EPA ICR No. 2195.03                                       OMB Control
No. 2070-0169

ATTACHMENT G

Memorandum on Calculation of Burden and Cost

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                                  WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

                                            OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND       									          TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: 	Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Human Studies
Rule

	Calculation of Burden and Cost

TO:	File

FROM:	Kelly Sherman

	Human Research Ethics Reviewer

	Office of Pesticide Programs

DATE:	September 2, 2008

Burden Hours for Respondents

	EPA sent consultation questions about the burden and cost estimates to
five respondents – the Agricultural Handlers Exposure Task Force
(AHETF), the Antimicrobial Exposure Assessment Task Force II (AEATF),
Carroll-Loye, ICR, Inc., and Grayson.  These five organizations are
experienced in submitting human subjects research to OPP, and are
expected to make additional submissions over the next several years.
The consultation responses received from these respondents indicated
that EPA’s previous estimates of the burden and cost were too low.  To
calculate new burden and cost estimates for this renewal ICR, EPA relied
upon the estimates provided in the five consultation responses.  EPA
calculated a weighted average of the different responses, recognizing
that some study types are more complicated and costly to conduct than
others.

	The respondent burden and cost estimates that appear in Table 1 in the
ICR, for research involving intentional exposure of human subjects, are
the weighted averages of the values in Table A (burden hour estimates
for agricultural handler studies, from the AHETF), Table B (burden hour
estimates for antimicrobial exposure studies, from the AEATF), and Table
C (burden hour estimates for insect repellant studies, averaged from the
responses received from Carroll-Loye and ICR, Inc.).  The weighted
average was calculated by multiplying the burden hour estimates that
appear in Tables A, B, and C by the expected number of each type of
study, and then dividing the sum of those products by the total number
of studies of all types expected per year.  The expected number of
studies per year was also determined from the consultation responses.

	The respondent burden and cost estimates that appear in Table 2 in the
ICR, for all other submitted research with human subjects, are based on
the consultation response from Joel Panara at Grayson.  Mr. Panara is
familiar with submitting completed study reports to EPA for pre-rule
research for which HSRB protocol review is not required, and his
consultation response was based on his billing records for work
performed on several studies to generate the reports necessary to meet
the requirements of the rule.

Hourly Rates for Respondents

	Four of the five respondents indicated that the hourly rates used by
EPA for calculating the estimated costs are too low.  In determining the
rates, OPP uses a single source of data, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics’ National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and
Wage Estimates, and selects the appropriate occupational category.
Using the BLS data allows EPA to be consistent between across sectors
and occupations.  If OPP were to separately research wages for each ICR,
the methodology in determining the wages would not be consistent and the
wage rates could not be compared between sectors and occupations.  Some
wages would be biased high, while others would be biased low.  The BLS
wages are categorized by North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) codes, and therefore are industry-specific.  They are, however,
national averages.  Therefore, some of the high wages earned by
specialists in high cost localities are offset by others who are less
specialized in lower cost localities.

The wage rates used in the draft ICR were from NAICS 325300 (Pesticide,
Fertilizer, and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing).  Upon
reconsidering the possible NAICS categories, EPA has concluded that
NAICS 541710 is more appropriate because there are a variety of types of
scientists involved in the human studies ICR, with higher education
requirements than in pesticide manufacturing companies.  The wage rates
in NAICS 541710 are slightly higher than those in NAICS 325300, which
helps to address the comments in the consultation responses indicating
that the hourly rates used by the Agency are too low.

Agency Burden and Costs

	The estimated burden and costs to the Agency are derived from input
from EPA staff members who have prepared reviews for studies that were
presented to the HSRB.  Recognizing that some study types are more
complicated and time consuming to review that others, EPA calculated a
weighted average using the staff time estimates and the expected
frequency of receiving different types of studies.  The values
calculated based on the staff input appear in Tables E, F, and G.  The
weighted averages are provided in ICR Tables 3 and 4.

Number of Transactions

	The estimated number of transactions is based heavily on the
consultation responses from the five respondents, as well as EPA’s
historical experience and knowledge of upcoming submissions.

RESPONDENT BURDEN HOUR ESTIMATES

Table A.  Agricultural Handler Exposure Studies – Burden Hour
Estimates from AHETF’s Consultation Response

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	2	2	2	6	506

Prepare and submit protocol for IRB review	5	80	10	95	6,950

Prepare and submit protocol for EPA and HSRB review	15	240	26	276	20,682

Document ethical conduct of a completed study for which EPA and the HSRB
have reviewed the protocol	10	260	10	285	20,780

Store, file, and maintain records	0	2	0	2	48,918

Table B.  Antimicrobial Exposure Studies – Burden Hour Estimates from
AEATF’s Consultation Response, with the adjustment described in
footnote 1

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	2	2	2	6	506

Prepare and submit protocol for IRB review	24	120	40	184	13,752

Prepare and submit protocol for EPA and HSRB review	40	320	40	400	30,560

Document ethical conduct of a completed study for which EPA and the HSRB
have reviewed the protocol	24	80	24	148	10,160

Store, file, and maintain records	8	16	16	40	2,944

Table C.  Insect Repellant Studies – Burden Hour Estimates from an
Average of the Consultation Responses from Carroll-Loye and ICR, Inc.,
with the adjustment described in footnote 2

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	1	1	1	3	253

Prepare and submit protocol for IRB review	54	54	24	132	12,402

Prepare and submit protocol for EPA and HSRB review	20	27	42	89	6,495

Document ethical conduct of a completed study for which EPA and the HSRB
have reviewed the protocol	20	42	26	88	6,918

Store, file, and maintain records	3	6	1	10	894

Table D.  Documentation of Ethical Conduct of a Completed Study for
which EPA and HSRB have NOT reviewed the Protocol (per requirements at
§26.1303) – Burden Hour Estimates Based on Consultation Response from
Joel Panara at Grayson (a laboratory with experience with submitting
this type of info)

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Occurrence	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Document ethical conduct of a completed study for which EPA and the HSRB
have not reviewed the protocol	5	16	8	29	2,194

For ICR Table 1

Weighted Average Burden and Cost Estimates for Respondents – Research
Involving Intentional Exposure of Human Subjects

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Response	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	2	4	2	8	652

Prepare and submit protocol for IRB review	31	83	33	147	11,723

Prepare and submit protocol for EPA and HSRB review	25	181	37	243	18,217

Document ethical conduct of a completed study for which EPA and the HSRB
have reviewed the protocol	19	113	21	153	11,753

Document ethical conduct of a pre-rule study for which EPA and the HSRB
have not reviewed the protocol	5	16	8	29	2,194

Store, file, and maintain records	4	8	6	18	1,388

Total per response	86	405	107	598	45,927

Annual Burden:	598 hours per protocol or completed study * 34 protocols
or 				completed studies per year = 20,332 hours

Annual Costs:		$45,927 per study * 34 protocols or completed studies per
year = 				$1,561,518

For ICR Table 2

Table 2. Respondent Burden and Cost Estimates – All Other Submitted
Research with Human Subjects

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Response	Total Per Response

	Management

$138	Technical

$73	Clerical

$42	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	1	1	0	2	211

Prepare and Submit Ethics Information of Completed Human Studies to EPA
0	8	1	9	626

Store, file, and maintain records	0	0	1	1	42

Total per response	1	9	2	12	879

Annual Burden:	12 hours per study * 20 studies submitted per year = 240
hours

Annual Costs:		$879 per study * 20 studies submitted per year =
$17,580Agency Burden Hour Estimates: Technical Staff

Table E.  Protocol Review

Study Type	Average Annual Number of Protocols	Average Number of Hours
Per Protocol Review	Total Number of Hours

AHETF	4	160	640

AEATF	5	120	600

Repellant Efficacy	6	80	480

Other Types of Post-Rule Intentional Exposure Studies	1	80	80

Weighted Average Number of Hours per Protocol Review	113 hours per
protocol

Estimated Annual Number of Protocol Reviews	16

Table F.  Review of Completed Studies

Study Type	Average Annual Number of Completed Study Reviews	Average
Number of Hours Per Completed Study Review	Total Number of Hours

AHETF	4	80	320

AEATF	5	60	300

Repellant Efficacy	6	40	240

Other Types of Post-Rule Intentional Exposure Studies	1	40	40

Pre-Rule Completed Intentional Exposure Studies that Measure or Identify
a Toxic Effect	2	60	120

Weighted Average Number of Hours per Protocol Review	57 hours per
completed study

Estimated Annual Number of Completed Study Reviews	18

Table G.  Ethics Reviews for Pre-Rule Completed Studies Not Requiring
HSRB Review

Study Type	Average Annual Number of Reviews	Avg. Number of Hours Per
Review	Annual Burden Hour Estimate

Pre-Rule completed studies that do NOT measure or identify a toxic
effect	20	4	80 hours

Burden Hour Estimates: Management and Clerical

Management:

Assume 2 hours for Protocol Reviews and Completed Study Reviews

Assume zero hours for Ethics Reviews for studies not requiring HSRB
Review

Clerical

Assume 2 hours for Protocol Reviews and Completed Study Reviews

Assume 1 hour for Ethics Reviews for studies not requiring HSRB Review

For ICR Table 3

Table 3.  Weighted Average Burden and Cost Estimates for Agency –
Research Involving Intentional Exposure

Activities	Average Burden Hours Per Response	Total Per Response

	Management

$103	Technical

$71	Clerical

$41	Hours	Cost ($)

Rule familiarization and training	2	2	0	4	348

Primary Review of Scientific and Ethical Aspects of a Protocol	1	113	0
114	8,126

Primary Review of Ethical Aspects of a Completed Study Report	1	57	0	58
4,150

Secondary Review of Scientific and Ethical Aspects of a Protocol or
Review of Ethical Aspects of a Completed Study

4,144*

Store, file, and maintain records	0	0	2	2	82

Total per protocol or completed study	4	172	2	178	16,850

* Cost of HSRB members working on the HSRB report (collectively spending
240 hours per HSRB report in FY 2008, compensated at the rate of
$53/hour), plus the cost of EPA Office of the Science Advisor technical
staff working on the HSRB report (171 hours per report, at the technical
staff rate of $71/hour).  Each HSRB report covers an average of 6
protocols and/or completed studies per report.

Annual Burden:  	178 hours per study or protocol * 34 protocols or
completed studies = 6,052 hours

Annual Costs:		16,850 * 34 protocols or completed studies = $572,900

Number of Transactions: February 2009 - January 2012

AHETF Monitoring Program

The AHETF monitoring program defines 33 scenarios, each of which will
typically involve 5 field studies.  About 80 field studies will be
needed to complete the program.

The AHETF plans to complete the program within 5 years.

~30 scenarios in 5 years = ~ 6 scenarios & 6 protocols per year.

For each protocol, there will be a completed study report approximately
1 year later = ~ 6 completed reports per year.

Note that approximately 50% of the time, protocols will need to go to
the HSRB twice, either because the AHETF chooses to present field
studies associated with one scenario at two different HSRB meetings, or
because the protocol is not reviewed favorably during the first visit to
the HSRB.

Original EPA Estimate (prior to consultation):  6 scenario-specific
protocols and 6 scenario-specific study reports per year

AHETF Estimate (from consultation):  4 protocols and 4 study reports per
year

Figures used in ICR:  4 protocols and 4 study reports per year, based on
AHETF’s consultation response

AEATF Monitoring Program

The AEATF monitoring program defines 17 scenarios, each of which will
typically involve a single field study. Some will likely be
observational and thus will not need to undergo HSRB review –
according to Tim L.

The AEATF plans to complete the program within 5 years

~15 scenarios / 5 years = ~ 3 protocols per year.

For each protocol, there will be a completed study report, approximately
1 year later = ~ 3 completed reports per year.

Original EPA Estimate (prior to consultation):  3 scenario-specific
protocols and 3 scenario-specific study reports per year

AEATF Estimate (from consultation): 5 protocols and 5 study reports per
year

Figures used in ICR:  5 protocols and 5 study reports per year, based on
AEATF’s consultation response

Insect Repellent Efficacy Testing

For the past two years we have averaged about 3 protocols or completed
studies at each HSRB meeting.

This is about half the steady-state demand under current requirements.

Therefore, ~ 3 protocols per year.

For each protocol, there will be a completed study report, approximately
1 year later = ~ 3 completed reports per year.

Original EPA Estimate (prior to consultation):  6 protocols and 6
completed studies per year

Carroll-Loye Estimate: an average of 4 protocols and 4 study reports per
year

ICR, Inc. Estimate: an average of 2 protocols and 2 study reports per
year

Figures used in ICR:  6 protocols and 6 study reports per year, adding
together the Carroll-Loye and ICR, Inc. estimates

Other Post-Rule Studies

These could include exposure studies from sources other than the task
forces, ADME studies, skin patch tests of irritation or sensitization,
systemic toxicity tests, or others.

All would require submission of a protocol before execution and of a
completed report after execution; both the protocol and the report would
require both EPA and HSRB review.

Estimate: 1 protocol and 1 completed study per year. (This is likely an
over-estimate)

Pre-Rule Completed Studies which measure or identify a toxic effect

2 categories:

New submissions requiring submission of §26.1303 information

Studies retrieved from the literature or from other sources, not subject
to §26.1303.

There is likely to be a steady trickle of these studies –
approximately 1 case every-other meeting

One case may include multiple individual studies with the same chemical

Estimate: 2 cases per year (requiring study review, but not protocol
review)

Pre-Rule Completed Studies which do not measure or identify a toxic
effect

These studies do not go to the HSRB, but they do require an EPA ethics
review.

Historical level: 20 reviews per year

Assume workload to remain constant over the time period of the ICR

Estimate: 20 per year (requiring EPA ethics review only – not HSRB
review)

TOTAL TRANSACTIONS PER YEAR:

16 protocols per year requiring EPA & HSRB review

AHETF, AEATF, Insect Repellant, and one additional type of post-rule
intentional exposure study

18 completed study reports per year requiring EPA & HSRB review

16 completed study reports for which there was previous protocol review

2 pre-rule studies that measure or identify a toxic effect

20 studies/year requiring EPA ethics review, but not HSRB review
(pre-rule studies that do not measure or identify a toxic effect)

 Values taken from table titled “Calculation of IPC per Human Study
Based on AHETF Experience” in the AHETF’s follow-up consultation
response submission, sent via email from David Johnson to Kelly Sherman
on 8-15-08.

 Values taken from table titled “Calculation of IPC per Human Study
Based on AHETF Experience” in the AHETF’s follow-up consultation
response submission, sent via email from David Johnson to Kelly Sherman
on 8-15-08.

 Values taken from table titled “Calculation of IPC per Human Study
Based on AHETF Experience” in the AHETF’s follow-up consultation
response submission, sent via email from David Johnson to Kelly Sherman
on 8-15-08.

 Values taken from table titled “Table 1: Respondent Burden Estimates:
Unit Costs of Discrete Activities Required by the New Rule” from the
AHETF’s original consultation response submission.  The AHETF’s
values, which were provided “per scenario” rather than “per
study,” were divided by five to obtain per study amounts.

 Values taken from table titled “Calculation of IPC per Human Study
Based on AHETF Experience” in the AHETF’s follow-up consultation
response submission, sent via email from David Johnson to Kelly Sherman
on 8-15-08.

 For the activity “Rule Familiarization and Training,” the AEATF
estimated 12 management hours, 32 technical hours, and 8 clerical hours,
based on expected personnel turnover.  Time spent training new staff is
not properly attributed to the paperwork and recordkeeping burdens of
the rule.  This is a one-time activity.  Since the AEATF is familiar
with the rule, its costs for this activity should be small.  Instead of
using AEATF’s reported numbers, KS used the numbers reported by the
AHETF (2 hrs. for each category).

 For the activity “Rule Familiarization and Training,” Carroll-Loye
estimated 50 management hours, 100 technical hours, and 10 clerical
hours.  This is a one-time activity, and since Carroll-Loye is familiar
with the rule, its costs for this activity should be small.  Thus,
instead of using an average of Carroll-Loye’s and ICR, Inc.’s
numbers, OPP used only the numbers provided by ICR, Inc. for this
activity.

 Comments from the AHETF, AEATF, and ICR, Inc., indicated an average of
2 hours for management, 2 hours for technical, and 2 hours for clerical
for the activity “Rule Familiarization and Training.”  The Agency
considers this burden to be representative of the time expenditure by
experienced submitters.  But EPA recognizes that there may be new
inexperienced entities that may need to spend more time on “Rule
Familiarization and Training.”  In order to capture the total burden
and cost across all submitters, both experienced and inexperienced, OPP
assumed that, in addition to the experienced submitters, there would be
one new submitter per year, and that a new submitter would spend 4
management hours, 16 technical hours, and 2 clerical hours on “Rule
Familiarization and Training.”  The weighted average, covering both
experienced and inexperienced submitters, is 2 management hours, 4
technical hours, and 2 clerical hours.

 Ag handler study estimates based on information from J. Evans, M.
Crowley and J. Carley (EPA/OPP). Antimicrobial exposure study estimates
based on information from T. Leighton, C. Walls, and J. Carley
(EPA/OPP).  Insect repellant study estimates based on information from
C. Fuentes, K. Sweeney, and J. Carley (EPA/OPP).  Other study type
estimates based on information from J. Carley, B. Jordan, and K.
Sherman.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32825-32826]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2016-0033]

Pipeline Safety: Gas and Liquid Advisory Committee Member
Nominations

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Request for nominations for members: Gas and Liquid Pipeline
Advisory Committees; vacancies.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is requesting nominations for individuals to serve on
the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee (GPAC), also known as the Technical
Pipeline Safety Standards Committee, and the Liquid Pipeline Advisory
Committee (LPAC), also known as the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Standards Committee. The GPAC is composed of 15 members
appointed by the Secretary of Transportation after consulting with
public and private agencies concerned with the technical aspect of
transporting gas or operating a gas pipeline facility. The LPAC is
composed of 15 members appointed by the Secretary after consulting with
public and private agencies concerned with the technical aspect of
transporting hazardous liquid or operating a hazardous liquid pipeline
facility.
    With this notice, PHMSA is seeking nominations for two individuals
from the general public: one on the LPAC and one on the GPAC.
Additionally, PHMSA is seeking to fill four state commissioner
vacancies, two on each committee and one federal government vacancy on
the GPAC committee.

DATES: Nominations must be received by June 23, 2016.

ADDRESSES: All nomination material should be emailed to Advisory
Committee Program Manager Cheryl Whetsel at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
mailed to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., PHP-30, E24-445, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Whetsel,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Information about the GPAC and LPAC can also be
obtained by visiting PHMSA's Web site by using the following link:
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/technical-advisory-comm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Advisory Committee Background

    The GPAC and LPAC are statutorily mandated advisory committees that
provide recommendations and advice on PHMSA's proposed safety
standards, risk assessments, and safety policies for gas pipelines and
for hazardous liquid pipelines. Both committees were established in
accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and 49 U.S.C.
60115.
    No later than 90 days after receiving a proposed standard and
supporting analyses, the appropriate committee prepares and submits a
report to the Secretary of Transportation on the technical feasibility,
reasonableness, cost-effectiveness, and practicability of the proposed
standard. The Secretary must publish each report, including any
recommended actions and minority views. The Secretary is not bound by
the committee's conclusions. However, if the Secretary rejects them, he
must publish the reasons.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 60115, the Secretary of Transportation has
the authority to appoint to each committee (1) five individuals from
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the U.S. Government and
of the states; (2) five individuals from the natural gas or hazardous
liquid industry, selected in consultation with industry
representatives; and (3) five individuals selected from the general
public. Two of the individuals selected for each committee from the
government must be state commissioners.
    At least three of the individuals selected for each committee from
the industry must be currently in the active operation of natural gas
or hazardous liquid pipelines or pipeline facilities. At least one
individual selected for each committee serving from the industry must
have education, background, or experience in risk assessment and cost-
benefit analysis.
    Two of the individuals selected for each committee from the general
public must have education, background, or experience in environmental
protection or public safety. At least one individual selected for each
committee serving from the general public must have education,
background, or experience in risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis.
At least one individual selected for each committee from the general
public may not have any financial interest in pipeline, petroleum, or
natural gas industries. No individuals selected for a committee serving
from the general public may have a significant financial interest in
the pipeline, petroleum, or gas industry.

II. Criteria for Committee Members

    The committee members selected by the Secretary of Transportation
must be knowledgeable in the safety regulation of transporting natural
gas or hazardous liquids or operating a natural gas or hazardous liquid
pipeline facility or, nominees that are technically qualified, by
training, experience or knowledge, in at least one field of engineering
applicable to transporting gas or hazardous liquids or operating a gas
or hazardous liquid pipeline facility. Members must also meet the
applicable criteria mentioned under section I of this notice. Nominees
should represent a broad constituency whose views the candidate can
represent. Individuals associated with organizations concerned with
fire safety, pipeline engineering, risk analysis, emergency response,
and other similar public safety groups as well as environmental
protection groups may have the knowledge and experience

we are looking for. In addition, experience working in a consensus
building environment would be helpful. The Secretary will consult with
the national organization of State commissioners before selecting any
state commissioner. Additionally, the Secretary will consult with the
national organizations representing the owners and operators of
pipeline facilities before selecting individuals from the industry.

III. Terms of Service

     Each member serves a three-year term, unless the member
becomes unable to serve, resigns, ceases to be qualified to serve, or
is removed by the Secretary.
     Members may be reappointed.
     All members serve at their own expense and receive no
salary from the Federal Government, although travel reimbursement and
per diem may be provided.
     The GPAC and LPAC generally meet in-person in the
Washington, DC, Metropolitan area.
     PHMSA will ask potential public candidates to provide
detailed information concerning such matters related to financial
holdings, employment, and research grants and/or contracts to permit
evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest.

IV. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified
individuals for membership on the advisory committee. Self-nominations
are also accepted.
     Nominations must include a current, complete
r[eacute]sum[eacute] including current business address and/or home
address, telephone number, and email address, education, professional
or business experience, present occupation, and membership on other
advisory committees past or present) for each nominee.
     Each nominee must meet the training, education or
experience requirements listed under section II above.
     Nominations must also specify the advisory committee for
which the nominee is recommended (the GPAC or LPAC).
     Nominations must also acknowledge that the nominee is
aware of the nomination unless self-nominated.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 18, 2016, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Acting Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2016-12136 Filed 5-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 65 (Friday, April 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18907-18908]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07503]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14597-000]

FFP Project 100, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On March 3, 2014, FFP Project 100, LLC, filed an application for a
preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of hydropower at the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) C. W. Bill Young Lock and Dam located
on the Allegheny River in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The sole
purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed C. W. Bill Young Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project
would consist of the following: (1) A new 150-foot-wide, 200-foot-long
intake channel; (2) a new 200-foot-long by 200-foot-wide concrete
powerhouse containing three generating units each rated at 5.0
megawatts (MW) having a total installed capacity of 15 MW; (3) a new
100-foot-wide, 300-foot-long tailrace channel; (4) new concrete
retaining walls upstream of the intake and downstream of the new
powerhouse; (5) a new 40-foot-long by 40-foot-wide substation; (6) a
new 69-kilovolt transmission line approximately 6,129 feet long from
the new substation to an existing substation; and (7) a new access road
60 feet in length. The estimated annual generation of the proposed
project would be 93 gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Daniel Lissner, Free Flow Power Corporation, 239
Causeway Street, Suite 300, Boston, MA 02114; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    FERC Contact: Monir Chowdhury; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14597-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14597) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 27, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07503 Filed 4-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 7, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18118-18120]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Actions on Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice of actions on special permit applications.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations, notice is hereby given
that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the
application described herein.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General Approvals and Permits Branch,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department
of Transportation, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the applications are available for
inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington DC.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2021.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits Branch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Nature of the special
          Application No.                   Applicant        Regulation(s) affected        permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Special Permits Data--Granted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12116-M............................  Proserv UK Ltd........  173.201, 173.301(f),    To modify the special
                                                              173.302a, 173.304a.     permit to authorize a new
                                                                                design and corrosion
                                                                                resistant cylinder.
14372-M............................  Kidde Technologies Inc  173.309(a), 180.213(a)  To modify the special
                                                                                permit to update the
                                                                                permit with the addition
                                                                                of a new part number.
14784-M............................  Weldship Corporation..  180.209(a),             To modify the special
                                                              180.209(b),             permit to clarify that
                                                              180.209(b)(1)(iv).      either AE/UE or 100% UE
                                                                                testing is authorized for
                                                                                the ten-year
                                                                                requalification period of
                                                                                cylinders.

16154-M............................  Patriot Fireworks USA,  172.101(i), 173.62,     To modify the special
                                      LLC.                    173.62.                 permit to authorize cargo
                                                                                webbing (netting) or metal
                                                                                fencing or grating as
                                                                                authorized methods to
                                                                                secure fireworks against
                                                                                significant lateral
                                                                                movement and preventing
                                                                                the release of any
                                                                                fireworks into the
                                                                                interior of the freight
                                                                                container.
16163-M............................  The Dow Chemical        172.203(a),             To modify the special
                                      Company.                172.302(c),             permit to authorize
                                                              180.605(h),             additional liquid hazmat
                                                              180.605(h)(3).          to be offered for
                                                                                transportation.
20294-M............................  The Dow Chemical        172.302(c),             To modify the special
                                      Company.                173.203(a),             permit to authorize a
                                                              180.605(h)(3).          higher maximum allowable
                                                                                working pressure for UN
                                                                                T11 portable tanks and to
                                                                                authorize two additional
                                                                                hazardous materials.
21041-M............................  KLA Corporation.......  173.212, 173.213......  To modify the special
                                                                                permit to authorize a
                                                                                change in the description
                                                                                of the hazmat being
                                                                                offered for
                                                                                transportation.
21061-M............................  KLA Corporation.......  173.212, 173.213......  To modify the special
                                                                                permit to authorize a new
                                                                                hazmat to be included in
                                                                                the permit.
21063-M............................  Cobham Mission Systems  173.302(a)(1).........  To modify the special
                                      Orchard Park Inc.                               permit to decrease the
                                                                                test pressure.
21112-N............................  Best Sanitizers, Inc..  173.154(b)(1).........  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain corrosive
                                                                                materials as limited
                                                                                quantities despite
                                                                                exceeding the quantity
                                                                                limitations specified in
                                                                                173.154.
21125-N............................  CTS Cylinder Sales LLC  180.209(a),             To authorize the
                                                              180.209(b)(1).          transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain hazardous
                                                                                materials in DOT
                                                                                Specification 3AL
                                                                                cylinders manufactured
                                                                                from aluminum allow 6061-
                                                                                T6 that are requalified
                                                                                every ten years rather
                                                                                than every five years
                                                                                using 100% ultrasound
                                                                                examination.
21136-N............................  Cimarron Composites,    173.302(a)(1).........  To authorize the
                                      LLC.                                            manufacture, mark, sale,
                                                                                and use fiber reinforced
                                                                                composite cylinders with
                                                                                non-load sharing plastic
                                                                                liners in compliance with
                                                                                UN/ISO11515: 2013, Type 4.
21137-N............................  DGM Italia SRL........  172.101(j)............  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of lithium ion batteries
                                                                                exceeding 35 kg by cargo-
                                                                                only aircraft.
21157-N............................  Innophos, Inc.........  ......................  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of polyphosphoric acid in
                                                                                non-authorized
                                                                                specification packaging.
21160-N............................  Alliant Techsystems     173.185(a)(1).........  To authorize the
                                      Operations LLC.                                 transportation in commerce
                                                                                of lithium batteries, that
                                                                                are not of a type proven
                                                                                to have passed the
                                                                                requirements of 38.3 in
                                                                                the UN Manual of Tests and
                                                                                Criteria, when contained
                                                                                in a subassembly.
21185-N............................  Hach Company..........  172.102(b)(4),          To authorization the
                                                              173.36(a).              transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain PG II corrosive
                                                                                materials in UN 50H
                                                                                packagings.
21197-N............................  Walmart Inc...........  172.301(a)(1),          To authorize the one time
                                                              172.301(c),             one way transportation of
                                                              172.301(d),             hand sanitizer for
                                                              172.312(a)(2).          donation in mismarked
                                                                                cartons. (mode 1)
21202-N............................  Lanxess Canada Co./cie  173.24(f)(1),           To authorize the one-time,
                                                              173.32(e).              one-way transportation in
                                                                                commerce of organometallic
                                                                                liquid in a portable tank
                                                                                that has a defective valve
                                                                                that has been temporarily
                                                                                repaired.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Special Permits Data--Denied
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16074-M............................  Welker, Inc...........  173.201, 173.202,       To modify the special
                                                              173.203.                permit to clarify the
                                                                                volume capacity of the
                                                                                approved pressure vessels.
20939-N............................  Arianegroup SAS.......  172.101(c), 173.166...  To authorize the
                                                                                manufacture, mark, sale,
                                                                                and use of certain fire
                                                                                suppression devices as
                                                                                safety devices.
21068-N............................  Firepro Systems         173.166...............  To authorize the
                                      Limited.                                        transportation in commerce
                                                                                of fire extinguishing
                                                                                products which are classed
                                                                                as Safety Devices.
21077-N............................  Kraton Corporation....  173.31(d)(1)(ii)......  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of tank cars that have
                                                                                been leakage tested in
                                                                                lieu of visually inspected
                                                                                prior to shipping.
21085-M............................  Omron Robotics and      172.101(j),             To modify the special
                                      Safety Technologies,    173.185(b)(3).          permit to authorize
                                      Inc.                                            additional supplemental
                                                                                ICAO TI packing
                                                                                instructions.
21098-N............................  The Dow Chemical        172.203(a),             To authorize the
                                      Company.                172.302(c),             transportation in commerce
                                                              173.31(d)(1)(ii).       of tank car tanks in which
                                                                                the manway cover gasket
                                                                                has been subjected to an
                                                                                alternative external
                                                                                visual inspection.
21147-N............................  iPackchem Group SAS...  173.158(f)(3).........  To authorize the
                                                                                manufacture, mark, sale,
                                                                                and use of UN 4G
                                                                                specification packagings
                                                                                for the transport of
                                                                                nitric acid where the
                                                                                primary receptacles are
                                                                                not individually
                                                                                overpacked in tightly
                                                                                closed metal packagings.
21153-N............................  BVI Medical, Inc......  171.24(d)(2),           To authorize the
                                                              173.302(f).             transportation in commerce
                                                                                of oxidizing gases
                                                                                contained in small
                                                                                pressure vessels via cargo-
                                                                                only aircraft.
21170-N............................  Westwind Helicopters,   172.101(j)............  To authorize the
                                      Inc.                                            transportation in commerce
                                                                                of certain hazardous
                                                                                materials by passenger-
                                                                                carrying aircraft in
                                                                                quantities that exceed the
                                                                                limitation in Column (9A)
                                                                                of the 172.101 Table.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                         Special Permits Data--Withdrawn
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3121-M.............................  Department of Defense   172.101(i)............  To modify the special
                                      US Army Military                                permit to correct certain
                                      Surface Deployment &                            references and practices
                                      Distribution Command.                           to more accurately align
                                                                                with current regulations
                                                                                and practices.
10631-M............................  Department of Defense   173.243, 173.244......  To modify the special
                                      (military Surface                               permit to correct certain
                                      Deployment &                                    references and practices
                                      Distribution Command).                          to more accurately align
                                                                                with current regulations
                                                                                and practices.
21058-N............................  Versum Materials, Inc.  180.209...............  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of cylinders with a water
                                                                                capacity not exceeding 125
                                                                                lbs. that have been
                                                                                retested every 10 years as
                                                                                opposed to the 5-year
                                                                                retest frequency required
                                                                                in Sec.   180.209. In
                                                                                addition, it is requested
                                                                                that the special permit
                                                                                provide relief from Sec.
                                                                                180.209(b)(1)(iv) in that
                                                                                combined acoustic emission
                                                                                and ultrasonic examination
                                                                                (AE/UE) or 100% UE methods
                                                                                are authorized in lieu of
                                                                                hydrostatic testing.
21071-N............................  The Kansas City         174.85................  To authorize the
                                      Southern Railway                                transportation in commerce
                                      Company.                                        of rail shipments without
                                                                                using buffer cars as
                                                                                required by 49 CFR 174.85.
21133-N............................  Securaplane             172.102(b)(2).........  To authorize the
                                      Technologies, Inc.                              transportation in commerce
                                                                                of lithium ion batteries
                                                                                at a state of charge
                                                                                exceeding 30%.
21145-N............................  Reg Grays Harbor LLC..  173.31(d)(1)(ii)......  To authorize the
                                                                                transportation in commerce
                                                                                of tank cars that have
                                                                                been pneumatic positive
                                                                                pressure tested in lieu of
                                                                                visually inspected prior
                                                                                to shipping.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-07145 Filed 4-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 76142]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29811]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG14-16-000.
    Applicants: Fortistar North Tonawanda Inc.
    Description: Self-Certification of EG or FC of Fortistar North
Tonawanda Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131205-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/13.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1725-003.
    Applicants: Red Oak Power, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Red Oak
Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131205-5092.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-374-001.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, Inc., Duke Energy Florida, Inc.,
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: OATT Order No. 764 Compliance filing (Amendment) to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/5/13.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/13.
    Accession Number: 20131205-5080.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-536-000.
    Applicants: Smoky Mountain Transmission LLC.
    Description: Normal Schedule 3 Duke to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 12/4/13.
    Accession Number: 20131204-5102.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-537-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, Inc.
    Description: Duke Energy Florida, Inc. submits OATT Formula
Transmission Rates (DEF) to be effective 2/3/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131205-5108.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 5, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29811 Filed 12-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75577-75582]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31001]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65843; File No. SR-CBOE-2011-107]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending and
Restating the CBSX Operating Agreement and Adopting Rule 2.50

November 28, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 28, 2011, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change
as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by
the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend and restate the Second Amended and

Restated Operating Agreement (``Operating Agreement'') of CBOE Stock
Exchange, LLC (``CBSX'') and adopt new Rule 2.50 in connection with
CBSX's proposed acquisition (the ``Transaction'') of the National Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``NSX''). The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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
a. Transaction
    Currently, NSX is wholly and directly owned by NSX Holdings, Inc.
(``NSX Holdings''). Under a Purchase Agreement (the ``Purchase
Agreement'') dated September 28, 2011 by and between NSX, NSX Holdings
and CBSX, CBSX will acquire all of the outstanding capital stock of NSX
on the date of or after all conditions precedent to closing \3\ have
been satisfied or waived, including approval by the Commission of this
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Conditions precedent to closing the Transaction are formal
requirements set forth in the Purchase Agreement and include
delivery of certain documents (such as officers' certificates, legal
opinions, and agreements), compliance by each party with specified
representations, warranties and covenants, and receipt of necessary
approvals by each party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the Transaction, NSX will be a wholly owned subsidiary of
CBSX. NSX will remain a Delaware for-profit stock corporation, with the
authority to issue 1,000 shares of common stock, 100 shares of which
would be held by CBSX. At all times, all of the outstanding stock of
NSX would be owned by CBSX. NSX would remain registered as a national
securities exchange under Section 6 of the Act,\4\ and accordingly, NSX
would remain a self-regulatory organization (``SRO'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \5\ NSX would continue to adhere to the undertakings in the
Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings
Pursuant to Sections 19(h) and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Sanctions, including those
related to a Regulatory Oversight Committee and the separation of
the regulatory functions from the commercial interests of NSX. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51714 (May 19, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2007, the Commission approved the establishment of CBSX as a
facility, as defined in Section 3(a)(2) of the Act,\6\ of CBOE.\7\ As
the SRO for CBSX, CBOE has regulatory responsibility for the activities
of CBSX. CBSX administers a fully automated trading platform for
securities other than options (the ``Facility''). As a limited
liability company, the governance structure and operating authority of
CBSX are set forth in the Operating Agreement and the CBSX Certificate
of Formation. In connection with the establishment of the Facility,
CBOE adopted Rule 3.32 pertaining to ownership concentration and
affiliation limitations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(2).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55389 (March 2,
2007), 72 FR 10575 (March 8, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2006-110) (the ``CBSX
Approval Order''); see also Securities Exchange Act Release No.
55172 (January 25, 2007), 72 FR 4745 (February 1, 2007) (SR-CBOE-
2006-110) (the ``CBSX Notice of Filing'').
    \8\ See CBSX Order Approval and CBSX Notice of Filing. CBOE Rule
3.32(a) provides, in part:
    For as long as CBSX LLC operates as a facility of the Exchange,
no Trading Permit Holder, either alone or together with its
Affiliates, at any time, may own, directly or indirectly, of record
or beneficially, an aggregate amount of Shares that would result in
a greater than twenty percent (20%) Percentage Interest in CBSX LLC
(the ``Concentration Limitation'').
    In addition, the Certificate of Incorporation of CBOE Holdings,
Inc., the owner of CBOE (``CBOE Holdings''), provides that no person
(either alone or together with its related persons) may beneficially
own more than 20% of the total outstanding shares of CBOE Holdings
stock. See Article Sixth (b) of the Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation of CBOE Holdings, Inc.; see also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62158 (May 24, 2010), 75 FR 30082 (May 28,
2010) (SR-CBOE-2008-88).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a limited liability company, ownership of CBSX is represented by
limited liability membership interests. The holders of such interests
are referred to as ``Owners.'' CBOE is one of the Owners of CBSX and
owns all outstanding ``Series A'' Voting Shares \9\ of CBSX,
representing just under 50% of all outstanding shares of CBSX.\10\ The
outstanding ``Series B'' Voting Shares of CBSX are held by nine broker-
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``Voting Shares'' means those Shares entitled to vote on
matters submitted to the Owners, which Voting Shares are held by the
Voting Owners. See Section 2.1(a)(28) of the Operating Agreement.
    \10\ As noted in Section 3.2 of the Operating Agreement, it is
the intention of the Owners that no other members of CBSX (other
than Affiliates of CBOE) be owners of Series A Voting Shares, and
that no additional Series A Voting Shares be authorized, created or
issued for such purpose; provided however, that this provision is
not intended to limit or restrict any rights of CBOE to transfer any
of its Series A Voting Shares with the prior approval of the
Commission as provided for in Article VI, including Section 6.14, of
the Operating Agreement, or any other provision thereof, or any
rights to be acquired by a transferee of those Shares as provided
therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As provided in Section 8.9 of the Operating Agreement, the
outstanding Series A Voting Shares, in the aggregate (and without being
deemed to be a voting trust), are entitled to a number of votes equal
to 50% of the total number of Voting Shares outstanding on each matter
submitted to a vote of the Owners. Each outstanding Series B Voting
Share is entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote of the
Owners.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Operating Agreement also creates a Series C Non-Voting
Restricted Shares; however, these Shares are not entitled to vote on
any matter submitted to a vote of the Owners, and there are
currently no Series C shares outstanding. See Section 8.9 of the
Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CBSX Approval Order and the CBSX Notice of Filing describe
various characteristics of CBSX, including: the relationship between
CBSX and CBOE; changes in control of CBSX; the regulatory jurisdiction
of the Commission and CBOE over the controlling parties and the Owners;
and the ownership and voting restrictions on Owners.\12\ These
provisions, as contained in the Operating Agreement and applicable CBOE
rules, will remain unchanged after the Transaction except as otherwise
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Section 6.12(a) of the Operating Agreement provides that no
person (other than CBOE), either alone or together with its
Affiliates, may directly or indirectly own an aggregate amount of
Shares that would result in a greater than 20% Percentage Interest
in CBSX (the ``Concentration Limitation''). In addition, Section
8.10 provides that if an Owner of Series B Voting Shares that is
also a CBOE member owns more than 20% of the outstanding Voting
Shares (``Excess Shares''), alone or together with any Affiliate,
such Owner will have no voting rights with respect to the Excess
Shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Proposed Rule Change
    In connection with the Transaction, CBOE proposes to amend and
restate the Operating Agreement to be effective as of the closing of
the Transaction. CBOE also proposes to adopt new Rule 2.50 regarding
its policy with respect to NSX.
i. CBSX's Ownership of NSX
    The proposed rule change includes several amendments related to
CBSX's ownership of NSX. These amendments address the fact that CBSX
will become a holding company of NSX after the Transaction to the
extent related to

CBSX's control of NSX and clarify CBSX's rights and responsibilities
related to its role as a holding company of a registered national
securities exchange (amendments related to such responsibilities are
further discussed in Section (ii) below). For example, the proposed
rule change amends Section 1.6 to provide that the Company's sole
purposes (and any other lawful purposes related to those purposes) will
be: (1) To act as a trading market for securities other than options as
a facility of a registered national securities exchange and (2) to act
as a holding company of NSX. The proposed rule change also amends
several provisions to clarify that certain references to CBSX include
its subsidiaries, including NSX.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., proposed Sections 1.6 and 9.15(a)(9) and (10) of
the Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposal amends Section 6.12 to provide that the
Concentration Limitation described in that section does not apply to
CBOE or CBOE Holdings, and to expand applicability of the Concentration
Limitation to persons and their Related Persons \14\ rather than to
persons and their Affiliates.\15\ The proposal also amends Section
6.12(c) and (e) to impose on NSX equity trading permit holders the
Concentration Limitation prohibitions described in those paragraphs,
which are currently only imposed on CBOE Trading Permit Holders. The
proposal makes similar amendments to Section 8.10 to expand
applicability of the voting restriction described in that section to
persons and their Related Persons and to provide that if any person,
not just a CBOE Trading Permit Holder, exceeds the Concentration
Limitation set forth in Section 6.12 of the Operating Agreement, then
the Owner and its Related Persons will have no voting rights with
respect to the shares in excess of such limitation unless it satisfies
certain requirements set forth in proposed Section 8.10(b) through (d),
which are similar to the requirements set forth in Section 6.12(b), (c)
and (e). The proposed rule change also extends the applicability of the
voting restriction in Section 8.10 to voting agreements, plans and
arrangements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Proposed Rule 2.1(a)(23) of the Operating Agreement defines
``Related Person'' as (A) with respect to any person, all
``affiliates'' as such term is defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act); (B) any person associated with a member (as the phrase
``person associated with a member'' is defined under Section
3(a)(21) of the Exchange Act); (C) any two or more persons that have
any agreement, arrangement or understanding (whether or not in
writing) to act together for the purpose of acquiring, voting,
holding or disposing of shares of CBSX; (D) in the case of a person
that is a company, corporation or similar entity, any executive
officer (as defined under Rule 3b-7 of the Exchange Act) or director
of such person and, in the case of a person that is a partnership or
a limited liability company, any general partner, managing member of
manager of such person, as applicable; (E) in the case of a person
that is a natural person, any relative or spouse of such natural
person, or any relative of such spouse who has the same home as such
natural person or who is a director or officer of CBSX or any of
CBSX's parents or subsidiaries; (F) in the case of a person that is
an executive officer (as defined under Rule 3b-7 of the Exchange
Act) or a director of a company, corporation or similar entity, such
company, corporation or entity, as applicable; and (G) in the case
of a person that is a general partner, managing member or manager of
a partnership or limited liability company, such partnership or
limited liability company, as applicable. Under this definition,
Related Persons include Affiliates and thus extends the
Concentration Limitation imposed by proposed Rule 6.12 to a broader
group of persons.
    \15\ Rule 2.1(a)(1) of the Operating Agreement defines
``Affiliate'' as, with respect to any person, any other person that
directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries,
controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, such
person. As used in this definition, ``control'' means the
possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause
the direction of management and policies of a person, whether
through the ownership of voting securities, by contract or otherwise
with respect to such person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal also amends Section 9.15(a)(9) to clarify that with
respect to a sale of material assets or ownership interests that
requires approval pursuant to Section 9.15, ``material assets or
ownership interests'' include subsidiaries of CBSX. In addition, the
proposed rule change adds Section 15.19 to the Operating Agreement,
which obligates CBSX, when voting as NSX's sole shareholder in an
election of the NSX board of directors, to vote in favor of ETP Holder
Directors (a certain class of directors defined in the NSX Bylaws) that
were nominated in accordance with the procedures set forth in NSX's
certificate of incorporation and bylaws.
ii. Self-Regulatory Function of NSX
    The proposed rule change adds various provisions designed to
protect the independence of the self-regulatory function of NSX and to
clarify NSX's jurisdiction with respect to CBSX, but only to the extent
related to CBSX's control of NSX. For example, the proposed rule change
adds Section 5.7(b), which, among other things:
     For so long as CBSX controls NSX, only to the extent
related to the activities of NSX, requires CBSX Owners, board of
directors, officers and employees to give due regard to the
preservation of the independence of the self-regulatory function of NSX
and to its obligations under the Act;
     Prohibits these persons from taking any actions that would
interfere with the effectuation of any decisions by the NSX board of
directors relating to NSX's regulatory functions, including
disciplinary matters, or with NSX's ability to carry out its
responsibilities under the Act; and
     Requires CBSX to comply with federal securities laws and
the rules and regulations thereunder, and requires CBSX and its
officers, directors, employees and agents to cooperate with the
Commission and NSX pursuant to and to the extent of their regulatory
authority.
    In addition, the proposed rule change amends Section 6.15 to
clarify possession of CBSX's and its Owners' books and records by the
Facility and NSX in connection with their oversight pursuant to the
Act. The proposed rule change amends Section 6.15(a): \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Section 6.15(a) of the Operating Agreement currently
provides: ``The Owners acknowledge that to the extent they are
related to [CBSX's] activities, the books, records, premises,
officers, directors, agents, and employees of the Owners shall be
deemed to be the books, records, premises, officers, directors,
agents, and employees of CBOE for the purpose of and subject to
oversight pursuant to the Exchange Act.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To clarify that the Owners acknowledge that the books,
records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and employees of the
Owners will be deemed to be the books, records, premises, officers,
directors, agents, and employees of CBOE for the purpose of and subject
to oversight pursuant to the Act, but only to the extent they are
related to the Facility; and
     To add the provision that the Owners acknowledge that the
books, records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and employees of
the Owners will be deemed to be the books, records, premises, officers,
directors, agents, and employees of NSX for the purpose of and subject
to oversight pursuant to the Act, but only to the extent they are
related to the activities of NSX.
    Similarly, the proposed rule change amends Section 6.15(b): \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Section 6.15(b) of the Operating Agreement currently
provides: ``The books, records, premises, officers, directors,
agents, and employees of [CBSX] shall be deemed to be the books,
records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and employees of
CBOE for the purpose of and subject to oversight pursuant to the
Exchange Act.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To clarify that the books, records, premises, officers,
directors, agents, and employees of CBSX will be deemed to be the
books, records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and employees of
CBSX for the purpose of and subject to oversight pursuant to the Act,
but only to the extent related to the Facility; and
     To add the provision that the books, records, premises,
officers, directors, agents, and employees of CBSX will be deemed to be
the books, records, premises, officers, directors, agents, and
employees of NSX for the purpose of and subject to oversight pursuant
to the

Act, but only to the extent related to the activities of NSX.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ CBSX's complete records and books of account must be
subject at all times to inspection and examination by CBOE (to the
extent related to the Facility), NSX (to the extent related to
CBSX's control of NSX), and the Commission at no additional charge
to CBOE, NSX and the Commission, as applicable. See proposed Section
13.2 of the Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal also amends Section 6.15(c) to provide that CBSX and
the Owners and their respective officers, directors, agents, and
employees,\19\ irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of the U.S.
federal courts, the Commission, CBOE and NSX for the purposes of any
suit, action, or proceeding pursuant to U.S. federal securities laws or
the rules or regulations thereunder, commenced or initiated by the
Commission arising out of, or relating to, the Facility or the
Company's control of NSX, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Proposed Rule 6.15(c) (consent to jurisdiction) and (d)
(consent in writing to applicability) also extend the requirements
of these provisions to all agents and employees of the Company and
its Owners, rather than only agents and employees whose principal
place of business and residence is outside of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule change amends Sections 9.15(c) and
9.16 to provide that CBSX directors agree to comply with the federal
securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, and to
cooperate with the Commission, CBOE, and NSX pursuant to their
regulatory authority, as applicable, and the provisions of the
Operating Agreement. The proposal also amends Section 9.15(c) to
provide that CBSX directors will take into consideration whether any
actions taken or proposed to be taken as a director for or on behalf of
CBSX, or any failure or refusal to act, would constitute interference
with CBOE's or NSX's regulatory functions and responsibilities, as
applicable, in violation of the Operating Agreement or the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Interference with respect to the Facility will be
determined by the CBSX board designees of CBOE. See proposed Section
9.15(c) of the Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the proposal amends Section 14.1(a) to provide that,
for so long as CBSX controls NSX, before any amendment, alteration, or
repeal of any provision of the Operating Agreement, to the extent
related to CBSX's control of NSX, will be effective, such amendment,
alteration, or repeal must be submitted to the NSX board of directors,
and if CBOE and the NSX board of directors determine that such
amendment, alteration, or repeal must be filed with or filed with and
approved by the Commission, then such amendment, alteration, or repeal
will not become effective until filed with or filed with and approved
by the Commission, as the case may be. The proposal also adds a 10-day
notice provision for any amendment, alteration, or repeal of the
Operating Agreement made pursuant to Section 14.1(a) to provide CBOE
and NSX with sufficient opportunity to review any potential regulatory
impacts of such amendment, alteration, or repeal before it becomes
effective.
    The proposal also amends Section 15.2 to provide that nothing in
the Operating Agreement will be interpreted to limit or impede the
rights of the Commission, CBOE, or NSX to access and examine any
Confidential Information (as defined in the Operating Agreement)
pursuant to the U.S. federal securities laws and the rules thereunder,
or to limit or impede the ability of an Owner or an officer, director,
agent, or employee of an Owner to disclose any Confidential Information
to the Commission, CBOE, or NSX. Proposed Section 15.2 also provides
that the obligation of Owners not to disclose Confidential Information
described in that section does not apply to CBOE's or NSX's
communications with the Commission with respect to the conduct of the
Facility's business or NSX's business, respectively. In addition, the
proposal amends the representation being made by Owners in Section
15.17(a) with respect to the validity and enforceability of the
Operating Agreement by excepting the requirement, as applicable to the
Facility or NSX (with respect to CBSX's control of NSX), that the
portions of the Operating Agreement that constitute rules of a facility
of an exchange or rules of a self-regulatory organization, as
applicable, be filed for public comment and approval by the Commission
from that representation.
    The proposed rule change adds CBOE Rule 2.50 to further preserve
the self-regulatory function of NSX. Rule 2.50 proposes a policy that
CBOE, as a partial owner of CBSX, will not take any action related to
NSX's activities that would interfere with NSX's efforts to carry out
its self-regulatory obligations under the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. Additionally, proposed Rule 2.50 provides that
the Exchange will exercise its powers as a partial owner of CBSX to
support the fulfillment by NSX of its self-regulatory obligations,
including the appropriate allocation by NSX of such financial,
technological, technical and personnel resources as may be necessary or
appropriate for NSX to meet its obligations under the Exchange Act.
While the Exchange is not a guarantor of NSX's compliance with the
Exchange Act and will not be in a position to monitor the day-to-day
operations of NSX, the purpose of proposed Rule 2.50(a) is to provide
that the Exchange will, through CBSX and consistent with its
relationship with CBSX, work with NSX to establish and maintain
appropriate resources in connection with NSX's self-regulatory
obligations, as well as to establish a framework by which NSX will
affirmatively report deficiencies in fulfilling its self-regulatory
obligations to the CBSX board of directors while taking action to
remedy such deficiencies.
iii. Facility of CBOE
    The proposed rule change amends various provisions to clarify that
the part of CBSX that constitutes the Facility is a facility of CBOE
under the Act, while the part of CBSX that relates to its control of
NSX will not be a facility of CBOE. For example, the proposal amends
Section 1.7 to clarify that the Facility (and not CBSX to the extent it
will act as a holding company for NSX) is a facility of CBOE under the
Act, and therefore the Facility will be subject to self-regulation by
CBOE and oversight by the Commission. The proposal also amends Section
1.8 to clarify that only the Facility is a facility of CBOE.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See also proposed Sections 6.2(e), 6.15(c) and (d), 9.2(d),
9.15(a)(14) and 14.1(a) for additional such clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iv. Additional Changes
    Finally, the proposed rule change makes several non-substantive
technical and conforming changes throughout the Operating Agreement,
including: Updating the name and date of the Operating Agreement;
updating the current Owners and their current percentage interests and
CBSX shares owned; \22\ replacing references to CBOE members with CBOE
trading permit holders; \23\ updating the table of contents and section
references; and adding new defined terms and renumbering the defined
terms as necessary.\24\ In connection with the updates to reflect the
current Owners, the proposed rule change amends the definition of
``Super Majority of the Owners'' to mean, subject to the regulatory
requirements described in Section 1.8 of the Operating Agreement, the
affirmative vote of both (i) all of the Owners of the Series A Voting
Shares at the time, and

(ii) Owners of the Series B Voting Shares who then retain ownership of
Series B Voting Shares and represent at least a twenty (20%) percentage
interest in CBSX, which more accurately corresponds to CBSX's current
ownership structure.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See proposed Section 3.2(d) of and signature page and
Exhibit A to the Operating Agreement.
    \23\ See proposed Sections 6.12(c) and (e) and 8.10 of the
Operating Agreement.
    \24\ See proposed Section 2.1 of the Operating Agreement.
    \25\ See proposed Rule 2.1(a)(26). This change is consistent
with the original structure of CBSX under which a super majority
could be obtained with an affirmative vote of CBOE and two initial
owners, who all initially had ten (10%) percentage interests in
CBSX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6 of the Act \26\ and the rules and regulations thereunder and,
in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\27\
Specifically, the Exchange believes the amendments described in Item
II(A)(1)(b)(iii), including amendments to Sections 1.7 and 1.8, that
clarify the Facility is a facility of CBOE under the Act further the
objective of Section 6(b)(1) of the Act because they ensure that CBOE
will continue to have the necessary authority to perform its regulatory
responsibilities with respect to the Facility under Section 6 of the
Act. Additionally, this clarification of what constitutes the Facility
ensures that CBSX, to the extent it controls NSX, is not part of the
Facility and thus is not subject to CBOE's regulatory authority over
the Facility, which the Exchange believes will preserve the
independence of NSX's self-regulatory functions and allow NSX to
fulfill its self-regulatory duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that this proposed rule change furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\28\ because the
amendments summarized in this filing will ensure that CBSX and NSX
continue to have governance and regulatory structures designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts, to remove impediments to and to perfect the
mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. In
particular, the amendments to Sections 6.12 and 8.10 described in Item
II(A)(1)(b)(i) above extend certain ownership and voting restrictions
to NSX equity trading permit holders in addition to CBOE trading permit
holders to ensure that CBSX continues to promote equitable principles
of trade by not allowing certain interested parties to have excessive
influence over CBSX's activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The addition of Section 5.7(b) (described in Item II(A)(1)(b)(ii)
above) is intended to preserve the independence of NSX's self-
regulatory function and ensure that NSX is able to obtain any
information it needs from the specified parties to detect and deter any
fraudulent and manipulative acts in its marketplace and carry out its
regulatory responsibilities under the Act. Similarly, the amendments to
Section 6.15(a) and (b) (described in Item II(A)(1)(b)(ii) above) that
clarify that CBSX's books and records with respect to the Facility and
NSX's activities will be subject to the necessary oversight of the Act
are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, because they provide
for the Commission, CBOE and NSX to have access to necessary
information that will allow CBOE and NSX to efficiently and effectively
enforce compliance with the Act and their respective rules, as well as
allow the Commission to provide proper oversight, which will ultimately
promote just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors.
The amendment to Section 14.1(a) (described in Item II(A)(1)(b)(ii)
above) is intended to make sure that NSX receives notice of any
amendment to the Operating Agreement so that it can make any filings
with the Commission necessary for NSX to fulfill its regulatory duties
under the Act.
    The Exchange represents that it remains committed to its role as a
national securities exchange and does not believe that the proposed
changes to the Operating Agreement will undermine the Exchange's
responsibilities for regulating the Facility. The proposed rule change
provides transparency and clarity with respect to the governance of
CBSX and the status of CBSX as both a facility of CBOE and a holding
company of NSX. Additionally, the proposed rule changes are intended to
protect and maintain the integrity of the self-regulatory functions of
CBOE with respect to the Facility and of NSX, and to allow both CBOE
and NSX to carry out their regulatory responsibilities under the Act.
    Moreover, the Exchange is not proposing any significant changes to
CBSX's existing operational or trading structure in connection with the
Transaction. Instead, the Exchange represents that the proposed rule
change primarily consists of amendments to the Operating Agreement that
will allow for CBSX's ownership of NSX, which are generally consistent
with parallel provisions of governance documents of other companies
that directly control SROs, which were previously approved by the
Commission,\29\ and with the principles articulated by the
Commission,\30\ while allowing CBOE to maintain its regulatory
jurisdiction and authority over the Facility and NSX to remain an
independent self-regulatory organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Articles Sixth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth of the Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of CBOE Holdings, Inc.;
see also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62158 (May 24, 2010),
75 FR 30082 (May 28, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2008-88) (order approving the
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of CBOE Holdings
in connection with the demutualization of CBOE).
    \30\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50699 (November 18,
2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8, 2004) (File No. S7-39-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Act.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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 up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the 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 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

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

Number SR-CBOE-2011-107 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-2011-107. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the Exchange's principal office. 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-CBOE-2011-107 and should be
submitted on or before December 23, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-31001 Filed 12-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P