[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53375-53376]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23028]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0940]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Steamboat Slough (Snohomish
River), Marysville, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway Company (BNSF) Railroad Bridge (BNSF Bridge 37.0) across
Steamboat Slough (Snohomish River), mile 1.0 near Marysville, WA. The
deviation is necessary to accommodate scheduled replacement of bridge
ties across the swing span replacement. The deviation allows the bridge
to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the maintenance
to allow safe movement of work crews.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 11 a.m. on November 26, 2018 to
3 p.m. on December 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0940 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Steven M. Fischer, the Bridge
Administrator, Coast Guard Thirteenth District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BNSF has requested a temporary deviation
from the operating schedule for the BNSF Bridge 37.0, mile 1.0,
crossing Steamboat Slough (Snohomish River), near Marysville, WA. BNSF
requested for BNSF Bridge 37.0 be allowed to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position for swing span maintenance. This maintenance will
improve the reliability of the bridge for marine openings. The normal
operating schedule for the subject bridge is in 33 CFR 117.1059. BNSF
Bridge 37.0 is a swing bridge and provides 8 feet of vertical clearance
above mean high water elevation while in the closed-to-navigation
position.
    This deviation allows the BNSF Bridge 37.0 to remain in the closed-
to-navigation position, and need not open for maritime traffic from 11
a.m. on November 26, 2018 to 3 p.m. on December 14, 2018 per the table
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        From time/date               To time/date         Span position
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 a.m./Nov 26, 2018..........  3 p.m./Nov 30, 2018...  Closed.
11 a.m./Dec 3, 2018...........  3 p.m./Dec 7, 2018....  Closed.
11 a.m./Dec 10, 2018..........  3 p.m./Dec 14, 2018...  Closed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.1059 at all
other times. Vessels able to pass through the subject bridge in the
closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridge will be
required to open, if needed, for vessels engaged in emergency response
operations during this closure period.
    Waterway usage on this part of the Snohomish River and Steamboat
Slough includes tug and barge to small pleasure craft. The BNSF Bridge
37.0 receives an average number of three opening request during this
time of year. BNSF has coordinated with Steamboat Slough users that
frequently request bridge openings during this time of year. No
immediate alternate route for vessels to pass is available on this part
of the river. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the
waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the
change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange
their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary
deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridges must return to
their regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the
effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the
operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: October 16, 2018.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-23028 Filed 10-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 178 (Tuesday, September 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 55351]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23148]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-68-000]

Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Filing

    On June 18, 2015, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act,
16 U.S.C. 824e, the Commission instituted an investigation in Docket
No. EL15-68-000 to examine the justness and reasonableness of the pro
forma Facilities Construction Agreement (FCA), Generator
Interconnection Agreement (GIA), and Multi-Party Facilities
Construction Agreement (MPFCA) contained in Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc.'s (MISO) Open Access Transmission, Energy and
Operating Reserve Markets Tariff (Tariff). Midcontinent Indep. Sys.
Operator, Inc., et al., 151 FERC ] 61,220 (2015). The Commission found
that, upon initial review, the pro forma FCA, GIA, and MPFCA may be
unjust and unreasonable, and that the potentially unjust and
unreasonable Tariff language could be remedied with certain revisions.
The Commission required MISO to make a filing either to (1) report
whether it will propose Tariff changes as suggested by the Commission
or (2) explain why such changes are not necessary. Take notice that, on
August 17, 2015, MISO submitted a filing in response to the
Commission's directive.
    The Commission is now providing an opportunity for other parties to
comment on the Commission's preliminary findings in the section 206
proceeding in Docket No. EL15-68-000, as well as MISO's response to the
Commission's directive. Any person desiring to comment must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Comments will be considered by
the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but
intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of comments in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of
the comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    MISO's filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using
the ``eLibrary'' link and is available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2015.

    Dated: September 9, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23148 Filed 9-14-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43676-43679]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17975]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0606; Product Identifier 2019-NM-120-AD; Amendment
39-19706; AD 2019-16-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This AD was
prompted by a report of a front engine mount primary pin which moved
axially out of place; investigation revealed that incorrect washers had
been installed on the engine mount pins. This AD requires a one-time
inspection of the washers installed on the front and rear engine mount
primary pins and thrust link pins of both engines, depending on
configuration, and corrective actions if necessary, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated
by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective September 6, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of September 6,
2019.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by October 7, 2019.

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 http://www.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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, at Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2019-0606.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0606; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace
Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0175, dated July 19, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0175'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes.
The MCAI states:

    A case was reported by an A350-1041 operator where a front
engine mount primary pin had moved axially out of place.
Investigations revealed that washers with incorrect P/N [part
number] had been installed on the subject engine mount pins. A350-
941 aeroplanes are also considered as potentially affected. The
engine mount assembly has a fail-safe design, loads are carried by
two links in the left-hand and right-hand positions and in case of
failure, a ``fail-safe'' link pin in the centre position is
activated and takes the loads.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, may lead to
disengagement of a primary engine mount pin, which along with an
additional failure of the ``fail-safe'' link pin, could possibly
result in in-flight detachment of an engine, with consequent reduced
control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the
AOT [All Operators Transmission] to provide inspection instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time inspection of the washers installed on the front and rear
engine mount primary pins and thrust links pins of both engines, and
depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective
action(s).

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0175 describes procedures for a one-time inspection of
the washers installed on the front and rear engine mount primary pins
and thrust link pins of both engines, depending on configuration, and
corrective actions. Corrective actions include replacing any affected
washer with a serviceable part and repair.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another

country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to a bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Requirements of This AD

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD
2019-0175 described previously, as incorporated by reference, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this AD. This AD also requires sending the inspection results to
Airbus.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to
use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for
compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. As a result,
EASA AD 2019-0175 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This AD, therefore, requires compliance with EASA AD 2019-0175 in
its entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using
common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section
in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only with that
section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to ``all required
actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD requirement is
not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance
Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified in EASA AD
2019-0175 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-0175 will
be available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0606 after the FAA final rule is
published.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because the unsafe condition could result in the in-flight detachment
of an engine, and consequent reduced control of the airplane.
Therefore, the FAA finds good cause that notice and opportunity for
prior public comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reasons
stated above, the FAA finds that good cause exists for making this
amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and the FAA did not precede it by notice and opportunity for
public comment. The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data,
views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0606;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-120-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD based on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 13 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340...........................              $0             $340           $4,420
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be $1,105, or $85
per product.
    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified
in this AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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 (AD):

2019-16-03 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19706; Docket No. FAA-2019-0606;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-120-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective September 6, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0175, dated July 19,
2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0175'').

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 71, Power Plant.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of a front engine mount primary
pin which moved axially out of place; investigation revealed that
incorrect washers had been installed on the engine mount pins. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address disengagement of a primary engine
mount pin, which, along with an additional failure of the ``fail-
safe'' link pin, could result in the in-flight detachment of an
engine, and consequent reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0175.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0175

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2019-0175 refers to its effective date,
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2019-0175 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus within a certain compliance time. For
this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time specified
in paragraph (h)(2)(i) or (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the effective date
of this AD.
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0175 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0175 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen Arrigotti,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0175,
dated July 19, 2019.

    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2019-0175, contact the EASA, at Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 6017; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this EASA AD at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. EASA AD
2019-0175 may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0606.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on August 8, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-17975 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16277-16279]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05982]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94432; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2022-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Fees Applicable to Various Market Data Products

March 16, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 3, 2022, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or the ``Exchange'') is filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') a
proposed rule change to amend the fees applicable to various market
data products. 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://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), 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 the Market Data section applicable
to its equities trading platform (``BZX Equities''). Particularly, the
Exchange proposes to (i) adopt a New External Distributor Credit
applicable to Cboe One Premium, and (ii) extend the New External
Distributor Credit applicable to BZX Summary Depth Feed from one (1)
month to three (3) months.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
January 3, 2022 (SR-CboeBZX-2022-001). On March 3, 2022 the Exchange
withdrew that filing and submitted this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of background, Cboe One Premium is a data feed that
disseminates, on a real-time basis, the aggregate best bid and offer
(``BBO'') of all displayed orders for securities traded on BZX and its
affiliated exchanges (i.e., Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX''), Cboe
EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), and Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGA'')) and contains optional functionality which enables
recipients to receive aggregated two-sided quotations from BZX and its
affiliated equities exchanges for up to five (5) price levels.\4\
Currently, the Exchange charges an external distribution fee of $12,500
per month to External Distributors \5\ of Cboe One Premium. The
Exchange now proposes to adopt a New External Distributor Credit which
provide that new External Distributors of the Cboe One Premium Feed
will not be charged an External Distributor Fee for their first three
(3) months in order to allow them to enlist new Users to receive the
Cboe One Premium Feed. The Exchange believes the proposal will
incentivize External Distributors to enlist new users to receive Cboe
One Premium. To

ensure consistency across the Cboe Equity Exchanges, EDGA, EDGX, and
BYX will be filing companion proposals to reflect this proposal in
their respective fee schedules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Cboe Aggregated Market (``Cboe One'') Feed is a data
feed that contains the aggregate best bid and offer of all displayed
orders for securities traded on the Exchange and its affiliated
exchanges (i.e., BYX, EDGX, and EDGA). See Exchange Rule 11.22(j).
The Cboe One Feed contains optional functionality which enables
recipients to receive aggregated two-sided quotations from the Cboe
Equities Exchanges for up to five (5) price levels (``Cboe One
Premium Feed''). The Cboe One Premium external distribution fee is
equal to the aggregate BZX Summary Depth, BYX Summary Depth, EDGX
Summary Depth, and EDGA Summary Depth external distribution fees.
    \5\ An External Distributor of an Exchange Market Data product
is a Distributor that receives the Exchange Market Data product and
then distributes that data to a third party or one or more Users
outside the Distributor's own entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it offers similar credits for other market
data products. For example, the Exchange currently offers a one (1)
month New External Distributor Credit applicable to Cboe One
Summary,\6\ which is a data feed that disseminates, on a real-time
basis, the aggregate BBO of all displayed orders for securities traded
on BZX and its affiliated equities exchanges and also contains
individual last sale information for the BZX and its affiliated
equities exchanges.\7\ It also offers a New External Distributor Credit
of one (1) month for subscribers of BZX Summary Depth, which is a data
feed that offers aggregated two-sided quotations for all displayed
orders entered into the System for up to five (5) price levels. BZX
Summary Depth also contains the individual last sale information,
Market Status, Trading Status, and Trade Break messages.\8\ As noted
above, the External Distribution fees for Cboe One Summary is
equivalent to the aggregate BZX Summary Depth, BYX Summary Depth, EDGA
Summary Depth, and EDGX Summary Depth External Distribution fees. In
order to alleviate any competitive issues that may arise with a vendor
seeking to offer a product similar to the Cboe One Premium Feed based
on the underlying data feeds, the Exchange proposes to also extend the
current New External Distributor Credit for BZX Summary Depth from one
(1) month to three (3) months and the Exchange's affiliates BYX, EDGA
and EDGX are also submitting similar proposals to increase the length
of their respective Summary Depth New External Distributor Credits from
one (1) month to three (3) months. The respective proposals to extend
these credits to three months ensures the proposed New External
Distributor Credit for Cboe One Premium will continue to not cause the
combined cost of subscribing to BZX, BYX, EDGA, and EDGX Summary Depth
feeds for new External Distributors to be greater than those currently
charged to subscribe to the Cboe One Premium feed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Rule 11.22(j).
    \7\ The Exchange notes that when it first adopted the New
External Distributor Credit for Cboe One Summary, it similarly
applied for a new External Distributor's first three (3) months. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74285 (February 18, 2015), 80 FR
9828 (February 24, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-11).
    \8\ See Exchange Rule 11.22(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\10\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and other recipients of
Exchange data. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 11(A) of the Act as it supports
(i) fair competition among brokers and dealers, among exchange markets,
and between exchange markets and markets other than exchange markets,
and (ii) the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors of
information with respect to quotations for and transactions in
securities.\11\ Finally, the proposed rule change is also consistent
with Rule 603 of Regulation NMS,\12\ which provides that any national
securities exchange that distributes information with respect to
quotations for or transactions in an NMS stock do so on terms that are
not unreasonably discriminatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \12\ See 17 CFR 242.603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that adopting a New External Distributor
Credit for Cboe One Premium is equitable and reasonable. As discussed
above, a similar New External Distributor Fee Credit was initially
adopted at the time the Exchange began to offer the Cboe One Summary to
subscribers. It was intended to incentivize new Distributors to enlist
Users to subscribe to Cboe One Summary in an effort to broaden the
product's distribution. Now, the Exchange proposes to adopt a similar
credit for Cboe One Premium subscribers for their first three (3)
months to similarly incentivize new Distributors to enlist Users to
subscribe to Cboe One Premium in an effort to broaden the product's
distribution. While this incentive is not available to Internal
Distributors of Cboe One Premium, the Exchange believes it is
appropriate as Internal Distributors have no subscribers outside of
their own firm. Furthermore, External Distributors are subject to
higher risks of launch as the data is provided outside their own firm.
For these reasons, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to provide
this incentive so that External Distributors have sufficient time to
test the data within their own systems prior to going live externally.
The Exchange believes extending the New External Distributor Credit for
BZX Summary Depth from one (1) month to three (3) months is also
equitable and reasonable, as it (along with simultaneous corresponding
proposals by the Exchange's affiliates) ensures the proposed New
External Distributor Credit for Cboe One Premium will continue to not
cause the combined cost of subscribing to BZX, BYX, EDGA, and EDGX
Summary Depth feeds for new External Distributors to be greater than
those currently charged to subscribe to the Cboe One Premium feed.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
believes that the proposed fees do not put any market participants at a
relative disadvantage compared to other market participants. As
discussed, the proposed credits would apply to all External
Distributors Cboe One Premium and BZX Depth on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis. Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed
fees do not impose a burden on competition or on other SROs that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Other exchanges are free to adopt a similar waiver if they choose. As
discussed above, the proposed amendments are designed to enhance
competition by providing an incentive to new Distributors to enlist new
subscribers.

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 has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \14\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule

change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CboeBZX-2022-015 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-CboeBZX-2022-015. 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-CboeBZX-2022-015 and should be submitted
on or before April 12, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-05982 Filed 3-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72496-72497]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30213]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2011-0001-N-20]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration, (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Requirements (ICRs) abstracted below are being forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
ICRs describe the nature of the information collections and their
expected burden. The Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collections of information
was published on September 8, 2011 (76 FR 55726).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before December 23, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,
Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., 3rd Floor, Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>), or Ms. Kimberly
Toone, Office of Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., 3rd Floor, Mail Stop 35,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>). (These telephone
numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13,
Section 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised at 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, require
Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public comment on
information collection activities before OMB may approve paperwork
packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1), 1320.12. On
September 8, 2011, FRA published a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register soliciting comment on these ICRs for which the agency is
seeking OMB approval. 76 FR 55726. FRA received no comments in response
to this notice.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice
informs the regulated community to file relevant comments and affords
the agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
of this Notice to best ensure having their full effect. 5 CFR
1320.12(c); see also 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995.
    The summary below describes the nature of the information
collection requirements (ICRs) and the expected burden being submitted
for clearance by OMB as required by the PRA.
    Title: Occupational Noise Exposure for Railroad Operating
Employees.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0571.
    Type of Request: Extension with change of a currently approved
collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Abstract: The collection of information is used by FRA to ensure
that railroads covered by this rule establish and implement--by
specified

dates--noise monitoring, hearing conservation, and audiometric testing
programs, as well as hearing conservation training programs, to protect
their employees against the damaging and potentially dangerous effects
of excessive noise in the everyday rail environment.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Total Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 35,301 hours.
    Addressee: Send comments regarding this information collection to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, DC, 20503,
Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be sent via email to OMB
at the following address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of
the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 17, 2011 .
Michael Logue,
Acting Director, Office of Financial Management, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-30213 Filed 11-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: March 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 60)]
[Notices]
[Page 14789]
[DOCID:fr29mr07-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. RP07-184-000 Through RP07-304-000]

Unassigned Gas Docket Numbers; Notice of Unused RP Docket Number

March 23, 2007.
    Take notice that Docket Numbers RP07-184-000 through RP07-304-000
were not assigned to any filing due to computer error. These docket
numbers will not be assigned to any filings with the Commission.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5772 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 10727-10728]
[DOCID:fr12mr09-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-733-000]

Grindstone Capital Management, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

March 4, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Grindstone Capital Management, LLC.'s application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 24, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling

link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list.
    They are also 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
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-5249 Filed 3-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46315-46320]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15270]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97902; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-033]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
its Fees Schedule

July 13, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 30, 2023, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. 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, effective July 3,
2023.
XSP Fees
    The Exchange first proposes to adopt and amend certain fees related
to transactions in Mini-SPX Index (``XSP'') options. Specifically, the
proposed rule changes amends and adopts certain fees for XSP in the
Rate Table for All Products Underlying Symbol List A, as follows:
     Amends fee code XC, appended to all Customer (capacity
``C'') orders in XSP that are for less than 10 contracts and assesses
no charge, to provide a rebate of $0.13 per contract.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange also proposes to update corresponding Footnote
9 to reflect Customer orders in XSP for less than 10 contracts will
receive a rebate (instead of no charge).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Amends fee code CC, appended to all Customer (capacity
``C'') orders in XSP that are for greater than or equal to 10 contracts
and assesses a fee of $0.04 per contract, to assess a fee of $0.07 per
contract.
     Adopts fee code MC, appended to all Market-Maker (capacity
``M'') orders in XSP that are contra customer and assesses a fee of
$0.15 per contract.
     Amends fee code MX, currently appended to all Market-Maker
(capacity ``M'') orders in XSP and assesses a fee of $0.045, to apply
to orders contra to non-customers and to assess a fee of $0.09 per
contract.
     Amends fee code XF, appended to all Clearing Trading
Permit Holders (``TPHs'') (capacity ``F'') and Non-Clearing TPH
Affiliates (capacity ``L'') (collectively, ``Firms'') orders in XSP and
assesses a fee of $0.06, to assess a fee of $0.13 per contract.
     Amends fee code XB, appended to all Broker-Dealer
(capacity ``B''), Joint Back-Office (capacity ``J''), Non-TPH Market-
Maker (capacity ``N''), and Professional (capacity ``U'')
(collectively, ``Non-Customers'') orders in XSP and assesses a fee of
$0.08 per contract, to assess a fee of $0.17 per contract.
Customer Volume Incentive Program
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Customer Volume Incentive
Program (``VIP''). The Exchange first notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More
specifically, the Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which
market participants may direct their order flow. Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 17% of
the market share.\4\ Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly
competitive market, no single options exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of option order flow. The Exchange
believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from
month to month demonstrates that market participants can shift order
flow, or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products,
in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain
the Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can readily
trade on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other
venues to be more favorable. In response to the competitive
environment, the Exchange offers tiered pricing in its Fees Schedule,
like that of other options exchanges fees schedules,\5\ which provides
TPHs opportunities to qualify for higher rebates or reduced fees where
certain volume criteria and thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides
an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive for higher tier levels,
which provides increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying
increasingly more stringent criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(June 28, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \5\ See e.g., NASDAQ Stock Market Rules, Options Rules, Options
7 Pricing Schedule, Sec. 2 Options Market--Fees and Rebates, Tiers
1-6; see also NYSE Arca Options, Fees and Charges, Customer Posting
Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, under the VIP, the Exchange credits each TPH the per
contract amount set forth in the VIP table for Public Customer (origin
code ``C'') orders transmitted by TPHs (with certain exceptions) \6\
and executed electronically on the Exchange, provided the TPH meets
certain volume thresholds in a month; volume for Professional Customers
and Voluntary Professionals (``Professional Customers'') (origin code
``W''), Broker-Dealers (origin code ``B''), and Joint Back-Offices
(``JBO'') (origin code ``J'') orders are counted toward reaching such
thresholds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 36.
    \7\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The VIP offers both rates for Complex and Simple orders. The VIP
provides however, that a TPH will only receive the Complex credit rates
for both its Complex AIM and Non-AIM volume if at least 38% of that
TPH's qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and Non-AIM) in the previous
month was comprised of Simple volume. If the TPH's previous month's
volume does not meet the 38% Simple volume threshold, then the TPH's
Customer (C) Complex volume will receive credits at the Simple rate
only (i.e., all volume, both Simple and Complex, will receive credits
at the applicable Simple rate). The Exchange proposes to reduce the 38%
threshold to 32%, for Tiers 1, 2, and 3 (the 38% threshold will
continue to apply to Tiers 4 and 5). The proposed change is designed to
increase the amount of volume TPHs provide on the Exchange

and further encourage them to contribute to a deeper, more liquid
market, as well as to increase transactions and take such execution
opportunities provided by such increased liquidity, while implementing
an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive for the highest level. The
Exchange believes the proposed change will still encourage TPHs to
continue to send both Simple and Complex volume to the Exchange.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to increase the VIP credit rates for
complex orders in Tier 3 from $0.24 to $0.23 per contract for non-AIM
volume and from $0.22 to $.021 per contract for AIM volume.
MRUT LMM Incentive Program
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend its Mini-Russell 2000 Index
option (``MRUT'') Lead Market-Maker (``LMM'') Incentive Program. The
Exchange offers several LMM Incentive Programs which provide a rebate
to TPHs with LMM appointments to the respective incentive program that
meet certain quoting standards in the applicable series in a month. The
Exchange notes that meeting or exceeding the quoting standards (both
current and as proposed; described in further detail below) in each of
the LMM Incentive Program products to receive the applicable rebate
(both currently offered and as proposed; described in further detail
below) is optional for an LMM appointed to a program. Particularly, an
LMM appointed to an incentive program is eligible to receive the
corresponding rebate if it satisfies the applicable quoting standards,
which the Exchange believes encourages appointed LMMs to provide
liquidity in the applicable class and trading session (i.e., Regular
Trading Hours (``RTH'') or Global Trading Hours). The Exchange may
consider other exceptions to the programs' quoting standards based on
demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating
circumstances. In calculating whether an LMM appointed to an incentive
program meets the applicable program's quoting standards each month,
the Exchange excludes from the calculation in that month the business
day in which the LMM missed meeting or exceeding the quoting standards
in the highest number of the applicable series.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the current MRUT LMM Incentive
Program. Currently, the MRUT LMM Incentive Program provides that, for
MRUT, if the appointed LMM provides continuous electronic quotes during
RTH that meet or exceed the heightened quoting standards in at least
99% of the MRUT series 90% of the time in a given month, the LMM will
receive a rebate for that month in the amount of $15,000 (or pro-rated
amount if an appointment begins after the first trading day of the
month or ends prior to the last trading day of the month). The Exchange
now proposes to amend the series qualification requirement for the MRUT
LMM Incentive Program. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to update
the series qualification requirement to require the appointed LMM to
provide continuous electronic quotes during RTH that meet or exceed the
heightened quoting standards in at least 97% the MRUT series 90% of the
time in a given month in order to receive the rebate, thereby
decreasing the series qualification requirement by 2%. In changing this
requirement, the Exchange wishes to encourage LMMs appointed to the
MRUT LMM Incentive Program to provide significant liquidity in MRUT
options by meeting the series qualification requirements (and relevant
quoting standards) under the Program in order to receive the rebate.
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.\8\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ 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) \10\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\11\ which
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its TPHs and other
persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees for Customer, Market-
Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in XSP are reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange notes that the proposed
transactions fees for Customer orders in XSP that are for more than 10
contracts, as well as for Market-Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in
XSP, remain lower than that of the similar market participant fees
associated with other index products.\12\ Further, the Exchange
believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
provide a rebate of $0.13 for all Customer orders in XSP that are for
less than 10 contracts, as such rebate is designed to incentivize
Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. Additionally, the Exchange
believes it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to establish a
fee structure for Market-Maker orders in XSP, based on contra-party,
and to adopt a new fee code specific to Market-Maker orders in XSP that
are contra customer, as such changes are also designed to incentivize
an increase in Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. The Exchange
believes that incentivizing more Customer orders in XSP will create
more trading opportunities, which, in turn attracts Market-Makers. A
resulting increase in Market-Maker activity facilitates tighter
spreads, which may lead to additional increase of order flow in XSP
from other market participants, further contributing to a deeper, more
liquid market to the benefit of all market participants by creating a
more robust and well-balanced market ecosystem. Further, the Exchange
believes that the changes are reasonable and that the fees, even as
amended, will continue to incentivize Members to send additional
Market-Maker orders to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Cboe Options Fee Schedule, ``Index Options Rate Table--
All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A and Sector
Indexes''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees for Customer, Market-
Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in XSP are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the proposed fees will apply
automatically and uniformly to all Customer, Market-Maker, Firm and
Non-Customer orders in XSP.
    The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to the VIP, to
decrease the percentage of TPH qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and
Non-AIM) that must be comprised of Simple volume in

order to receive the complex rates for both Complex AIM and Non-AIM
volume for Tiers 1 through 3, is reasonable because it makes it
slightly easier for TPHs to meet the qualifying criteria to receive the
Complex credits in Tiers 1 through 3. The Exchange notes that the VIP
will continue to provide an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive
for the highest tier level, which provides increasingly higher credits,
for both Complex and Simple volume. The Exchange believes the proposed
change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
proposed changes apply to all TPHs uniformly.
    Further, the Exchange believes that decreasing the VIP credit rates
for complex orders in Tier 3 is reasonable because it will still allow
all TPHs transmitting public customer complex orders that reach the
Tier 3 volume thresholds to receive a credit for doing so (albeit at
slightly lower amounts). The proposed complex credit rates for Tier 3
also do not represent a significant departure from the credit rates
offered under the existing Tier 3 and are therefore still reasonable
based on the difficulty of satisfying the tier's criteria and ensures
the proposed credit rates, along with the existing threshold,
appropriately reflect the incremental difficulty to achieve VIP Tier 3.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the VIP are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory, as such changes
should continue to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to
the Exchange. This should provide greater liquidity and trading
opportunities, including for market participants who send simple orders
to the Exchange (as simple orders can trade with the legs of complex
orders). The greater liquidity and trading opportunities should benefit
not just public customers (whose orders are the only ones that qualify
for the VIP) but all market participants.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal represents an equitable
allocation of rebates and is not unfairly discriminatory because all
TPHs have the opportunity to meet the proposed Simple volume thresholds
in Tiers 1 through 3, to receive the complex rates for both Complex AIM
and Non-AIM volume for Tiers 1 through 3. Given that TPHs change their
trading strategies and patterns month-to-month to align with changing
market trends and conditions, as well as pricing and functionality
changes across other exchanges, and without having a view of activity
on other markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of
knowing whether this proposed rule change would definitively result in
a shift of TPHs qualifying for the proposed tiers. While the Exchange
has no way of predicting with certainty how the rule change will impact
TPHs, the Exchange anticipates the impact of the proposed change to be
minimal in at least one TPH will be able to reach Tier 2, as amended,
and two TPHs will be able to reach Tier 3, as amended. As stated, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes do not represent a
significant departure from the current required criteria, is still
reasonable based on the difficulty of satisfying each tier's criteria,
and is appropriately aligned with the incremental difficulty to achieve
the existing VIP tiers. As such, the Exchange does not anticipate the
proposed change to impact the number of firms that compete across all
tiers, but instead encourages competition by encouraging an increase in
order flow in order to qualify for contract credits. Therefore, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes are unfairly
discriminatory as it would not impact the range of typical competition
across such tiers.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable to decrease the series
requirement for the MRUT LMM Incentive Program to 97% (from 99%), as
such changes are reasonably designed to slightly ease the difficulty in
meeting the heightened quoting standards offered under these programs
(for which an appointed LMM receives the respective rebates), which, in
turn, provides increased incentive for LMMs appointed to these programs
to provide significant liquidity in MRUT options. Such liquidity
benefits all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, tighter spreads, and added market transparency and price
discovery, and signals to other market participants to direct their
order flow to those markets, thereby contributing to robust levels of
liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the LMM
Incentive Program is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The
Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to amend the series qualification requirement for the MRUT LMM
Incentive Program, because such series qualification requirement will
equally apply to any and all TPHs with LMM appointments to the MRUT LMM
Incentive Program that seek to meet the program's heightened quoting
standard in order to receive the rebate offered under the program. The
Exchange additionally notes that, if an LMM appointed to the LMM
Incentive Program does not satisfy the corresponding heightened quoting
standard for any given month, then it simply will not receive the
rebate offered by the respective program for that month.
    Regarding the MRUT LMM Incentive Program generally, the Exchange
believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
continue to offer these financial incentives, including as amended, to
LMMs appointed to the program, because it benefits all market
participants trading in MRUT options during RTH. This incentive program
encourages the LMMs appointed to such program to satisfy the heightened
quoting standards, which may increase liquidity and provide more
trading opportunities and tighter spreads. Indeed, the Exchange notes
that these LMMs serve a crucial role in providing quotes and the
opportunity for market participants to trade MRUT options, as
applicable, which can lead to increased volume, providing for robust
markets. The Exchange ultimately offers the LMM Incentive Program, as
amended, to sufficiently incentivize LMMs appointed to the incentive
program to provide key liquidity and active markets in the
corresponding program products during the corresponding trading
sessions, and believes that these incentive program, as amended, will
continue to encourage increased quoting to add liquidity in MRUT,
thereby protecting investors and the public interest. The Exchange also
notes that an LMM appointed to an incentive program may undertake added
costs each month to satisfy that heightened quoting standards (e.g.,
having to purchase additional logical connectivity).

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 change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments to XSP fees will
apply to all similarly situated TPHs equally, the VIP will apply to all
TPHs submitting qualified orders equally, and the amendments to the
MRUT LMM Incentive Program will apply uniformly to any LMM appointment
to the programs.
    The Exchange believes that providing a rebate of $0.13 for Customer
orders in XSP that are for less than 10 contracts will incentivize
Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. Further, the

proposed change to establish a fee structure for Market-Maker orders in
XSP, based on contra-party, and adopt a new fee code specific to
Market-Maker orders in XSP that are contra customer, is designed to
incentivize an increase in Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. As
noted above, Customer order flow, importantly, provides increased
trading opportunities signaling additional liquidity and ultimately
enhancing overall market quality. Further, preferential pricing to
Customers is a long-standing options industry practice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See e.g., NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, Section I.A,
Options Transaction Fees and Credits: Rates for Options
transactions; and MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Section (b)(1),
Proprietary Products Exchange Fees: SPIKES, each of which assesses a
lower transaction fee for customer orders than that of other market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Exchange believes the proposed VIP changes
would continue to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to the
Exchange, which in turn would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all TPHs. The Exchange believes the proposed change to decrease the
percentage of TPH qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and Non-AIM) that
must be comprised of Simple volume in order to receive the complex
rates for both Complex AIM and Non-AIM volume for Tiers 1 through 3
will continue to provide an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive
for the highest tier level, which provides increasingly higher credits,
for both Complex and Simple volume, thus incentivizing order flow to
the Exchange. Further, the Exchange believes the change to decrease the
VIP credit rates for complex orders in Tier 3 remain in line to the
amounts of credits paid to market participants by another exchange for
similar transactions and do not represent a significant departure from
the credit rates offered under the existing Tier 3.
    Finally, in regard to the MRUT LMM Incentive Program, to the extent
LMMs appointed to this programs receive a benefit that other market
participants do not, as stated, these LMMs in their role as Market-
Makers on the Exchange have different obligations and are held to
different standards. An LMM appointed to an incentive program may also
undertake added costs each month to satisfy that heightened quoting
standards (e.g., having to purchase additional logical connectivity).
The Exchange also notes that the proposed changes are designed to
attract additional order flow to the Exchange, wherein greater
liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, tighter spreads, and added market transparency and price
discovery, and signals to other market participants to direct their
order flow to those markets, thereby contributing to robust levels of
liquidity.
    As a result of the above, the Exchange believes that the proposed
changes furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of
fostering competition among orders, which promotes ``more efficient
pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders, large and
small.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 70 FR 37495,
37498-99 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. The Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly competitive market. TPHs have
numerous alternative venues that they may participate on and direct
their order flow, including 16 other options exchanges, 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 17% of the market share.\15\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of option order flow.
Indeed, participants can readily choose to send their orders to other
exchange, and, additionally off-exchange venues, if they deem fee
levels at those other venues to be more favorable. 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.'' \16\ 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'. . ..''.\17\ Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed fee change imposes any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 4.
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \17\ 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 has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \18\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \19\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-CBOE-2023-033 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-2023-033. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2023-033, and should be
submitted on or before August 9, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-15270 Filed 7-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36879-36881]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15691]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75258; File No. SR-FICC-2015-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change to the Government Securities
Division Rules in Connection With the Extension of the GCF Repo Service
Pilot Program

June 22, 2015.
    On May 7, 2015, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
proposed rule change SR-FICC-2015-002 pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal

Register on May 21, 2015.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposed rule change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission
is approving the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-74973 (May 15, 2015),
80 FR 29352 (May 21, 2015) (SR-FICC-2015-002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    FICC seeks the Commission's approval to extend the pilot program
that is currently in effect for the GCF Repo[supreg] service (``2014
Pilot Program'').\4\ FICC requests that the 2014 Pilot Program be
extended for one year following the Commission's approval of this
filing. FICC represents that, during this extension period, the final
phase of tri-party reform will be implemented.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-72457 (June 24,
2014), 79 FR 36856 (June 30, 2014) (SR-FICC-2014-02) (order
approving the 2014 Pilot Program).
    \5\ The final phase of tri-party reform includes the development
of an interactive messaging system to facilitate the substitution of
collateral between settlement banks. FICC has represented that, if
it determines to change the parameters of the GCF Repo[supreg]
service during the one-year extension period, it will file a
proposed rule change with the Commission. FICC has further warranted
that, if it seeks to extend the 2014 Pilot Program beyond the one-
year extension period or proposes to make the program permanent, it
will also file a proposed rule change with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. The GCF Repo[supreg] Service

    The GCF Repo[supreg] service allows dealer members of FICC's
Government Services Division to trade general collateral finance repos
(``GCF Repos'') \6\ throughout the day without requiring intraday,
trade-for-trade settlement on a delivery-versus-payment \7\ basis. The
service allows dealers to trade GCF Repos, based on rate and term, with
inter-dealer broker netting members on a blind basis. Standardized,
generic CUSIP numbers have been established exclusively for GCF Repo
processing, and are used to specify the type of underlying security
that is eligible to serve as collateral for GCF Repos. Only Fedwire
eligible, book-entry securities may serve as collateral for GCF Repos.
Acceptable collateral for GCF Repos include most U.S. Treasury
securities, non-mortgage-backed federal agency securities, fixed and
adjustable rate mortgage-backed securities, Treasury Inflation-
Protected Securities (``TIPS'') and separate trading of registered
interest and principal securities (``STRIPS'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A GCF Repo is one in which the lender of funds is willing to
accept any of a class of U.S. Treasuries, U.S. government agency
securities, and certain mortgage-backed securities as collateral for
the repurchase obligation. This is in contrast to a specific
collateral repo.
    \7\ Delivery-versus-payment is a settlement procedure in which
the buyer's cash payment for the securities it has purchased is due
at the time the securities are delivered.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-58696 (September
30, 2008), 73 FR 58698, 58699 (October 7, 2008) (SR-FICC-2008-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Background of the Pilot Program

    Because FICC's GCF Repo[supreg] service operates as a tri-party
mechanism, FICC was asked to alter the service to align it with the
recommendations of the Tri-Party Repo Infrastructure Reform Task Force
(``TPR'').\9\ FICC consequently developed a pilot program (``2011 Pilot
Program'') to address the TPR's recommendations,\10\ and sought
Commission approval to institute that program.\11\ The Commission
approved the 2011 Pilot Program on August 29, 2011 for a period of one
year.\12\ When the expiration date for the 2011 Pilot Program
approached, FICC sought Commission approval to implement the 2012 Pilot
Program, which continued the 2011 Pilot Program in some aspects, and
modified it in others.\13\ On August 8, 2012, the Commission approved
the 2012 Pilot Program for a period of one year.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The TPR was an industry group formed and sponsored in 2009
by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to address weaknesses that
emerged in the tri-party repo market during the financial crisis.
The TPR's chief goal was to develop recommendations to address the
risks presented by the reversal of tri-party repo transactions, and
to develop procedures to ensure that tri-party repos would be
collateralized throughout the day, rather than at the end of the
day.
    \10\ The TPR issued preliminary and final reports setting forth
its recommendations for the reform of the tri-party repo market. See
Tri-Party Repo Infrastructure Reform Task Force Report of May 17,
2000, available at http://www.newyorkfed.org/prc/files/report_100517.pdf; see also Tri-Party Repo Infrastructure Reform
Task Force Final Report (February 15, 2012), available at http://www.newyorkfed.org/tripartyrepo/pdf/report_120215.pdf.
    \11\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-64955 (July 25,
2011), 76 FR 45638 (July 29, 2011) (SR-FICC-2011-05).
    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-65213 (August 29,
2011), 76 FR 54824 (September 2, 2011) (SR-FICC-2011-05).
    \13\ The 2012 Pilot Program implemented several changes which,
although described in the rule filing that accompanied the 2011
Pilot Program, were not implemented during the 2011 Pilot Program's
period of effectiveness. They include: (i) Moving the time for
unwinding repos from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.; (ii) moving the net-
free-equity process from morning to the evening; and (iii)
establishing rules for intraday GCF Repo collateral substitutions.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-67227 (June 20, 2012), 77
FR 38108 (June 26, 2012) (SR-FICC-2012-05).
    \14\ Securities Exchange Release No. 34-67621 (August 8, 2012),
77 FR 48572 (August 14, 2012) (SR-FICC-2012-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. The 2014 Pilot Program

    The 2014 Pilot Program, as well its predecessors, the 2013 and 2012
Pilot Programs, have been the subject of a number of notices and
approval orders published by the Commission.\15\ These notices and
orders provide extensive detail on both the GCF Repo[supreg] service
and the pilot program itself. Under this proposed rule change, FICC is
not proposing to alter the current pilot program in any way; rather, it
proposes only to extend that program, as approved in 2012, 2013, and
2014 for one additional year.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 34-67227 (June 20,
2012), 77 FR 38108 (June 26, 2012) (SR-FICC-2012-05); 34-67621
(August 8, 2012), 77 FR 48572 (August 14, 2012) (SR-FICC-2012-05);
34-69774 (June 17, 2013), 78 FR 37631 (June 21, 2013) (SR-FICC-2013-
06); 34-70068 (July 30, 2013), 78 FR 47453 (August 5, 2013) (SR-
FICC-2013-06); and 34-72457 (June 24, 2014), 79 FR 36856 (June 30,
2014) (SR-FICC-2014-02).
    \16\ FICC would be required to file a proposed rule change with
the Commission pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act if were to do
any of the following: (i) Change the parameters of the GCF
Repo[supreg] service during the one-year extension period, (ii)
extend the Pilot Program beyond the one-year period extension
period, or (iii) establish the Pilot Program as a permanent program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \17\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \18\
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be
designed to achieve several goals, including (i) promoting the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and,
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, (ii) assuring the safeguarding of securities and funds
that are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which
it is responsible, and (iii) protecting investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission concludes that extending the 2014 Pilot Program for
one additional year is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder. The 2014 Pilot Program furthers
the Act's goals because it helps attenuate the substantial risks
confronting the tri-party repo market, particularly those risks
associated with the provision of intraday credit to market
participants.\19\

The Commission believes that extending the 2014 Pilot Program will
ensure that these risks remain subject to more stringent controls and
that this, in turn, will help promote the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of securities transactions. The Commission further
believes that, by requiring tri-party repos to remain collateralized
for a longer period each day, the 2014 Pilot Program helps to assure
the safety of the securities and funds within FICC's control, or for
which it is responsible.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The TPR characterized the ``practical elimination'' of this
intraday credit as its ``first and most significant . . .
recommendation.'' Tri-Party Repo Infrastructure Reform Task Force
Final Report, 4 (February 15, 2012), available at http://www.newyorkfed.org/tripartyrepo/pdf/report_120215.pdf.
    \20\ See 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
particularly those set forth in section 17A,\21\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\22\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FICC-2015-002) be, and
hereby is, approved.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \23\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15691 Filed 6-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P