[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 77 (Monday, April 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16701-16709]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07983]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85657; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Update
Defined Terms in Its Rules, Delete Obsolete and Redundant Language, and
Make Other Nonsubstantive Changes

April 16, 2019.
    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 April 10, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to update defined terms in its Rules, delete obsolete and redundant
language, and make other nonsubstantive changes. 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
    Rule 1.1 currently contains definitions of terms used throughout
the Cboe Options Rules. Each defined term is currently contained in a
lettered paragraph within Rule 1.1. The proposed rule change first puts
the defined terms in alphabetical order so that market participants can
better locate defined terms within the Rules.
    The proposed rule change also moves certain defined terms from
other Rules to Rule 1.1, adds certain defined terms, makes certain
nonsubstantive changes to existing definitions, and makes the changes
described in the following table. The proposed rule change makes
changes throughout the Rules to conform to the changes to defined
terms.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For example, the proposed rule change deletes the definition
of ``National Spread Market'' from Rule 6.25, Interpretation and
Policy .07(b), and deletes the definition of ``Exchange Spread
Market'' from Rule 6.53C, Interpretation and Policy .06(b)(2), as
each term is defined in Rule 1.1.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Current Cboe    Description of
    Defined term         Provision        options rule       change .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregate Exercise   the exercise       1.1(t) and       Applied the
 Price.               price of an        24.1(c).         definition to
                      option contract                     index options
                      multiplied by                       and delete
                      (a) for equity                      redundant
                      options, the                        definition in
                      number of units                     Rule 24.1(c).
                      of the
                      underlying
                      security or (b)
                      for index
                      options, the
                      index multiplier
                      for the
                      underlying index
                      covered by the
                      option contract.
American-Style       option contract    1.1(vv)........  No change to
 Option.              that, subject to                    definition,
                      the provisions                      but delete
                      of Rule 11.1                        redundant
                      (relating to the                    definitions in
                      cutoff time for                     Rule 24.1(m).
                      exercise
                      instructions)
                      and to the Rules
                      of the Clearing
                      Corporation, may
                      be exercised on
                      any business day
                      prior to and on
                      its expiration
                      date..
BBO................  the best bid or    6.45(a)(ii)(c)(  Moved to Rule
                      offer              2) and other     1.1.
                      disseminated on    Rules.
                      the Exchange.
Bid................  the price of a     N/A............  Added to Rule
                      limit order or                      1.1.\6\
                      quote to buy one
                      or more options
                      contracts.
Board..............  the Exchange's     N/A (Board of    Added to Rule
                      Board of           Directors is     1.1.
                      Directors.         currently
                                         referenced
                                         throughout the
                                         Rules).
Book and Simple      electronic book    1.1(rrr).......  Adding that
 Book.                of simple orders                    Book may also
                      and quotes                          be referred to
                      maintained by                       as Simple
                      the System.                         Book.
Call...............  an option          1.1(o) and       Added
                      contract under     24.1(b).         clarifying
                      which the holder                    language and
                      of the option                       applied the
                      has the right,                      definition to
                      in accordance                       index options;
                      with the terms                      \7\ deletes
                      of the option                       redundant
                      and the Rules of                    definition in
                      the Clearing                        24.1(b).
                      Corporation, to
                      purchase from
                      the Clearing
                      Corporation (a)
                      for equity
                      options, the
                      number of units
                      of the
                      underlying
                      security covered
                      by the option
                      contract, at a
                      price per unit
                      equal to the
                      exercise price,
                      or (b) for index
                      options, the
                      current index
                      value times the
                      index multiplier
                      upon the timely
                      exercise of the
                      option.
Capped-Style Option  option contract    1.1(ww) and      No change;
                      that is            24.1(o).         delete
                      automatically                       redundant
                      exercised when                      definition in
                      (a) for equity                      24.1(o).
                      options, the cap
                      price is reached
                      or (b) for index
                      options, the cap
                      price is less
                      (greater) than
                      or equals the
                      closing index
                      value for calls
                      (puts). If this
                      does not occur
                      prior to
                      expiration, it
                      may be
                      exercised,
                      subject to the
                      provisions of
                      Rule 11.1
                      (relating to the
                      cutoff time for
                      exercise
                      instructions)
                      and to the Rules
                      of the Clearing
                      Corporation,
                      only on its
                      expiration date;
                      CAPSTM refers to
                      capped-style
                      options traded
                      on the Exchange.
Class and Hybrid     all option         1.1(q).........  Deletes
 Class.               contracts with                      unnecessary
                      the same unit of                    reference to
                      trading covering                    options, given
                      the same                            only options
                      underlying                          trade on the
                      security or                         Exchange;
                      index.                              applies the
                                                          definition to
                                                          index option;
                                                          deletes that a
                                                          class means
                                                          options of the
                                                          same type
                                                          (currently
                                                          defined as put
                                                          or call), as a
                                                          class is
                                                          comprised of
                                                          both puts and
                                                          calls; adds
                                                          that a class
                                                          is comprised
                                                          of option
                                                          contracts with
                                                          the same unit
                                                          of trading
                                                          covering the
                                                          same
                                                          underlying
                                                          security or
                                                          index
                                                          (discussed
                                                          below).\8\
Clearing             Options Clearing   1.1(d).........  Adding that the
 Corporation and      Corporation.                        Clearing
 OCC.                                                     Corporation
                                                          may also be
                                                          referred to as
                                                          OCC.
Clearing Trading     a Trading Permit   1.1(f).........  Added that
 Permit Holder.       Holder that has                     Clearing
                      been admitted to                    Trading Permit
                      membership in                       Holders self-
                      the Clearing                        clear or clear
                      Corporation                         on behalf of
                      pursuant to the                     others
                      provisions of                       (consistent
                      the rules of the                    with Cboe
                      Clearing                            Options
                      Corporation and                     today).\9\
                      is self-clearing
                      or that clears
                      transactions for
                      other Trading
                      Permit Holders.
Commission and SEC.  U.S. Securities    3.1(a)(vi) and   Moved to Rule
                      and Exchange       other Rules.     1.1 and adding
                      Commission.                         that the
                                                          Commission may
                                                          also be
                                                          referred to as
                                                          SEC.

Complex Order......  order involving    6.42 and         Added general
                      the concurrent     6.53C(a)(1).     definition of
                      execution of two                    complex order;
                      or more                             \10\ the
                      different series                    definition of
                      in the same                         complex order
                      class (the                          with respect
                      ``legs'' or                         to Rules 6.9,
                      ``components''                      6.42, 6.45,
                      of the order),                      and 6.74 is
                      for the same                        limited
                      account,                            pursuant to
                      occurring at or                     those Rules,
                      near the same                       so the
                      time and for the                    proposed
                      purpose of                          definition
                      executing a                         notes the
                      particular                          limitations
                      investment                          currently set
                      strategy with no                    forth in those
                      more than the                       Rules (and
                      applicable                          deletes them
                      number of legs                      from the
                      (which number                       specified
                      the Exchange                        Rules);
                      determines on a                     clarified that
                      class-by-class                      complex orders
                      basis); the                         for the
                      Exchange                            purpose of
                      determines in                       electronic
                      which classes                       processing
                      complex orders                      have a
                      are eligible for                    different
                      processing;                         definition.\11
                      unless the                          \
                      context
                      otherwise
                      requires, the
                      term complex
                      order includes
                      stock-option
                      order and
                      security future-
                      option order;
                      for purposes of
                      electronic
                      trading, the
                      term ``complex
                      order'' has the
                      meaning set
                      forth in Rule
                      6.53C; for
                      purposes of
                      Rules 6.9, 6.42,
                      6.45(b), and
                      6.74, the term
                      ``complex
                      order'' means a
                      spread order,
                      combination
                      order, straddle
                      order, or ratio
                      order (each as
                      defined in Rule
                      6.53), a stock-
                      option order, a
                      security future-
                      option order, or
                      a complex order
                      as defined Rule
                      6.53C.
Customer...........  Public Customer    N/A............  Added to Rule
                      or broker-dealer.                   1.1; new
                                                          definition in
                                                          the Rules, but
                                                          concept of
                                                          customers
                                                          exists
                                                          throughout
                                                          current Rules
                                                          (including in
                                                          priority
                                                          rules).
Customer Order.....  agency order for   N/A............  Added to Rule
                      the account of a                    1.1.
                      Customer.
DEA................  designated         3.6A(b) and      Moved to Rule
                      examining          others.          1.1.
                      authority.
Discretion.........  authority of a     N/A............  Added to Rule
                      broker or dealer                    1.1; \12\
                      to determine for                    concept of
                      a Customer the                      broker
                      type of option,                     discretion
                      class or series                     contained in
                      of options, the                     various Rules
                      number of                           (see, e.g.,
                      contracts, or                       Rule 6.75).
                      whether options
                      are to be bought
                      or sold.
DPM Designee.......  has the meaning    8.81...........  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 8.81.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Equity Option......  option on an       N/A (equity      Added to Rule
                      equity security    options          1.1, and
                      (including Units   permitted by     clarifying
                      (or ETFs) or       Chapter 5).      that equity
                      Index-Linked                        options
                      Securities (or                      includes
                      ETNs)).                             options on
                                                          ETFs and ETNs
                                                          (both of which
                                                          are permitted
                                                          to be listed
                                                          pursuant to
                                                          Rule 5.3).
European-Style       option contract    1.1(uu) and      No change to
 option.              that, subject to   24.1(k).         definition,
                      the provisions                      but delete
                      of Rule 11.1                        redundant
                      (relating to the                    definitions in
                      cutoff time for                     Rule 24.1(k).
                      exercise
                      instructions)
                      and to the Rules
                      of OCC, may be
                      exercised only
                      on its
                      expiration date.
Exchange or Cboe     Cboe Exchange,     N/A (but         Added to rule
 Options.             Inc.               referenced       1.1.
                                         throughout).
Exchange Act.......  Securities         1.1............  Added rules and
                      Exchange Act of                     regulations,
                      1934, including                     to which the
                      rules and                           Exchange is
                      regulations                         also subject.
                      thereunder.
Exercise Price.....  the specified      1.1(s) and       Applied the
                      price per unit     24.1(d).         definition to
                      at which (a) for                    index options;
                      equity options,                     deletes
                      the underlying                      redundant
                      security or (b)                     definition in
                      for index                           Rule 24.1(d).
                      options, current
                      index value may
                      be purchased or
                      sold upon the
                      exercise of an
                      option contract.
Expiration Date....  third Friday of    1.1............  Deleted
                      expiration month.                   language about
                                                          series that
                                                          expire on
                                                          Saturday
                                                          rather than
                                                          Friday, as no
                                                          more
                                                          grandfathered
                                                          series are
                                                          listed on the
                                                          Exchange.
FINRA..............  Financial          17.2,            Added to Rule
                      Industry           Interpretation   1.1.
                      Regulatory         and Policy .05
                      Authority, Inc.    and other
                                         Rules.
Floor Broker.......  has the meaning    6.70...........  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 6.70.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
He, Him, His.......  deemed to refer    N/A............  Added to Rule
                      to persons of                       1.1.
                      female as well
                      as male gender
                      and to include
                      organizations,
                      as well as
                      individuals,
                      when the context
                      requires.
Index-Linked         shares or other    5.3,             Added to Rule
 Security or ETN.     securities         Interpretation   1.1.
                      traded on a        and Policy .13.
                      national
                      securities
                      exchange and
                      defined as an
                      ``NMS stock'' as
                      set forth in
                      Interpretation
                      and Policy .13.
Index Option.......  option on a broad- N/A (index       Added to Rule
                      based, narrow-     options          1.1.
                      based, micro       permitted by
                      narrow-based or    Chapter 24).
                      other index of
                      equity
                      securities
                      prices.
Lead Market-Maker    has the meaning    8.15...........  Added to Rule
 or LMM.              set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 8.15.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Limit Up-Limit Down  has the meaning    6.3A...........  Added to Rule
 State.               set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 6.3A.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Market-Maker.......  has the meaning    8.1............  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 8.1.                           reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.

NBB, NBO, and NBBO.  the national best  6.80             Added to Rule
                      bid, the           (referenced      1.1.
                      national best      throughout the
                      offer, and the     Rules).
                      national best
                      bid or offer the
                      Exchange
                      calculates based
                      on market
                      information it
                      receives from
                      OPRA.
NMS Stock..........  has the meaning    5.3(a)(1) and    Added to Rule
                      set forth in       other Rules.     1.1.
                      Rule 600 of
                      Regulation NMS
                      of the Exchange
                      Act.
Notional Value.....  value calculated   6.25(e)(1)(C)..  Added to Rule
                      by multiplying                      1.1.
                      the number of
                      contracts
                      (contract size
                      multiplied by
                      the contract
                      multiplier) in
                      an order by the
                      order's limit
                      price.
Offer..............  the price of a     N/A............  Added to Rule
                      limit order or                      1.1.\13\
                      quote to sell
                      one or more
                      option contracts.
OLPP...............  Options Listing    5.5A...........  Moved to Rule
                      Procedures Plan.                    1.1.
OPRA...............  Options Price      6.43...........  Moved to Rule
                      Reporting                           1.1.
                      Authority.
Options Principal..  person engaged in  N/A (but term    Added to Rule
                      the management     used in          1.1.\14\
                      and supervision    various Rules).
                      of the TPH's
                      business
                      pertaining to
                      option contracts
                      that has
                      responsibility
                      for the overall
                      oversight of the
                      TPH's options-
                      related
                      activities on
                      the Exchange.
Order..............  firm commitment    1.1(ooo) and     Moved market
                      to buy or sell     6.53.            order and
                      option contracts.                   limit order
                                                          definitions to
                                                          Rule 1.1.\15\
Order Service Firm.  has the meaning    6.77...........  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 6.77.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
PAR Official.......  has the meaning    6.12B..........  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 6.12B.                         reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Preferred Market-    has the meaning    8.13...........  Added to Rule
 Maker or PMM.        set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 8.13.                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Put................  option contract    1.1(n) and       Added
                      under which the    24.1(a).         clarifying
                      holder of the                       language and
                      option has the                      applied the
                      right, in                           definition to
                      accordance with                     index options;
                      the terms and                       \16\ deletes
                      provisions of                       redundant
                      the option and                      definition in
                      the Rules of the                    Rule 24.1(a).
                      Clearing
                      Corporation, to
                      sell to the
                      Clearing
                      Corporation (a)
                      for equity
                      options, the
                      number of units
                      of the
                      underlying
                      security covered
                      by the option
                      contract, at a
                      price per unit
                      equal to the
                      exercise price,
                      or (b) for index
                      options, the
                      current index
                      value times the
                      index multiplier
                      upon the timely
                      exercise of the
                      option.
Reporting authority  with respect to a  24.1(h)........  Moved from
                      particular                          24.1(h).
                      index, the
                      institution or
                      reporting
                      service
                      designated by
                      the Exchange as
                      the official
                      source for
                      calculating the
                      level of the
                      index from the
                      reported prices
                      of the
                      underlying
                      securities that
                      are the basis of
                      the index and
                      reporting such
                      level.
Series or Series of  all option         1.1............  Clarified that
 Options.             contracts of the                    a series
                      same class that                     consists of
                      are the same                        options of the
                      type of option                      same type
                      and have the                        (i.e., options
                      same exercise                       with the same
                      price, and                          exercise price
                      expiration date.                    and date that
                                                          are calls are
                                                          a series, and
                                                          options with
                                                          the same
                                                          exercise price
                                                          and date that
                                                          are puts are
                                                          another
                                                          series).
Sponsored User.....  has the meaning    6.20A..........  Added to Rule
                      set forth in                        1.1 a
                      Rule 6.20A.                         reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
System or Hybrid     the Exchange's     1.1(aaa).......  As discussed
 Trading System.      trading platform                    below, deletes
                      that allows                         reference to
                      Market-Makers to                    Hybrid 3.0
                      submit                              platform and
                      electronic                          indicates it
                      quotes in their                     may be
                      appointed                           referred to as
                      classes and any                     System in
                      connectivity to                     addition to
                      the foregoing                       Hybrid Trading
                      trading platform                    System.
                      that is
                      administered by
                      or on behalf of
                      the Exchange,
                      such as a
                      communications
                      hub.
Trading Session....  hours during       6.1 and 6.1A...  Added to Rule
                      which the                           1.1.
                      Exchange is open
                      for trading for
                      Regular Trading
                      Hours or Global
                      Trading Hours,
                      each as defined
                      in Rule 6.1.
Transaction or       transaction        1.1(l).........  Updated and
 Exchange             involving a                         simplified the
 transaction.         contract                            definition to
                      effected on or                      conform to the
                      through the                         definition of
                      Exchange or its                     transaction in
                      facilities or                       C2 Rule 1.1.
                      systems.
UIT Interest.......  share, unit, or    1.1(rr) and      Combined
                      other interest     Interpretation   definition and
                      in or relating     and Policy .01.  types of UIT
                      to a unit                           interests into
                      investment                          a single term.
                      trust, including
                      any component
                      resulting from
                      the subdivision
                      or separation of
                      such an interest.
Unit or ETF........  shares or other    5.3,             Added to Rule
                      securities         Interpretation   1.1.
                      traded on a        and Policy .06
                      national           and 5.8(b).
                      securities
                      exchange and
                      defined as an
                      ``NMS stock'' as
                      set forth in
                      Interpretation
                      and Policy .06.
Unit of Trading....  defined in Rule    6.40...........  Added to Rule
                      6.40.                               1.1 a
                                                          reference to
                                                          the
                                                          definition.
Web CRD............  the Central        2.23,            Moved to 1.1.
                      Registration       Interpretation
                      Depository         and Policy .02
                      operated by        and other
                      FINRA.             Rules.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the proposed rule change amends the definition of
class to mean all option contracts with the same unit of trading
(including adjusted series as determined by OCC) covering the same
underlying security or index. The current definition states a class
consists of options of the same type, which is defined as either a put
or a call. This definition of class corresponds to the definition as
used when options trading began on the Exchange in the 1970s. However,
as options trading grew, the term class became understood to include
both puts and calls. This is consistent with current industry use of
the term ``class'' and use of the term class throughout the Exchange's
Rules. Because a class is generally understood to include both puts and
calls, which are types of series, not separate classes, the current
definition of class is outdated. As described above, options with the
same exercise price and expiration date that are puts constitute one
series, and options with the same exercise price and expiration date
that are calls constitute another series. Additionally, there are some
exceptions for options that cover the same underlying but constitute a
separate class, and the proposed definition incorporates this
concept.\17\ For example, mini-options cover the same underlying
security as standard options, but are considered as separate class
since they have a different deliverable (10 shares of the underlying
security rather than 100 shares of the underlying security,
respectively). Additionally, when OCC adjusts series in connection with
corporate actions (see Rule 5.7), it announces whether those series are
part of the same existing class or a new class covering the same
underlying security. The concept of unit of trading more accurately
describes the series that constitute a class (e.g., the unit of trading
for a mini-option is 10, and the unit of trading for a standard option
is 100, making each a separate class under the proposed definition).
The proposed definition accounts for these exceptions, and is a more
accurate definition of what options constitute a class today on the
Exchange.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The proposed definition is consistent with the industry term
``bid'' and is the same as the definition of bid in C2 Rule 1.1 and
EDGX Rule 16.1(a)(6).
    \7\ The proposed definition is the same as the definition of
call in C2 Rule 1.1 and EDGX Rule 16.1(a)(12).
    \8\ The proposed rule change is the same as the definition of
class in C2 Rule 1.1.
    \9\ The proposed rule change is the same as the definition of
Clearing Trading Permit Holder in C2 Rule 1.1.
    \10\ The proposed rule change is substantially similar the
definition of complex orders that are permitted in open outcry of
other exchanges. See, e.g, BOX Exchange LLC (``BOX'') Rule
7600(a)(4); and Nasdaq Phlx, LLC (``Phlx'') Rule 1098(a)(i) and
(c)(iii).
    \11\ The proposed rule change has no impact on the trading,
minimum increment, or priority of complex orders.
    \12\ The proposed rule change is substantively the same as the
definition of discretion in C2 Rule 1.1 and EDGX Rule 16.1(a)(21).
    \13\ The proposed definition is consistent with the industry
term ``offer'' and is the same as the definition of bid in C2 Rule
1.1 and EDGX Rule 16.1(a)(30).
    \14\ The proposed definition is the same as the definition of
Options Principal in C2 Rule 1.1.
    \15\ The proposed rule change deletes the concept of ``reaching
a post'' with respect to a market order, as that is solely related
to floor trading and also an obsolete term. Market orders may trade
on the floor or electronically, and trade at the best price
available at the time of execution (either on the trading floor or
in the System). The proposed rule change adds that a limit order to
buy (sell) is marketable when, at the time it enters the System or
is represented on the trading floor, the order is equal to or higher
(lower) than the then-current offer (bid), which is substantively
the same as the definition of limit order in C2 Rule 1.1.
    \16\ The proposed definition is the same as the definition of
put in C2 Rule 1.1 and EDGX Rule 16.1(a)(49).
    \17\ The proposed definition is the same as the definition of
class in C2 Rule 1.1. The proposed definition with respect to the
phrase ``unit of trading'' is consistent with the OCC definition of
that term (the Exchange notes the OCC definition continues to remain
outdated, as it still refers to a class consisting of contracts of
the same type (OCC By-Laws Article I, C.(11)). See OCC By-Laws
Article 1, U.(5)(a unit of trading. The proposed definition of unit
of trading is consistent with Rule 6.40.
    \18\ The proposed rule change makes conforming changes to Rule
4.11, Interpretation and Policy .01(a) and 24A.7(a)(4), which
currently contain references to class as being puts only or calls
only. The term class with respect to these Rules regarding position
limits is currently interpreted to mean both puts and calls, as
described by the proposed definition of class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change alphabetizes the terms in Rule 6.53. In
addition, the proposed rule change conforms the definition of ISO to
the definition of ISO in C2 Rule 1.1 and moves the language regarding
how ISOs are not eligible for processing under Rule 6.14A to that Rule.
The proposed rule change amends the definition of a stop order to
eliminate the reference to a trade on the Cboe Options floor, as the
triggering trade may occur electronically (if the Exchange enables stop
orders for electronic trading pursuant to Rule 6.53). The proposed rule
change amends the definitions of FOK and IOC to provide that each may
execute electronically in addition to in open outcry.
    The proposed rule change also adds the following order times-in-
force to Rule 6.53:
    (a) Day: The term ``Day'' means, for an order so designated, an
order to buy or sell that, if not executed, expires at the close of
trading. While the term is not currently defined in the Rules, Day
orders are currently referenced in various Rules and is consistent with
current functionality.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See, e.g., Rule 6.53C(c)(iii). The proposed definition of
Day is the same as the definition of Day in C2 Rule 1.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Good-til-Cancelled or GTC: The terms ``Good-til-Cancelled'' or
``GTC'' mean, for an order so designated, if after entry into the
System, the order is not fully executed, the order (or unexecuted
portion) remains available for potential display or execution (with the
same timestamp) unless cancelled by the entering User, or until the
option expires, whichever comes first. While the term is not currently
defined in the Rules, GTC orders are currently referenced in various
Rules and is consistent with current functionality.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Rule 6.53C(c)(iii). The proposed definition of Day is
the same as the definition of Day in C2 Rule 1.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change deletes ``One-Cancels-the-Other'' from
current Rule 6.53(h). A one-cancels-the-other order consists of two or
more orders treated as a unit. The Execution of any one of the orders
causes the others to be cancelled. The Exchange no longer offers this
order instruction for any class, and does not intend to in the future.
The proposed rule change makes conforming changes throughout the Rules
to delete this term. The proposed rule change also moves the provisions
in Rule 6.53, Interpretation and Policy .01 to proposed Rule 6.45(d),
and moves the provisions in Rule 6.53, Interpretation and Policy .02 to
Rule 6.24(a)(5).
    The proposed rule change makes nonsubstantive changes to the
introductory language of Rule 6.53 to provide that the Exchange
determines which order types are available (or not available) on a
class-by-class and system-by-system basis. This is consistent with the
flexibility currently provided by Rule 6.53.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The proposed rule change is also substantively the same as
C2 Rule 6.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change amends Rule 6.12A(c) to state that, in
addition to the orders that may not route to PAR pursuant to Rule
6.12A(c), orders may not be eligible to route to PAR if the Rules or
context otherwise requires. For example, there are certain order types
not currently listed in Rule 6.12A(c) that may not route to PAR by
their terms.\22\ Which orders may route to PAR are listed on the
Exchange's website.\23\ The proposed rule change ensures consistency
throughout the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See, e.g., electronic-only order, opening rotation order.
    \23\ See https://www.cboe.org/publish/opsettingsrth/operational-settings-for-rth.pdf.

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

    Various Rules provide the Exchange will generally announce any
determinations pursuant to those Rules by Regulatory Circular. The
Exchange announces determinations in a variety of ways, including
Regulatory Circular and Exchange Notice. Proposed Rule 1.2 states the
Exchange will announce to Trading Permit Holders all determinations it
makes pursuant to the Rules via (a) specifications, Notices, or
Regulatory Circulars with appropriate advanced notice, which will be
posted on the Exchange's website, (b) electronic message, or (c) other
communication method as provided in the Rules. To the extent the Rules
provide the Exchange will announce a determination via Regulatory
Circular, the Exchange may announce such determination via Notice.
Proposed Rule 1.2 makes clear this information will be available on
C2's website in an easily accessible manner, regardless of the manner
in which the Exchange announces it. Additionally, certain
determinations are made more real-time pursuant to electronic message
received by Trading Permit Holders (e.g., providing intra-day relief
for parameter settings in in price protection mechanisms described in
proposed Rule 6.14, Interpretation and Policy .01, other determinations
related to need to maintain fair and orderly market). This single rule
simplifies the Rules by eliminating the need to repeatedly state in the
rules how the Exchange will announce determinations.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Proposed Rule 1.2 is substantively the same as C2 Rule 1.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also deletes various Rules that are no
longer necessary or in use. First, the proposed rule change deletes
various Rules from Chapter II.\25\ Current Rule 2.1 provides that the
Board of Directors will have certain specified committees as well as
other committees it establishes in accordance with the Bylaws and the
Rules. Current Rule 2.2 provides the Board with the power to review
Exchange decisions. The Exchange's Bylaws describe all of the Board's
authority, include its authority to establish committees and to oversee
the Exchange's activities.\26\ Therefore, Rules 2.1 and 2.2 are
redundant and unnecessary to include in the Rules, and the proposed
rule change deletes them. Pursuant to the Bylaws, the Board will
continue to retain the same authority as provided by these Rules. The
Exchange notes other options exchanges do not contain similar rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ As a result of these deletions, the only remaining Rules in
Chapter II relate to fees and charges imposed on Trading Permit
Holders. The proposed rule change therefore renames Chapter II as
``Fees and Other Charges'' and deletes the different ``parts'' of
Chapter II that are no longer necessary.
    \26\ See Bylaws Section 3 (providing the Board with, among other
things, all powers necessary for the management of the business and
affairs of the Exchange, the authority to exercise all power of the
Exchange, and the authority make decisions as it deems necessary or
appropriate) and Article IV (describing committees of the Board).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current Rule 2.15 describes divisions that the Exchange must have.
This Rule relates to the corporate and operational structure of the
Exchange, which is within the authority and discretion of Exchange
management, and does not relate to the how the Exchange operates or
regulates its market. Therefore, the proposed rule change deletes this
rule. Exchange management will continue to have the authority to
determine the Exchange's corporate structure in the same manner as it
does today. The Exchange notes other options exchanges not contain
similar rules.
    Current Rule 2.22 provides the Exchange may, from time to time, fix
and impose fees and charges other than those provided for by current
Rule 2.20 to be paid to the Exchange or to an organization designated
by the Exchange by Trading Permit Holders or by categories of Trading
Permit Holders with respect to applications, registrations, approvals,
use of Exchange facilities, or other services or privileges granted.
However, current Rule 2.20 provides that the Exchange may fix, from
time to time, fees and charges payable by Trading Permit Holders. This
provision would include the fees and charges that the Exchange may
impose pursuant to Rule 2.22, and thus Rule 2.22 is redundant.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes to delete current Rule 2.22.
    The proposed rule change renumbers the remaining Rules in Chapter
II--current Rules 2.20, 2.23, 2.24, and 2.51--to be Rules 2.1, 2.2,
2.3, and 2.4, respectively. The proposed rule change also makes
nonsubstantive changes to these Rules (including to make the Rules
plain English and update paragraph lettering). The proposed rule change
also updates cross-references as necessary throughout the Rules.
    The following rules contain language that the C2 board of directors
may make certain trading decisions:
     Rules 5.3(b) and Interpretation and Policy .01 and 5.4,
Interpretation and Policy .01, which state the Board may establish
guidelines the Exchange considers when evaluating potential underlying
securities for options transactions, and that the Board may establish
guidelines to be considered when the Exchange determines whether an
underlying security previously approved for Exchange option
transactions no longer meets its requirements for the continuance of
such approval.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The proposed rule change also deletes the provision in Rule
5.3(b) that states, in exceptional circumstances, an underlying
security may be approved by the Exchange even though it does not
meet all the guidelines. Rule 5.3, Interpretation and Policy .01
already provides that the guidelines set forth in that
interpretation and policy must be met except in exception
circumstances, and therefore the provision in Rule 5.3(b) is
redundant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rules 6.1, 21.10, and 24.6, which states the Board
determines trading hours and Exchange holidays.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The proposed rule change also restructures Rule 6.1 to more
clearly present the Regular and Global Trading Hours for options on
securities and indexes, as well as identify other Rules that contain
trading hours for different option products, as well as to make
nonsubstantive changes (such as making the Rule plain English).
Additionally, because Rule 6.1 references other Rules related to
trading hours of different option products, the proposed rule change
amends certain of those Rules to delete provisions that state those
Rules replace or supplement Rule 6.1, as those Rules are part of
Rule 6.1 by reference. See Rule 21.10, 28.9, and 29.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 6.6(d), which provides the Board must approve any
Exchange restriction on the entry of stop, stop-limit, or market-if-
touched orders whenever market conditions warrant, if such restriction
is to be effective more than two consecutive business days.
     Rule 6.17, which permits the Board to designate persons
other than the CEO or President to halt or suspend trading and take
other action if necessary or appropriate for the maintenance of a fair
and orderly market or the protection of investors, due to emergency
conditions, and requires the person taking action to notify the Board
of actions taken pursuant to that Rule.
     Rule 8.7(d)(iv), which states an official designated by
the Board may call upon a Market-Maker to submit a quote or maintain
continuous quotes in a series of a class to which the Market-Maker is
appointed.
     Rule 8.87, which permits the board to establish a
participation entitlement formula applicable to DPMs.
    These decisions relate to Exchange trading and operations, and thus
are made by Exchange management, rather than the Board, which generally
is not involved in determinations related to day-to-day operations of
the Exchange. Therefore, the proposed rule change modifies these
provisions to indicate the Exchange or senior Exchange officials, as
applicable, will make these determinations rather than the Board. The
Exchange notes pursuant to corresponding C2 and EDGX rules, those
exchanges or senior exchange officials makes those determinations
rather than the exchange's board.

    The proposed rule change deletes the following obsolete rules or
redundant Rules and related provisions:
     Hybrid 3.0: The Rules currently provide that the Exchange
has two trading platforms, and the Exchange determines on which
platform each class of options will trade.\29\ Currently, the Exchange
has determined that all option classes trade on the Hybrid Trading
System, and no option classes trade on the Hybrid 3.0 Platform.\30\ The
Exchange has no intention of trading any option classes on the Hybrid
3.0 Platform in the future. Therefore, the proposed rule change deletes
all rule provisions related to and references to the Hybrid 3.0
Platform, as well as the concept of multiple trading platforms.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See current Rule 8.14(a).
    \30\ See current Rule 1.1(aaa) (definition of Hybrid Trading
System and Hybrid 3.0 Platform).
    \31\ See Rules 1.1 (including definitions of Hybrid Trading
System, Voluntary Professional, Professional, and broker-dealer
order), 6.1A(b), 6.2(h) and Interpretation and Policy .05, 6.11,
6.12A(b)(v), 6.13(a), (b)(i)(A)(2) and (C)(1), 6.14A(a)(iii),
6.43(b), 6.45(c)(i)(C) and Interpretations and Policies .01 through
.04, 6.53C, Interpretation and Policy .10, 8.3(c)(iii) and (iv),
8.7, Interpretation and Policy .03 (the proposed rule change
restructures this Interpretation and Policy, as there is no longer a
need for separately lettered paragraphs), 8.14(a), (b), and
Interpretation and Policy .01, 8.15(c) and Interpretation and Policy
.03, 8.18 (eliminating reference to Market-Makers as ``Hybrid
Market-Makers,'' as the term Market-Makers is sufficient given that
all appointed classes are Hybrid classes), 8.83(g), 8.85(e), and
24.9(d)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Order Book Officials: Recently, the Exchange deleted Rules
related to Order Book Officials, who were Exchange employees
responsible for maintaining the book with respect to classes assigned
to them, effecting proper executions of orders placed with them,
displaying bids and offers, and monitoring the market for classes
assigned to them. The Exchange currently has no employees designated
as, and does not intend to designate any employees as, Order Book
Officials, as Order Book Official functions are generally obsolete now
that most trading occurs electronically.\32\ Several references to
Order Book Officials were inadvertently left in the Rules, and the
proposed rule change deletes those references.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-82529 (January 18,
2018), 83 FR 3372 (January 24, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-003).
    \33\ See Rules 3.9, Interpretation and Policy .02, 6.3B,
Interpretation and Policy .01(c), 6.24, Interpretation and Policy
.02, 6.46, 6.51, Interpretation and Policy .01, 6.74(a) and (d),
8.7, Interpretation and Policy .03, 8.17(b), 21.18, 24.13,
Interpretation and Policy .02, and 29.17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Quote Indications: Rule 6.1, Interpretation and Policy .05
permits the Exchange to designate classes and time periods in which
TPHs may, prior to the scheduled opening rotation of Regular Trading
Hours, enter option market quote indications based upon the anticipated
opening price of the security underlying such designated option class.
The Exchange has not designated, and does not intend to designate, any
classes in which TPHs may enter these option market quote indications.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes to delete this Interpretation and
Policy. TPHs may submit orders and quote prior to the opening rotation
pursuant to Rule 6.2.
     SAL: Rule 6.13A describes the Simple Auction Liaison
(``SAL''). SAL is a feature within the System that auctions marketable
orders for price improvement over the NBBO. Pursuant to current Rule
6.13A(a), the Exchange has the authority to activate SAL on a class-by-
class basis. Currently, the Exchange has not activated SAL for any
class, and does not intend to activate it for any class in the future.
Therefore, the proposed rule change deletes Rule 6.13A, and references
to that Rule and SAL in various Rules.
     COATS Implementation Language: In 2005, the Exchange
adopted Rule 6.24 to require TPHs to systematize certain order
information in connection with the implementation of a consolidated
order audit trail (``COATS''). Rule 6.24 states the requirements of
that Rule were to commence on January 10, 2005, except for certain
classes, for which the requirements of that Rule were to commence on
March 28, 2005 (as set forth in paragraph (c)). As the requirements of
Rule 6.24 are in place and applicable to all classes, the proposed rule
change deletes those provisions.
     Provision Related to Rule 6.13B: Rule 6.47, Interpretation
and Policy .02 indicates the applicability of Rule 6.47 to Rule 6.13B.
Rule 6.13B no longer exists, so the proposed rule change deletes that
Interpretation and Policy.
     Transactions off the Exchange: Rule 19c-3 under the
Exchange Act describes a rule provision that each national securities
change must contain regarding the ability of members to engage in
transactions off an exchange. The proposed rule change adds this
provision to Interpretation and Policy .01(b). The proposed rule change
also deletes the introductory language in Interpretation and Policy
.01, as it is unnecessary. Rules 19c-1 and 19c-3 under the Exchange Act
only require the Exchange's Rules to include language set forth in
those Exchange Act Rules. The proposed rule change also amends the
current language in Interpretation and Policy .01 (proposed paragraph
(a)) to incorporate terms used throughout the Rules.
     Leg Orders: Rule 6.53C(c)(iv) describes leg order
functionality, pursuant to which leg orders may be automatically
generated on behalf of complex orders so that they are represented in
the individual leg markets. The Exchange has not implemented, and does
not intend to implement, leg order functionality. Therefore, the
proposed rule change deletes Rule 6.53C(C)(iv), as well as related
provisions in current Interpretations and Policies .06, .07, and .12
and Rule 6.53(x).
     Rules Related to Non-Option Transactions: Currently, the
Exchange only permits and has trading Rules related to options trading.
Rules 6.65 and 10.10 through 10.22 relate to transactions in stocks,
bonds, warrants, and other non-option products. Because these Rules do
not apply to options trading, the proposed rule change deletes them.
     Brokerage Bills: Current Rules 6.76 and 6.76A describe
certain payment practices related to amounts due from a customer to a
broker. The Exchange no longer has a role in the billing brokerage
services provided to a customer. All provisions related to how the
Exchange bills Trading Permit Holders are contained in the Fees
Schedule and Rule 3.23. Therefore, the proposed rule change deletes
Rules 6.76 and 6.76A.
     Class Quoting Limit: Current Rule 8.3A states the Exchange
may impose an upper limit on the aggregate number of Market-Makers that
may quote in each product (the ``CQL''). The Exchange no longer intends
to impose a limit on the aggregate number of TPHs that may quote
electronically in each product during a trading session, and thus
proposes to delete Rule 8.3A.\34\ The current limit for each class is
50 pursuant to Rule 8.1, Interpretation and Policy .01, and there is no
product for which the Exchange has increased the CQL, as the current
number of quoters per class is below this maximum. The Exchange
represents it has capacity to handle any additional quoters due to the
elimination of the CQL. The Exchange monitors System capacity in other
ways, making a CQL no longer necessary.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The proposed rule change deletes a cross-reference to Rule
8.3A in Rule 3.1(b)(ii).
    \35\ See, e.g., Rule 6.23B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     RFQ Functionality: Pursuant to Rule 8.14(b).3, the
Exchange may activate request-for-quote (``RFQ'') functionality in
index classes, and if it does, Market-Makers would have an obligation
to respond to a specified percentage of RFQs. The Exchange has

not activated, and does not intend to activate in the future, this RFQ
functionality for any index class. Therefore, the proposed rule change
deletes this provision.
     Trading Crowd Definition: Rule 1.1 defines in-crowd market
participants. A trading crowd in a pit on the Exchange's trading floor
today consists of market participants other than Market-Makers. The
definition of trading crowd in Rule 8.50 is outdated, and therefore the
proposed rule change deletes this Rule.
    The proposed rule change makes additional nonsubstantive changes
throughout the Rules, including to make Rules plain English, update
paragraph lettering and numbering, update cross-references as
necessary, and add or modify headings and subheadings.
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.\36\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \37\ 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) \38\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change updates certain terms that
are currently outdated and clarifies applicability of other terms, and
deletes certain rules that are obsolete, no longer applicable to Cboe
Options trading, or duplicative, and makes other nonsubstantive
changes, such as reorganizing rules, updating paragraph lettering and
numbering, and making rule provisions plain English. The Exchange
believes this will more clearly identify currently applicable of rules,
which the Exchange believes removes impediments to and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market. The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change will eliminate confusion regarding which rules apply to
current trading, which ultimately protects investors and the public
interest. These changes will have no impact on current trading on Cboe
Options.

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

    Cboe Options 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 proposed rule change to
delete rules that no longer apply to Cboe Options trading and make
other nonsubstantive changes will have no impact on current trading on
Cboe Options, and thus are not intended to have any impact on
competition. The proposed rule change eliminates confusion with respect
to rules applicable to current trading on Cboe Options.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \39\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \40\ thereunder.\41\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \40\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \41\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2019-017 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-2019-017. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2019-017, and

should be submitted on or before May 13, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\42\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-07983 Filed 4-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 47945]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19408]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9999-48-Region 6]

Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection
Restrictions; Petition for Exemption Reissuance--Class I Hazardous
Waste Injection; TM Deer Park Services (TMDPS) Limited Partnership Deer
Park, Texas Facility

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of a final decision on a UIC no migration petition
reissuance.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a reissuance of an exemption to
the Land Disposal Restrictions, under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, has
been granted to TMDPS for three Class I hazardous waste injection wells
located at their Deer Park, Texas facility. The company has adequately
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) by the petition reissuance application and supporting
documentation that, to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will be
no migration of hazardous constituents from the injection zone for as
long as the waste remains hazardous. This final decision allows the
underground injection by TMDPS of the specific restricted hazardous
wastes identified in this exemption reissuance request, into Class I
hazardous waste injection wells WDW-169, WDW-249 and WDW-422 until
December 31, 2030, unless the EPA moves to terminate this exemption.
Additional conditions included in this final decision may be reviewed
by contacting the EPA Region 6 Ground Water/UIC Section. A public
notice was issued June 19, 2019, and the public comment period closed
on August 12, 2019, and no comments were received. This decision
constitutes final Agency action and there is no Administrative appeal.

DATES: This action took effect on August 15, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition reissuance and all pertinent
information relating thereto are on file at the following location:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Water Division, Safe
Drinking Water Branch (6WDD), 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas
75270-2102.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Dellinger, Chief, Ground Water/
UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 15, 2019.
Charles W. Maguire,
Director, Water Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-19408 Filed 9-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


             Summary of EPA Region 8 Public Listening Session on
                           111 (d) for Power Plants

                        October 30, 2013 -- Denver, CO

On October 30, 2013, EPA Region 8 held a public listening session to obtain input on controlling carbon pollution from existing power plants. Approximately 239 people attended the session in person, and another 28 attended a two-hour call-in session. In total, 153 people provided comments. A high-level summary of the session is provided below.

Overview of Speakers

Comments were provided by a variety of stakeholders, including: elected officials, concerned citizens, local/state government officials, students, academics, entrepreneurs, medical professionals, and representatives from industry, electric utilities, trade associations, the business community, the outdoor industry, faith-based organizations, unions, environmental advocacy groups, and community groups.

General Support for Carbon Pollution Standards:

Speakers acknowledged that climate change was happening, that carbon pollution from power plants [coal in particular] was causing it, and that there was an urgent need to address it. Young adults, parents, and other concerned citizens stated concerns about the future for themselves and their children. Many have seen the impacts first hand, but are also concerned about the ability of developing countries, and the poor in general, to face the impacts of climate change. Several stated that the United States (US) has a moral imperative to lead on the issue, and applauded the President's Climate Action Plan for doing so. The US needs to set an example  -  countries around the world are watching to see what we do. Others mentioned that they were motivated by the science and their faith, that we are collectively the stewards of creation, and that we all need to work together to address the issue of climate change.

It was recognized that the standards may affect communities and industries that are reliant on fossil fuels, but that the cost of inaction may be greater in terms of rising temperatures, health effects, extreme weather, and ecosystem transformation [including fisheries]. Additionally, it was pointed out that the economic benefits of actions under the Clean Air Act (CAA) have proven to be more than the cost of compliance. Proponents of outdoor recreation [skiing in particular] cited concern for the viability of their sports, and the economic benefits they bring to the State of Colorado. There was also concern about the health effects of air pollution, such as asthma, cancer, other diseases, and mercury levels in fish. The point was made that reducing carbon will also reduce other pollutants from the use of fossil fuels.

Although there was concern about the spread of misinformation on climate change science, there was also optimism that there is a way to make the transition to a low or zero carbon future, and solve climate change. Several speakers supported the science behind climate change, and the goal to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere to 350ppm or less. Another speaker stated that many residents in her coal-based state support strong standards, even though it will be a hard transition, because they have other large untapped energy sources. Speakers were appreciative of the opportunity to call in and provide comments, without the need to travel to Denver.

A number of speakers noted that they have personally taken actions to reduce carbon pollution [e.g., installing solar on home], and that the fossil fuel industry needs to do its part. In particular, there needs to be a cost implication for polluting the environment. It was pointed out that the industry enjoys tax breaks, and in turn, uses their proceeds to lobby and influence decision-makers against climate action. It was suggested that EPA exemptions for the fossil fuel industry be ended, and that the real cost of carbon be placed on the polluter. Doubt was expressed that markets alone would reduce carbon pollution from the power industry in time to solve the climate crises.

Others stressed the need to repower America, and not invest in costly retrofits to existing power plants. One speaker pointed out that the economics of renewables may be more favorable due to reduced coal supplies, particularly in the Powder River Basin. A utility representative mentioned that the western electrical grid is getting cleaner, and that state leadership has resulted in large reductions in carbon pollution. Several speakers conveyed the point of view of small businesses. They stated that small businesses and entrepreneurs [in the majority] support EPA's efforts to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other pollutants, and believe they will boost the national economy and positively impact their operations.

On a final note, it was stated, "If we can't do it, we can't expect others to do it."

General Opposition to Carbon Pollution Standards:

A number of speakers spoke against EPA regulations for power plants in general, and for existing plants in particular. EPA was criticized for not holding listening sessions in coal-based rural areas, and for not hearing from the people who will be affected by the standards [and is invited to visit them]. They stressed that the new guidelines will harm the economies of these areas, and raise energy costs for everyone. It would in effect be a tax increase. Additionally, it was stated that the timeline for EPA's standards is too aggressive, and should be delayed to allow for the evolution of carbon reduction or carbon capture technologies that are yet unproven or too expensive.

Speakers supported the need for an "all-of-the-above" energy policy, including renewable energy and coal. It was pointed out that coal is reliable, and has been and will continue to be the pathway to prosperity in the US and abroad. One speaker noted that we have more coal than any other nation, especially in the west, and that we have made advances in reducing emissions from its use. That is why it is vital that we use the best in class available today, which is coal [in particular, supercritical steam generation]. EPA needs to integrate proven technologies into the standard, which does not include carbon capture and storage (CCS). One energy company stated that they can produce coal efficiently and cheaply, and are doing effective land reclamation. There was concern that the standard will be developed in closed offices without engineers who are familiar with coal plants and the workers who work in them. For example, the recently issued standard for new power plants is technologically infeasible. The new standard for existing plants needs to be different; otherwise it could hamper manufacturing for all things, including renewables.

A number of people traveled great distances to attend the listening session, primarily from rural, fossil fuel-based communities. They stated that they have benefited from coal, oil, and gas, which have provided an affordable source of energy, and lifted people out of energy poverty. Even the threat of a new standard is causing harm. They pointed out that they have upgraded to meet past EPA standards at a significant cost [e.g., mercury standards], which has resulted in the closure of plants and stranded assets. There was concern that the new standards will raise energy prices, result in a loss of jobs, deeply affect rural economies [some never recovered from the recession], and especially harm low-income people and seniors. Additionally, the reliability of the electrical grid will be affected because we rely on coal for base-load power.

Others mentioned that rural families are stewards of the land, and that they utilize it thoughtfully. Some live near [coal-fired] power plants, and noted that there isn't an air quality problem there because of the use of new technologies. They question what would be gained by the new standards. There was concern that EPA standards will not be effective in fighting climate change, unless other countries implement similar policies. The European Union has tried to reduce carbon emissions with significant adverse impacts, and is returning to a more balanced approach. Additionally, other countries are not concerned about carbon reductions. We [collectively] need to get the science right, and balance the consideration of carbon with the welfare of our citizens. If EPA pursues this course of action, then coal communities will be forced to export their products.

On a final note, it was stated, "Coal is the solution, not the problem."

Impacts of Climate Change:

It was stated that climate change is the new normal, and without a path to eliminate GHG emissions, we are deliberately causing harm [to many species and populations]. The impacts are already being felt, from drought, wildfires, hurricanes, and floods, to changes in phenology and the hydrology cycle [which is affecting water resources for things like irrigation]. Setting the standards for power plants is a major step in the right direction. A sense of urgency was expressed, and concern that even Americans may not be ok as climate change progresses. It was pointed out that we are already paying for the costs for extreme weather events to the tune of billions of dollars, and that taxpayers have picked up most of these costs. Additionally, climate change will also impact human health.

Location of Public Listening Sessions:

A number of speakers were upset that EPA was holding listening sessions in large, urban areas, and not in the rural areas that would be affected by the new standards [i.e., coal country]. Some indicated that it would benefit EPA to see how they are abiding by environmental laws, and thriving with high paying jobs and low energy costs. They requested additional listening sessions in these areas, and reiterated the requests by their leadership.

Climate Change Science:

Several speakers questioned the science of climate change, and noted that CO2 is a necessary part of life, and not a pollutant. Who knows how much is bad? Things always cycle  -  we [policy-makers] are just picking the high points [of temperatures and CO2 to justify our actions]. IPCC reports contain a number of misleading or inaccurate statements. There is no basis to conclude that warming is human-caused.  Temperatures have not risen even though CO2 levels continue to rise. The models are wrong, and policy-makers are ignoring the data.

Comments on Section 111(d):

There was concern about the use of the CAA for controlling carbon from power plants, and in particular, Section 111(d). It was noted that the CAA is an imperfect vehicle through which to regulate GHGs, and the best carbon policy would be legislated by Congress. Several speakers noted that Section 111(d) gives states broad authority [including flexible compliance timelines], and that EPA's authority is limited to setting guidelines. Additionally, these guidelines are limited to the best system of emissions reduction (BSER), which has been adequately demonstrated, not a broader systems approach. Another speaker suggested that we abandon the use of the CAA, and move forward [with other GHG reduction strategies] in the interest of time.

Energy Efficiency (EE) and Renewable Energy (RE):

Speakers suggested that we need to get on with the transition to clean energy, and noted that the economics of wind and solar have improved, making them competitive with natural gas [and they may be lowering costs for consumers]. Several success stories were offered, including Boulder City, NV [which is entirely powered by solar], and Fort Zed in Fort Collins [which is a local energy system]. The region's vast renewable resources were also noted [Colorado in particular]. There was concern about the timely transition to wind and solar because their percentage of the energy mix is still so low, and that more renewables will harm the reliability of the electrical grid and result in rolling brownouts.

It was stated that energy efficiency is key to reducing carbon, and the quickest way to achieve GHG reductions. This can be achieved through building environmental performance [more than half of the US building stock is inefficient], and can be done on a large scale. EPA should afford the states the flexibility to use energy efficiency as a compliance mechanism.

It was pointed out that more people are employed in green industries than in the oil industry. These jobs are strengthening the economy. The new standards will give some regulatory certainty to renewable energy and energy efficiency markets.

How to Set the Standard:

Speakers spoke in favor of various approaches for the setting the standards, including a utility or system wide approach using renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as restricting the standard to plant improvements that are legally defensible and within the legal boundaries of a generating source [recognizing that there are constraints from power industry market practices, and the exchange of power across state borders]. Regardless, definition needs to be given as to who the regulated entity will be [a single power plant, a group of power plants, the entire electric utility sector, or some mix thereof].

Others requested that EPA acknowledge and give credit to states that have taken early action [as early back as ten years or more]. It was noted that some have already implemented GHG reduction strategies such as demand-side management, and shifts to natural gas and renewable energy through programs such as renewable portfolio standards (RPSs). They have also developed more innovative programs, such as the Clean Air Clean Jobs Act in Colorado, which can be replicated in other states. Counter to this, the point was made that reductions need to be unique and additional, and above and beyond what states have already done.

Speakers encouraged EPA to give states the flexibility they need to implement effective programs. States should be free to explore options given their circumstances and mix of energy resources, and grow their economies. A free market approach is needed rather than a heavy-handed approach. States should be allowed the time to develop and implement state plans that are flexible. A standard that reduces coal use and prematurely closes power plants was not seen as a favorable option.

A number of speakers suggested that the timeframe for developing the standards is too short, and that EPA should postpone the reductions until there are proven GHG reduction technologies. They were confident that the US would move in the right direction over time by implementing best practices, and by keeping the goal of energy independence in mind. A timeframe of 10 to 20 years was suggested.

Other suggestions included: setting a statewide standard for CO2/unit of energy produced [to promote efficiency where it makes the most sense]; setting a BSER that can be achieved at each unit considering the unit's design, maintenance, and operational performance; setting a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for CO2; including provisions for offsets and trading [which are a viable option today and can be effective immediately]; not using a heat rate standard (BTU/MW), which could create market instability; establishing economic policies to create a market for carbon; requiring fossil fuel plants to prove a zero net impact; allowing for tools like enforceable demand-side management; requiring measurable and enforceable reduction strategies; setting a national renewable energy standard [of 30% renewables]; taking a holistic approach that embraces a diversity of fuels and methodologies and does not support over-reliance on a single source of fuel [like natural gas]; being specific about compliance options; requiring increased power plant energy efficiency; not allowing for cap and trade or carbon taxes, which may be untenable due to a lack of time; only applying standards when plant modifications are made; considering environmental justice; establishing a credit-based accounting system to make sure emissions are genuine; performing true cost accounting and a cost-benefit analysis for all options, including the health, extreme weather, and economic costs associated with climate change; adopting the Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC) plan to reduce carbon from existing power plants; being cautious about relying on environmental dispatch for emissions reductions; allowing for reductions in other GHGs [such as sulfur hexafluoride] to meet the standard; building in a cost containment mechanism; setting the baseline period for emissions from 2003 to 2006; and requiring that the private sector be responsible for achieving the GHGs reductions [not the states].

Finally, speakers encouraged cooperative action on the standards between federal and state government, and affected industries. EPA is particularly encouraged to engage in discussions with electric utilities to design a program that can be implemented effectively and efficiently.

Carbon Capture and Storage:

It was noted that carbon capture technologies are being developed and tested in the region at various locations. Economics of scale will be needed to bring down the costs, which are still high. EPA is encouraged to consider partial carbon capture to allow for technology development, and become familiar with the success stories in the region [in particular the Drake Power Plant in Colorado Springs, CO, and Basin Electric's Dakota Gasification Plant in ND]. EPA policies need to allow companies to make money off of carbon capture through enhanced oil recovery, or provide tax incentives for development of CO2 control technology. Sequestration of carbon is saving a valuable resource. There was concern that carbon capture is not the best solution since it has not been demonstrated on a full scale, and that it will increase costs across the board. Also, there are legal and feasibility issues with the underground storage of CO2.

Economic Impacts:

There was considerable concern that the guidelines will cause coal-fired power plants to shut down, or require them to put on additional, costly, control technologies. This could severely affect the economies of rural communities [including tribes], and the subcontractors [e.g., boilermakers] and parts dealers that depend on them [resulting in a loss of jobs, schools, etc., and especially affect the poor]. It was pointed out that their economies have already been hurt by the recession and other EPA regulations. Others were concerned that the standards would raise the cost of electricity, won't achieve their objectives, and could cause jobs to migrate to other countries.

Noting that coal-fired power plants have installed control technologies in the past to meet EPA regulations at considerable cost, a number of speakers expressed concern that the standards would result in shut downs and stranded assets. Coal-based communities have proven that they can meet environmental standards, have clean air, and preserve the land. They believe that the new standards are an uneconomical way to address climate change.

Others pointed out that the costs of climate change are already being borne by the public in terms of extreme weather events, and that the industry should be asked to share in the costs. The tourist economy in Colorado is being affected. Additionally, analysis shows that switching from coal-based energy to other sources does not have an economic penalty.