[Federal Register: October 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 199)]
[Notices]
[Page 53227]
[DOCID:fr16oc09-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2144-038]

City of Seattle; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With
the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and
Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

October 8, 2009.

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2144-038.
    c. Date Filed: September 29, 2009.
    d. Applicant: City of Seattle.
    e. Name of Project: Boundary Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Pend Oreille
River in Pend Oreille County, Washington. The project currently
occupies 920.87 acres of Federal land managed by the U.S. Forest
Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Agent Contact: Jorge Carrasco, Superintendent, Seattle City
Light, 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, WA 98124-4023; (206) 615-
1091.
    i. FERC Contact: David Turner<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    k. Project Description: The existing project consists of: (1) A
concrete arch dam with a crest elevation of 2,004 feet NGVD (North
American Vertical Datum), a structural height of 340 feet, a thickness
ranging from 8 feet at the crest to 32 feet at the base, and a crest
length of 508 feet, with a total length, including the spillways, of
740 feet; (2) two 50-feet-wide spillways fitted with 45-feet-high
radial gates, one on each abutment, which have a combined maximum
capacity of 108,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at a forebay water
surface elevation of 1994 feet NGVD; (3) seven 21-foot-high by 17-foot-
wide, low-level vertical fixed-wheel sluice gates that provide an
additional discharge capacity of 252,000 cfs, for a total discharge
capacity at the dam of 360,000 cfs; (4) a 17.5-mile-long, 1,794-acre
reservoir at a normal full pool elevation of 1,994 feet NGVD with
87,913 acre-feet of gross storage; (5) power intake facilities
excavated on the left abutment area consisting of an approximately 300-
foot-wide by 800-foot-long forebay, a trash rack structure across the
entrance to the forebay, and the portal face with six 30-foot-wide by
34-foot-high horseshoe-shaped tunnels extending to intake gate
chambers; (6) six 315-feet-long penstocks lead from each of the intake
gates to one of the six turbine-generator units in the power plant; (7)
an underground power plant comprised of a 76-feet wide by 172-feet-high
by 477-feet-long machine hall; (8) two 204,506-horsepower (hp) Francis
turbines, with 158.4-megawatt (MW) generators, two 204,506-hp Francis
turbines, with 161.5-MW generators, and two 259,823-hp Francis
turbines, with 200-MW generators for a total authorized generating
capacity of 1,003 MW; (9) six draft tubes that discharge water into the
tailrace immediately below the dam; (10) six horseshoe-shaped
transformer bays; (11) six individual three-phase, 230-kilovolt (kV)
transmission lines up the vertical face of the left abutment of the dam
to six pairs of transmission towers on top of the abutment; and (12)
appurtenant equipment. The applicant proposes to install new high
efficiency turbines in Units 55 and 56, concurrently with planned
generator rewinds and step-up transformer replacements, to increase the
project's total installed capacity to 1,033 MW.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's website 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, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Procedural Schedule: On September 30, 2009, Seattle City Light
filed an agreement-in-principle and a request to suspend processing of
the license application until February 1, 2010 to complete settlement
negotiations. The negotiations also involve measures linking the
Boundary relicense with the surrender of Pend Oreille County Public
Utility District's Sullivan Creek Project No. 2225. In the interest of
furthering settlement negotiations and resolution of both proceedings,
we are agreeing to delay the issuance of our ready for environmental
analysis notice. Therefore, the application will be processed according
to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule
may be made as appropriate and a more detailed schedule will be issued
with the ready for environmental analysis notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Acceptance and Ready for          March 2010.
 Environmental Analysis.
Filing interventions, comments,             May 2010.
 recommendations, preliminary terms and
 conditions, and fishway prescriptions.
Notice of availability of the Draft EA....  October 2010.
Filing comments on Draft EA...............  November 2010.
Filing modified terms and conditions......  January 2011.
Notice of availability of Final EA........  April 2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-24911 Filed 10-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 91 (Thursday, May 11, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30264-30266]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09887]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0939; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00743-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (P&WC) Model PW307D engines. This
proposed AD was prompted by a root cause analysis of an event involving
an uncontained failure of a high-pressure turbine (HPT) 1st-stage disk,
on an International Aero Engines AG Model V2533-A5 engine, that
resulted in high-energy debris penetrating the engine cowling and an
aborted takeoff. This proposed AD would require removing certain HPT
2nd-stage disks from service and would also prohibit installation of
certain HPT 2nd-stage disks on any affected engine. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this NPRM by June 26, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0939; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Caufield, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781)
238-7146; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-0939; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00743-E'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other

information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all
comments received, without change, to regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report
summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Barbara Caufield, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has
issued Transport Canada AD CF-2022-31, dated June 9, 2022 (Transport
Canada AD CF-2022-31) (referred to after this as the MCAI), to correct
an unsafe condition on P&WC Model PW307D engines with serial numbers
(S/Ns) CM0226 and CM0238, and with an installed HPT 2nd-stage disk,
part number (P/N) 30P3182-01 with S/Ns A004D8X1 and A004E9K3,
respectively. The MCAI states that on March 18, 2020, an Airbus Model
A321-231 airplane, powered by International Aero Engines AG (IAE) Model
V2533-A5 engines, experienced an uncontained HPT 1st-stage disk failure
that resulted in an aborted takeoff and high-energy debris penetrating
the engine cowling.
    In response to the March 2020 uncontained HPT 1st-stage disk
failure, the FAA issued a series of ADs, including Emergency AD 2020-
07-51, Amendment 39-21110 (85 FR 20402, April 13, 2020) (AD 2020-07-
51). Since the FAA issued AD 2020-07-51, IAE determined that the
failure of the V2533-A5 engine was due to an undetected subsurface
material defect in the HPT 1st-stage disk that may affect the life of
the part. In coordination with IAE, P&WC performed a records review and
analysis of PW307A and PW307D engine parts made of similar material and
identified two additional affected HPT 2nd-stage disks (S/Ns A004D8X1
and A004E9K3), installed on PW307D engines. These two additional HPT
2nd-stage disks may have a material defect which could reduce the life
of the part. As such, the affected HPT 2nd-stage disks must be removed
from service. The FAA is proposing this AD to prevent failure of the
HPT 2nd-stage disks, which could result in damage to the engine, damage
to the airplane, and loss of the airplane.

FAA's Determination

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI described above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after
determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to
exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require removing certain part-numbered HPT
2nd-stage disks from service and would prohibit the installation of
these HPT 2nd-stage disks onto any engine.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 2 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. Registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace high pressure turbine (HPT)   10 work-hours x $85 per        $176,000         $176,850         $353,700
 2nd-stage disk.                       hour = $850.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp.: Docket No. FAA-2023-0939; Project
Identifier MCAI-2022-00743-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by June 26, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (P&WC) Model
PW307D engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a root cause analysis of an event
involving an International Aero Engines AG Model V2533-A5 engine,
which experienced an uncontained failure of a high pressure turbine
(HPT) 1st-stage disk that resulted in high-energy debris penetrating
the engine cowling. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the HPT 2nd-stage disk. The unsafe condition, if not addressed,
could result in uncontained HPT disk failure, damage to the engine,
damage to the airplane, and loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    For engines with an HPT 2nd-stage disk, part number (P/N)
30P3182-01, with serial number (S/N) A004D8X1 or A004E9K3 installed,
within 100 engine cycles after the effective date of this AD, remove
the HPT 2nd-stage disk from service.

(h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install any HPT 2nd-
stage disk having P/N 30P3182-01 with S/N A004D8X1 or A004E9K3 on
any engine.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, AIR-520 Continued Operational Safety Branch,
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the certification office,
send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)
of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Barbara Caufield,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on May 3, 2023.
Michael Linegang,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-09887 Filed 5-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51713-51722]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18098]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95530; File No. SR-CBOE-2022-042]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Facility Fees Section in the Fees Schedule in Connection With the
Exchange's New Trading Floor

August 17, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on August 5, 2022, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Facility Fees section in the Fees Schedule in connection
with the

Exchange's new trading floor. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule in connection with
the opening of a new trading floor.\4\ Until June 6, 2022, the Exchange
conducted open outcry trading at 400 S LaSalle, Chicago, Illinois
(``LaSalle trading floor''). On June 6, 2022, the Exchange moved its
open outcry trading operations to a new trading floor located at 141 W
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois (``CBOT Building''). As a result of
this transition, certain infrastructure and technology on the LaSalle
trading floor were rendered obsolete, and the new trading floor in the
CBOT Building has new infrastructure and offers new technology.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to adopt new, and/or update current,
facility fees with respect to the new trading floor, as well as
eliminate obsolete facility fees that are only applicable to the
Exchange's LaSalle facility and trading floor which is no longer in use
as of June 6, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
June 1, 2022 (SR-CBOE-2022-026). On June 10, 2022, the Exchange
withdrew that filing and submitted SR-CBOE-2022-029. The Exchange
notes no comment letters were received for either filing. On August
5, 2022, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Booth Fees
    Under the current Fees Schedule, the Exchange assesses monthly fees
for ``standard Booths'', which refers to a portion of designated space
on the trading floor of the Exchange adjacent to or in particular
trading crowds, which may be occupied by a Trading Permit Holder
(``TPH''), clerks, runners, or other support staff for operational and
other business-related activities. The Exchange assesses a monthly fee
of $195 for standard Booths located along the perimeter of the trading
floor, and $550 for standard Booths located in the OEX, Dow Jones, MNX
and VIX trading crowds. The Exchange also assesses monthly fees for
``nonstandard Booths'', which refers to space on the trading floor of
the Exchange that is set off from a trading crowd, which may be rented
by a TPH for whatever support, office, back-office, or any other
business-related activities for which the TPH may choose to use the
space. A TPH that rents non-standard booth space on the floor of the
Exchange is subject to a base non-standard booth rental fee of $1,250
per month in addition to a square footage fee of $1.70 per square foot
per month based on the size of the TPH's non-standard booth. The
Exchange proposes to modify and simplify its fees assessed for booth
rentals. First, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the distinction
between standard and non-standard Booths. The Exchange also proposes to
adopt a tiered pricing schedule for Booths based on the number of
Booths rented by a TPH. Particularly, the Exchange proposes to adopt
the following fees for Booths that are set off from a trading crowd:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Monthly
                      Quantity of booths                           fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-2...........................................................      $400
3-6...........................................................       300
7-10..........................................................       200
11 or more....................................................       100
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed tiered pricing provides discounted pricing for
additional Booths. For example, if a TPH rented 4 Booths, the TPH would
be assessed $1,400 a month (2 Booths at $400 and 2 Booths at $300). The
Exchange also proposes to adopt a monthly fee of $750 per booth for any
booth located in a trading crowd. The Booth Pass-Through Fee would
remain unchanged.\5\ The Exchange notes that use of Booths, whether or
located away from or in a trading crowd are optional and not necessary
in order to conduct open outcry trading on the trading floor. Booth
spaces are also uniform and nearly identical in size. The Exchange also
notes that at this time, the Exchange has ample space on its new
trading floor for booth space.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Pursuant to the Booth Pass-Through Fee, TPHs bear
responsibility for all costs associated with any modifications and
alterations to any trading floor Booths leased by the TPH (or TPH
organization) and must reimburse the Exchange for all costs incurred
in connection therewith.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Policy
    The Exchange also proposes to update the Exchange's policy
(``Policy'') regarding the rental and use of booth space on its trading
floor by TPH organizations. The Exchange memorialized the Policy and
filed it with the Commission in 1994.\6\ The Exchange proposes to
update the Policy in a few respects. First, the Exchange proposes to
change references to ``Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated''
and ``CBOE'' to ``Cboe Exchange, Inc.,'' and ``Cboe Options'',
respectively to reflect the Exchange's current legal name which has
been updated since the last update to the Policy. The Exchange also
proposes to update the rule reference relating to the Appeals process
from Chapter ``19'' to Chapter ``15'' to reflect recent updates to the
Exchange's rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33972 (April 28,
1994), 59 FR 23242 (May 5, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes the Policy includes a section that sets forth
the requirement that all TPH organizations renting Booths execute a
``Trading Floor Booth Rental Agreement'' (hereinafter, ``Agreement'')
which sets forth the contractual terms, conditions and restrictions
governing rental and use of Booths by TPH organizations.\7\ A copy of
the Agreement was included in the Exchange's 1994 rule filing noted
above for the Commission's information.\8\ The Agreement specifically
sets forth the details of the parties' contractual relationship
regarding rental and use of the Booths. Among other provisions, the
Agreement includes specific provisions delineating the termination
rights of both the TPH organization and the Exchange and sets forth a
procedure for adding Booths to and deleting Booths from the Agreement.
The Agreement also spells out requirements respecting the TPH's use of
the Booths, such as those governing the installation of equipment, the
conduct of business, and access of persons to the Booths.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Agreement is non-negotiable and its terms are the same
for every TPH organization.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33972 (April 28,
1994), 59 FR 23242 (May 5, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has updated the Agreement (which is now referred to as
the Agreement for ``standard Booths''). In 2012, the Exchange also
created a separate form of the Agreement for non-

standard Booths.\9\ In connection with the proposal to eliminate non-
standard Booths, the Exchange proposes to eliminate use of that
agreement. A copy of the standard form of Agreement is included with
this filing in Exhibit 3. The Exchange proposes to update this section
of the Policy to eliminate references to the non-standard booth
agreement. The Exchange also proposes to update the Agreement to (i)
change references to ``Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated''
and ``CBOE'' to ``Cboe Exchange, Inc.,'' and ``Cboe Options'',
respectively; (ii) update the link to where the Cboe Options Fees
Schedule can be found; (iii) eliminate the requirement for Cboe to
provide TPH organizations with a copy of TPH Organization's current
booth assignments, as it no longer believes such record is necessary or
desired by TPHs; and (iv) eliminate Section 13, which prohibits TPH
Organizations leasing SPX arbitrage Booths from installing data
equipment in such Booths, as the Exchange does not intend to provide
such Booths and to the extent it determines to do so in the future does
not anticipate maintaining such prohibition. The Exchange will
disseminate the updated Policy and forms of the Agreement to TPHs by
posting them on the Trading Permit Holder portion of the Cboe website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66727 (April 9,
2012), 77 FR 21134 (April 3, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Line to Cboe Floor Network
    On the LaSalle trading floor, TPHs used various lines and
telecommunications (``telco'') circuits to connect to the trading
floor. Independent wiring had to be used for each line or telco
circuit, which means firms may have needed to relocate their lines or
telco circuits if they moved into, or relocated to, a new trading space
or Booth. These telco circuits are also on a per device basis. The new
trading floor utilizes a single floor network (i.e., ``Cboe Floor
Network'') for TPHs' devices consisting of both wired jacks and
wireless network access located at kiosks, in trading pits, and in
Booths throughout the new trading floor. As such, unlike the LaSalle
trading floor infrastructure, TPHs do not need to order lines from the
Exchange to specific locations on the floor. Rather, a TPH only needs
to order one Ethernet port (``Line'') (or a pair for redundancy) to
connect to the Cboe Floor Network and will be able to connect their
devices to the Exchange's network anywhere on the trading floor through
wired jack ports or the wireless network. Additionally, firms no longer
need to provide network equipment to support dedicated lines to the
floor, as on the new trading floor the Exchange provides the network
switches and local area network (LAN) lines for all firms.
    The Exchange believes the new trading floor will provide TPHs more
flexibility to move and relocate as needed, as compared to the LaSalle
trading floor. If a TPH wished to relocate trading spaces or trading
booths on the LaSalle trading floor, it could have triggered
installation, relocation and removal of various lines and circuits,
which subsequently triggered various installation, relocation and
removal fees.\10\ For example, on the LaSalle trading floor, if a
Market-Maker needed to move to a new trading space, it may have needed
to relocate the lines or circuits from its current space to the new
space and would be subject to relocation fees such as $129 relocation
fee to relocate any Exchangefones and $200 relocation fee for
relocation of any Market-Maker Handheld Terminal.\11\ As another
example, if a TPH needed to relocate to a new Booth, it may have been
subject to a relocation fee of $625 for relocating lines from the
trading floor to local carriers or the Communications Center.\12\ Since
all network access is wireless or plug and play at any location on the
new trading floor, the new infrastructure eliminates the need for
installation of multiple lines, as well as relocation and removal of
connectivity lines to devices and also renders the following Lines fees
(including fees relating to installation, relocation and removal)
obsolete: Intra-Floor, Voice Circuits, Appearances, Data Circuits at
Local Carrier, and Data Circuits at In-House Frame. The Exchange
therefore proposes to instead adopt a monthly fee of $350 per Line and
notes it does not expect TPHs to purchase more than one Line and one
redundant Line. The Exchange also proposes to adopt a one-time $500
installation fee for the installation of the line to the Cboe Floor
Network, which is a pass-through fee of what the Exchange is assessed
by the building within which the new trading floor resides (i.e., the
CBOT Building). The proposed $500 installation fee would include
installation of a redundant line at no additional cost and allows the
Exchange to recoup the costs it incurs from third-party vendors for the
installation of the Lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Lines Table.
    \11\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Communications Table,
Exchangefone and Miscellaneous Table, Market-Maker Handheld Terminal
Tethering Services.
    \12\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Lines Table, Lines Direct
from Local Carrier to Trading Floor and Lines Between Communication
Center and Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Co-Location and Meet-me-Room
    For a monthly fee, the Exchange historically has provided TPHs (and
third-party vendors, collectively ``firms'') with cabinet space in its
building for placement of network and server hardware. Particularly,
TPHs are charged a monthly fee of $50 per ``U'' of shelf space \13\ and
Sponsored Users \14\ are assessed a monthly fee of $100 per ``U''. Fees
are charged in increments of 4 ``U'' (i.e., a minimum of $200 per 4
``U'' is charged or, for Sponsored Users, a minimum of $400 per 4 ``U''
is charged). A firm also receives power, cooling, security and
assistance with installation and connection of the equipment to the
Exchange's servers, at no additional charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The term ``U'' is used to indicate an equipment unit 1.75''
high with a maximum power of 125 watts per U space. Per the Fees
Schedule, Co-Location fees are charged in increments of 4 ``U'' (7
inches).
    \14\ See Cboe Options Rule 3.60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will continue to provide firms cabinet space in the
new facility (``Meet-me-Room'') for placement of network and server
hardware at the same rate of $50 per ``U'', billed in increments of 4
``U''. The Exchange proposes however to eliminate the separate rate for
Co-Location of Equipment Fee for Sponsored Users, as the Exchange does
not currently have any Sponsored Users, nor has it had any Sponsored
users in several years. As such, the Exchange no longer believes its
necessary to maintain a separate rate for Sponsored Users.\15\ The
Exchange also proposes to relocate the ``Co-Location'' section in the
Fees Schedule to immediately follow the ``Lines'' section in the Fees
Schedule, as it believes such fees are more appropriately grouped
together and will make the Fees Schedule easier to read and follow. The
Exchange also believes it will make the Fees Schedule easier to read
and follow if it reflects the rate of the minimum increment charged,
instead of a broken-out rate that can never be assessed. As noted
above, the Fees Schedule currently sets forth the monthly rate per
``U'' (i.e., ``$50 per ``U''), even though it states it only charges in
increments of 4 ``U'' (i.e., fee is really $200 per 4 ``U''). The
Exchange will continue to charge in increments of 4 ``U'' in the new
facility and therefore proposes to update the fee language in

the relocated line item to reflect the rate for the minimum increment
of 4 ``U''. Despite this language change, the Exchange reiterates it is
not changing the amount assessed for the Co-Location of Equipment Fee.
Within the new Meet-me-Room however, the Exchange is proposing to limit
firms to 8 ``U'' in order to ensure all firms can be accommodated in
the Meet-me-Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ To the extent the Exchange has Sponsored Users in the
future, such participants will be assessed the same rate as all
other firms (i.e., $50 per ``U'', billed in minimum increments of 4
``U'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to adopt monthly and installation fees
for cross connects, including telecommunication (i.e., telco) and Cboe
Floor Network cross connects,\16\ within the Meet-Me-Room.
Particularly, each cross connect will be subject to a $25 per month per
cross connect fee, which is a pass-through fee of what the Exchange is
assessed by the CBOT Building for each cross connect. Additionally,
firms will be subject to a one-time $500 installation fee for each
cross connection, which is also a pass-through fee of what the Exchange
is assessed by the CBOT Building. The Exchange notes that at the
LaSalle trading floor, the Exchange assessed third-party vendors a $50
per month fee for ``Data Circuits from Local Carrier to Equipment
Shelf'' which offers similar cross-connectivity from Local Carriers
(telco providers) to a firm's equipment shelf in the current meet-me-
room. The Exchange no longer uses data circuits from Local Carriers to
equipment on the shelf and proposes to therefore eliminate this fee
(currently under the Vendor Services section) from the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange offers fiber cross connect. The cross connects
may run between a firm's hardware to a third-party
telecommunications service or the Cboe Floor Network switches that
will service the trading floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to adopt a fee relating to accessing the
Meet-me-Room. Particularly, in order for a firm to access the Meet-me-
Room (e.g., if they need technical support), they must request access.
The Exchange notes that because the Meet-me-Room now resides in a
building not owned by the Exchange, the Exchange is assessed a fee by a
third-party (CBOT Building) for providing firms access to the Meet-me-
Room. The Exchange notes that the CBOT Building requires individuals
accessing the Meet-me-Room to be accompanied by CBOT Building
representatives and therefore assesses a fee associated with the visit.
Exchange staff personnel are also present for each visit. The Exchange
therefore proposes to adopt a fee to recoup fees it is billed by the
CBOT Building for providing this access (``Cboe Datacenter Services'').
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to assess a fee of $100 per half-
hour (with a 1 hour minimum required). The Exchange notes that it
waived this fee for the month of June 2022.\17\ Particularly, the
Exchange believed that firms may have had a greater need during the
first month of operations on the new trading floor to visit the Meet-
me-Room. The waiver therefore allowed firms to respond to any potential
issues that may have arisen in the Meet-me-Room during the first month
at no additional cost. The Exchange anticipates that firm requests for
this type of access will be infrequent going forward. The Exchange also
notes that it similarly assessed fees for various third-party technical
support or vendor services on the LaSalle trading floor.\18\ However,
these services are no longer be available in the new trading floor and
the Exchange therefore proposes to eliminate the following
corresponding fees: Technical Support Outside Normal Hours, IPC
(vendor) Time & Material, IPC (vendor) Time & Material Overtime, After
Hours Technician Service, Market-Maker Handheld Tethering Services, and
Market-Maker Handheld Tethering Services For Indexes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95155 (June 24,
2022), 87 FR 39145 (June 30, 2022) (SR-CBOE-2022-029).
    \18\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Vendor Services, Technical
Support Outside Normal Hours, and Miscellaneous, IPC (vendor) Time &
Material, IPC (vendor) Time & Material Overtime, After Hours
Technician Service, Market-Maker Handheld Tethering Services, and
Market-Maker Handheld Tethering Services For Indexes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trading Floor Device Fees
    The Exchange currently lists various fees under the Trading Floor
Terminal Rentals section of the Facility Fees table.\19\ For example,
TPHs are currently assessed $125 per month for ``PAR Workstations'' to
help offset hardware costs incurred by the Exchange in making PAR
workstations available to TPHs. A PAR (Public Automated Routing System)
Workstation is an Exchange-provided order management tool for use on
the Exchange's trading floor by TPHs and PAR Officials to manually
handle orders pursuant to the Rules and facilitate open outcry trading.
Access to PAR is only available on Exchange-provided tablets (currently
Surface Tablets) and the current monthly fee covers both the Exchange-
provided tablet and PAR access. In connection with the transition to
the new trading floor, the Exchange proposes to modify the way it
assesses fees for use of PAR \20\ and also adopt fees for non-Exchange
provided tablets that connect to the Exchange's network. Particularly,
the Exchange proposes to adopt a separate monthly Exchange Tablet fee
of $140 for any tablet provided by the Exchange and a separate monthly
fee of $45 to access PAR. TPHs will continue to utilize PAR on the new
trading floor, which will continue to only be available on Exchange-
provided tablets. Exchange tablets used for PAR may also be used for
access to Silexx.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Exchange proposes to rename this section ``Trading
Floor Device Fees''.
    \20\ The Exchange proposes to replace the reference to ``PAR
Workstation'' to ``PAR Access''. Particularly, the current version
of PAR is no longer a physical touch screen terminal (i.e.,
workstation) but an order management tool that can be accessed on a
tablet such as a Surface.
    \21\ Silexx is a User-optional order entry and management
trading platform. The Silexx platform consists of a ``front-end''
order entry and management trading platform (also referred to as the
``Silexx terminal'') for listed stocks and options that supports
both simple and complex orders, and a ``back-end'' platform which
provides a connection to the infrastructure network. The Silexx
front-end and back-end platforms are a software application that is
installed locally on a user's laptop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to adopt a separate Exchange Tablet fee
as TPHs will have the option of using Exchange-provided tablets for
Cloud9, which is the new telecommunication system the Exchange offers
on the new trading floor.\22\ The Exchange notes that TPHs have the
option of using their own tablet to access Cloud9 in lieu of using an
Exchange-provided tablet. Such tablets would be subject to the ``TPH-
Owned Device Authentication Fee'' described more fully below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Cloud9 is the voice communication solution for the new
trading floor. Cloud9 is a VoIP cloud-based service offering a
traditional turret, the Cloud Hub. The Cloud Hub will be provided by
Cboe and will need to connect to a laptop or device provided either
by the TPH or by Cboe. TPHs may not use the same Exchange Tablet for
both PAR and Cloud9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the new trading floor, TPHs will be able to use a variety of
devices such as tablets, laptops, Market-Maker handheld devices,
printers, and phone systems. TPHs will be able to connect these devices
to the Exchange's network anywhere on the trading floor through wired
jack ports or the wireless network on the trading floor, as long as
they are onboarded to the Cboe Network Authentication System. The
Exchange proposes to assess a fee for TPH-owned devices that connect to
the Exchange's network on the new trading floor (``TPH-Owned Device
Authentication Fee''). Particularly, the Exchange proposes to assess a
fee of $100 per authenticated connection (i.e., when a device connects
to the wired jack and/or wireless network on the trading floor).\23\
The proposed fee will be based

on the maximum number of concurrent authenticated connections made
during market hours during the calendar month. As discussed above, the
Exchange believes the new trading floor provides TPHs more flexibility
to move and relocate any of their devices by eliminating the need for
installation, relocation and removal of connectivity lines to devices.
Consequently, corresponding monthly, installation, relocation and
removal fees will also be eliminated on the new trading floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ For example, a TPH that connects to Cloud9 using its own
laptop would be assessed $100 per month for that connection. If that
same TPH chooses to connect an additional laptop and a printer to
the network, that TPH will be assessed a total of $300 per month
(i.e., $100 for each of the tablet used for Cloud9, the laptop and
the printer).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Replacement Fees
    The Exchange currently assesses fees related for certain hardware
that needs to be replaced because of loss or because of non-normal wear
and tear. Particularly, the Exchange assesses the following replacement
fees:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement Tablet.......................  $1,300 each.
Replacement Stylus Pen...................  $100 each.
Replacement Chargers.....................  $75 each.
Replacement Adapters and Protective Cases  $50 each.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to maintain these replacement fees on the new
trading floor. However, the Exchange proposes to increase the fee to
replace a table from $1,300 per tablet to $1,400 per tablet to reflect
increased costs to the Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to adopt a
new replacement fee for lost Access Badges at the rate of $100 per
badge in order to encourage TPHs to hold onto their badges and not
misplace them.
Obsolete Fees
    The Exchange next proposes to eliminate fees assessed for
technology and infrastructure and related services that will be
rendered obsolete upon the transition to the new trading floor.
Particularly, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the following fees
that have not otherwise been discussed above:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Description                              Fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arbitrage Phone Positions..............  $550/month.
HP Laser Printer Paper.................  $5.00 per packet of 500 sheets.
Zebra Printer Papers...................  $19.50 per roll.
Zebra Printer Ink......................  $19.50 per roll.
Forms Storage..........................  $11.
Exchangefone...........................  $935/installation; $129/
                                          relocation; $100/removal.
Exchangefone--Maintenance..............  $57/month.
Exchangefone--With Recorded Coupler      $126/relocation.
 Between Booths.
Exchangefone--Within Booth.............  $25/relocation.
Single Line--Maintenance...............  $11.50/month.
Phone Rentals--Monthly Fee.............  $110/month.
Phone Rentals--Replacement Repairs.....  cost.
Lines--Intra Floor.....................  $57.75/per month.
Lines--Voice Circuits..................  $16/month; $52.50/installation;
                                          $36.75/removal.
New Circuits--First....................  $120/installation; $50/removal.
New [email protected]  $18/installation; $18/removal.
Existing Line Appearance--First........  $50/installation; $25/removal.
Existing Line Appearance--A Additional.  $18/installation: $18/removal.
Data Circuits (DC) at Local Carrier      $16/month; $52.50/installation;
 (entrance).                              $36.75 removal.
DC @In-House Frame--Lines between Local  $12.75/month; $550/
 Carrier and Comms Center.                installation.
DC @In-House Frame--Lines Between Comms  $12.75/month; $725/
 Center and Trading Floor.                installation; $625/relocation.
DC @In-House Frame--Lines Direct from    $12.75/month; $725/
 Local Carrier to Trading Floor.          installation; $625/relocation.
Shelf for Equipment....................  $100/month.
Lines from Equipment to Floor..........  $50/month.
Handsets...............................  $79/installation.
Headset Jack...........................  $131/installation; $58
                                          relocation; $28/removal.
Recorder Coupler.......................  $150 new/$50 existing
                                          installation; $25/relocation;
                                          $25/removal.
Thomson/Other (Basic Service)..........  $425/month.
Satellite TV...........................  $50/month.
Cboe Options Trading Floor Terminal....  $250/month; $175/installation;
                                          $225 relocation; $125/removal.
Trading Floor Printer Maintenance \24\.  $75/month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to eliminate all PULSe Workstation fees
as PULSe was decommissioned in January 2021, but the Exchange
inadvertently did not delete references to PULSe-related fees at that
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Exchange proposes to eliminate a corresponding
reference in Footnote 50 to Trading Floor Printer Maintenance in
light of the proposal to eliminate this fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Temporary Fees
    In June 2020, the Exchange adopted Footnote 24 of the Fees Schedule
to govern pricing changes that would apply for the duration of time the
Exchange trading floor was being operated in a modified manner in
connection with the COVID-19 pandemic. By way of background, the
Exchange closed its trading floor on March 16, 2020 due to the COVID-19
pandemic and reopened its trading floor on June 15, 2020, but with a
modified configuration of trading crowds in order to implement social
distancing and other measures consistent with local and state health
and safety guidelines to help protect the safety and welfare of
individuals accessing the trading floor. As a result, the Exchange
relocated and modified the physical area of certain trading crowds and
also determined and reduced how many floor participants may access the
trading floor. In connection with these changes, the Exchange proposed
a number of modified billing changes that would remain in place for the
duration of the time the Exchange operated in a modified manner.
Particularly, the following fees are modified when the

Exchange is operating in a modified state due to the COVID-19 pandemic:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trading Permits...................  Floor trading permit fees are not be
                                     assessed on the total number of
                                     floor trading permits a TPH
                                     organization holds, and instead are
                                     based on the floor trading permits
                                     used by nominees of the TPH each
                                     day during the month using the
                                     following formula: (i) the number
                                     of floor trading permits that have
                                     a nominee assigned to it in the
                                     Customer Web Portal system
                                     (``Portal'') in a given month,
                                     multiplied by the number of trading
                                     days that the floor is open and
                                     that a nominee is assigned to each
                                     respective trading permit in that
                                     month, divided by (ii) the total
                                     number of trading days in a month.
                                     The Exchange rounds up to determine
                                     the total number of trading permits
                                     assessed the fees set forth in the
                                     Floor Trading Permit Sliding
                                     Scales.
SPX Tier Appointment Fee..........  The monthly fee for the SPX/SPXW
                                     Floor Market-Maker Tier Appointment
                                     Fee will be increased to $5,000 per
                                     Trading Permit from $3,000 per
                                     Trading Permit.
Inactive Nominee Status (Parking    $300 Parking Space Fees is not
 Space).                             applied.
Inactive Nominee Status Change      $100 Trading Permit Swap Fee is not
 (Trading Permit Swap).              applied.
SPX/SPXW and SPESG Floor Brokerage  SPX/SPXW and SPESG Floor Brokerage
 Fees.                               Fees are be assessed the rate of
                                     $0.05 per contract for non-crossed
                                     orders and $0.03 per contract for
                                     crossed order instead of $0.04 and
                                     $0.02, respectively.
Facility Fees.....................  Monthly fees are waived for the
                                     following facilities fees:
                                     arbitrage phone positions and
                                     satellite tv. If a TPH is unable to
                                     utilize designated facility
                                     services while the trading floor is
                                     operating in a modified state,
                                     corresponding fees, including for
                                     standard and non-standard booth
                                     rentals, Exchangefone maintenance,
                                     single line maintenance, intra
                                     floor lines, voice circuits, data
                                     circuits at local carrier
                                     (entrance), and data circuits at in-
                                     house frame, are waived.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that while the LaSalle trading floor utilized
social distancing and reconfigured trading crowds through its closure
(and therefore was considered to be operating in a modified manner), it
does not believe it was necessary to implement such safety measures on
the new trading floor at the time of transition given recent
developments relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, upon moving to
the new trading floor on June 6, 2022, the Exchange no longer operates
in a modified manner and Footnote 24 does not apply. Accordingly, (1)
Floor Trading Permit fees will be assessed based on the total number of
floor trading permits a TPH holds each month; (2) Parking Space and
Trading Swap fees will no longer be waived; and (3) SPX/SPXW and SPESG
Floor Brokerage fees will be assessed $0.04 per contract for non-
crossed orders (instead of $0.05 per contract) and $0.02 per contract
for crossed orders (instead of $0.03 per contract). As noted above,
arbitrage phone positions, satellite tv, Exchangefone maintenance,
single line maintenance, intra floor lines, voice circuits, data
circuits at local carrier (entrance), and data circuits at in-house
frame are being eliminated as of June 1, 2022 so the Exchange proposes
to also eliminate references to such fees from Footnote 24. The
Exchange also proposes to maintain the current modified rate of $5,000
for the SPX Floor Tier Appointment Fee under Footnote 24 (i.e.,
increase the fee from $3,000 per permit to $5,000 permit regardless of
whether the Exchange is operating in a modified state due to COVID-19
pandemic). The Exchange notes that it has not amended the original Tier
Appointment Fee since its inception almost twelve years ago in July
2010.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62386 (June 25,
2010), 75 FR 38566 (July 2, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2010-060).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\26\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \27\ 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) \28\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the proposed changes are prompted by the
Exchange's recent transition from its previous trading floor, which it
had occupied since the 1980s, to a brand new, modern and upgraded
trading floor facility. The Exchange believes customers continue to
find value in open outcry trading and rely on the floor for price
discovery and the deep liquidity provided by floor Market-Makers and
Floor Brokers. The Exchange believes the build out of a new modern
trading floor is therefore consistent with its commitment to open
outcry trading and focus on providing the best possible trading
experience for its customers. Indeed, the new trading floor provides a
state-of-the-art environment and technology and more efficient use of
physical space, which the Exchange believes better reflects and
supports the current trading environment. The Exchange also believes
the new infrastructure provides a cost-effective, streamlined, and
modernized approach to floor connectivity. For example, the new trading
floor has more than 330 individual kiosks, equipped with top-of-the-
line technology, that enable floor participants to plug in and use
their devices with greater ease and flexibility. It also provides floor
Market-Makers and Floor Brokers with more space and increased capacity
to support additional floor-based traders on the trading floor.
Moreover, the new trading floor is conveniently located across the
street from the LaSalle trading floor, resulting in minimal disruption
to TPH floor participants, many of whom have office space nearby,
including in the CBOT Building. The Exchange believes the CBOT
Building, which was also home to the Exchange's original trading floor
in the 1970s and early 1980s, is also able to support robust trading
floor infrastructure as it currently hosts

several banks, trading firms and even trading floors (i.e., trading
floors for the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and BOX Options Market).
    As described above, the recent transition rendered much of the
Exchange's previous trading floor technology and infrastructure
obsolete, as it has been replaced by new infrastructure in a new
building (no longer owned by the Exchange). As such, the proposed
modifications to corresponding facility fees are not only necessary,
but the Exchange believes reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as discussed in further detail below. The Exchange also
believes the proposed rule change results in a streamlined and
simplified trading floor and facility fee structure.
Booth Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposed Booth Fees are reasonable as
they are not a significant departure from fees that were assessed for
Booths on the LaSalle trading floor (and in some instances are even
lower than currently assessed). Additionally, the Booths on the new
trading floor are slightly larger than the standard Booths that were
available on the LaSalle trading floor. The proposed fees are also in
line with similar fees charged currently and historically at other
exchanges with a physical trading floor.\29\ The Exchange believes that
the proposed booth space fee is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it applies uniformly to trading floor
participants who choose to rent Booths (and all booths are uniform and
nearly identical in size). Moreover, the use of Booths, whether located
away from or in a trading crowd, are optional and not necessary in
order to conduct open outcry trading on the trading floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ In 2011, Nasdaq PHLX charged a flat $300 per month fee for
Trading/Administrative Booth paid by floor brokers and clearing
firms. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-66086 (January 3,
2012), 77 FR 1111 (January 9, 2012) (SR-Phlx-2011-181). NYSE
American currently assesses $40 per linear foot per month for all
booth space utilized by such Floor Broker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule changes to the Booth Policy
and Agreement make non-substantive changes that merely clarify the
Policy and Agreement, make it more accurate, and alleviate potential
confusion, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, protecting investors and the public interest. The Exchange
believes that notwithstanding any of the proposed changes, the Booth
Policy and Agreement continues to ensure that trading floor Booths are
leased to TPH organizations on equal and non-discriminatory terms.
Line to Cboe Floor Network
    The Exchange believes the proposed Line to Cboe Floor Network fee
is reasonable as TPHs will not be subject to the current lines and
circuit fees set forth in the Fees Schedule, including for relocation
and removal, that are assessed on the LaSalle trading floor for similar
connectivity to the trading floor network. Additionally, unlike the
current floor which requires independent wiring be used for each line
or circuit and on a per device basis, the new trading floor will allow
TPHs to maintain one Line (or 2 for redundancy purposes). Accordingly,
the new trading floor will provide TPHs more flexibility to move and
relocate as needed and with greater ease and be able to do so without
incurring additional relocation and removal fees. Moreover, firms will
no longer need to provide their own network equipment to support
dedicated lines to the floor as the Exchange will be providing the
network switches and local area network (LAN) lines for all firms on
the new trading floor. The Exchange notes that on the LaSalle trading
floor, TPHs had to supply their own pair of network switches, which the
Exchange estimates cost approximately $5,000 for each switch (i.e.,
$10,000 total), in addition to ongoing costs incurred for vendor
support and staff personnel time. Under the proposal, TPHs are no
longer subject to these costs, as the Exchange provides both the
network switches and ongoing support. The Exchange also notes other
exchanges assess a variety of facility fees relating to connectivity
and equipment in order to maintain their trading floor facilities.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ For example, Nasdaq PHLX assesses a Floor Facility Fee of
$330 per month for such purpose. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No 69672 (June 5, 2013), 78 FR 33873 (May 30, 2013) (SR-PHLX-2013-
58). Nasdaq PHLX also assesses a variety of options trading floor
fees including for equipment services and relocation requests. See
Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 9. Other Member
Fees, A. Option Trading Floor Fees. See also NYSE America Options
Fees Schedule, Section IV, Monthly Floor Communication,
Connectivity, Equipment and Booth or Podia Fees and NYSE Price List,
Equipment Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed installation fee is also
reasonable as the Exchange is passing through costs it incurs from a
third party (i.e., the CBOT Building) with respect to the installation
of such Lines. The Exchange believes this fee reasonably represents the
materials and labor costs of installation which, as discussed above, is
assessed by a building that has experience in similar installations as
it hosts many other participants in the financial industry, including
trading firms and other exchanges' trading floors. The proposed fee
also includes a redundant Line at no additional cost. The Exchange
believes the proposed monthly and installation Line fees are equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory as they will apply uniformly to all
trading floor participants.
Co-Location and Meet-me-Room
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable to cap all TPHs and non-TPHs
to 8 ``U'' because the Exchange no longer owns the premises in which
the Meet-me-Room resides and there is finite amount of space. The
proposed cap however applies to all TPHs and non-TPHs uniformly.
Additionally, the Exchange believes 8 ``U'' should be sufficient amount
of space for any TPH or non-TPH and that with such cap in place there
is sufficient space to accommodate all TPHs or non-TPHs who request co-
location service. The Exchange believes it's reasonable, equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to eliminate the Co-Location of Equipment
Fee for Sponsored Users as it has not had any Sponsored Users in
several years. If the Exchange were to approve a Sponsored User, such
participant would merely be subject to the remaining (and lower) Co-
Location of Equipment Fee (i.e., $200 per 4 ``U''). The Exchange
believes the proposed relocation and language updates to the current
Co-Location fee are reasonable as the Exchange is not proposing to
change the amount assessed but is merely updating and simplifying the
Fees Schedule and making it easier to read.
    The Exchange believes the proposed $25 per cross-connect monthly
fee is reasonable as it is a modest fee that is a pass-through of the
fee the Exchange is assessed by a third-party (i.e., the CBOT Building)
to maintain such cross connect. Additionally, the Exchange notes third-
party vendors such as telecommunication providers will no longer be
subject to the $50 per month fee for ``Data Circuits from Local Carrier
to Equipment Shelf''. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed
amount is in line (and lower than) the amount assessed by another
exchange for similar cross connects.\31\ The proposed cross connect
installation fee is also reasonable as it is intended to recoup the
fees incurred by the Exchange by

third-party vendors for establishing the cross connects. The Exchange
believes the installation fee assessed by the CBOT Building is also
reasonable as it is in line with installation fees assessed by other
data centers and exchanges for installation of cross-connections.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 9.
Other Member Fees, A. Option Trading Floor Fees, Cabinet-to-Cabinet
Connectivity and Cabinet-to-Cabinet MPOE Connectivity, which are
both subject to a $50 per month fee.
    \32\ See, e.g., NYSE American Options Fees Schedule, Section
V(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed Cboe Datacenter Services fee is
reasonable as it recoups the costs the Exchange is assessed by the CBOT
Building (as the owner of the building) when firms needs to access to
the Meet-me-Room for purposes such as on-site support. The Exchange
notes that it is aware that other data center facilities similarly
require security escorts for Meet-me-Room access and assess fees for
such access. Additionally, the Exchange waived the fee for the month of
June 2022, so that visits to the Meet-me-Room to address any onboarding
questions or issues that arose during the first month in the new
facility were free of charge. Moreover, as noted above, the Exchange
does not anticipate that access to the Meet-me-Room will be needed on a
frequent basis.
    The Exchange believes the proposed cross connect and Cboe
Datacenter Services fees are also equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as they will apply uniformly to all market participants
that request these services, respectively.
Trading Floor Devices
    The Exchange believes the proposed changes related to the PAR fee
are reasonable as the combined proposed fees for using PAR (i.e.,
Exchange Tablet fee and PAR Access fee) are only modestly higher than
the fee TPHs are currently assessed for use of PAR. The Exchange notes
that although TPHs that use PAR will be subject to a modestly higher
fee, the PAR Workstation fee has remained unchanged for over eleven
years, notwithstanding technology changes and improvements over the
last decade, including for example, the ability to also access Silexx
from the same tablet on which PAR is accessed.\33\ Moreover, the
Exchange notes the proposed fee is still lower than fees assessed at
other exchanges for trading floor terminals. For example, NYSE American
assesses $450 per device per month for Floor Broker Handheld and an
additional $215 per month per Exchange sponsored Floor Broker order
entry system.\34\ Moreover, the Exchange notes that the Exchange
provides technical support services for these tablets, eliminating the
need for TPHs to purchase protection plans themselves for their device.
The Exchange also incurs other costs associated with the tablets that
it does not otherwise separately pass through, such as fees incurred
for replacement of batteries and other parts. The Exchange will also
replace a tablet at no additional cost if a tablet is damaged from
normal wear and tear. Further, the Exchange replaces tablets at no
additional cost approximately every 3 years. The Exchange believes the
proposed Exchange Tablet fee is also reasonable as TPHs may, but do not
have to, use an Exchange Tablet to access Cloud9. Indeed, they may use
their own TPH-owned device for purposes of accessing Cloud9 and be
subject to the alternative, and lower, TPH-Owned Device Authentication
Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63701 (January 11,
2011), 76 FR 2934 (January 18, 2011) (SR-CBOE-2010-116).
    \34\ See also NYSE America Options Fees Schedule, Section IV,
Monthly Floor Communication, Connectivity, Equipment and Booth or
Podia Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed PAR Access fee is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory as it applies to all TPHs using PAR.
Moreover, the proposed changes enable the Exchange to offer Exchange-
provided tablets for a separate monthly fee to TPHs that wish to use
them for Cloud9, which is the Exchange's new telecommunications system
that it will offer on the new trading floor. Currently, TPHs are
subject to various communication fees including monthly fees,
installation fees, relocation fees and removal fees which will no
longer be assessed by the Exchange as the Exchange's current
communications offerings will be rendered obsolete upon the transition
to the new trading floor.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Cboe Options Fee Schedule, Communications Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed TPH-Owned Device Authentication
Fee is reasonable as the proposed fee is lower than the proposed fee
assessed for Exchange Tablets which may alternatively be used if a TPH
is looking to access Silexx or Cloud9. Additionally, the Exchange
believes it's reasonable to assess TPHs a monthly fee for access to its
network. Particularly, the Exchange expends resources to monitor and
maintain the network, and importantly, ensure its secure and resilient.
The Exchange also offers assistance during the onboarding process for
the devices and expends resources monitoring and troubleshooting
networking issues. The Exchange notes that as the number of devices
connected to the network increases, demand of Exchange time and
resources may therefore also increase. As such, the Exchange also
believes the proposed fee may encourage firms to be efficient with the
number of devices it chooses to connect to the network. Moreover, the
Exchange believes the new trading floor provides TPHs more flexibility
to move and relocate any of their devices by eliminating the need for
installation, relocation and removal of connectivity lines to devices
and consequently, corresponding monthly, installation, relocation and
removal fees. The proposed fee also applies to all TPHs accessing the
Cboe floor Network from their own device.
Replacement Items
    The Exchange believes the proposed change to increase the tablet
replacement fee is reasonable as the proposed amount better reflects
the approximate cost to the Exchange to provide a replacement tablet to
TPHs. Additionally, the Exchange believes adopting a $100 fee for
replaced access badges is reasonable as the Exchange believes it will
incentivize TPHs to keep track of their access badges and reduce the
need for the Exchange to expend resources to print additional
replacement badges. The Exchange believes these changes are also
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because TPHs that
lose these items or damage these items from non-normal wear or tear
should be responsible for the cost of replacement. The Exchange
believes the proposed fees will encourage TPHs to take proper care and
track of these items. Additionally, the Exchange notes that it will not
charge TPHs to replace defective items (that were not the result of
non-normal wear and tear).
Obsolete Fees
    The Exchange believes eliminating the facility fees discussed above
is reasonable as such corresponding services and architecture will be
rendered obsolete upon transitioning to the new trading floor.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed new fee structure as
compared to the fees being eliminated provides for a more streamlined
and simplified approach to facility fees. The Exchange believes the
proposed elimination of these fees is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as it will apply uniformly to all TPHs. The proposal to
eliminate references to these fees in Footnote 12, 24 and 50 also
maintains clarity in the Fees Schedule and avoids potential confusion.

Footnote 24
    As discussed above, as of June 6, 2022, the Exchange no longer
operates in a modified state due to the COVID-19 pandemic as the
Exchange no longer maintains a modified configuration of trading crowds
to implement social distancing nor does it reduce or limit how many
floor participants may access the trading floor. Accordingly, because
the Exchange is not considered to be operating in a modified
configuration as of June 6, 2022, Footnote 24 is no longer applicable
and the modified billing practices will revert back to original
billing. The Exchange believes its proposal to maintain the current
modified rate of $5,000 for the SPX Floor Tier Appointment Fee under
Footnote 24 (i.e., increase the fee from $3,000 per permit to $5,000
permit regardless of whether the Exchange is operating in a modified
state due to COVID-19 pandemic) \36\ is reasonable because the proposed
amount is not significantly higher than was previously assessed.
Additionally, the Exchange notes that it has not amended the Market-
Maker SPX Tier Appointment Fee since such fee was adopted nearly twelve
years ago in July 2010.\37\ The proposed change also is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory as it applies to all similarly situated
TPHs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ The Exchange proposes to eliminate this language from
Footnote 24 as it will no longer be considered a ``modified'' rate,
and instead update the rate reflected in the Market-Maker Tier
Appointment Fees table.
    \37\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62386 (June 25,
2010), 75 FR 38566 (July 2, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2010-060).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In sum and in addition to all the reasons discussed above, the
Exchange believes its proposed fees are reasonable in light of the
numerous benefits the new trading floor provides its floor
participants. The Exchange believes the new trading floor provides for
state-of-the-art infrastructure, enhanced technology capabilities, and
a flexible, open and dynamic environment to facilitate more seamless
and efficient interaction between traders. The Exchange also notes that
it considered a number of factors in determining the location of the
new trading floor including cost to the Exchange and its TPHs, as well
as the convenience of location for the trading floor community and
Exchange staff. Another critical consideration was whether the new
building would have the necessary infrastructure and ability to support
a sophisticated and state-of-the art trading floor. As the CBOT
Building already hosts several trading firms and two other exchange
trading floors, the Exchange felt confident the CBOT Building would be
able to accommodate the Exchange's technology and infrastructure needs
for its floor. The Exchange therefore believes the amounts of the fees
assessed by the CBOT Building that it proposes to pass-through are
reasonable. The proposed fees are also in line with fees assessed by
other data centers and exchanges for similar technology and services.
For example, as noted above, the $25 cross connect fee is lower than
the fees assessed by other exchanges for similar cross connections.
    The Exchange also notes that is has not sought to pass through
other costs incurred in connection with the new trading floor,
including design, construction and other on-going maintenance costs.
Moreover, the Exchange has not modified many of its facilities fees in
several years. The Exchange therefore believes the proposed fees are
reasonable because they allow the Exchange to recoup fees associated
with the costs of operating a modern and cutting-edge trading floor and
offset and keep pace with increasing technology costs.

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 that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed changes
would be applied in the same manner to all similarly situated
participants and as such, would not impose a disparate burden on
competition among the same classes of market participants. As described
in further detail above, the proposed fees are also applicable only to
market participants that choose to avail themselves to the
corresponding facility services. For example, only firms that choose to
rent Booths (which are optional and not required for open-outcry
trading) will be subject to the proposed Booth Fees. Similarly, only
firms that choose to purchase Exchange-provided tablets are subject to
the tablet fee, and firms may otherwise choose to purchase and provide
their own tablets.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed rule changes apply only to fees relating to the Exchange's
floor facility. Further, as described in detail above, the Exchange
believes its proposed facilities fees are in line with facility fees
assessed at other exchanges that maintain physical trading floors.
Additionally, the Exchange notes it operates in a highly competitive
market. In addition to Cboe Options, TPHs have numerous alternative
venues that they may participate on and director their order flow,
including 15 other options exchanges (four of which also maintain
physical trading floors), as well as off-exchange venues, where
competitive products are available for trading. Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 16% of
the market share of executed volume of options trades.\38\ Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
option order flow. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed
its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in
determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets.
Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the
importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and,
also, recognized that current regulation of the market system ``has
been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \39\ The fact that this market is competitive has also
long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and
Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers' . . . .''.\40\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed changes to the incentive programs impose any burden on
competition that

is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
by Month (May 31, 2022), available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_share/.
    \39\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \40\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \41\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \42\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \42\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \43\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2022-042 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2022-042. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2022-042, and should be submitted
on or before September 13, 2022.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-18098 Filed 8-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 70578-70579]
[DOCID:fr12de07-29]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-1-009]

Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Compliance
Filing

December 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on November 30, 2007, Florida Gas Transmission
Company, LLC (FGT) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with an
effective date of January 1, 2008:

First Revised Sheet No. 333

First Revised Sheet No. 335
First Revised Sheet No. 337
First Revised Sheet No. 338

    FGT states that the filing is being made in compliance with the
Commission's ``Order Issuing Certificates'' issued on June 15, 2006 in
the above referenced proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of
the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest
must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time December 12, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-24030 Filed 12-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P