stock-
option orders are currently excluded from the Complex Surcharge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fees in connection
with AIM Responses and Customer Agency orders does not represent a
significant departure from the fees and credits rebates currently
offered under the fees schedule for these market participants. For
example, under the existing fees schedule orders with F and L Capacity
Codes are assessed a fee of $0.43 per contract in Penny Classes and
$0.70 per contract in non-Penny Classes, while orders with B, N, U, or
J Capacity Codes are assessed a fee of $0.47 per contract in Penny
Classes and $0.75 per contract in non-Penny Classes. Additionally,
under the existing ``Volume Incentive Program'', Customer orders may
receive credits ranging from $0.09 to $0.24 per contract executed in
AIM.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fees are equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed fee for AIM Responses
will apply equally to all non-Customer, non-Market-Maker responses,
i.e., all such

TPHs will be assessed the same amount. Similarly, the exclusion of Aim
Responses from the Complex Surcharge is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as it applies equally to all non-Customer, non-Market-
Maker responses. The Exchange also believes that not assessing a fee
for Market-Maker responses is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because Market-Makers, unlike other market participants, take on a
number of obligations, including quoting obligations that other market
participants do not have. Further, Market-Makers have added market
making and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply to
other market participants. For example, Market-Makers have obligations
to maintain continuous markets, engage in a course of dealings
reasonably calculated to contribute to the maintenance of a fair and
orderly market, and to not make bids or offers or enter into
transactions that are inconsistent with a course of dealing. As stated,
the Exchange also recognizes that Market-Makers are the primary
liquidity providers in the options markets, thus, the Exchange believes
Market-Makers provide the most accurate prices reflective of the true
state of the market. Increased Market-Maker liquidity also increases
trading opportunities and signals to other participants to increase
their order flow, which benefits all market participants. Market-Makers
Likewise, the proposed Break-Up Credit will apply equally to all
Customer Agency orders that execute in an Auction against qualifying
responses. The Exchange notes that while Customer Agency orders will
receive the Break-Up Credit, as opposed to other Agency orders, the
Exchange believes that this application of the credit is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because, as stated above, Customer order
flow enhances liquidity on the Exchange, in turn providing more trading
opportunities and attracting other market participants, thus,
facilitating tighter spreads, increased order flow and trading
opportunities to the benefit of all market participants. Moreover, the
options industry has a long history of providing preferential pricing
to Customers, and the Exchange's current fees schedule currently does
so in many places, as do the fees structures of multiple other
exchanges.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Section 1(a)(v), ``MIAX
Price Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME'') Fees, and NYSE American
Options Fee Schedule, Section I(G), ``CUBE Auction Fees and
Credits'', each of which assesses a lower transaction fee for
customer orders than that of other market participants for
executions in their respective auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 intramarket or intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Rather, as discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change would encourage the submission of additional liquidity to price
improvement auctions of a public exchange, thereby promoting market
depth, price discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution
and price improvement opportunities for all TPHs. As a result, the
Exchange believes that the proposed change furthers the Commission's
goal in adopting Regulation NMS of fostering competition among orders,
which promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all
types of orders, large and small.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 70 FR 37495,
37498-99 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes will apply uniformly to all non-Customer, non-Market-
Maker responses and to all Customer Agency orders, respectively. As
described above, different market participants have different
circumstances, such as the fact that Market-Makers have quoting
obligations that other market participants do not have and have
recently lost their exclusive Auction response incentive, as well as
the fact that preferential pricing to Customers is a long-standing
options industry practice. The proposed fee changes serve to enhance
Market-Maker and Customer order flow to the Exchange's Auctions, and,
as a result, facilitate increased liquidity and execution opportunities
to the benefit of all market participants. In addition to this, the
Exchange notes that it currently assesses similar fees for certain non-
Customer, non-Market-Maker orders and similar credits for certain
Customer orders.
    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed fees will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the Act because, as noted above,
competing options exchanges,\19\ including the Exchange's affiliated
options exchange,\20\ currently have substantially similar fees in
place in connection with similar price improvement auctions.
Additionally, and as previously discussed, the Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market. TPHs have numerous alternative venues that
they may participate on and direct their order flow, including 15 other
options exchanges, many of which offer substantially similar price
improvement auctions. Based on publicly available information, no
single options exchange has more than 21% of the market share.\21\
Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of option order flow. Indeed, participants can readily choose
to send their orders to other exchange, and, additionally off-exchange
venues, if they deem fee levels at those other venues to be more
favorable. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \22\ The fact
that this market is competitive has also long been recognized by the
courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C.
Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for
order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S.
national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the
broker-dealers that act as their order-routing agents, have a wide
range of choices of where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no
exchange can afford to take its market share percentages for granted'
because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker dealers'. . . .''.\23\
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its proposed fee change
imposes any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 13.
    \20\ See supra note 14.
    \21\ See supra note 3.
    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \23\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).

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

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \25\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \25\ 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-CBOE-2019-112 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2019-112. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2019-112 and should be submitted on
or before January 9, 2020.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-27345 Filed 12-18-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14823-14824]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6330]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0160; Airspace Docket No. 11-AEA-05]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Kenbridge, VA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E Airspace at
Kenbridge, VA, to accommodate the additional airspace needed for the
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) developed for Lunenburg
County Airport. This action would enhance the safety and airspace
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before May 2, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U. S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2011-0160; Airspace Docket No. 11-AEA-05, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Horrocks, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2011-0160; Airspace Docket No. 11-AEA-05) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2011-0160; Airspace Docket No. 11-AEA-05.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, room 210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace at
Kenbridge, VA to provide controlled airspace required to support the
SIAPs developed for Lunenburg County Airport. Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be established
for the safety and management of IFR operations.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document would be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the
use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace at Lunenburg
County Airport, Kenbridge, VA.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

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

    1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AEA VA E5 Kenbridge, VA [NEW]

Lunenburg County Airport, VA
    (Lat. 36[deg]57'37'' N., long. 78[deg]11'06'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.8-mile radius of the Lunenburg County Airport and within
4 miles each side of the 024[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 6.8 mile radius to 8.8 miles NE of the airport and within 4
miles each side of the 204[deg] bearing extending from the 6.8 mile
radius to 10 miles southwest of the airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on March 8, 2011.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2011-6330 Filed 3-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 8, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 152)]
[Notices]
[Page 44507]
[DOCID:fr08au07-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. RP07-443-000]

Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.; Notice of Technical
Conference

August 1, 2007.
    The Commission's June 27, 2007 Order in the above-captioned
proceeding,\1\ directed that a technical conference be held to discuss
Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.'s proposed gas quality and
interchangeability standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P., 119 FERC ] 61,325
(2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that a technical conference will be held on Monday,
September 10, 2007 at 10 am, in a room to be designated at the offices
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    All interested parties and staff are permitted to attend. For
further information please contact Katie Williams at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-15404 Filed 8-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 172 (Friday, September 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53606-53608]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21956]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75794; File No. SR-Phlx-2015-74]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding
FLEX No Minimum Value Pilot

August 31, 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 August 21, 2015, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposal to amend Phlx
Rule 1079 (FLEX Index, Equity and Currency Options) to extend a pilot
program that eliminates minimum value sizes for opening transactions in
new series of FLEX index options and FLEX equity options (together
known as ``FLEX Options'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In addition to FLEX Options, FLEX currency options are also
traded on the Exchange. These flexible index, equity, and currency
options provide investors the ability to customize basic option
features including size, expiration date, exercise style, and
certain exercise prices; and may have expiration dates within five
years. See Rule 1079. FLEX currency options traded on the Exchange
are also known as FLEX FX Options. The pilot program discussed
herein does not encompass FLEX currency options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the amended Exchange rule is set forth immediately
below.
    Additions are in italics and deletions are [bracketed].

Rules of the Exchange

Options Rules

* * * * *

Rule 1079. FLEX Index, Equity and Currency Options

    A Requesting Member shall obtain quotes and execute trades in
certain non-listed FLEX options at the specialist post of the non-FLEX
option on the Exchange. The term ``FLEX option'' means a FLEX option
contract that is traded subject to this Rule. Although FLEX options are
generally subject to the Rules in this section, to the extent that the
provisions of this Rule are inconsistent with other applicable Exchange
Rules, this Rule takes precedence with respect to FLEX options.
    (a)-(f) No Change.

   Commentary: ------------

    .01 Notwithstanding subparagraphs (a)(8)(A)(i) and (a)(8)(A)(ii)
above, for a pilot period ending the earlier of [August]January 31,
[2015]2016, or the date on which the pilot is approved on a permanent
basis, there shall be no minimum value size requirements for FLEX
options.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend Phlx Rule 1079
(FLEX Index, Equity and Currency Options) to extend a pilot program
that eliminates minimum value sizes for opening transactions in new
series of FLEX Options (the ``Pilot Program'' or ``Pilot'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange is also filing a separate proposal to
permanently approve the Pilot Program. See footnote 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 1079 deals with the process of listing and trading FLEX
equity, index, and currency options on the Exchange. Rule 1079(a)(8)(A)
currently sets the minimum opening transaction value size in the case
of a FLEX Option in a newly established (opening) series if there is no
open interest in the particular series when a Request-for-Quote
(``RFQ'') is submitted (except as provided in Commentary .01 to Rule
1079): (i) $10 million underlying equivalent value, respecting FLEX
market index options, and $5 million underlying equivalent value
respecting FLEX industry index options; \5\ (ii) the lesser of 250
contracts or the number of contracts overlying $1 million in the
underlying securities, with respect to

FLEX equity options (together the ``minimum value size'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Market index options and industry index options are broad-
based index options and narrow-based index options, respectively.
See Rule 1000A(b)(11) and (12).
    \6\ Subsection (a)(8)(A) also provides a third alternative:
(iii) 50 Contracts in the case of FLEX currency options. However,
this alternative is not part of the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Presently, Commentary .01 to Rule 1079 states that by virtue of the
Pilot Program ending August 31, 2015, or the date on which the pilot is
approved on a permanent basis, there shall be no minimum value size
requirements for FLEX Options as noted in subsections (a)(8)(A)(i) and
(a)(8)(A)(ii) of Rule 1079.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74481 (March 11,
2015), 80 FR 13923 (March 17, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-22) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposal to extend Pilot
Program). The Pilot Program was instituted in 2010. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62900 (September 13, 2010), 75 FR 57098
(September 17, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-123) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness of proposal to institute Pilot Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to extend the Pilot Program for a pilot
period ending the earlier of January 31, 2016, or the date on which the
Pilot is approved on a permanent basis.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange notes that any positions established under this
Pilot would not be impacted by the expiration of the Pilot. For
example, a 10 contract FLEX equity option opening position that
overlies less than $1 million in the underlying security and expires
in January 2016 could be established during the Pilot. If the Pilot
Program were not extended, the position would continue to exist and
any further trading in the series would be subject to the minimum
value size requirements for continued trading in that series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that there is sufficient investor interest
and demand in the Pilot Program to warrant an extension. The Exchange
believes that the Pilot Program has provided investors with additional
means of managing their risk exposures and carrying out their
investment objectives. Extension of the Pilot Program would continue to
provide greater opportunities for traders and investors to manage risk
through the use of FLEX Options, including investors that may otherwise
trade in the unregulated over the counter (``OTC'') market where
similar size restrictions do not apply.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange has not experienced any adverse market effects
with respect to the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of the proposed extension of the Pilot Program, the
Exchange has under separate cover submitted to the Commission a Pilot
Program Report (``Report'') that provides an analysis of the Pilot
Program covering the period during which the Pilot has been in effect.
This Report includes: (i) Data and analysis on the open interest and
trading volume in (a) FLEX equity options that have an opening
transaction with a minimum size of 0 to 249 contracts and less than $1
million in underlying value; (b) FLEX index options that have an
opening transaction with a minimum opening size of less than $10
million in underlying equivalent value; and (ii) analysis of the types
of investors that initiated opening FLEX Options transactions (i.e.,
institutional, high net worth, or retail). The Report has been
submitted to the Commission and the Exchange has requested confidential
treatment under the Freedom of Information Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 552. The Exchange notes that it expects to file a
proposal for permanent approval of the Pilot Program. With this
proposal, the Exchange will submit a Report that is publicly
available. In the event the Pilot Program is not permanently
approved by January 31, 2016, the Exchange will submit an additional
Report covering the extended Pilot period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange's proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act \12\ in particular, in that it is 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 facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that the proposed extension of the Pilot Program, which
eliminates the minimum value size applicable to opening transactions in
new series of FLEX Options, would provide greater opportunities for
investors to manage risk through the use of FLEX Options. The Exchange
notes that it has not experienced any adverse market effects with
respect to the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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. To the contrary, the proposal
would give traders and investors the opportunity to more effectively
tailor their trading, investing and hedging through FLEX options traded
on the Exchange. Prior to the Pilot, options that represented opening
transactions in new series that could not meet a minimum value size
could not trade via FLEX on the Exchange, but rather had to trade OTC.
Extension of the Pilot enables such options to continue to trade on the
Exchange.

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) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\15\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the Exchange
may seamlessly continue its Pilot Program without interruption. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\16\ The Commission notes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay would prevent the expiration of the Pilot Program on August 31,
2015, prior to the extension of the pilot program becoming operative.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2015-74 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-Phlx-2015-74. 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-Phlx-2015-74, and should be
submitted on or before September 25, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-21956 Filed 9-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51395-51397]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19856]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92911; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2021-067]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Extend the Expiration Date of the Temporary Amendments Concerning Video
Conference Hearings

September 9, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 30, 2021, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a
``non-controversial'' rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
under the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of
this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to extend the expiration date of the
temporary amendments in SR-NASDAQ-2020-076 from August 31, 2021, to
December 31, 2021.\4\ The proposed rule change would not make any
changes to the text of the Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If the Exchange seeks to provide additional temporary relief
from the rule requirements identified in this proposed rule change
beyond December 31, 2021, the Exchange will submit a separate rule
filing to further extend the temporary extension of time. The
amended Exchange rules will revert to their original form at the
conclusion of the temporary relief period and any extension thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/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 Exchange proposes to continue to harmonize Exchange Rules 1015,
9261, 9524 and 9830 with recent changes by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') to its Rules 1015, 9261, 9524
and 9830 in response to the COVID-19 global health crisis and the
corresponding need to restrict in-person activities. The Exchange
originally filed proposed rule change SR-NASDAQ-2020-076, which allows
the Exchange's Office of Hearing Officers (``OHO'') and the Exchange
Review Council (``ERC'') to conduct hearings, on a temporary basis, by
video conference, if warranted by the current COVID-19-related public
health risks posed by an in-person hearing. In April 2021, the Exchange
filed a proposed rule change, SR-NASDAQ-2021-033, to extend the
expiration date of the temporary amendments in SR-NASDAQ-2020-076 from
April 30, 2021, to August 31, 2021.\5\ While there are signs of
improvement, much uncertainty remains for the coming months. The
emergence of the Delta variant, dissimilar vaccination rates throughout
the United States, and the uptick in transmissions in many locations
indicate that COVID-19 remains an active and real public health
concern.\6\ Based on its assessment of current COVID-19 conditions and
the lack of a clear timeframe for a sustained and widespread abatement
of COVID-19-related health concerns and corresponding restrictions,\7\
the Exchange has determined that there is a continued need for
temporary relief for several months beyond August 31, 2021.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to extend the expiration date of the
temporary rule amendments in SR-NASDAQ-2020-076 from August 31, 2021,
to December 31, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91763 (May 4, 2021),
86 FR 25055 (May 10, 2021) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of File No. SR-NASDAQ-2021-033).
    \6\ For example, President Joe Biden on July 29, 2021, announced
several measures to increase the number of people vaccinated against
COVID-19 and to slow the spread of the Delta variant, including
strengthening safety protocols for federal government employees and
contractors. See https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/07/29/fact-sheet-president-biden-to-announce-new-actions-to-get-more-americans-vaccinated-and-slow-the-spread-of-the-delta-variant/.
    \7\ For instance, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
on July 27, 2021, began recommending that fully vaccinated people
wear a mask in public indoor settings in areas of substantial or
high transmission and noted that fully vaccinated people might
choose to wear a mask regardless of the level of transmission,
particularly if they are immunocompromised or at increased risk for
severe disease from COVID-19. See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html. Also, several
cities, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, New Haven and San
Francisco, have recently reinstated their mask mandates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 5, 2020, the Exchange filed, and subsequently extended
to August 31, 2021, SR-NASDAQ-2020-076, to temporarily amend Exchange
Rules 1015, 9261, 9524 and 9830 to grant OHO and the ERC authority \8\
to conduct hearings in connection with appeals of Membership
Application Program decisions, disciplinary actions, eligibility
proceedings and temporary

and permanent cease and desist orders by video conference, if warranted
by the COVID-19-related public health risks posed by an in-person
hearing.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For OHO hearings under Exchange Rules 9261 and 9830, the
proposed rule change temporarily grants authority to the Chief or
Deputy Chief Hearing Officer to order that a hearing be conducted by
video conference. For ERC hearings under Exchange Rules 1015 and
9524, this temporary authority is granted to the ERC or relevant
Subcommittee.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90390 (November 10,
2020), 85 FR 73302 (November 17, 2020) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-076); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 90774 (December 22, 2020), 85 FR 86614
(December 30, 2020) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-092); supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As set forth in the previous filings, the Exchange also relies on
COVID-19 data and the guidance issued by public health authorities to
determine whether the current public health risks presented by an in-
person hearing may warrant a hearing by video conference.\10\ Based on
that data and guidance, the Exchange does not believe the COVID-19-
related health concerns necessitating this relief will meaningfully
subside by August 31, 2021, and has determined that there will be a
continued need for this temporary relief for several months beyond that
date. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to extend the expiration date
of the temporary rule amendments originally set forth in SR-NASDAQ-
2020-076 from August 31, 2021, to December 31, 2021. The extension of
these temporary amendments allowing for specified OHO and ERC hearings
to proceed by video conference will allow the Exchange's critical
adjudicatory functions to continue to operate effectively in these
extraordinary circumstances--enabling the Exchange to fulfill its
statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain fair and
orderly markets--while also protecting the health and safety of hearing
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As noted in SR-NASDAQ-2020-076, the temporary proposed rule
change grants discretion to OHO and the ERC to order a video
conference hearing. In deciding whether to schedule a hearing by
video conference, OHO and the ERC may consider a variety of other
factors in addition to COVID-19 trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that
the proposed rule change not become operative for 30 days after the
date of the filing, so the Exchange can implement the proposed rule
change immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ 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, by continuing to provide greater harmonization between the
Exchange rules and FINRA rules of similar purpose,\13\ resulting in
less burdensome and more efficient regulatory compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92685 (August 17,
2021), 86 FR 47169 (August 23, 2021) (SR-FINRA-2021-019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change, which extends the expiration date of the
temporary amendments to the Exchange rules set forth in SR-NASDAQ-2020-
076, will continue to aid the Exchange's efforts to timely conduct
hearings in connection with its core adjudicatory functions. Given the
current and frequently changing COVID-19 conditions and the uncertainty
around when those conditions will see meaningful, widespread, and
sustained improvement, without this relief allowing OHO and ERC
hearings to continue to proceed by video conference, the Exchange might
be required to postpone some or almost all hearings indefinitely. The
Exchange must be able to perform its critical adjudicatory functions in
order to fulfill its statutory obligations to protect investors and
maintain fair and orderly markets. As such, this relief is essential to
the Exchange's ability to fulfill its statutory obligations and allows
hearing participants to avoid the serious COVID-19-related health and
safety risks associated with in-person hearings.
    Among other things, this relief will allow OHO to conduct temporary
cease and desist proceedings by video conference so that the Exchange
can take immediate action to stop ongoing customer harm and will allow
the ERC to timely provide members, disqualified individuals and other
applicants an approval or denial of their applications. As set forth in
detail in SR-NASDAQ-2020-076, this temporary relief allowing OHO and
ERC hearings to proceed by video conference accounts for fair process
considerations and will continue to provide fair process while avoiding
the COVID-19-related public health risks for hearing participants.
Accordingly, the proposed rule change extending this temporary relief
is in the public interest and consistent with the Act's purpose.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the temporary proposed rule
change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As set forth in
SR-NASDAQ-2020-076, the proposed rule change is intended solely to
extend temporary relief necessitated by the continued impacts of the
COVID-19 outbreak and the related health and safety risks of conducting
in-person activities. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will prevent unnecessary impediments to its operations,
including its critical adjudicatory processes, and its ability to
fulfill its statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain
fair and orderly markets that would otherwise result if the temporary
amendments were to expire on August 31, 2021.

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 \14\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \15\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\17\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange has
indicated that the proposed rule change to extend the expiration date
will continue to prevent unnecessary impediments to its operations,
including its critical adjudicatory processes, and its ability to

fulfill its statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain
fair and orderly markets that would otherwise result if the temporary
amendments were to expire on August 31, 2021.\18\ Importantly,
extending the relief provided in SR-NASDAQ-2021-033 immediately upon
filing and without a 30-day operative delay will allow the Exchange to
continue critical adjudicatory and review processes in a reasonable and
fair manner and meet its critical investor protection goals, while also
following best practices with respect to the health and safety of its
employees.\19\ The Commission also notes that this proposal extends
without change the temporary relief previously provided by SR-NASDAQ-
2021-033.\20\ As proposed, the changes would be in place through
December 31, 2021 and the amended rules will revert back to their
original state at the conclusion of the temporary relief period and, if
applicable, any extension thereof.\21\ For these reasons, the
Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay for this
proposal is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day
operative delay and designates the proposal operative upon filing.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ See supra Item II.
    \19\ See FINRA Filing, 86 FR at 47171 (noting the same in
granting FINRA's request to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
SR-FINRA-2021-019 would become operative immediately upon filing).
    \20\ See supra note 5.
    \21\ See supra note 4. As noted above, the Exchange states that
if it requires temporary relief from the rule requirements
identified in this proposal beyond December 31, 2021, it may submit
a separate rule filing to extend the effectiveness of the temporary
relief under these rules.
    \22\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2021-067 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-NASDAQ-2021-067. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2021-067 and should
be submitted on or before October 6, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-19856 Filed 9-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 1, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 14837-14838]
[DOCID:fr01ap09-83]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Providing Guidance on Airline Baggage Liability and
Responsibilities of Code Share Partners Involving International
Itineraries

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department is publishing the following notice on Airline
Baggage Liability and Responsibilities of Code Share Partners Involving
International Itineraries.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Lowry, Attorney, Office of
Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (C-70), 1200 New Jersey Ave.,
SE.,Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This notice is intended to give guidance to U.S. and foreign air
carriers on two tariff matters: First, tariffs relating to liability
for lost, stolen, delayed or damaged baggage carried on international
itineraries; and second, tariffs that appear to assign responsibility,
in code-share service, to the operating carrier rather than the selling
carrier (i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket).
    We have become aware of tariff provisions filed by several carriers
that attempt, with respect to checked baggage, to exclude certain
items, generally high-cost or fragile items such as electronics,
cameras, jewelry or antiques, from liability for damage, delay, loss or
theft. A typical provision found in carrier tariffs and disclosed on
carrier Web sites states that the carrier does not assume liability for
loss, damage, or delay of ``certain specific items, including: * * *
antiques, documents, electronic equipment, film, jewelry, keys,
manuscripts, medication, money, paintings, photographs * * *.''
    Such exclusions, while not prohibited in domestic contracts of
carriage, are in contravention of Article 17 of the Montreal Convention
(Convention),\1\ as revised on May 28, 1999. Article 17 provides that
carriers are liable for damaged or lost baggage if the ``destruction,
loss or damage'' occurred while the checked baggage was within the
custody of the carrier, except to the extent that the damage ``resulted
from the inherent defect, quality or vice of the baggage.'' \2\ Article
19 provides that a carrier is liable for damage caused by delay in the
carriage of baggage, except to the extent that it proves that it took
all reasonable measures to prevent the damage or that it was impossible
to take such measures. Although carriers may wish to have tariff terms
that prohibit passengers from including certain items in checked
baggage, once a carrier accepts checked baggage, whatever is contained
in the checked baggage is protected, subject to the terms of the

Convention, up to the limit of 1000 SDRs (Convention, Article 22, para.
2.).\3\ Carriers should review their filed tariffs on this matter and
modify their tariffs and their baggage claim policies, if necessary, to
conform to the terms of the Convention. In addition, carriers should
ensure that their websites do not contain improper information
regarding baggage liability exclusions applicable to international
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for
International Carriage by Air, adopted on May 28, 1999 at Montreal.
    \2\ The quoted language might absolve a carrier from liability
for a fragile item that is damaged during transport. It would not
absolve the carrier from liability for the item's loss or theft.
    \3\ Article 22, para. 2 also allows the passenger to declare
excess value for baggage, subject to payment of a supplementary fee
if the carrier so requires. Some tariff provisions state that the
higher declared value shall not apply to a list of valuable articles
including ``money, jewelry, silverware, negotiable papers,
securities, business documents, samples, paintings * * *.'' Such
rules are also inconsistent with the Convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A second issue of concern stems from airline tariffs related to
code-share service. As a condition for approval of international code-
share services, the Department has as a matter of policy required that
``the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in the contract of carriage
with the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating
carrier be unaffected.'' (Order 2008-5-19, OST-2008-0064).\4\
Notwithstanding this clear language, several carriers have filed tariff
provisions that purport to apply the terms and conditions of the
operating carrier's contract of carriage generally, or in certain areas
such as check-in time limits, unaccompanied minors, carriage of
animals, refusal to transport, oxygen service, irregular operations,
denied boarding compensation, and baggage acceptance, allowance and
liability. Others state that passengers on code-share flights ``may be
subject'' to the operating carrier's baggage charges. A number of
carriers have no clear tariff rule on the subject. The intent of this
DOT code-share approval provision may not be circumvented by tariff
provisions attempting to allocate responsibility and contract of
carriage provisions in different ways by the carriers involved, or by
silence on the subject. As with the exclusionary provisions cited
above, carriers should review their tariffs and practices and make
revisions, if necessary, to reflect the conditions imposed in the
Department's orders approving code-share service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Similar language occurs in numerous other approvals of code-
share services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a matter of policy, the Aviation Enforcement Office will
consider the subject tariff provisions noted above involving
exclusionary baggage provisions to be of no effect and in violation of
the Convention and those involving code share relationships to be in
violation of pertinent Department approvals of those code-share
services. The tariffs and their application, and similar practices, in
the view of the Aviation Enforcement Office, also constitute unfair or
deceptive business practices and unfair methods of competition in
violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712. Carriers should, therefore, review their
tariffs and practices with respect to these two areas and, if
necessary, immediately modify their practices to conform to the
Convention and Department code-share conditions and, within 90 days of
this notice, revise their respective tariffs and modify appropriately
the statements of their baggage and code-share policies on their Web
sites. After that date, the Aviation Enforcement Office will pursue
enforcement action in appropriate cases. This disclosure guidance, it
should be noted, also extends to ticket agents. Questions regarding
this notice may be addressed to the Office of Aviation Enforcement and
Proceedings (C-70), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590.

     Dated: March 26, 2009.
    By:
Samuel Podberesky,
Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings.
    An electronic version of this document is available at http://
www.regulations.gov.

 [FR Doc. E9-7264 Filed 3-31-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P