[Federal Register: March 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 56)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13723-13726]
[DOCID:fr23mr07-25]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0091, FRL-8291-1]

Proposed Finding of Failure To Attain; State of Arizona, Phoenix
Nonattainment Area; State of California, Owens Valley Nonattainment
Area; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to find that the Phoenix Planning Area
(Phoenix nonattainment area) and the Owens Valley Planning Area (Owens
Valley nonattainment area) did not attain the 24-hour National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter of 10 microns or
less (PM-10) by the deadline mandated in the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act), December 31, 2006. These proposed findings are based on monitored
air quality data for the PM-10 NAAQS from 2004 through September 2006.
    Several Indian tribes have reservations located within the
boundaries of the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas. EPA
implements CAA provisions for determining whether such areas have
attained the NAAQS by the applicable attainment deadline in these
reservations. EPA is also proposing that these areas have failed to
attain the PM-10 NAAQS. Thus, this proposed rule could potentially
affect these tribes. Accordingly, EPA has notified the affected tribal
leaders of this proposed rule and is inviting consultation with
interested tribes.
    If EPA finalizes, after public notice and comment, these failure to
attain findings, Arizona and California must submit by December 31,
2007, plan provisions that provide for attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS
and that achieve 5 percent annual reductions in PM-10 or PM-10
precursor emissions as required by CAA section 189(d).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 23, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-0091, by one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow

the on-line instructions.
    (2) E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) Mail or deliver: Doris Lo (AIR-2), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through the
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an anonymous

access system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region

IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed directly below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Phoenix issues contact Doris Lo,
EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>for Owens Valley
issues contact Larry Biland, EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and for air quality monitoring issues contact Bob

Pallarino, EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' are used, we mean EPA.

I. Background

    The NAAQS are levels for certain ambient air pollutants set by EPA
to protect public health and welfare. PM-10 is among the ambient air
pollutants for which EPA has established health-based standards. PM-10
causes adverse health effects by penetrating deep in the

lungs, aggravating the cardiopulmonary system. Children, the elderly,
and people with asthma and heart conditions are the most vulnerable.
    On July 1, 1987 EPA revised the health-based national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) (52 FR 24672), replacing standards for
suspended particulates with new standards applying only to particulate
matter up to ten microns in diameter (PM-10). At that time, EPA
established two PM-10 standards, the annual standard and a 24-hour
standard. On December 18, 2006, EPA revoked the annual PM-10 standard
but retained the 24-hour PM-10 standard. 71 FR 61144 (October 17,
2006). The 24-hour PM-10 standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter
([mu]g/m3) is attained when the expected number of days per
calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 [mu]g/
m3, as determined in accordance with appendix K to 40 CFR
part 50, is equal to or less than one. 40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR part 50,
appendix K.
    On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA
or the Act), PM-10 areas, including the Phoenix and Owens Valley
nonattainment areas, meeting the qualifications of section 107(d)(4)(B)
of the amended Act were designated nonattainment by operation of law.
56 FR 11101 (March 15, 1991). EPA codified the boundaries of the
Phoenix nonattainment area at 40 CFR 81.303 and the Owens Valley
nonattainment area at 40 CFR 81.305.
    Once an area is designated nonattainment for PM-10, section 188 of
the CAA outlines the process for classifying the area and establishes
the area's attainment deadline. In accordance with section 188(a), at
the time of designation, all PM-10 nonattainment areas, including the
Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas, were initially classified
as moderate.
    Section 188(b)(1) of the Act provides that moderate areas can
subsequently be reclassified as serious before the applicable moderate
area attainment date if at any time EPA determines that the area cannot
``practicably'' attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the moderate area attainment
deadline, December 31, 1994. On January 8, 1993, EPA made such a
determination and reclassified the Owens Valley nonattainment area as
serious. 58 FR 3334.
    Moreover, a moderate area must be reclassified by operation of law
if EPA determines after the applicable attainment date that, based on
air quality, the area was not in attainment after that date. CAA
sections 179(c) and 188(b)(2). On May 10, 1996, EPA published such a
reclassification of the Phoenix nonattainment area as serious. 61 FR
21372.
    As serious PM-10 nonattainment areas, the Phoenix and Owens Valley
nonattainment areas acquired a new attainment deadline of no later than
December 31, 2001. CAA section 188(c)(2). However, CAA section 188(e)
allows states to apply for up to a 5-year extension of the serious area
attainment deadline of December 31, 2001. In order to obtain the
extension, there must be a showing that: (1) Attainment by 2001 would
be impracticable, (2) the state complied with all requirements and
commitments pertaining to the area in the implementation plan for the
area, and (3) the state demonstrates that the plan for the area
includes the most stringent measures that are included in the
implementation plan of any state or are achieved in practice in any
state, and can feasibly be implemented in the area. Both Arizona and
California requested extensions under CAA section 188(e) to December
31, 2006. On July 24, 2002, EPA granted Arizona's request to extend the
attainment date for the Phoenix nonattainment area to December 31,
2006. 67 FR 48718. On September 3, 1999 EPA granted the request to
extend the attainment date for the Owens Valley nonattainment area to
December 31, 2006. 64 FR 48305.
    For a more detailed discussion of the history of PM-10 planning for
the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas, please refer to EPA
actions on the PM-10 state implementation plans (SIPs) for these areas.
67 FR 48718 (July 25, 2002); 64 FR 48305 (September 3, 1999).

II. Proposed Findings of Failure To Attain

A. Clean Air Act Requirements for Findings of Failure To Attain

    EPA has the responsibility, pursuant to sections 179(c) and
189(b)(2) of the Act, to determine within 6 months of the applicable
attainment date (i.e., by June 30, 2007), whether the Phoenix and Owens
Valley nonattainment areas have attained the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.
Section 179(c)(1) of the Act provides that these determinations are to
be based upon an area's ``air quality as of the attainment date'' and
section 188(b)(2) is consistent with this requirement. EPA determines
whether an area's air quality is meeting the PM-10 NAAQS based upon air
quality data gathered at monitoring sites in the nonattainment area and
entered into EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS).
These data are reviewed to determine the area's air quality status in
accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.
    As stated above, pursuant to appendix K, attainment of the 24-hour
PM-10 NAAQS is achieved when the expected number of exceedances per
year at each monitoring site is less than or equal to one. A total of
three consecutive years of clean air quality data is generally
necessary to show attainment of the 24-hour PM-10 standard. A complete
year of air quality data as referred to in 40 CFR part 50, appendix K,
comprises all four calendar quarters with each quarter containing data
from at least 75 percent of the scheduled sampling days.
    There are two basic types of PM-10 monitors, manual samplers and
automated continuous analyzers. Manual samplers use a filter to collect
PM-10 that must be weighed in a laboratory before a PM-10 concentration
can be determined. Automated continuous analyzers run continuously and
can produce hourly average concentrations of PM-10 in close to real-
time. Most PM-10 monitors do not record a sample every day of the year,
either by design or because of operational or maintenance issues.
Manual PM-10 samplers generally run on a one-in-every-six day schedule.
Automated analyzers generally produce a PM-10 24-hour average
concentration every day, but as noted above, operational or maintenance
issues may effect an automated analyzer's ability to produce a PM-10
concentration every day of the year.
    Because attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS is based on the number of
expected exceedances per year, it is necessary to adjust the number of
observed exceedances per year to account for any days for which a 24-
hour PM-10 concentration is not available. This adjustment results in
an estimated number of expected exceedances per year and is made in
accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section
3.1. In two simple examples, if a PM-10 instrument operates every day
of the year, then no adjustment is necessary and the observed number of
exceedances will be equal to the estimated number of exceedances. If a
sampler operates on a one-in-every-six day schedule, then the number of
observed exceedances will be adjusted to account for the five days with
no samples. In this example, one observed exceedance would be the
equivalent of six estimated exceedances.
    Most PM-10 samplers in the Phoenix nonattainment area originally
operated on a one-in-six day schedule. A number of monitoring sites in
the Phoenix

nonattainment area recorded exceedances while operating on this
schedule. 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 3.1(f) states that EPA
will not perform the estimated exceedance adjustment described above if
a monitor meets certain conditions, including a change in the sampling
frequency to every day monitoring. In an effort to reduce the potential
for overestimating the number of expected exceedances, the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department began operating some sites on an every
day schedule as allowed under the provisions of appendix K. All of the
PM-10 monitors in the Owens Valley network operate every day. Tables 1
and 2 in section II.B. below indicate the operating schedule for each
of the violating monitors in the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment
areas.
    As summarized in Tables 1 and 2 in section II.B. below, there are a
number of PM-10 monitoring sites in the Phoenix and Owens Valley
nonattainment areas that continue to violate the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.
If a site averages more than one estimated exceedance per year during
the three-year attainment period, it is in violation of the NAAQS (see
far right columns of Tables 1 and 2).
    In the Phoenix nonattainment area, five sites are in violation of
the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS: West Phoenix, Greenwood, Higley, West 43rd
Avenue, and Bethune School. In the Owens Valley nonattainment area,
seven sites continue to violate the PM-10 NAAQS: Lone Pine, Olancha-
Walker Creek Road, Olancha-Dirty Sox, Olancha-Flat Rock, Olancha-Shell
Cut, Olancha-Bill Stanley Site, and Keeler.

B. Ambient Air Monitoring Data

                      Table 1.--Phoenix Nonattainment Area PM-10 Data Summary 2004-2006\1\
                                 [Sites in Violation of the 24-Hour PM-10 NAAQS]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Number of                      Average number
                                  Operating      1st Max conc.     observed        Number of       of estimated
    Site name / AQS ID No.         schedule       [mu]g/m\3\      exceedances      estimated     exceedances per
                                                                      \2\         exceedances          year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Phoenix, 04-013-0019....  1 in 6 / Every              155               1              6                2
                                day.
Greenwood, 04-013-3010.......  1 in 6 / Every              173               2              7                2.3
                                day.
Higley 04-013-4006...........  1 in 6 /                    170               3              3.6              1.2
                                Everyday.
West 43rd Ave, 04-013-4009...  1 in 6 / Every              260              26             26                8.7
                                day.
Bethune School, 04-013-8006..  1 in 6.........             198               1              6.4              2.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The data in Tables 1 and 2 for both nonattainment areas are only for the period January 1, 2004 through
  September 30, 2006. EPA generally uses a complete three-year set of data in making nonattainment/attainment
  determinations. EPA does not currently have the data for the last quarter of 2006 and the State is not
  required to submit them until March 31, 2007. See 40 CFR 58.16(b); 71 FR 61236 (October 17, 2006). However,
  when less data are sufficient to unambiguously establish nonattainment, 40 CFR 50, appendix K, section 2.3(c)
  allows EPA to determine that a monitor is in violation of the PM-10 NAAQS.
\2\ There were additional exceedences observed in the Phoenix nonattainment area that are not included in this
  table. The State of Arizona requested, as allowed by EPA's Natural Events Policy (Memorandum entitled ``Areas
  Affected by PM-10 Natural Events'' from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation to
  Regional Air Division Directors, May 30, 1996), that the Agency exclude certain observed exceedances from our
  nonattainment determination because they were considered high wind natural events. The letters from the State
  requesting that we exclude or ``flag'' certain exceedances and EPA's responses concurring with the State's
  requests are included in the docket accompanying this rulemaking.

                   Table 2.--Owens Valley Nonattainment Area PM-10 Data Summary 2004-2006 \3\
                                 [Sites in Violation of the 24-Hour PM-10 NAAQS]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average number
                                  Operating      1st Max conc.     Number of       Number of       of estimated
    Site name / AQS ID No.         schedule       [mu]g/m\3\       observed        estimated     exceedances per
                                                                  exceedances     exceedances          year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lone Pine, 06-027-0004.......  Every day......             349               5              5.1              1.7
Olancha Walker Creek Road, 06- Every day......             407              11             11                3.7
 027-0021.
Olancha, Dirty Sox, 06-027-    Every day......            4471              54             54               18
 0022.
Olancha, Flat Rock, 06-027-    Every day......            6171              11             11.8              3.9
 0024.
Olancha, Shell Cut, 06-027-    Every day......            6846              43             43               14.3
 0025.
Olancha, Bill Stanley Site,    Every day......             879               6              7                2.3
 06-027-0026.
Keeler, 06-027-1003..........  Every day......            3322              27             27                9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See footnote 1.

C. Tribal Lands

    EPA intends to take final action to determine whether the Phoenix
and Owens Valley nonattainment areas have attained the PM-10 NAAQS
following notice and comment. We believe that the plain language of
sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) mandates that we make such findings
with respect to these areas. We also believe that, as a matter of EPA's
federal implementation of relevant provisions of the CAA over Indian
country within the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas, the
findings of failure to attain should apply to these areas of Indian
country. PM-10 continues to be a pervasive pollution problem in the
Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas. PM-10 can be transported
into an area from pollution sources found many miles away from its
source. Therefore, EPA recommends that boundaries for nonattainment
areas be drawn to encompass both areas with direct sources of the
pollution problem as well as nearby areas in the same airshed. EPA
believes that this approach best ensures public health protection from
the adverse effects of PM-10 pollution. Therefore, it is generally
counterproductive from an air quality and planning perspective to
segregate

land areas located well within the boundaries of a nonattainment area,
such as the three Indian reservations in the Phoenix nonattainment area
and the four Indian reservations in the Owens Valley nonattainment
area. Moreover, violations of the PM-10 standard, which are measured
and modeled throughout each of the nonattainment areas, as well as
shared meteorologic conditions, would dictate the same result. EPA
does, however, recognize the significance of Indian country boundaries
within the nonattainment areas and, as described below, will consult
with the affected Tribes regarding this finding of failure to attain
the NAAQS and their Indian country.

III. Summary of Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to find that the Phoenix and Owens Valley
nonattainment areas did not attain the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS by the
December 31, 2006 attainment deadline as discussed above in section II.
    Under section 189(d) of the Act, serious PM-10 nonattainment areas
that fail to attain are required to submit within 12 months of the
applicable attainment date, ``plan revisions which provide for
attainment of the PM-10 air quality standard and, from the date of such
submission until attainment, for an annual reduction in PM-10 or PM-10
precursor emissions within the area of not less than 5 percent of the
amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory
prepared for such area.''
    In accordance with CAA section 179(d)(3), the attainment deadline
applicable to an area that misses the serious area attainment date is
as soon as practicable, but no later than 5 years from the publication
date of the nonattainment finding notice. EPA may, however, extend the
attainment deadline to the extent it deems appropriate for a period no
greater than 10 years from the publication date, ``considering the
severity of nonattainment and the availability and feasibility of
pollution control measures.'' In addition to the attainment
demonstration and 5 percent requirements, the plans under section
189(d) for the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas must
address all applicable requirements of the CAA, including sections
110(a), 172(c), 176(c) and 189(c)(1).
    Because the applicable attainment date for both nonattainment areas
was December 31, 2006, under section 189(d), the submittal deadline for
the plans will be December 31, 2007 if EPA's proposed findings of
failure to attain are finalized.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action in and of itself establishes no new requirements, it
merely notes that the air quality in the Phoenix nonattainment area and
the Owens Valley nonattainment area did not meet the federal health
standard for PM-10 by the CAA deadline. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this proposed rule does
not in and of itself establish new requirements, EPA believes that it
is questionable whether a requirement to submit a SIP revision
constitutes a federal mandate. The obligation for a State to revise its
SIP arises out of sections 110(a), 179(d), and 189(d) of the CAA and is
not legally enforceable by a court of law, and at most is a condition
for continued receipt of highway funds. Therefore, it is possible to
view an action requiring such a submittal as not creating any
enforceable duty within the meaning of section 421(5)(9a)(I) of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 658(a)(I)). Even if it
did, the duty could be viewed as falling within the exception for the
condition of Federal assistance under section 421(5)(a)(i)(I) of UMRA
(2 U.S.C. 658(5)(a)(i)(I)). Therefore, today's proposed action does not
contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4).
    Several Indian tribes have reservations located within the
boundaries of the Phoenix and Owens Valley nonattainment areas. EPA is
responsible for the implementation of federal Clean Air Act programs in
Indian country, including findings of failure to attain. EPA has
notified the affected tribal officials and will be consulting with all
interested tribes, as provided for by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). EPA will ensure that each tribe is contacted
and given the opportunity to enter into consultation on a government-
to-government basis. This proposed action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This proposed action does not in and of
itself create any new requirements and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive
Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant. Because these proposed findings of failure to
attain are factual determinations based on air quality considerations,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This
proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: March 15, 2007.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
 [FR Doc. E7-5357 Filed 3-22-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 13618-13620]
[DOCID:fr22mr10-119]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61699; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-42]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Fees and Rebates for Adding and Removing Liquidity

March 12, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 1, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
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. Phlx has designated this
proposal as one establishing or changing a member due, fee, or other
charge imposed under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 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 proposes to amend the applicability of Complex Orders
to fees and rebates for adding and removing liquidity.
    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative for transactions settling on or after March 1, 2010.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission notes that the fees in this proposed rule
change were effective upon filing on March 1, 2010 and apply solely
to trades effected on or after that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

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 amend the
applicability of Complex Orders to remain competitive.
    The Exchange proposes modifying the applicability of Complex Orders
to the fees and rebates for adding and removing liquidity. Currently,
single contra-side orders that are executed against the individual
components of Complex Orders will be charged under the proposed Fee
Schedule. The individual components of such a Complex Order will not be
charged. The Exchange proposes amending this exception to state that
individual components of such a Complex Order will be charged according
to the fees and rebates for adding and removing liquidity. The Exchange
is amending the applicability of Complex Orders to the fees described
herein because the Exchange no longer believes that this incentive is
necessary.
    Currently, the Exchange assesses a per-contract transaction charge
in Standard and Poor's Depositary Receipts/SPDRs (``SPY'') \6\, the
PowerShares QQQ Trust (``QQQQ'')[reg]; Ishares Russell 2000 (``IWM'')
and Citigroup Inc. (``C'')options on five different categories of
market participants that submit orders and/or quotes that remove, or
``take,'' liquidity from the Exchange. The per-contract transaction
charge depends on the category of market participant submitting an
order or quote to the Exchange that removes liquidity.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ SPY options are based on the SPDR exchange-traded fund
(``ETF''), which is designed to track the performance of the S&P 500
Index.
    \7\ See SR-Phlx-2010-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The market participants are as follows: (i) Specialists, Registered
Options Traders (``ROTs''), Streaming Quote Traders (``SQTs'') \8\ and
Remote Streaming Quote Traders (``RSQTs''); \9\ (ii) customers; \10\
(iii) specialists, ROTs, SQTs and RSQTs that receive Directed Orders
(``Directed Participants'' \11\ or ``Directed Specialists, RSQTs, or
SQTs'' \12\); (iv) Firms; and (v) broker-dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ An SQT is an Exchange Registered Options Trader (``ROT'')
who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit
option quotations electronically through an electronic interface
with AUTOM via an Exchange approved proprietary electronic quoting
device in eligible options to which such SQT is assigned. See
Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A).
    \9\ An RSQT is an ROT that is a member or member organization
with no physical trading floor presence who has received permission
from the Exchange to generate and submit option quotations
electronically through AUTOM in eligible options to which such RSQT
has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such quotations
electronically from off the floor of the Exchange. See Exchange Rule
1014(b)(ii)(B).
    \10\ This applies to all customer orders, directed and non-
directed.
    \11\ For purposes of this fee, a Directed Participant is a
Specialist, SQT, or RSQT that executes a customer order that is
directed to them by an Order Flow Provider and is executed
electronically on the Exchange's electronic trading platform for
options, PHLX XL II.
    \12\ See Exchange Rule 1080(l), ``* * * The term `Directed
Specialist, RSQT, or SQT' means a specialist, RSQT, or SQT that
receives a Directed Order.'' A Directed Participant has a higher
quoting requirement as compared with a specialist, SQT or RSQT who
is not acting as a Directed Participant. See Exchange Rule 1014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The per-contract transaction charges are assessed on participants
who submit proprietary quotes and/or orders that remove liquidity from
the Exchange's market in options listed on the Fee Schedule. The
Exchange also assesses a transaction charge to Firms and broker-dealers
that add liquidity.
    Additionally, the Exchange has in place a per-contract rebate
relating to transaction charges for orders or quotations that add
liquidity to the Exchange's market in options listed on the fee
schedule. The amount of the rebate depends on the category of
participant whose order or quote was executed as part of the Phlx
disseminated Best Bid and/or Offer.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its schedule of
fees is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \14\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members. The impact of the proposal
upon the net fees paid by a particular market participant will depend
on a number of variables, including its monthly volumes, the order
types it uses, and the prices of its quotes and orders (i.e., its
propensity to add or remove liquidity). The rate increase to Firms for
adding liquidity in the various symbols including the additional
Symbols is the same rate that is currently being assessed on Broker-
Dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that amending the applicability
of the complex orders to these fees is equitable as that will apply
equally to all participants.
    Accordingly, the Exchange also believes that the addition of the
options to this portion of the Fee Schedule is equitable in that it
will apply to all categories of participants in the same manner.

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.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \16\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File

Number SR-Phlx-2010-42 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-42. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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
a.m. and 3 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-42 and should be
submitted on or before April 12, 2010.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-6115 Filed 3-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 197 (Thursday, October 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51518-51520]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22045]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84362; File No. SR-PEARL-2018-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change by MIAX PEARL, LLC To Amend
Exchange Rule 203, Qualification and Registration of Members and
Associated Persons, Relating to Registration and Qualification
Examinations Required for Members and Associated Persons of Members
That Engage in Trading Activities on the Exchange

October 4, 2018.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 September 27, 2018, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX
PEARL'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change '') a 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Rule 203, Qualification
and Registration of Members and Associated Persons, relating to
registration and qualification examinations required for Members and
Associated Persons of Members that engage in trading activities on the
Exchange.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``SEC'' or the
``Commission'') recently approved a proposed rule change to restructure
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') representative-
level qualification examination program.\3\ The rule change, which will
become effective on October 1, 2018, restructures the examination
program into a more efficient format whereby all new representative-
level applicants will be required to take a general knowledge
examination (the Securities Industry Essentials Examination (``SIE''))
and a tailored, specialized knowledge examination (a revised
representative-level qualification examination) for their particular
registered role. Individuals are not required to be associated with the
Exchange or any other self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') member to
be eligible to take the SIE. However, passing the SIE alone will not
qualify an individual for registration with the Exchange. To be
eligible for registration, an individual must also be associated with a
firm, pass an appropriate qualification examination for a
representative or principal and satisfy the other requirements relating
to the registration process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81098 (July 7,
2017), 82 FR 32419 (July 13, 2017) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2017-007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIE will assess basic product knowledge; the structure and
function of the securities industry markets, regulatory agencies and
their functions; and regulated and prohibited practices. In particular,
the SIE will cover four major areas. The first, ``Knowledge of Capital
Markets,'' focuses on topics such as types of markets and offerings,
broker-dealers and depositories, and economic cycles. The second,
``Understanding Products and Their Risks,'' covers securities products
at a high level as well as associated investment risks. The third,
``Understanding Trading, Customer Accounts and Prohibited Activities,''
focuses on accounts, orders, settlement and prohibited activities. The
final, ``Overview of the Regulatory Framework,'' encompasses topics
such as SROs, registration requirements and specified conduct rules. It
is anticipated that the SIE will include 75 scored questions plus an
additional 10 unscored pretest questions. The passing score will be
determined through methodologies compliant with testing industry
standards used to develop examinations and set passing standards.
    The restructured program will eliminate duplicative testing of
general securities knowledge on the current representative-level
qualification examinations by moving such content into the SIE. The SIE
will test fundamental securities related knowledge, including knowledge
of basic products, the structure and function of the securities
industry, the regulatory agencies and their functions and regulated and
prohibited practices, whereas the revised representative-level
qualification examinations will test knowledge relevant to day-to-day
activities, responsibilities and job functions of representatives. The
SIE was developed in consultation with a committee of industry
representatives and representatives of several SROs. Each of the
current representative-level examinations covers general securities
knowledge, with the exception of the Research Analyst (Series 86 and
87) examinations.
    The Exchange proposes to require that effective October 1, 2018,
new applicants seeking to register in a representative capacity with
the Exchange must pass the SIE before their registrations can become
effective. The Exchange proposes to make the requirement operative on
October 1, 2018 to coincide with the effective date of FINRA's
requirement.
    The Exchange notes that individuals who are registered as of
October 1, 2018 will be eligible to maintain their registrations
without being subject to any additional requirements. Individuals who
have been registered within the last two years prior to October 1,
2018, will also be eligible to maintain those registrations without
being subject to any additional requirements, provided they register
within two years from the date of their last registration. However,
with respect to an individual who is not registered

on the effective date of the proposed rule change but was registered
within the last two years prior to the effective date of the proposed
rule change, the individual's SIE status in the Central Registration
Depository (``CRD'') system would be administratively terminated if
such individual does not register with the Exchange within four years
from the date of the individual's last registration. The Exchange also
notes that consistent with Rule 203 Interpretations and Policies .05,
the Exchange will consider waivers of the SIE alone or the SIE and the
representative or principal-level examination(s) for applicants who are
seeking registration in a representative-or principal-level
registration category.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Pursuant to a Regulatory Services Agreement between FINRA
and MIAX PEARL, FINRA provides MIAX PEARL certain exam waiver
services in responding to exam waiver requests from MIAX PEARL
Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add Interpretations and Policies .09
to Rule 203 ``Summary of Qualifications Requirements'' which summarizes
the qualification requirements for each of the required registration
categories described in the Exchange Rules.
    The Exchange notes that this filing is substantially similar to a
companion Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX
Options'') filing relating to registration and qualification
examinations required for Members and Associated Persons of Members
that engage in trading activities on the MIAX Options Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \6\ 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, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will improve
the efficiency of the Exchange's examination requirements, without
compromising the qualification standards, by eliminating duplicative
testing of general securities knowledge on examinations. FINRA has
indicated that the SIE was developed in an effort to adopt an
examination that would assess basic product knowledge; the structure
and function of the securities industry markets, regulatory agencies
and their functions; and regulated and prohibited practices. The
Exchange also notes that the introduction of the SIE and expansion of
the pool of individuals who are eligible to take the SIE, has the
potential of enhancing the pool of prospective securities industry
professionals by introducing them to securities laws, rules and
regulations and appropriate conduct before they join the industry in a
registered capacity. Lastly, the Exchange notes adopting the SIE
requirement is consistent with the requirement recently adopted by
FINRA.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Exchange believes that adding Interpretations and
Policies .09 to Rule 203 will provide greater clarity regarding the
Exchange's examination requirements as updated by, and those remaining
in effect following, the proposed rule change, and consistency with the
rules of other exchanges.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See e.g. Cboe Exchange, Inc. Rule 3.6A Interpretations and
Policies .08(b) and Nasdaq ISE, LLC Rule 313 Registration
Requirements Supplementary Material .08 (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change, which harmonizes its rules with recent rule
changes adopted by FINRA and which is being filed in conjunction with
similar filings by the other national securities exchanges, will reduce
the regulatory burden placed on market participants engaged in trading
activities across different markets. The Exchange believes that the
harmonization of these registration requirements across the various
markets will reduce burdens on competition by removing impediments to
participation in the national market system and promoting competition
among participants across the multiple national securities exchanges.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    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 \10\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing. However, Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \11\ permits the Commission to 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 on
October 1, 2018 to coincide with the effective date of FINRA's proposed
rule change on which the proposal is based.\12\ The waiver of the
operative delay would make the Exchange's qualification requirements
consistent with those of FINRA, as of October 1, 2018. Therefore, the
Commission believes that the waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest and
hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal
operative on October 1, 2018.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ See supra note 3.
    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2018-20 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-PEARL-2018-20. 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 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-PEARL-2018-20 and should be submitted on or before
November 1, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-22045 Filed 10-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34279-34281]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14519]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64617; File No. SR-CBOE-2011-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Increase the Class Quoting Limit in One Option Class

June 7, 2011.
    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 May 25, 2011, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE''or ``Exchange'') 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 this proposal as one constituting
a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect

to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act, and Rule 19b-4(f)(1)
thereunder, which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to increase the class quoting limit in one
option class. The text of the proposed rule change is available on
CBOE's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the CBOE'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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    CBOE Rule 8.3A, Maximum Number of Market Participants Quoting
Electronically per Product, establishes class quoting limits (``CQLs'')
for each class traded on the Hybrid Trading System.\3\ A CQL is the
maximum number of quoters that may quote electronically in a given
product and Rule 8.3A, Interpretation .01(a) provides that the current
levels are generally established at 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Rule 8.3A.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Rule 8.3A, Interpretation .01(b) provides a procedure
by which the President of the Exchange may increase the CQL for an
existing or new product. In this regard, the President of the Exchange
may increase the CQL in a particular product when he deems it
appropriate. The effect of an increase in the CQL is procompetitive in
that it increases the number of market participants that may quote
electronically in a product. The purpose of this filing is to increase
the CQL in options on the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) from its current
limit of 60 \4\ to 70, which CBOE's President has determined would be
appropriate. Increasing the CQL also may enhance the liquidity offered
in the option class. Lastly, CBOE represents that it has the systems
capacity to support this increase in the CQL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63001 (September 28,
2010), 75 FR 61538 (October 5, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2010-85) (increasing
the VIX CQL from 50 to 60).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    CBOE believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act
and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national
securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of section
6(b) of the Act.\5\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \6\ requirements
that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. As indicated
above, the Exchange believes that increasing the CQL in this option
class is procompetitive and may enhance the liquidity offered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE 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 Exchange Act.

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

    The Exchange neither received nor solicited written comments on the
proposal.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change will take effect upon filing
with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \7\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder,\8\ because it constitutes a stated
policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning,
administration, or enforcement of an existing rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2011-050 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2011-050. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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
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. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-

2011-050 and should be submitted on or before July 5, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-14519 Filed 6-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P