
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 250 (Thursday, December 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 96092-96100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31480]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79665; File No. SR-ISE-2016-27]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, 
LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment 
No. 1 Thereto, To Amend the Exchange's Rules Regarding Routing of 
Orders, Cancellation of Orders, and Handling of Error Positions, and 
Permit Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC To Become an Affiliated Member of 
the Exchange To Perform Certain Routing and Other Functions

December 22, 2016.
    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 December 9, 2016, the International Securities Exchange, LLC 
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change. On 
December 20, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed 
rule

[[Page 96093]]

change, which amended and replaced the original filing in its entirety. 
The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is 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, as modified by Amendment No. 1, 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 (1) permit the Exchange to receive inbound 
orders in options routed through Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC 
(``NES'') from certain affiliated exchanges, as described in detail 
below, by establishing procedures designed to prevent potential 
informational advantages resulting from the affiliation with NES; (2) 
route outbound orders through NES either directly or through a third 
party routing broker-dealer; (3) grant the Exchange an exemption to 
permit NES, an affiliate of the Exchange, to become a Member of the 
Exchange in order to perform certain routing an [sic] other functions 
on behalf of the Exchange; and (4) adopt a rule regarding the 
cancellation of orders and the maintenance of a NES error account.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
Web site at www.ise.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 the 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the filing is to permit ISE to receive inbound 
orders in options routed through Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC 
(``NES'') from certain affiliated exchanges, as described herein and 
establish procedures designed to prevent potential informational 
advantages resulting from the affiliation between ISE and NES. The 
Exchange requests approval to permit NES, an affiliate of the Exchange, 
to become a Member of the Exchange in order to perform certain routing 
and other functions on behalf of the Exchange. First, the Exchange 
requests that NES be permitted to route orders inbound to the Exchange 
in its capacity as a facility of the Affiliated Entities as defined 
below. Also, this proposal is to permit ISE to route outbound orders 
through NES either directly or indirectly through a third party routing 
broker-dealer \3\ to other market centers. Additionally, the Exchange 
proposes to add a rule regarding the cancellation of orders and the 
maintenance of a NES error account.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The ability to route orders to other exchanges using either 
the Exchange's affiliated broker-dealer (NES) or a third party 
unaffiliated broker-dealer, which the Exchange may choose to use, is 
for efficiency and potential cost savings.
    \4\ The Exchange notes that the amendments to the Chapter 19 
rules noted herein will also impact ISE Gemini an ISE Mercury rules 
which are cross-referenced to Chapter 19 in the ISE Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Restriction on Affiliation
    NES is a broker-dealer owned and operated by Nasdaq, Inc. NES is 
affiliated with ISE, ISE Gemini LLC (``ISE Gemini''), ISE Mercury LLC 
(``ISE Mercury''),\5\ Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx''), The Nasdaq Options 
Market LLC (``NOM'') and Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX''). For purposes of this 
filing the term ``Affiliated Entities'' shall refer to ISE Gemini, ISE 
Mercury, Phlx, NOM and BX. Currently, NES is a member of Phlx, NOM and 
BX (collectively ``Nasdaq Exchanges'') and provides all options routing 
functions for Phlx, NOM and BX.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ISE, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury are collectively referred to 
as ``ISE Exchanges.''
    \6\ See Phlx Rule 1080(m) and Nasdaq and BX Rules at Chapter VI, 
Section 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, Phlx Rule 985 (Affiliation and Ownership Restrictions), The 
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') Rule 2160 (Restrictions on 
Affiliation) \7\ and BX Rule 2140 (Restrictions on Affiliation) 
currently prohibit the Nasdaq Exchanges [sic] or any entity with which 
it is affiliated from, directly or indirectly, acquiring or maintaining 
an ownership interest in, or engaging in a business venture with, a 
Nasdaq Exchange member or an affiliate of a Nasdaq Exchange member in 
the absence of an effective filing under 19(b) of the Act. 
Specifically, in connection with prior filings, the Commission has 
expressed concern that the affiliation of an exchange with one of its 
members raises the potential for unfair competitive advantage and 
potential conflicts of interest between an exchange's self-regulatory 
obligations and its commercial interests.\8\ NES performs similar 
functions for the Nasdaq Exchanges and is a member of those three 
markets respectively.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NOM is a facility of Nasdaq.
    \8\ Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 71416 (January 28, 
2014), 79 FR 6244 (February 3, 2014) (SR-Phlx-2014-05); 71419 
(January 28, 2014), 79 FR 6247 (February 3, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-
007); and 714121 (January 28, 2014), 79 FR 6264 (February 3, 2014) 
(SR-BX-2014-003).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59721 (April 7, 
2009), 74 FR 17245 (April 14, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32); 59779 (April 
16, 2009) 74 FR 18600 (April 23, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32, Amendment 
No. 1) notice of filing of proposed rule change relating to enhanced 
electronic trading platform for options); 61667 (March 5, 2010), 75 
FR 11964 (March 12, 2016)(SR-Phlx-2010-36)(notice of filing and 
immediate effectiveness of proposed rule changes to establish 
procedures to prevent information advantages resulting from the 
affiliation between Phlx and NES); and 71416 (January 28, 2014), 79 
FR 6244 (February 3, 2014) (SR-Phlx-2014-05)(notice of filing and 
immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change to inbound routing 
of options orders). Nasdaq Options Services was the affiliated 
broker-dealer prior to a rule change to utilize NES, another 
affiliated broker-dealer of Nasdaq. See also Securities Exchange Act 
Release Nos. 63769 (January 25, 2011), 76 FR 5423 (January 31, 2011) 
(SR-BX-2011-003); 63859 (February 7, 2011), 76 FR 8391 (February 14, 
2011) (SR-BX-2011-007) (notice of filing of proposed rule change 
relating to permanent approval of the BX and NES inbound routing 
relationship); 71420 (January 28, 2014), 79 FR 6256 (February 3, 
2014)(SR-BX-2014-004)(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness 
of proposed rule change to inbound routing). See also Securities 
Exchange Act Release Nos. 65554 (October 13, 2011), 76 FR 65311 
(October 20, 2011)(SR-NASDAQ-2011-142); 71418 (January 28, 2014), 79 
FR 6262 (February 3, 2014)(SR-NASDAQ-2014-008)(notice of filing and 
immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change to inbound routing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, NES would be prohibited from becoming an ISE member 
pursuant to ISE Rule 312, titled ``Limitation on Affiliation between 
the Exchange and Members,'' without Commission approval. Specifically, 
a Member or non-member owner may not become an affiliate of the 
Exchange, or any facility of the Exchange, or any entity with which the 
Exchange or any facility of the Exchange is affiliated such as the 
Affiliated Entities. This rule change requests permission from the 
Commission to allow NES, an affiliate of ISE, to become a Member of ISE 
for the purpose of performing certain functions, including receiving 
inbound orders from one of the Affiliated Entities. The Exchange 
proposes adopting language at proposed ISE Rule 312(c), adding 
references to paragraphs ``a'' and ``b'' within Rule 312. Proposed 
paragraph 312(c) is similar to Phlx Rule 985(c)(2).
    In order for NES to be a Member of ISE, the Exchange proposes to 
permit the acceptance of inbound orders that NES routes in its capacity 
as a facility

[[Page 96094]]

of the Affiliated Exchanges \10\ subject to certain limitations and 
conditions as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange notes that ISE, [sic] ISE Gemini and ISE 
Mercury are each separately filing rule changes to permit NES to be 
a Member of ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury for the purpose of performing 
certain routing and other functions, including, but not limited to 
receiving inbound orders from other entities that are affiliated 
with NES such as the Affiliated Entities. See SR-ISEGemini-2016-16 
and SR-ISEMercury-2016-22 (both not published).

     First, ISE shall maintain a Regulatory Services 
Agreement (``RSA'') with FINRA, as well as an agreement pursuant to 
Rule 17d-2 under the Act (``17d-2 Agreement'').\11\ Pursuant to the 
RSA and the 17d-2 Agreement, FINRA will be allocated regulatory 
responsibilities to review NES's compliance with certain Exchange 
rules.\12\ Pursuant to the RSA, however, ISE retains ultimate 
responsibility for enforcing its rules with respect to NES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2. FINRA will review NES' compliance for 
certain common rules. The RSA with FINRA specifies the types of 
business activities that NES may undertake and it also indicates the 
obligations to which NES is subject under the RSA. Among other 
things, NES must maintain a certain amount of net capital pursuant 
to SEC Rule 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii) and operate pursuant to SEC Rule 15c3-
3(k)(2)(ii). NES is permitted to route orders in options to the 
appropriate market center for execution in accordance with member 
order and requirements.
    \12\ NES is also subject to independent oversight by FINRA, its 
designated examining authority, for compliance with financial 
responsibility requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Second, FINRA will monitor NES for compliance with the 
Exchange's trading rules, and will collect and maintain certain 
related information.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Pursuant to the RSA, both FINRA and ISE shall collect and 
maintain all alerts, complaints, investigations and enforcement 
actions in which NES (in its capacity as a facility of the 
Affiliated Entities) is identified as a participant that has 
potentially violated applicable Commission or Exchange rules. The 
Exchange and FINRA shall retain these records in an easily 
accessible manner in order to facilitate any potential review 
conducted by the Commission's Office of Compliance Inspections and 
Examinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Third, FINRA will provide a report to the Exchange's 
chief regulatory officer (``CRO''), on a quarterly basis, that: (i) 
Quantifies all alerts (of which the Exchange or FINRA is aware) that 
identify NES as a participant that has potentially violated 
Commission or Exchange rules, and (ii) lists all investigations that 
identify NES as a participant that has potentially violated 
Commission or Exchange rules.
     Fourth, ISE has in place Rule 312, which the Exchange 
proposes to amend into paragraphs (a) and (b) and adopt a new 
paragraph (c) which states that Nasdaq, Inc., as the holding company 
owning ISE and NES, shall establish and maintain procedures and 
internal controls reasonably designed to ensure that NES does not 
develop or implement changes to its system, based on non-public 
information obtained regarding planned changes to ISE's system, 
obtained as a result of its affiliation with the Exchange, until 
such information is available generally to similarly situated 
Exchange Members, in connection with the provision of inbound order 
routing to the Exchange.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Similarly, Phlx Rule 985 also prohibits a Phlx member from 
being or becoming an affiliate of Phlx, or an affiliate of an entity 
affiliated with Phlx, in the absence of an effective filing under 
Section 19(b). See Phlx Rule 985(b)(1)(B) [sic]. Phlx filed a rule 
proposal and received approval based on meeting the four conditions 
specified above to protect the independence of the Exchange's 
regulatory responsibility with respect to NES, and has demonstrated 
that NES cannot use any information advantage it may have because of 
its affiliation with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inbound Routing
    This new rule text provides that Nasdaq, Inc. which owns NES and 
ISE, shall establish and maintain procedures and internal controls 
reasonably designed to ensure that NES does not develop or implement 
changes to its system on the basis of non-public information regarding 
planned changes to the Exchange's systems, obtained as a result of its 
affiliation with the Exchange, until such information is available 
generally to similarly situated Exchange members in connection with the 
provision of inbound routing to the Exchange.
    By meeting the conditions above under Restriction on Affiliation, 
ISE will have set up mechanisms that protect the independence of ISE's 
regulatory responsibilities, with respect to NES, as well as 
demonstrate that NES cannot use any information advantage it may have 
because of its affiliation with ISE.
    The Exchange has approval from Financial Regulatory Authority 
(``FINRA'') \15\ and The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') \16\ 
for NES to perform these inbound routing functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Membership Agreement as between NES and FINRA, dated 
January 15, 2014, provides that NES may ``[e]ngage in the following 
types of business: Route orders in equities and options to the 
appropriate market center for execution in accordance with member 
order and requirements.''
    \16\ On December 5, 2013, OCC provided NES membership approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that each of the Nasdaq Exchanges are also 
separately filing rule changes to permit NES to route orders inbound 
from ISE to the Nasdaq Exchanges.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See SR-NASDAQ-2016-169, SR-Phlx-2016-120 and SR-BX-2016-068 
(not published).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Outbound Routing
    Today, ISE utilizes Linkage Handlers \18\ to route orders. These 
Linkage Handlers are unaffiliated with ISE. The Exchange proposes to 
have NES route, either directly to other options exchanges or 
indirectly through third-party routing brokers on behalf of ISE. 
Regardless of whether a third-party routing broker is utilized, all 
options routing will go through NES, however the Exchange could 
determine to direct NES to route orders to certain exchanges through a 
routing broker rather than routing an order directly. In those cases, 
orders are submitted to the third-party routing broker through NES, and 
the third-party routing broker would route the orders to the routing 
destination in its name. These rules are similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m). 
As part of this proposal, the Exchange will remove references to 
Linkage Handlers in Rule 705, the Supplementary Material to Rule 1901 
and Rule 1903, including the Supplementary Material to Rule 1903. Rule 
1904, which includes references to Linkage Handlers is being replaced 
in its entirety and Rule 1905, which contains references to Linkage 
Handlers is being reserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ A Linkage Handler is a broker that is unaffiliated with the 
Exchange with which the Exchange has contracted to provide Routing 
Services, as that term is defined in Rule 1903, by routing ISO(s) to 
other exchange(s) as agent on behalf of Public Customer and Non-
Customer Orders according to the requirements of Rule 1901 
(prohibition on trade-throughs) and Rule 1902 (prohibition on locked 
and crossed markets). See Supplementary Material .03 to ISE Rule 
1901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend the current Rule 1903 to adopt new 
language similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m). The Exchange proposes to 
maintain the first part of this rule which specifies that the Exchange 
may automatically route ISOs to other exchanges under certain 
circumstances, including pursuant to Supplementary Material .02 to Rule 
1901 which describes trade throughs. This provision, although not 
specified directly within Phlx Rule 1080(m) is also true today for Phlx 
orders. The Exchange believes this language adds more context to the 
Rule.
    Proposed Rule 1903(a), which is similar to Phlx Rule 
1080(m)(iii)(A) would provide that the Exchange shall route orders in 
options via NES, a broker-dealer that is a member of an unaffiliated 
SRO which is the designated examining authority for the broker-dealer. 
NES would serve as the Routing Facility of the Exchange (the ``Routing 
Facility''). The sole use of the Routing Facility by the system would 
route orders in options listed and open for trading on the system to 
away markets either directly or through one or more third-party 
unaffiliated routing broker-dealers pursuant to Exchange rules on 
behalf of the Exchange. The Routing Facility would be subject to 
regulation as a facility of the Exchange, including the requirement to 
file proposed rule changes under Section 19 of the Securities Exchange 
Act of 1934,

[[Page 96095]]

as amended. Similar to Phlx, this rule describes the affiliation to NES 
and indicates the sole use for NES to route orders either directly or 
indirectly. This is the current practice on Phlx today.
    Proposed Rule 1903(b), which is similar to Phlx Rule 
1080(m)(iii)(B), describes that routing is optional. Parties that do 
not desire to use NES must designate orders as Do-Not-Route-Orders as 
described in Rule 715(m).
    Proposed Rule 1903(c), similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(C) states 
that the Exchange shall establish and maintain procedures and internal 
controls reasonably designed to adequately restrict the flow of 
confidential and proprietary information between the Exchange and the 
Routing Facility, and any other entity, including any affiliate of the 
Routing Facility; or, where there is a routing broker, the Exchange, 
the Routing Facility and any routing broker, and any other entity, 
including any affiliate of the routing broker (and if the routing 
broker or any of its affiliates engages in any other business 
activities other than providing routing services to the Exchange, 
between the segment of the routing broker or affiliate that provides 
the other business activities and the segment of the routing broker 
that provides the routing services). Thus this provision would extend 
to the routing broker, if one is used. This is the current practice on 
Phlx today.
    The Exchange proposes to state at Rule 1903(c)(1), the books, 
records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and employees of the 
Routing Facility, as a facility of the Exchange, shall be deemed to be 
the books, records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and 
employees of the Exchange for purposes of and subject to oversight 
pursuant to the Act. The books and records of the Routing Facility, as 
a facility of the Exchange, shall be subject at all times to inspection 
and copying by the Exchange and the Commission. This provision is 
similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(D).
    The Exchange proposes to add language at Rule 1903(c)(2), similar 
to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(F) that states that the Exchange and NES may 
not use a routing broker for which the Exchange or any affiliate of the 
Exchange is the designated examining authority. This provision is 
intended to prevent any conflicts of interest which may arise wherein a 
regulatory oversight entity is privy to trades conducted on ISE.
    The Exchange proposes to add language in Rule 1903(d), similar to 
Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(E) to provide language related to Market Access. 
Specifically, the rule text addresses NES' obligations pursuant to Rule 
15c3-5 under the Act to implement certain tests designed to mitigate 
risks associated with providing the Exchange's Members with access to 
away trading centers. Pursuant to the policies and procedures developed 
by NES to comply with Rule 15c3-5, if an order or series of orders are 
deemed to be violative of applicable pre-trade requirements of Rule 
15c3-5, the order will be rejected prior to routing and/or NES will 
seek to cancel any orders that have been routed.
    The Exchange also proposes to expressly state in Rule 1903(e), 
similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(G), that the Exchange will determine 
the logic that provides when, how, and where orders are routed away to 
other exchanges. In addition, the routing broker(s) cannot change the 
terms of an order or the routing instructions, nor does the routing 
broker have any discretion about where to route an order. The Exchange 
may determine to use a different routing broker by destination 
exchange, depending upon the costs and technological efficiencies 
involved by indirectly routing to that broker through NES. The proposal 
is intended to allow the Exchange to structure its routing arrangements 
accordingly. At a minimum, the Exchange anticipates using a routing 
broker to access certain markets where the Exchange finds that the 
costs of maintaining a membership, for NES, and/or the costs of 
connectivity and execution do not make sense in light of the number or 
types of orders the Exchange typically routes to that particular 
market. These costs necessarily determine the ultimate costs to the 
Exchange of routing to a market, and, in turn, affect how the Exchange 
chooses to recoup those costs through its own transaction fees.\19\ 
Sometimes, it will not make economic sense for NES to access an 
exchange directly. Accordingly, the Exchange would route the order 
through NES to another routing broker where the Exchange determines 
that it is appropriate. In addition to costs, the Exchange will also 
consider ease of connectivity and execution as well as general 
reliability in selecting a routing broker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For these reasons, today, transaction fees for orders vary 
depending on the market where an order is ultimately executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to replace Rule 1903(f) with a provision 
similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(ii), which provides that entering Members 
whose orders are routed to away markets shall be obligated to honor 
such trades that are executed on away markets to the same extent they 
would be obligated to honor a trade executed on the Exchange. This is 
the case today for all orders entered on ISE today pursuant to current 
ISE Rule 1903(f).\20\ The Exchange is simply conforming the rule text 
to Phlx's rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ ISE Rule 1903(f) currently states, ``Any bid or offer 
entered on the Exchange routed to another exchange via a Linkage 
Handler that results in an execution shall be binding on the Member 
that entered such bid/offer.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange is amending the Supplementary Material to 
Rule 1903 to address citations to a ``Linkage Handler.'' In 
Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 1903 the Exchange is replacing the 
term Linkage Handler with references to NES or third-party unaffiliated 
routing broker dealers used by NES. In Supplementary Material .02 to 
Rule 1903 the Exchange is replacing the term Linkage Handler with NES 
in describing the case where routing services cannot be provided by the 
today (Linkage Handler) and now proposed NES. The Exchange is amending 
Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 1903 the Exchange is replacing the 
term ``Linkage Handler'' with ``NES.''
Other Corresponding Changes
    The Exchange proposes to amend ISE Rule 705 to remove the rule text 
in Rule 705(d)(4) which provides an exception to the limits on 
compensation in Rule 705(d) for Members to the extent that such Members 
are acting as Linkage Handlers, as defined in Supplementary .03 to Rule 
1901. NES is replacing the Linkage Handlers for purposes of routing 
options orders from the ISE Exchanges. Today, Phlx does not have a 
similar provision and ISE is removing it from this rule. Unlike NES, 
Linkage Handlers are not affiliated with ISE and therefore the Exchange 
does not believe that this provision is necessary.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Supplementary Material to Rule 
1901 to replace the term ``Linkage Handler'' with ``NES'' and amend the 
cross-reference to define NES. Supplementary Material .02(d) has a 
reference to ``Linkage Handler'' which is being changed to ``NES'' and 
a cross-reference to the Linkage Handler definition in Supplementary 
Material .03 to Rule 1901, which is being deleted, is proposed to be 
replaced with a reference to proposed Rule 1903. Finally, the reference 
to ``Linkage Handler'' in Supplementary Material .05 is being replaced 
with ``NES.''
Cancellation of Orders and Error Accounts
    The Exchange is amending Rule 1904 entitled ``Order Cancelation/
Release'' to retitle the rule ``Cancellation of Orders and Error 
Account.'' The Exchange is replacing the current rule text with rule

[[Page 96096]]

text similar to Phlx Rule 1080(m)(v). The Exchange is also removing and 
reserving Rule 1905, entitled ``Routing Service Error Accounts.''
    Today ISE Rule 1904 provides the Exchange may cancel orders as it 
deems to be necessary to maintain fair and orderly markets if a 
technical or systems issue occurs at the Exchange, a Linkage Handler in 
connection with the Routing Service provided under Rule 1903, or 
another exchange to which an Exchange order has been routed. A Linkage 
Handler may only cancel orders being routed to another exchange based 
on the Exchange's standing or specific instructions or as otherwise 
provided in the Exchange Rules. The Exchange shall provide notice of 
the cancelation of the Members' original order to affected Members as 
soon as practicable.\21\ Further, the Exchange may release orders being 
held on the Exchange awaiting an away exchange execution as it deems 
necessary to maintain fair and orderly markets if a technical or 
systems issue occurs at the Exchange, a Linkage Handler, or another 
exchange to which an Exchange order has been routed.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Rule 1904(a).
    \22\ See Rule 1904(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, ISE Rule 1905 permits each Linkage Handler to maintain, in 
the name of the Linkage Handler, one or more accounts for the purpose 
of liquidating unmatched trade positions that may occur in connection 
with the Routing Service provided under Rule 1903 (``error 
positions''). Errors to which this Rule applies include any action or 
omission by the Exchange, a Linkage Handler, or another exchange to 
which an Exchange order has been routed, that results in an unmatched 
trade position due to the execution of an order that is subject to the 
away market Routing Service and for which there is no corresponding 
order to pair with the execution (each a ``routing error''). Such 
routing errors would include, without limitation, positions resulting 
from determinations by the Exchange to cancel or release an order 
pursuant to Rule 1904. An error position will be liquidated in a 
Linkage Handler's error account.
    A Linkage Handler utilizing its own account to liquidate error 
positions, shall liquidate the error positions as soon as practicable. 
The Linkage Handler shall: (i) Establish and enforce policies and 
procedures reasonable [sic] designed to (1) adequately restrict the 
flow of confidential and proprietary information associated with the 
liquidation of the error positions in accordance with Rule 1903, and 
(2) prevent the use of information associated with other orders subject 
to the Routing Services when making determinations regarding the 
liquidation of error positions; and (ii) make and keep records 
associated with the liquidation of such Linkage Hander error positions 
and shall maintain such records in accordance with Rule 17a-4 under the 
Exchange Act. Finally, the Exchange shall make and keep records to 
document all determinations to treat positions as error positions under 
this Rule and shall maintain such records in accordance with Rule 17a-1 
under the Exchange Act
    The Exchange proposes to adopt language similar to Phlx Rule 
1080(m)(v). This rule provides general authority for Phlx or NES to 
cancel orders in order to maintain fair and orderly markets when 
technical and systems issues are occurring, and Rule 1080(m)(v) also 
sets forth the manner in which error positions may be handled by the 
Exchange or NES.\23\ NES, as the proposed routing broker of the 
Exchange, would be subject to the conditions listed in this proposed 
Rule 1903. The Exchange, pursuant to this proposal, would rely on NES 
to provide outbound routing services from itself to routing 
destinations of NES (``routing destinations''). When NES routes orders 
to a routing destination, it would do so by sending a corresponding 
order in its own name to the routing destination. In the normal course, 
routed orders that are executed at routing destinations are submitted 
for clearance and settlement in the name of NES, and NES arranges for 
any resulting securities positions to be delivered to the member that 
submitted the corresponding order to the Exchange. From time to time, 
however, the Exchange and NES encounter situations in which it becomes 
necessary to cancel orders and resolve error positions.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68393 (December 10, 
2012), 77 FR 74520 (December 14, 2012) (SR-Phlx-2012-134). 
Accordingly, pursuant to proposed ISE Rule 1904, the Exchange is 
responsible for filing with the Commission rule changes and fees 
relating to NES's functions. In addition, the Exchange is using the 
phrase ``NES or the Exchange'' in this rule filing to reflect the 
fact that a decision to take action with respect to orders affected 
by a technical or systems issue may be made in the capacity of NES 
or the Exchange depending on where those orders are located at the 
time of that decision. From time to time, the Exchange may use non-
affiliate third-party broker-dealers to provide outbound routing 
services (i.e., third-party Routing Brokers). In those cases, orders 
are submitted to the third-party Routing Broker through NES, the 
third-party Routing Broker routes the orders to the routing 
destination in its name, and any executions are submitted for 
clearance and settlement in the name of NES so that any resulting 
positions are delivered to NES upon settlement. As described above, 
NES normally would arrange for any resulting securities positions to 
be delivered to the member that submitted the corresponding order to 
the Exchange. If error positions (as defined in proposed ISE Rule 
1904(b)) result in connection with the Exchange's use of a third-
party Routing Broker for outbound routing, and those positions are 
delivered to NES through the clearance and settlement process, NES 
would be permitted to resolve those positions in accordance with 
proposed ISE Rule 1904. If the third-party Routing Broker received 
error positions in connection with its role as a routing broker for 
the Exchange, and the error positions were not delivered to NES 
through the clearance and settlement process, then the third-party 
Routing Broker would resolve the error positions itself, and NES 
would not be permitted to accept the error positions, as set forth 
in proposed ISE Rule 1904(b)(2).
    \24\ The examples described in this filing are not intended to 
be exclusive. Proposed Rule 1904 would provide general authority for 
the Exchange or NES to cancel orders in order to maintain fair and 
orderly markets when technical and systems issues are occurring, and 
Rule 1904 also would set forth the manner in which error positions 
may be handled by the Exchange or NES. The proposed rule change is 
not limited to addressing order cancellation or error positions 
resulting only from the specific examples described in this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Examples of Circumstances That May Lead to Canceled Orders
    A technical or systems issue may arise at NES, a routing 
destination, or the Exchange that may cause the Exchange or NES to take 
steps to cancel orders if the Exchange or NES determines that such 
action is necessary to maintain a fair and orderly market. The examples 
set forth below describe some of the circumstances in which the 
Exchange or NES may decide to cancel orders.
    Example 1. If NES or a routing destination experiences a technical 
or systems issue that results in NES not receiving responses to 
immediate or cancel (``IOC'') orders that it sent to the routing 
destination, and that issue is not resolved in a timely manner, NES or 
the Exchange would seek to cancel the routed orders affected by the 
issue.\25\ For instance, if NES experiences a connectivity issue 
affecting the manner in which it sends or receives order messages to or 
from routing destinations, it may be unable to receive timely execution 
or cancellation reports from the routing destinations, and NES or the 
Exchange may consequently seek to cancel the affected routed orders. 
Once the decision is made to cancel those routed orders, any 
cancellation that a member submitted to the

[[Page 96097]]

Exchange on its initial order during such a situation would be 
honored.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ In a normal situation (i.e., one in which a technical or 
systems issue does not exist), NES should receive an immediate 
response to an IOC order from a routing destination, and would pass 
the resulting fill or cancellation on to the Exchange member. After 
submitting an order that is routed to a routing destination, if a 
member sends an instruction to cancel that order, the cancellation 
is held by the Exchange until a response is received from the 
routing destination. For instance, if the routing destination 
executes that order, the execution would be passed on to the member 
and the cancellation instruction would be disregarded.
    \26\ If a member did not submit a cancellation to the Exchange, 
however, that initial order would remain ``live'' and thus be 
eligible for execution or posting on the Exchange, and neither the 
Exchange nor NES would treat any execution of that initial order or 
any subsequent routed order related to that initial order as an 
error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Example 2. If the Exchange experiences a systems issue, the 
Exchange may take steps to cancel all outstanding orders affected by 
that issue and notify affected members of the cancellations. In those 
cases, the Exchange would seek to cancel any routed orders related to 
the members' initial orders.
Examples of Circumstances That May Lead to Error Positions
    In some instances, the technical or systems issue at NES, a routing 
destination, the Exchange, or a non-affiliate third party Routing 
Broker may also result in NES acquiring an error position that it must 
resolve. The examples set forth below describe some of the 
circumstances in which error positions may arise.
    Example A. Error positions may result from routed orders that the 
Exchange or NES attempts to cancel but that are executed before the 
routing destination receives the cancellation message or that are 
executed because the routing destination is unable to process the 
cancellation message. Using the situation described in Example 1 above, 
assume that the Exchange seeks to cancel orders routed to a routing 
destination because it is not receiving timely execution or 
cancellation reports from the routing destination. In such a situation, 
NES may still receive executions from the routing destination after 
connectivity is restored, which it would not then allocate to members 
because of the earlier decision to cancel the affected routed orders. 
Instead, NES would post those positions into its error account and 
resolve the positions in the manner described below.
    Example B. Error positions may result from an order processing 
issue at a routing destination. For instance, if a routing destination 
experienced a systems problem that affects its order processing, it may 
transmit back a message purporting to cancel a routed order, but then 
subsequently submit an execution of that same order (i.e., a locked-in 
trade) to OCC for clearance and settlement. In such a situation, the 
Exchange would not then allocate the execution to the member because of 
the earlier cancellation message from the routing destination. Instead, 
NES would post those positions into its error account and resolve the 
positions in the manner described below.
    Example C. Error positions may result if NES receives an execution 
report from a routing destination but does not receive clearing 
instructions for the execution from the routing destination. For 
instance, assume that a member sends the Exchange an order to buy 100 
contracts overlying ABC stock, which causes NES to send an order to a 
routing destination that is subsequently executed, cleared, and closed 
out by that routing destination, and the execution is ultimately 
communicated back to that member. On the next trading day (T+1), if the 
routing destination does not provide clearing instructions for that 
execution, NES would still be responsible for settling that member's 
purchase, but would be left with a short position in its error 
account.\27\ NES would resolve the position in the manner described 
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ To the extent that NES incurred a loss in covering its 
short position, it would submit a reimbursement claim to that 
routing destination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Example D. Error positions may result from a technical or systems 
issue that causes orders to be executed in the name of NES that are not 
related to NES's function as the Exchange's routing broker and are not 
related to any corresponding orders of members. As a result, NES would 
not be able to assign any positions resulting from such an issue to 
members. Instead, NES would post those positions into its error account 
and resolve the positions in the manner described below.
    Example E. Error positions may result from a technical or systems 
issue through which the Exchange does not receive sufficient notice 
that a member that has executed trades on the Exchange has lost the 
ability to clear trades through OCC. In such a situation, the Exchange 
would not have valid clearing information, which would prevent the 
trade from being automatically processed for clearance and settlement 
on a locked-in basis. Accordingly, NES would assume that member's side 
of the trades so that the counterparties can settle the trades. NES 
would post those positions into its error account and resolve the 
positions in the manner described below.
    Example F. Error positions may result from a technical or systems 
issue at the Exchange that does not involve routing of orders through 
NES. For example, a situation may arise in which a posted quote/order 
was validly cancelled but the system erroneously matched that quote/
order with an order that was seeking to access it. In such a situation, 
NES would have to assume the side of the trade opposite the order 
seeking to access the cancelled quote/order. NES would post the 
position in its error account and resolve the position in the manner 
described below.
    In the circumstances described above, neither the Exchange nor NES 
may learn about an error position until T+1, either: (1) During the 
clearing process when a routing destination has submitted to OCC a 
transaction for clearance and settlement for which NES never received 
an execution confirmation; or (2) when a routing destination does not 
recognize a transaction submitted to OCC for clearance and settlement. 
Moreover, the affected members' trade may not be nullified absent 
express authority under Exchange rules.\28\ As noted, the Exchange or 
NES would be expressly authorized to cancel orders as may be necessary 
to maintain fair and orderly markets if a technical or systems issue 
occurred at the Exchange, NES, or a routing destination.\29\ The 
Exchange or NES would be required to provide notice of the cancellation 
to affected members as soon as practicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See, e.g., ISE Rule 720.
    \29\ Such a situation may not cause the Exchange to declare 
self-help against the routing destination pursuant to Rule 
1901(b)(1)(i). If the Exchange or NES determines to cancel orders 
routed to a routing destination under proposed Rule 1904, but does 
not declare self-help against that routing destination, the Exchange 
would continue to be subject to the trade-through requirements in 
the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Markets Plan and 
Rule 1901 with respect to that routing destination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NES would be required to maintain an error account for the purpose 
of addressing positions that result from a technical or systems issue 
at NES, the Exchange, a routing destination, or a non-affiliate third-
party Routing Broker that affects one or more orders (``error 
positions''). For purposes of this Rule 1904 an error position shall 
not include any position that results from an order submitted by a 
Member to the Exchange that is executed on the Exchange and 
automatically processed for clearance and settlement on a locked-in 
basis. Except as provided in Rule 1904(b)(3), NES shall not (i) accept 
any positions in its error account from an account of a Member, or (ii) 
permit any Member to transfer any positions from the Member's account 
to NES' error account.\30\ If a technical or systems issue

[[Page 96098]]

results in the Exchange not having valid clearing instructions for a 
Member to a trade, NES may assume that Member's side of the trade so 
that the trade can be automatically processed for clearance and 
settlement on a locked-in basis.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The purpose of this provision is to clarify that NES may 
address error positions under the proposed rule that are caused by a 
technical or systems issue, but that NES may not accept from a 
member positions that are delivered to the member through the 
clearance and settlement process, even if those positions may have 
been related to a technical or systems issue at NES, the Exchange, a 
routing destination of NES, or a non-affiliate third-party Routing 
Broker. This provision would not apply, however, to situations like 
the one described in Example C in which NES incurred a short 
position to settle a member's purchase, as the member did not yet 
have a position in its account as a result of the purchase at the 
time of NES's action (i.e., NES's action was necessary for the 
purchase to settle into the member's account). Similarly, the 
provision would not apply to situations like the one described in 
Example F, where a system issue caused one member to receive an 
execution for which there was not an available contra-party, in 
which case action by NES would be necessary for the position to 
settle into that member's account.
    \31\ See proposed Rule 1904(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with a particular technical or systems issue, NES or 
the Exchange shall either (i) assign all resulting error positions to 
Members, or (ii) have all resulting error positions liquidated. Any 
determination to assign or liquidate error positions, as well as any 
resulting assignments, shall be made in a nondiscriminatory fashion. 
NES or the Exchange shall assign all error positions resulting from a 
particular technical or systems issue to the Members affected by that 
technical or systems issue if NES or the Exchange:
    (i) Determines that it has accurate and sufficient information 
(including valid clearing information) to assign the positions to all 
of the Members affected by that technical or systems issue;
    (ii) determines that it has sufficient time pursuant to normal 
clearance and settlement deadlines to evaluate the information 
necessary to assign the positions to all of the Members affected by 
that technical or systems issue; and
    (iii) has not determined to cancel all orders affected by that 
technical or systems issue in accordance with Rule 1904(a).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See proposed Rule 1904(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, a technical or systems issue of limited scope or 
duration may occur at a routing destination, and the resulting trades 
may be submitted for clearance and settlement by such routing 
destination to OCC. If there were a small number of trades, there may 
be sufficient time to match positions with member orders and avoid 
using the error account.
    If NES or the Exchange is unable to assign all error positions 
resulting from a particular technical or systems issue to all of the 
affected Members, or if NES or the Exchange determines to cancel all 
orders affected by the technical or systems issue in accordance with 
Rule 1904(a), then NES shall liquidate the error positions as soon as 
practicable. NES shall: (i) Provide complete time and price discretion 
for the trading to liquidate the error positions to a third-party 
broker-dealer and shall not attempt to exercise any influence or 
control over the timing or methods of such trading; \33\ and (ii) 
establish and enforce policies and procedures that are reasonably 
designed to restrict the flow of confidential and proprietary 
information between the third-party broker-dealer and NES/the Exchange 
associated with the liquidation of the error positions.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ This provision is not intended to preclude NES from 
providing the third-party broker with standing instructions with 
respect to the manner in which it should handle all error account 
transactions. For example, NES might instruct the broker to treat 
all orders as ``not held'' and to attempt to minimize any market 
impact on the price of the stock being traded.
    \34\ See proposed Rule 1904(c)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, in some cases, the volume of questionable executions 
and positions resulting from a technical or systems issue might be such 
that the research necessary to determine which members to assign those 
executions to could be expected to extend past the normal settlement 
cycle for such executions. Furthermore, if a routing destination 
experiences a technical or systems issue after NES has transmitted IOC 
orders to it that prevents NES from receiving responses to those 
orders, NES or the Exchange may determine to cancel all routed orders 
affected by that issue. In such a situation, NES or the Exchange would 
not pass on to the members any executions on the routed orders received 
from the routing destination.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ If NES determines in connection with a particular technical 
or systems issue that some error positions can be assigned to some 
affected members but other error positions cannot be assigned, NES 
would be required under the proposed rule to liquidate all such 
error positions (including those positions that could be assigned to 
the affected members).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NES and the Exchange would be required to make and keep records to 
document all determinations to treat positions as error positions and 
all determinations for the assignment of error positions to Members or 
the liquidation of error positions, as well as records associated with 
the liquidation of error positions through the third-party broker-
dealer.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See proposed Rule 1904(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    The Exchange intends to begin implementation of the proposed rule 
changes in Q2 2017 in tandem with a technology migration to Nasdaq INET 
architecture. The migration will be on a symbol by symbol basis, and 
the Exchange will issue an alert to members to provide notification of 
the symbols that will migrate and the relevant dates.
    The Exchange notes that with respect to the Rules in Chapter 19, 
Rules 1901, 1903, 1904 and 1905, these rules impact not only the ISE 
market but also ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury because Chapter 19 is 
incorporated by reference into those rulebooks. As noted above, ISE 
Gemini and ISE Mercury have filed to propose that NES may be an 
affiliated Member of those exchanges to similarly perform the specified 
functions pursuant to the specified conditions. ISE rule changes, if 
approved, will be implemented in Q2 2017 on a symbol by symbol basis, 
as noted above. ISE Gemini rule changes, if approved, will be 
implemented in Q1 2017 on a symbol by symbol basis. ISE Mercury rule 
changes, if approved, will be implemented in Q3 2017 on a symbol by 
symbol basis.
    The Exchange will add notations in the rulebook to cross reference 
the amended rule text and make clear the implementation date in each 
rulebook.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 
6(b) of the Act,\37\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 
6(b)(5) of the Act,\38\ 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, because the proposed rule change will allow the Exchange to 
receive inbound orders from each Affiliated Entity through NES, acting 
in its capacity as a facility of the respective Affiliated Entity, in a 
manner consistent with prior approvals and established protections. The 
Exchange believes that these conditions establish mechanisms that 
protect the independence of the Exchange's regulatory responsibility 
with respect to NES, as well as ensure that NES cannot use any 
information it may have because of its affiliation with the Exchange to 
its advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange notes that its proposal 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 because ISE will have set up mechanisms that protect the 
independence of ISE's regulatory responsibilities, with respect to NES, 
as well as demonstrate that NES cannot use any information advantage it

[[Page 96099]]

may have because of its affiliation with ISE. The Exchange will not be 
granting any preferential access to information from the Exchange's 
Order Book to NES. As an affiliated routing broker, NES would not be 
treated differently than any other unaffiliated routing broker.
    The proposal should remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism 
of a free and open market and a national market system by providing 
customer order protection and by facilitating trading at away exchanges 
so customer orders trade at the best market price. The proposal should 
also protect investors and the public interest by fostering compliance 
with the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan. In 
addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal is not designed to 
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or 
dealers, because of the specific protections pertaining to the routing 
broker, in light of the potential conflict of interest where the member 
routing broker could have access to information regarding other 
members' orders or the routing of those orders. These protections 
include the Exchange's control over all routing logic as well as the 
confidentiality of routing information.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See proposed Rule 1903(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal related to the cancellation 
of orders and error account is consistent with the Act because NES's or 
the Exchange's ability to cancel orders during a technical or systems 
issue and to maintain an error account facilitates the smooth and 
efficient operations of the market. Specifically, the Exchange believes 
that allowing NES or the Exchange to cancel orders during a technical 
or systems issue would allow the Exchange to maintain fair and orderly 
markets. Moreover, the Exchange believes that allowing NES to assume 
error positions in an error account and to liquidate those positions, 
subject to the conditions set forth in the proposed amendments to Rule 
1904 would be the least disruptive means to correct these errors, 
except in cases where NES can assign all such error positions to all 
affected members of the Exchange. Overall, the proposed amendments are 
designed to ensure full trade certainty for market participants and to 
avoid disrupting the clearance and settlement process. The proposed 
amendments are also designed to provide a consistent methodology for 
handling error positions in a manner that does not discriminate among 
members. The proposed amendments are also consistent with Section 6 of 
the Act insofar as they would require NES to establish controls to 
restrict the flow of any confidential information between the third-
party broker and NES/the Exchange associated with the liquidation of 
error positions.

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. Receiving orders through NES 
does not raise any issues of intra-market competition because it 
involves inbound routing from an affiliated exchange. This proposal 
provides that Nasdaq, which owns NES and the Exchange, shall establish 
and maintain procedures and internal controls reasonably designed to 
ensure that NES does not develop or implement changes to its system on 
the basis of non-public information regarding planned changes to the 
Exchange's systems, obtained as a result of its affiliation with the 
Exchange, until such information is available generally to similarly 
situated Exchange members and member organizations in connection with 
the provision of inbound routing to the Exchange. Utilizing NES as the 
routing broker does not create any undue burden on inter-market 
competition because NES cannot use any information advantage it may 
have because of its affiliation with ISE. The Exchange will not be 
granting any preferential access to information from the Exchange's 
Order Book to NES. As an affiliated routing broker, NES would not be 
treated differently than any other unaffiliated routing broker.
    The proposal does not result in a burden on competition among 
exchanges, because there are many competing options exchanges that 
provide routing services, including through an affiliate. Further, the 
proposal does not raise issues of intra-market competition, because the 
Exchange's decision to route through a particular routing broker would 
impact all participants equally.
    With respect to the proposal to establish error accounts, the 
Exchange's proposal does not result in a burden on competition among 
exchanges because NES' or the Exchange's ability to cancel orders 
during a technical or systems issue and to maintain an error account 
facilitates the smooth and efficient operations of the market for all 
impacted members. The proposals regarding assumption of error positions 
and [sic] to liquidation of those positions ensures certainty for all 
impacted market participants. The proposal does not discriminate among 
Members.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may 
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to 
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to 
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve 
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings 
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be 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, as modified by Amendment No. 1, 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 rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File Number SR-ISE-2016-27 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-ISE-2016-27. 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

[[Page 96100]]

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-ISE-2016-27, and should be submitted on or before 
January 19, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-31480 Filed 12-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


