[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 249 (Monday, December 31, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67785-67792]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28395]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84929; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-060]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating To Discontinue Bulk Order Functionality and Implement Bulk
Message Functionality, and Make Other Nonsubstantive Changes

December 21, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 13, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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 text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In 2016, the Exchange's parent company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
(``Cboe Global''), which is the parent

company of Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe Options'') and Cboe C2 Exchange,
Inc. (``C2''), acquired the Exchange, Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGA''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX or BZX Options''), and Cboe
BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'' and, together with C2, Cboe Options, the
Exchange, EDGA, and BZX, the ``Cboe Affiliated Exchanges''). The Cboe
Affiliated Exchanges are working to align certain system functionality,
retaining only intended differences between the Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges, in the context of a technology migration. Cboe Options
intends to migrate its technology to the same trading platform used by
the Exchange, C2, and BZX Options in the fourth quarter of 2019. The
proposal set forth below is intended to add certain functionality to
the Exchange's System that is more similar to functionality offered by
Cboe Options in order to ultimately provide a consistent technology
offering for market participants who interact with the Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges. Although the Exchange intentionally offers certain features
that differ from those offered by its affiliates and will continue to
do so, the Exchange believes that offering similar functionality to the
extent practicable will reduce potential confusion for Users.
    Cboe Options currently offers quoting functionality to Market-
Makers, which permits Market-Makers to update their electronic quotes
in block quantities.\3\ Quotes on Cboe Options do not route to other
exchanges,\4\ and Market-Makers generally enter new quotes at the
beginning of the trading day based on-then current market
conditions.\5\ The Exchange currently offers bulk order functionality,
which is intended to provide Users, and Market-Makers in particular,
with a way to submit orders that simulate quoting functionality.\6\
However, while bulk order functionality simulates quoting
functionality, bulk order functionality provides Users with a less
efficient way to update multiple bids and offers. To update multiple
bids and offers, a User must submit multiple messages at the same time,
compared to quoting functionality, which generally permits a market
participant to update multiple bids and offers in a single quote
message. Specifically, a bulk order port is a dedicated logical port
that provides Users with the ability to submit single and bulk order
messages to enter, modify, or cancel orders designated as Post Only
Orders \7\ with a Time-in-Force of Day \8\ or Good-til-Date (``GTD'')
\9\ with an expiration time on that trading day.\10\ Like quotes, bulk
order messages do not route to other exchanges because they include a
Post Only instruction.\11\ Use of the Day or GTD Time-in-Force is
consistent with Market-Maker's entry of new quotes at the beginning of
each trading day.\12\ Unlike current Cboe Options quoting
functionality, bulk order ports on the Exchange are available to all
Users, not just Market-Makers. The Exchange makes bulk order ports
available to all Users to encourage them to provide liquidity to the
Exchange's market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Options Rule 1.1(ppp).
    \4\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.14B (which describes how the
Exchange routes orders (specifically intermarket sweep orders) but
not quotes routed to other exchanges); see also Nyse Arca, LLC
(``Arca'') Rule 6.37-O(a)(3)(D) (which states quotes do not route).
    \5\ The Exchange understands this is common practice by Market-
Makers throughout the industry, and is consistent with Cboe Options
functionality, which cancels all unexecuted resting Market-Maker
quotes at the close of each trading day. Additionally, it is
consistent with Market-Makers' obligation to update market
quotations in response to changed market conditions. See Rule
22.5(a)(5); see also Cboe Options Rule 8.7(b)(iii).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82741 (February 20,
2018), 83 FR 8306 (February 26, 2018) (SR-CboeEDGX-2018-005).
    \7\ See Rule 21.1(d)(8) for the definition of ``Post Only
Orders.''
    \8\ See Rule 21.1(f)(3) for the definition of the ``Day'' Time-
in-Force.
    \9\ See Rule 21.1(f)(1) for the definition of the GTD Time-in-
Force.
    \10\ See current Rule 21.1(j)(3) for the current definition of
``bulk order ports.'' Pursuant to Rule 21.1(j)(3)(C), Users may also
submit auction responses through bulk order ports, and will continue
to be able to submit auction responses through bulk ports.
    \11\ See Rule 21.1(d)(8), which provides that an order with a
Post Only instruction may not route away to another exchange.
    \12\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to replace bulk order functionality with bulk
message functionality substantially similar to the quoting
functionality available on Cboe Options. The proposed bulk message
functionality is similar to but more efficient than currently available
bulk order functionality.\13\ A ``bulk port'' is a dedicated logical
port that, as proposed, would provide Users with the ability to submit:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 4 (the Exchange adopted bulk order
functionality to simulate quoting functionality).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Bulk messages,\14\ subject to the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Proposed Rule 16.1(a)(4) defines a bulk message as a bid or
offer included in a single electronic message a User submits to the
Exchange in which the User may enter, modify, or cancel up to an
Exchange-specified number of bids and offers (which number the
Exchange will announce via Exchange notice or publicly available
technical specifications). This is similar to Cboe Options Rule
1.1(ppp), which provides that electronic quotes may be updated in
block quantities. The limit on bids and offers per message is a
reasonable measure for the Exchange to use to manage message traffic
and activity to protect the integrity of the System. Proposed Rule
16.1(a)(4) also states that a User may submit a bulk message through
a bulk port as set forth in proposed Rule 21.1(j)(3), and that the
System handles a bulk messages in the same manner as it handles an
order or quote, unless the Rules specify otherwise. In other words,
a bulk message will be treated as an order (or quote if submitted by
a Market-Maker) pursuant to the Rules, including with respect to
priority and allocation. The proposed rule change identifies the
rule provisions pursuant to which bulk messages will be handled in a
different manner. The proposed rule change also amends the paragraph
numbering in Rule 16.1(a) to account for the addition of bulk
messages in subparagraph (a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) A bulk message has a Time-in-Force of Day;
    (b) a Market-Maker with an appointment in a series may designate a
bulk message for that series as Post Only or Book Only (which Post Only
or Book Only designation, as applicable, applies to all bulk message
bids and offers within a single message),\15\ and other Users must
designate a bulk message for that series as Post Only; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In other words, a Market-Maker cannot designate one bulk
message bid within a single message as Post Only and designate
another bulk message bid within the same message as Book Only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) a User may establish a default Match Trade Prevention (``MTP'')
Modifier of MTP Cancel Newest (``MCN''), MTP Cancel Oldest (``MCO''),
or MTP Cancel Both (``MCB''), and a default value of Attributable or
Non-Attributable, for a bulk port, each of which applies to all bulk
messages submitted to the Exchange through that bulk port;
    (2) single orders in the same manner as Users may submit orders to
the Exchange through any type of port,\16\ including designated with
any Order Type and any Time-in-Force in Rule 21.1(d) and (f),
respectively, except a Market-Maker with an appointment in a series may
designate an order for that series submitted through a bulk port only
as Post Only or Book Only, and other Users must designate an order for
that series submitted through a bulk port as Post Only; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The proposed rule change also specifies that, subject to
the restrictions in the proposed rule, Users may submit single
orders through bulk ports in the same manner as they may submit
single orders through any other type port, which is consistent with
how Users may submit single orders to the Exchange through bulk
order ports today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) auction responses.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed Rule 21.1(j)(3)(C). The proposed rule change
has no impact on the ability of Users to submit auction responses
through bulk ports, and clarifies that Users may submit auction
responses through bulk ports in the same manner as they may submit
auction responses through any other type of port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 21.1(j)(3)(A)(i) states that bulk messages have a
Time-in-Force of Day. As discussed above, this is consistent with
current Cboe Options quoting functionality, which cancels all resting
quotes at the close of the trading

day. This is also consistent with a Market-Maker's obligation to update
its quotations in response to changed market conditions in its
appointed classes.\18\ Unlike current bulk orders, the GTD Time-in-
Force with an expiration time on that trading day will not be available
for bulk messages. Users will continue to have the ability to manually
cancel bulk messages at any time during the trading day, they will just
not be able to have bulk messages automatically cancel at a specific
time on that trading day. Additionally, Users may apply the GTD Order
Type to orders submitted through a bulk port (as further discussed
below) or other type of port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Rule 22.5(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unlike Cboe Options quoting functionality, which is only available
to Cboe Options market-makers, the proposed bulk messages will be
available to all Users (as bulk orders are today). While all Users will
be able to use bulk messages (and may currently use bulk orders), the
primary purpose of bulk orders and the proposed bulk messages has
always been to encourage market-maker quoting on exchanges.\19\ The
proposed rule change provides that a Market-Maker with an appointment
in a series may designate a bulk message for that series as ``Post
Only'' or ``Book Only.'' This will provide Exchange Market-Makers with
functionality substantially similar to Cboe Options quoting
functionality currently available to Cboe Options market-makers, which
permits Market-Makers' incoming quotes to execute against resting
orders and quotes, except against the resting quote of another Market-
Maker (see discussion below).\20\ The Exchange believes permitting
Market-Makers to use bulk messages to remove liquidity from the Book
(if they so elect) will put Exchange Market-Makers on an even playing
field as market-makers on other exchanges that offer quoting
functionality. Additionally, Market-Makers are subject to various
obligations, including obligations to provide two-sided quotes, to
provide continuous quotes, and to trade at least 75% of its contracts
each quarter in appointed classes. The Exchange believes providing
Market-Makers with flexibility to use the Post Only or Book Only
instruction with respect to bulk messages will provide Market-Makers
with additional tools to meet their obligations in a manner they deem
appropriate. The Exchange further believes this may encourage liquidity
providers to register as Market-Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra notes 8 and 15.
    \20\ Incoming market-maker quotes on some options exchanges may
execute against interest resting in the book (see, e.g., Arca Rule
6.37A-O(a)(3)), while on other options exchanges they may not (see,
e.g., Box Options Exchange, LLC (``BOX'') Rule 8050, IM-8050-3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change provides that other Users (i.e., non-
Market-Makers or Market-Makers without an appointment in a series) must
designate a bulk message for that series as ``Post Only.'' This is
consistent with current bulk orders available to these Users, and will
continue to provide Users with flexibility to avoid incurring a take
fee if their intent is to add liquidity to the Book. The Exchange notes
these Users may apply the Book Only instruction to orders submitted to
the Exchange through other ports. The proposed rule change also amends
Rule 21.9 to make clear that bulk messages (like current bulk orders)
are not eligible for routing (which is consistent with the Order Types
of Post Only and Book Only, which do not route to other options
markets).\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See also Cboe Options Rule 6.14B; and Arca Rule 6.37A-
O(a)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also permits Users to establish a default
MTP Modifier of MCN, MCO, or MCB that would apply to all bulk messages
submitted through a bulk port. Cboe Options currently offers a Market-
Maker Trade Prevention Order, which would be cancelled if it would
trade against a resting quote or order for the same Market-Maker, and
also cancel the resting order or quote.\22\ This is equivalent to the
MCB Modifier (except the MCB Modifier may be used by all Users rather
than just Market-Makers). The proposed rule change provides Users with
the ability to apply same trade prevention designation that is
available for quotes on Cboe Options to bulk messages (MCB), as well as
two additional MTP options (MCN and MCO) (the Exchange notes there is
currently no trade prevention functionality equivalent to MCN or MCO
available on Cboe Options for quotes). Allowing three MTP designations
for bulk messages will provide Users with additional control over the
circumstances in which their bulk messages (and resting orders
(including bulk messages)) will interact with each other. The Exchange
does not believe there is demand by Users for the MDC and MCS modifies
(which are available on the Exchange for orders) for bulk messages (the
Exchange notes there is currently no trade prevention functionality
equivalent to MDC or MCS available on Cboe Options for quotes). The
Exchange notes all Users may continue to apply all MTP Modifiers to
orders submitted through a bulk port (as further discussed below) or
any other type of port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.53(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, the System will handle bulk messages in the same manner
as it handles orders with the same Order Types and Times-in-Force that
will be available for bulk messages, including prioritizing,
displaying, and executing them pursuant to Rule 21.8. Proposed Rule
21.1(j)(3)(A)(iv) through (vi) adds detail regarding how the System
will handle bulk messages and orders submitted through bulk ports.
Specifically, proposed subparagraph (A)(iv) states the System will
cancel or reject a Post Only bulk message bid (offer) with a price that
locks or crosses the Exchange best offer (bid) or the ABO (ABB).\23\
This is consistent with how the System would handle a Post Only order
not subject to the Price Adjust process.\24\ Pursuant to the Post Only
instruction, an order (or bulk message as proposed) may not remove
liquidity from the Book or route away to another Exchange. If a Post
Only bulk message locked or crossed the best contra-side interest on
the Exchange, the System would cancel it to prevent execution of the
bulk message against the interest on the Exchange in accordance with
the User's instructions and to prevent the Exchange from displaying a
locked or crossed market.\25\ Similarly, if a Post Only bulk message
locked or crossed an away market, the System would cancel it since it
cannot route in accordance with the User's instructions and to prevent
the Exchange's dissemination of a locked or crossed market.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The ABBO means the best bid (offer) disseminated by other
exchanges.
    \24\ See Rule 21.1(i). Pursuant to the Price Adjust process, the
System ranks and displays a buy (sell) order that, at the time of
entry, would lock a Protected Quotation of the Exchange or another
Exchange at one minimum price increment below (above) the current
NBO (NBB). The System executes a Book Only order against orders and
quotes and cancels any unexecuted portion if displaying the order on
the Book would create a violation of Rule 27.3, and the System
rejects a Post Only order that locks or crosses the opposite side
Exchange best bid or offer (``BBO'') or if displaying the order on
the Book would create a violation of Rule 27.3). Bulk messages will
not be eligible for the Price Adjust process, and thus will be
handled similar to an order not subject to the Price Adjust process.
See proposed Rule 21.1(i) (which clarifies that the Price Adjust
Process will not apply to bulk messages).
    \25\ See Chapter XXVII of the Rules; see also Options Order
Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan (the ``Linkage Plan'').
    \26\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, proposed subparagraph (A)(v) states the System will
execute a Book Only bulk message bid (offer) that locks or crosses the
ABO (ABB) against offers (bids) resting in the Book at prices the same
as or better than the ABO

(ABB) and then cancels the unexecuted portion. This is consistent with
how the System would handle a Book Only order not subject to the Price
Adjust process. Pursuant to the Book Only instruction, an order (or
bulk message as proposed) may not route away to another Exchange. If a
Book Only bulk message locked or crossed an away market, the System
would execute it to the extent it could against contra-side interest on
the Exchange and then cancel it since it cannot route in accordance
with the User's instructions and to prevent the Exchange's
dissemination of a locked or crossed market.\27\ In addition to being
similar to current Exchange Rules regarding the handling of Post Only
and Book Only Orders not subject to the Price Adjust process, the
Exchange notes that proposed subparagraphs (A)(iv) and (v) are
substantially the same as another exchange's handling rules applicable
to quotes.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See id.
    \28\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.14(b) (if Cboe Options is not at
the NBBO, the System rejects a quote back to a Market-Maker if the
quote locks or crosses the NBBO, which is the ABBO) and (c) (if the
Cboe Options System accepts a quote that locks or crosses the NBBO,
it executes the quote against quotes and orders in the Cboe Options
Book at the price(s) that is the same or better than the best price
disseminated by an away exchange(s) up to the size available on the
Exchange and cancels the remaining size if the quote's price locks
or crosses the ABBO or books any remaining size); see also Rule
6.37A-O(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed subparagraph (A)(vi) states the System will cancel or
reject a Book Only bulk message bid (offer) (or unexecuted portion)
submitted by a Market-Maker with an appointment in the series through a
bulk port if it would execute against a resting offer (bid) with a
Capacity of M (Market-Maker). The options market is driven by Market-
Maker quotes, and thus Market-Maker quotes are critical to provide
liquidity to the market and contribute to price discovery for
investors. The Exchange expects Market-Makers regularly to use bulk
messages to input and update prices on multiple series of options at
the same time. Market-Maker quotes are generally based on pricing
models that rely on various factors, including the price of the
underlying security and that security's volatility. As these variables
change, a Market-Maker's pricing model automatically will enter updates
to its bids and offers with bulk messages for some or all of an
option's series. Because Market-Makers may update bids and offers using
bulk messages in multiple series at the same time, there can be a
multitude of instances in which their bids and offers inadvertently
interact with each other, which can lead to significant risk and
exposure. This may occur, for example, when one Market-Maker's price
update system is faster than systems used by other Market-Makers. In
this respect, a Market-Maker's system that updates options prices
microseconds faster than another Market-Maker's system may lock or
cross its bids (offers) against the other Market-Maker's offers (bids)
every time its bid (offer) adjusts to the offer (bid) of the second
Market-Maker even if the second Market-Maker's system was also in the
process of updating that offer (bid). For example, assume Market-Makers
A and B are both quoting $1.10-1.20 when the underlying moves, causing
both each Market-Maker's system to update its quotes to $1.20-1.30. By
being microseconds faster, Market-Maker A's system will send a bid of
$1.20, which locks Market-Maker B's offer prior to Market-Maker B's
offer updating, even though its system was also in the process of
updating its offer. This could happen contemporaneously in a large
number of series within the class, such that instead of locking one
quote, Market-Maker A may lock 20 of Market-Maker B's quotes. This may
expose each Market-Maker to significant risk due to these unintended
executions.
    The proposed rule change will protect Market-Makers from executions
that occur due to technology disparities rather than the intention of
Market-Makers to trade with one another at a particular price. As a
result, Market-Maker quotes will continue to provide liquidity on the
Book. This proposed functionality is similar to the quote-lock
functionality available on Cboe Options.\29\ While that functionality
permits locked quotes to execute against each other after a specified
amount of time, it also provides market-makers with an opportunity to
update their resting quotes, which would prevent execution of an
incoming market-maker quote against a resting market-maker quote. As
proposed, a Market-Maker bulk message (or order) will be rejected if it
would execute against resting Market-Maker interest. The Market-Maker
may resubmit its bulk message (or order) after being rejected, which
would be able to rest in the Book if the Market-Maker repriced its
resting bid or offer in the interim. Additionally, a Market-Maker may
interact with resting Market-Maker interest by submitting an order to
the Exchange through a different type of port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.45(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 21.6(a) provides that a User may only enter one bid
and one offer for a series per Executing Firm ID (``EFID'') per bulk
port. The Exchange believes this will encourage Users to submit their
best bids and offers in series, and thus provide displayed liquidity to
the market and contribute to public price discovery. Note firms may
have multiple EFIDs and multiple bulk ports, and thus will have the
ability through separate ports or EFIDs to submit additional bids and
offers using bulk messages in the same series if they choose. This
provision is consistent with the rule interpretation of another
exchange.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Cboe Options Regulatory Circular RG18-008 (March 6,
2018), which provides that each market-maker acronym may only have
one quote (which is considered to be a two-sided quote) in each
series at a time. An EFID is comparable to an acronym. Under Cboe
Options rules, the term Market-Maker generally refers to an
individual (and thus a person with a specific acronym), except as
otherwise provided in the Rules. See, e.g., Cboe Options Rule
8.7(d)(ii)(B) (which provides that market-maker continuous
electronic quoting obligations may be satisfied by market-makers
either individually or collectively with market-makers of the same
TPH organization). The interpretation in the circular referenced
above is consistent with this term and a Market-Maker's obligations
set forth in Rule 8.7 (e.g., market-Makers must contribute to the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market, including by competing to
improve markets, update quotes in response to changed market
conditions, and price options contracts fairly).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to permitting Users to submit bulk orders (which
functionality the Exchange will discontinue and replace with bulk
message functionality), current bulk order ports permit Users to submit
single orders to the Exchange. To encourage Users that may not have
quoting systems to provide liquidity to the Exchange, the proposed rule
change will permit Users to continue to submit single orders to the
Exchange through these ports, which are proposed to be renamed as bulk
ports. Proposed Rule 21.1(j)(3)(B)(i) will permit Users to designate
these orders with any Order Type and any Time-in-Force in Rule 21.1(d)
and (f), respectively, subject to the Book Only and Post Only
restrictions described below. This will provide Users with additional
functionality that is available for single orders submitted through
bulk ports today, and allow their liquidity to rest on the Exchange for
multiple trading days, if Users so choose. This will also provide Users
with additional control over the orders they use to provide liquidity
to the Exchange through bulk ports. Proposed subparagraph (B)(i)
imposes the same restrictions on the use of Book Only and Post Only for
orders submitted through a bulk port that apply to bulk messages, as
described above. Additionally, proposed subparagraph (B)(ii) imposes
the same prohibition on Market-Maker orders submitted through bulk
ports from removing resting Market-Maker

interest that applies to bulk messages, as described above. The
Exchange believes it is appropriate for orders submitted through bulk
ports be subject to the same restrictions on adding and removing
liquidity as bulk messages submitted through bulk ports, so that orders
submitted through bulk ports do not have an advantage over bulk
messages, and vice versa.
    While liquidity providers are most commonly registered market-
makers, other professional traders also provide liquidity to the
options market, which contributes to price discovery. As a result,
unlike other exchanges that restrict quoting functionality to market-
makers, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to make bulk messages
available to all Users to encourage them to provide liquidity, which is
critical to the Exchange's market. Additionally, permitting orders to
be submitted through bulk ports will continue to provide all liquidity
providers with this functionality that is available today, as well as
additional flexibility with respect to this functionality they may use
to provide liquidity to the Exchange.
    The proposed rule change adds a price protection mechanism for bulk
messages similar to the fat finger check the Exchange currently
provides for orders. Proposed Rule 21.17(f) states the System cancels
or rejects any bulk message bid (offer) above (below) the NBO (NBB) by
more than a specified amount determined by the Exchange. This is
similar to the fat finger check currently applicable to limit
orders.\31\ Bulk messages that cross the NBBO by more than a specified
amount are rejected as presumptively erroneous. This proposed check
will not apply to bulk messages submitted prior to the conclusion of
the Opening Process or when no NBBO is available. The Exchange believes
it is appropriate to have the ability to not apply this check during
the pre-open or opening rotation so that the check does not impact the
determination of the opening price. The Exchange also believes it is
appropriate to not apply this check when there is no NBBO, as the
Exchange believes that is the most reliable measure against which to
compare the price of the bulk message to determine its reasonability.
The proposed change is similar to a quote price protection mechanism
available at other options exchanges.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Rule 21.17(b). Orders submitted through bulk ports will
be subject to the current order price protection mechanisms, such as
limit fat finger check in Rule 21.17. The proposed rule change
amends Rule 21.17(a) through (e) (and the introductory language to
that rule) to make clear that the price protections and risk
controls in those paragraphs will not be applicable to bulk
messages.
    \32\ See, e.g., Cboe Options Rule 6.14(a) and (b); Arca Rule
6.37A-O(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 21.17(g) states if, pursuant to the Rules, the System
cancels or rejects a bulk message bid (offer) to update a resting bulk
message bid (offer) submitted for the same EFID and bulk port, the
System also cancels the resting bulk message bid (offer). The Exchange
currently offers Users similar functionality for orders, which is
optional.\33\ Pursuant to the proposed rule change, the System will
always apply this protection to bulk messages. The Exchange believes
this will operate as an additional safeguard that causes liquidity
providers to re-evaluate their bids and offers in a series before
attempting to update them again. Additionally, when a User submits a
new bulk message, it is implicitly instructing the Exchange to cancel
any resting bulk message in the same series. Thus, even if the new bulk
message is rejected as a result of this proposed check, the implicit
instruction to cancel the resting bulk message remains valid
nonetheless. The proposed rule change is substantially similar to a
risk control applicable to quotes available at another options
exchange.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See ``cancel on reject'' functionality in technical
specifications available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/support/technical/.
    \34\ See, e.g., Cboe Options Rule 6.14(b); Arca Rule 6.37A-
O(a)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change amends Rule 21.1(d), (f), and (g) to
provide that eligible Order Types, Times in Force, and MTP Modifiers,
respectively, are subject to the proposed restrictions in Rule 21.1(j)
with respect to orders and bulk messages submitted through bulk ports,
and clarify which Order Types, Times in Force, and MTP Modifiers are
available and not available for bulk messages, as described above. The
proposed rule change also amends the definitions of Orders, Order
Types, Time in Force, and MTP Modifiers in Rule 21.1(c), (d), (f), and
(g), respectively, in accordance with proposed Rule 21.1(j)(3)(A).
    Additionally, the proposed rule change amends Rule 21.20 to make
clear that Users may not submit complex orders through bulk ports.\35\
The proposed rule change also amends Rules 21.18 and 21.19 to clarify
that bulk messages are not eligible for the Step Up Mechanism for Bats
Auction Mechanism, respectively. Quotes are not eligible for submission
in corresponding auction mechanisms on Cboe Options.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ The Exchange notes that Market-Makers are not required to
quote on the COB, and that complex quoting functionality is not
currently available on Cboe Options.
    \36\ See Cboe Options Rules 6.14A (describing the Hybrid Agency
Liaison, which is similar to the Step Up Mechanism) and 6.74A
(describing the Automated Improvement Mechanism, which is similar to
the Bats Auction Mechanism).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\37\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \38\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \39\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change will remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market because it provides
Users, including Market-Makers and other liquidity providers, with
enhanced functionality to allow them to provide liquidity to the market
and update bids and offers in response to changed market conditions.
While current bulk orders simulate quotes, Users must submit multiple
messages in bulk to update bids and offers in multiple series. The
proposed bulk messages will permit Users to update multiple bids and
offers in block quantities in a single message, which will permit them
to update bids and offers (for example, in response to changing market
conditions) in a more efficient manner. The proposed ability to update
bids and offers in block quantities is similar to that available on
another options exchange.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Cboe Options Rule 1.1(ppp), which provides that
electronic quotes may be updated in block quantities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to all Users, the proposed bulk messages are

substantially similar to the current bulk orders available through bulk
order ports--Users will be able to submit bulk messages that are Day
and Post Only. However, the proposed rule change will permit them to do
so in a single bulk message rather than in multiple messages. While the
use of the GTD Time-in-Force will not be permitted for bulk messages as
it currently is for bulk orders, Users may achieve the same result as
GTD for their bulk messages by manually cancelling a bulk message at a
specified time during the trading day--the proposed rule change merely
does not provide a means for automatic cancellation of bulk messages at
a specific time during the trading day. Additionally, Users may
continue to apply GTD to orders submitted to the Exchange through bulk
ports and other ports.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will permit
liquidity providers to more efficiently update their resting bids and
offers, which may help them manage their risk exposure when, for
example, updating their bids and offers in response to changing market
conditions. The Exchange believes this will continue to encourage all
Users to provide liquidity on the Exchange and avoid incurring a taker
fee if their intent is to submit bids and offers to add liquidity to
the Book. As a result, this may increase liquidity, resulting in more
trading opportunities and tighter spreads, which benefits all
investors. The Exchange notes the proposed rule change provides Users
with additional flexibility by permitting certain MTP Modifiers to be
applied to bulk messages to prevent their orders and bulk messages from
trading against each other. The MTP Modifiers not available for bulk
messages will continue to be available for Users on orders submitted
through bulk ports and other ports. Unlike other options exchanges that
limit the use of quoting functionality to market-makers, the proposed
rule change will permit all Users to submit bulk messages.
Additionally, the proposed rule change to permit Users to continue to
submit orders (subject to restrictions on the Post Only and Book Only
instructions, as discussed above) through bulk ports will encourage
Users that may not have quoting systems to provide liquidity to the
Exchange by submitting single orders through bulk ports. This is also
consistent with current bulk orders, which permits Users to submit both
single and bulk orders through bulk order ports.
    The proposed rule change further removes impediments to and
perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system by providing appointed Market-Makers with the ability to submit
Book Only bulk messages, because it will align functionality available
to appointed Market-Makers on the Exchange with the quoting
functionality available to market-makers on other options exchanges,
including Cboe Options, which permit quotes to both add and remove
liquidity.\41\ Market-Makers are critical to providing liquidity and
price discovery on the Exchange, and are subject to various
obligations, as discussed above. The Exchange notes all other Users may
continue to use the Book Only instruction (or other instructions that
permit execution against resting orders on the Book) on orders
submitted through other ports, as they may do today. The Exchange
believes providing Market-Makers with flexibility to use the Post Only
or Book Only instruction with respect to bulk messages will provide
them with additional tools to meet their obligations in a manner they
deem appropriate and is reasonable given the critical role Market-
Makers plan in the options market. The Exchange believes this may also
encourage liquidity providers to register as Market-Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Other options exchanges only permit market-makers to submit
quotes. See, e.g., Cboe Options Rules 1.1(ppp) and 8.3(c); Arca Rule
6.37A-O(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change provides Market-Makers with a combination
of functionality available to market-makers on other exchanges, as some
exchanges permit market-makers to remove liquidity and others only
permit market-makers to post liquidity using quotes.\42\ As a result,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will provide Market-
Makers with greater control over their interactions with contra-side
liquidity and would increase opportunities for such interaction. The
Exchange believes this will provide Market-Makers with a greater level
of determinism, in terms of managing their exposure, which may
encourage them to be more aggressive when providing liquidity. The
Exchange believes this may result in more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads, which contributes to price discovery. Ultimately, this
may improve overall market quality and enhance competition on the
Exchange, which benefits all investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See id. and Box Options Exchange, LLC (``BOX'') Rule 8050,
IM-8050-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the proposed rule change to prevent Market-Maker bulk
messages from removing Market-Maker orders or bulk messages resting on
the Book removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a
national market system by eliminating trades that may be unintended
(potentially the result of technological disparities between Market-
Makers) and thus not beneficial to customers, and that may impede
certain liquidity providers' ability to competitively price their bids
and offers. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will
increase availability of liquidity in the market and will enhance
competition, because Market-Makers will be better able to quote
aggressively with fewer concerns over technological disparities in
their quoting systems, which ultimately benefits all investors. The
Exchange notes this proposed rule change is similar to functionality
available on another options exchange.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.45(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed handling of bulk messages to prevent the display of a
locked or crossed market will perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and national market system, as it is consistent with the Linkage
Plan and the Exchange's handling of orders with similar instructions.
This proposed handling of bulk messages is also consistent with
handling of quotes on other options exchanges.\44\ The proposed risk
controls and price protection mechanisms that will apply to bulk
messages promote just and equitable principles of trade and will
protect investors by mitigating potential risks associated with Users
submitting bulk messages at clearly unintended prices and trading at
extreme and potentially erroneous prices. Additionally, the proposed
rule change to cancel a User's resting bulk message when the System
rejects a bulk message intended to update that resting bulk message
provides Users with an additional safeguard that causes Users to
reevaluate their bids and offers in the series before attempting to
update them again. Additionally, when a User submits a new bulk
message, it is implicitly instructing the Exchange to cancel any
resting bulk message. Thus, even if the new bulk message is rejected,
the Market-Maker's implicit instruction to cancel the resting bulk
message remains valid nonetheless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.14(b) and (c); see also Rule 6.37A-
O(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The options markets are quote driven markets and thus dependent on
liquidity providers, which are most commonly registered market-makers
but also other professional traders, for liquidity and price discovery.
The Exchange believes the proposed enhanced functionality, including
the additional flexibility for Market-Makers

to manage their risk exposure and provide additional control over
interactions with contra-side liquidity, for these liquidity providers
to more efficiently enter and update bids and offers. This may
encourage the provision of more aggressive liquidity, which may result
in more trading opportunities and tighter spreads, which contributes to
price discovery. This may improve overall market quality and enhance
competition on the Exchange, which benefits all investors.
    The proposed rule change is generally intended to align system
functionality currently offered by the Exchange with Cboe Options
functionality in order to provide a consistent technology offering for
the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. A consistent technology offering, in
turn, will simplify the technology implementation, changes, and
maintenance by Users of the Exchange that are also participants on Cboe
Affiliated Exchanges. The proposed rule change would also provide Users
with access to functionality that is generally available on markets
other than the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, which may result in the
efficient execution of quotes and orders and provide Users with
additional flexibility and increased functionality on the Exchange's
System.
    When Cboe Options migrates to the same technology as that of the
Exchange and other Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, Users of the Exchange and
other Cboe Affiliated Exchanges will have access to similar
functionality on all Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. As such, the proposed
rule change would foster cooperation and coordination with persons
engaged in facilitating transactions in securities and would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act, as the proposed bulk messages, like the current
bulk orders, are optional for all Users. While only Market-Makers may
submit Book Only bulk messages, the Exchange believes this is
appropriate given the various obligations Market-Makers must satisfy
under the Rules and the unique and critical role Market-Makers play in
the options market, as discussed above. The Exchange believes providing
Market-Makers with flexibility to use the Post Only or Book Only
instruction with respect to bulk messages will provide Market-Makers
with additional tools to meet their obligations in a manner they deem
appropriate. The Exchange believes the proposed functionality for
Market-Makers adds value to market-making on the Exchange and provides
them with greater control over how their quotes interact with contra-
side liquidity both on the Exchange. The Exchange notes all other Users
may continue to use the Book Only instruction on orders submitted to
the Exchange through other types of ports. The Post Only instruction
for bulk messages will be available to all Users, and is substantially
similar to the bulk orders currently available to all Users.
Additionally, all Users may submit single orders with all other Times-
in-Force and Order Types (subject to the same Post Only and Book Only
restrictions applicable to bulk messages) not available for bulk
messages through bulk ports, which may encourage Users that may not
have quoting systems to provide liquidity to the Exchange.
    The proposed rule change to prevent Market-Maker bulk message
executions against other resting Market-Maker interest is intended to
protect Market-Makers from executions due to technology disparities
rather than the intention of Market-Makers to trade with one another at
that price. The Exchange believes this functionality and protection for
Market-Makers may encourage Market-Makers to quote tighter and deeper
markets, which will increase liquidity and enhance competition. The
proposed price protection mechanisms and risk controls applicable to
bulk messages will apply in the same manner to all bulk messages
submitted by market participants. The Exchange believes this protection
for bulk messages provides liquidity providers with additional
protection from anomalous or erroneous executions. Generally, once bulk
messages are resting on the Book, the System will handle them no
differently than resting orders--this includes how the System
prioritizes orders and quotes when executing them against incoming
orders or quotes. Bulk messages that are available to all Users will
work in the same manner for all Users, and the additional bulk message
functionality available to appointed Market-Makers will work in the
same manner for all such Market-Makers. The Exchange believes it is
reasonable to provide additional functionality to Market-Makers given
their unique and critical role in the options market and the various
obligations that Market-Makers must satisfy.
    The Exchange does not believe the propose rule change will impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because it will
provide Market-Makers with bulk message functionality that is similar
to that quoting available to market-makers on other options exchanges.
The Exchange believes the proposed functionality will permit the
Exchange to operate on an even playing field relative to other
exchanges that have similar functionality. As discussed above, the
options markets are quote driven markets and thus dependent on
liquidity providers, which are most commonly registered market-makers
but also other professional traders, for liquidity and price discovery.
The Exchange believes the proposed enhanced functionality, including
the additional flexibility for Market-Makers to manage their risk
exposure and provide additional control over interactions with contra-
side liquidity, for these liquidity providers to more efficiently enter
and update bids and offers. This may encourage the provision of more
aggressive liquidity, which may result in more trading opportunities
and tighter spreads, which contributes to price discovery. This may
improve overall market quality and enhance competition on the Exchange,
which benefits all investors.
    The Exchange reiterates that the proposed rule change is being
proposed in the context of the technology integration of the Cboe
Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, the Exchange believes this proposed rule
change permits fair competition among national securities exchanges. In
addition, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will benefit
Exchange participants in that it will provide a consistent technology
offering for Users by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant

burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days after the
date of the filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate, it has become effective pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\45\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \46\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \46\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-060 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-060. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-060 and should be
submitted on or before January 22, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-28395 Filed 12-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 78417]
[DOCID:fr29de06-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-32-000]

Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice of Application

December 21, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 11, 2006, Gulf South Pipeline Company,
LP (Gulf South), 20 East Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046, filed in
Docket No. CP07-32-000, an application pursuant to sections and 7(c) of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to authorize Gulf South to site, construct,
and operate facilities consisting of 111 miles of pipeline, 45,080
horsepower of compression, interconnecting facilities and appurtenant
facilities (Southeast Expansion Project), all as more fully set forth
in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to
public inspection. Additionally, beginning October 1, 2008, Gulf South
expects to lease additional capacity on the Southeast Expansion Project
to Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP's Gulf Crossing Project which is
currently in the Commission's pre-filing process in Docket No. PF07-1-
000. The instant filing may be also viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY, (202) 502-
8659.
    Any questions regarding this application may be directed to J. Kyle
Stephens, Director of Certificates, 20 East Greenway Plaza, Houston,
Texas 77046 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or telecopy to 713-544-
3540.
    On June 20, 2006, the Commission staff granted Gulf South's request
to utilize the Commission's Pre-Filing Process for its Southeast
Expansion Project and assigned Docket No. PF06-31-000 to staff
activities involved therein. Now, as of the filing of Gulf South's
application on December 11, 2006, the Commission's Pre-Filing Process
for these projects has ended. From this time forward, Gulf South's
proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP07-32-000, as noted in the
caption of this Notice.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: January 11, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-22354 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 8 (Monday, January 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2166-2167]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00374]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9905-36-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. Seq.). An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Westlund<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and please refer to the appropriate EPA
Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 1975.09; NESHAP for Stationary Reciprocating
Internal Combustion Engines; 40 CFR part 63 subparts A and ZZZZ; was
approved on 12/17/2013; OMB Number 2060-0548; expires on 12/31/2016;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1789.08; NESHAP for Natural Gas Transmission and
Storage; 40 CFR part 63 subparts A and HHH; was approved on 12/17/2013;
OMB Number 2060-0418; expires on 04/30/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1361.16; Information Requirements for Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces (Renewal); 40 CFR 261.38; 40 CFR 264.12, 264.13,
264.15, 264.16, 264.17, 264.37, 264.56, 264.73, 264.101, 264.112,
264.113, 264.115, 264.142, 264.143, 264.147, 264.148, 264.149, 264.150,
265.12, 265.13, 265.15, 265.16, 265.50, 265.51, 265.52, 265.53, 265.54,
265.56, 265.73, 265.112, 265.113, 265.115, 265.142, 265.143, 265.147,
265.148, 265.149, 265.150, 266.100, 266.102, 266.103, 266.104, 266.106,
266.107, 266.108, 266.109, 266.110, 266.111, 266.112, 270.14, 270.22,
270.30, 270.33, 270.40, 270.41, 270.42, 270.50, 270.51 and 270.66; was
approved on 12/17/2013; OMB Number 2050-0073; expires on 12/31/2016;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1071.11; NSPS for Stationary Gas Turbines; 40 CFR
part 60 subparts A and GG; was approved on 12/17/2013; OMB Number 2060-
0028; expires on 12/31/2016; Approved without change. EPA ICR Number
2256.04; NESHAP for Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers Prod., Carbon Black
Prod., Chemical Mfg: Chromium Compounds, Flexible Polyurethane Foam
Production/Fabrication, Lead Acid Battery Mfg, Wood Preserving
(Renewal); 40 CFR part 63 subparts A, LLLLLL, NNNNNN, OOOOOO, PPPPPP
and QQQQQQ; was approved on 12/17/2013; OMB Number 2060-0598; expires
on 12/31/2016; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1687.09; NESHAP for Aerospace Manufacturing and
Rework Facilities; 40 CFR part 63 subparts A and GG; was approved on
12/17/2013; OMB Number 2060-0314; expires on 12/31/2016; Approved
without change.
    EPA ICR Number 2228.04; Reformulated Gasoline Commingling
Provisions (Renewal); 40 CFR 80.78(a)(8)(ii)(B) and
80.78(a)(8)(iii)(A); was approved on 12/17/2013; OMB Number 2060-0587;
expires on 12/31/2016; Approved with change.
    EPA ICR Number 1593.09; Air Emission Standards for Tanks, Surface
Impoundments and Containers; 40 CFR part 60 subpart A; 40 CFR part 264
subpart CC; and 40 CFR part 265 subpart CC; was approved on 12/19/2013;
OMB Number 2060-0318; expires on 12/31/2016; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 2375.02; Implementation of Ambient Air Protocol Gas
Verification Program (Renewal); 40 CFR part 58; was approved on 12/19/
2013; OMB Number 2060-0648; expires on 12/31/2016; Approved without
change.

Comment Filed

    EPA ICR Number 1783.07; NESHAP for Flexible Polyurethane Foam
Product; in 40 CFR part 63 subparts A and III; OMB filed comment on 12/
17/2013.
    EPA ICR Number 2462.01; Amended Heating Oil Definition Under the
Renewable Fuels Standard (Proposed Rule); in 40 CFR 80.1450, 80.1453
and 80.1454; OMB filed comment on 12/31/2013.

Withdrawn and Continue

    EPA ICR Number 2482.01; Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
Regarding the Sulfur Content of Motor Vehicle Gasoline, Gasoline
Additives, Denatured Fuel

Ethanol, and Other Oxygenates Under the Tier 3 Rule; Withdrawn from OMB
on 12/13/2013.

Short Term Approval Extension

    EPA ICR 1907.05 Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Regarding
the Sulfur Content of Motor Vehicle Gasoline Under the Tier 2 Rule; 40
CFR part 80, subpart H; on 12/17/2013 OMB granted an extension of the
expiration date to 04/30/2014.
    EPA ICR 2212.03 Minority Business Enterprise/Woman Business
Enterprise (MBE/WBE) Utilization Under Federal Grants Cooperative
Agreements and Interagency Agreements; on 12/19/2013 OMB granted an
extension of the expiration date to 06/30/2014.

John Moses,
Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-00374 Filed 1-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P