[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 58070]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22839]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-23-000.
    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: 2021 Annual Penalty Revenues Credit Report of WBI
Energy Transmission, Inc. RP22-23.
    Filed Date: 10/1/21.
    Accession Number: 20211001-5293.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/13/21.

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

    Dated: October 14, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-22839 Filed 10-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38582-38586]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12575]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97663; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-030]

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

June 7, 2023.
    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 June 1, 2023, 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, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/

CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule, effective June 1,
2023.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Based on publicly available information,
no single options exchange has more than 15% of the market share.\3\
Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no
single options exchange possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of option order flow. The Exchange believes that the ever-
shifting market share among the exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants can shift order flow or
discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products in response
to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain the
Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can readily trade
on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other venues
to be more favorable. In response to competitive pricing, the Exchange,
like other options exchanges, offers rebates and assesses fees for
certain order types executed on or routed through the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Monthly Market Volume
Summary (May 26, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, in response to the competitive environment, the Exchange
offers various tiered incentive programs which provide Trading Permit
Holders (``TPHs'') opportunities to qualify for higher rebates or
reduced rates where certain volume criteria and thresholds are met.
Tiered pricing provides an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive for
higher tier levels, which provides increasingly higher benefits or
discounts for satisfying increasingly more stringent criteria. For
example, the Exchange currently offers, among other tiered volume
programs, a Floor Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program, which offers
four tiers that provide rebates on a sliding scale \4\ for qualifying
orders where a TPH meets certain liquidity thresholds. The Program
applies to all products except for Underlying Symbol List A,\5\ Sector
Indexes,\6\ DJX, MRUT, MXEA, MXEF, NANOS, XSP, and FLEX Micros
(``multiply-listed options''). The Program offers two categories of
rebates that correspond to each of the proposed tiers; one that applies
to Firm Facilitated orders (i.e., orders that yield fee code FF) \7\
and another that applies to all other non-Firm Facilitated orders
(i.e., orders that do not yield fee code FF).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The rebate offered under each tier is only applied to the
qualifying volume within that tier. In addition, the Exchange
calculates the average rebate for each type of rebate (Firm
Facilitated and Non-Firm Facilitated) based on the TPH's total
qualifying volume across all four tiers plus its qualifying baseline
volume (which corresponds to a rebate of $0.00). Each respective
average rebate is applied to the percentage of qualifying volume
that corresponds specifically to the type of order (Firm Facilitated
or Non-Firm Facilitated) volume and added together, which results in
a final average rebate. The final average rebate is then applied to
the TPH's total qualifying executions. This is consistent with the
manner in which the Exchange calculates rebates for other sliding
scale programs offered under the Fees Schedule.
    \5\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 34, which provides
that Underlying Symbol List A includes OEX, XEO, RUT, RLG, RLV, RUI,
UKXM, SPX (includes SPXW), SPESG and VIX.
    \6\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 47, which provides
that Sector Index underlying symbols include IXB, SIXC, IXE, IXI,
IXM, IXR, IXRE, IXT, IXU, IXV AND IXY, and corresponding option
symbols include SIXB, SIXC, SIXE, SIXI, SIXM, SIXR, SIXRE, SIXT,
SIXU, SIXV AND SIXY.
    \7\ Orders that yield fee code FF are not assessed a charge. See
Cboe U.S. Options Fee Schedules, Fees and Associated Fee Codes,
available at: https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/membership/fee_schedule/cboe/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current Floor Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program tiers and
corresponding rebates are as follows:
     Tier 1 provides a rebate of $0.01 per contract for all
qualifying (i.e., Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker orders in
all products except Underlying Symbol List A, Sector Indexes, DJX,
MRUT, MXEA, MXEF, NANOS, XSP, and FLEX Micros) Firm Facilitated orders,
and a rebate of $0.03 per contract for all qualifying non-Firm
Facilitated orders, where a TPH has a Step-Up Volume in Non-Customer,
Non-Strategy, Floor Broker Volume (in applicable products) from April
2021 that is greater than zero contracts;
     Tier 2 provides a rebate of $0.01 per contract for all
qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of $0.04 per contract
for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders, where a TPH has a Step-
Up Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker Volume (in
applicable products) from April 2021 that is greater than or equal to
100,000 contracts;
     Tier 3 provides a rebate of $0.01 per contract for all
qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of $0.05 per contract
for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders, where a TPH has a Step-
Up Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker Volume (in
applicable products) from April 2021 that is greater than or equal to
250,000 contracts; and
     Tier 4 provides a rebate of $0.015 per contract for all
qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of $0.06 per contract
for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders, where a TPH has a Step-
Up Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker Volume (in
applicable products) from April 2021 that is greater than or equal to
500,000 contracts.
    The Exchange now proposes to update the Floor Broker Sliding Scale
Rebate Program. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend tier
rebates for Tiers 1, 3, and 4, and to amend tier criteria for all Tiers
1 through 4. The proposed changes are as follows.
     Tier 1, as amended, provides a rebate of $0.005 per
contract for all qualifying (i.e., Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor
Broker orders in all products except Underlying Symbol List A, Sector
Indexes, DJX, MRUT, MXEA, MXEF, NANOS, XSP, and FLEX Micros) Firm
Facilitated orders, and a rebate of $0.020 per contract for all
qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders, where a TPH has Volume in Non-
Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker (in applicable products) that is
greater than zero contracts;
     Tier 2, as amended, provides a rebate of $0.01 per
contract for all qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of
$0.04 per contract for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders,
where a TPH has Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker (in
applicable products) that is greater than or equal to 250,000
contracts;

     Tier 3, as amended, provides a rebate of $0.02 per
contract for all qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of
$0.07 per contract for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders,
where a TPH has Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker (in
applicable products) that is greater than or equal to 500,000
contracts; and
     Tier 4, as amended, provides a rebate of $0.025 per
contract for all qualifying Firm Facilitated orders, and a rebate of
$0.1 per contract for all qualifying non-Firm Facilitated orders, where
a TPH has Volume in Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker (in
applicable products) that is greater than or equal to 1,000,000
contracts.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The proposed change also amends language in the Fees
Schedule regarding the Floor Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program to
note that the Exchange will aggregate a TPH's volume with the volume
of its affiliates (``affiliate'' defined as having at least 75%
common ownership between the two entities as reflected on each
entity's Form BD, Schedule A) for the purposes of calculating Volume
each month (rather than Step-Up Volume).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes certain clean-up changes to its
Fees Schedule to eliminate PULSe Workstation fees and references in the
Routing, Network Access Port, and Logical Connectivity sections and
Footnotes 27 and 45, as PULSe was decommissioned in January 2021, and
thus, such fees and references are obsolete. The Exchange also proposes
to eliminate reference to Cboe ``Command'' system in Footnotes 27, 36,
and 45 of the Fees Schedule, as it no longer uses that naming
convention with respect to its system.
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.\9\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ 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) \11\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\12\ which
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Trading Permit
Holders and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The proposed changes
reflect a competitive pricing structure designed to incentivize market
participants to direct their order flow to the Exchange's trading
floor, which the Exchange believes would enhance market quality to the
benefit of all TPHs. The Exchange notes that the proposed volume-based
incentives and discounts, as amended, are reasonable, equitable and
non-discriminatory because they are open to all TPHs on an equal basis
and provide additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably
related to (i) the value to an exchange's market quality and (ii)
associated higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels of
liquidity provision and/or growth patterns. Additionally, as noted
above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Exchange is only one of several options venues to which market
participants may direct their order flow, and it represents a small
percentage of the overall market. Competing options exchanges offer
similar tiered pricing structures to that of the Exchange, including
incentive programs that offer rebates or rates that apply based upon
TPHs achieving certain volume thresholds.
    The Exchange believes that reducing the rebates offered under Tier
1 is reasonable because TPHs are still eligible to receive a rebate for
meeting the corresponding criteria, albeit at a lower amount than
before. The Exchange believes that increasing the rebates offered under
Tiers 3 and 4 is reasonable because TPHs will be receiving higher
rebates for meeting the corresponding criteria. The Exchange believes
the proposed changes to the rebate amounts offered under these tiers
are commensurate with the corresponding criteria under the respective
tiers, even as amended.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed changes to the Floor
Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program are reasonable and equitable
because they are designed to incentivize increased order flow in
multiply-listed options to the Exchange's trading floor. The Exchange
believes the changes are reasonably designed to encourage market
participants to submit Non-Customer, Non-Strategy order flow, which
provides liquidity to the Exchange's trading floor, facilitates tighter
spreads and may attract an additional corresponding increase in order
flow from other market participants. Increased overall order flow
benefits all investors by deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool,
potentially providing even greater execution incentives and
opportunities, as well as improved price opportunities for all market
participants.
    Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the
criteria and rebates of the Floor Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program
are reasonable as they are comparable to the tier criteria and rebates
or reduced rates offered under similar volume-based incentive programs
offered at other options exchanges.\13\ The Exchange also believes that
it is reasonable to continue to offer higher rebates for Non-Firm
Facilitated order flow than for Firm Facilitated order flow (i.e.,
where the same executing broker and clearing firm are on both sides of
the transaction) because it wishes to further incentivize order flow
that attracts contra-side interest from a wider variety of market
participants, which may further contribute towards a robust, well-
balance market ecosystem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See BOX Options Fee Schedule, Section V(C), Qualified Open
Outcry (``QOO'') Order Rebate, which offers a rebate for floor
broker orders of $0.075 or $0.05 per contract (depending on the
capacity) and does not apply to Strategy QOO Orders. See also NYSE
American Options Fee Schedule, E.1, Floor Broker Fixed Cost
Prepayment Incentive Program (the ``FB Prepay Program''), which
offers participating floor brokers annual rebates for achieving
growth in manual volume by a certain percentage as measured against
certain benchmarks, and does not apply to volume executed as part of
Strategy Execution Fee Cap (that is, strategy orders); and NYSE Arca
Options Fee Schedule, Floor Broker Fixed Cost Prepayment Incentive
Program (the ``FB Prepay Program), which provides a rebate for floor
broker orders on manual billable volume of $0.08 to $0.10 per
billable side (based on billable sides), and excludes strategy
executions from the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Floor Broker
Sliding Scale Rebate Program represent an equitable allocation of fees
and are not unfairly discriminatory because the program, as amended,
applies uniformly to all qualifying TPHs, in that all TPHs that submit
the requisite order flow (i.e.,

Non-Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker Volume in multiply-listed
options) have the opportunity to compete for and achieve the tiers, as
amended. The proposed rebates will apply automatically and uniformly to
all TPHs that achieve the proposed corresponding criteria. Without
having a view of activity on other markets and off-exchange venues, the
Exchange has no way of knowing whether these proposed changes would
definitely result in any TPHs qualifying for Tiers 1-4. While the
Exchange has no way of predicting with certainty how the proposed
changes will impact TPH activity, based on trading activity from the
prior months, the Exchange anticipates that at least 2 TPHs will
achieve Tier 2, 2 TPH will achieve Tier 3 and 1 TPH will achieve Tier
4.
    Finally, the Exchange believes eliminating PULSe fees and
references as discussed above is reasonable as such PULSe has been
decommissioned, rendering such fees and references obsolete. The
proposed change to eliminate references to Cboe ``Command'' is also
reasonable as the Exchange no longer refers to its system as ``Cboe
Command''. The proposed deletions reduce potential confusion and
maintain clarity in the Fees Schedule.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As discussed above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes encourage the submission of
additional liquidity to the floor of a public exchange, thereby
promoting market depth, price discovery and transparency and enhancing
order execution and price improvement opportunities for all TPHs.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the Floor
Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program, as amended, will apply equally to
all similarly situated TPHs that submit the requisite order flow. That
is, the proposed criteria and rebates will apply equally to all Non-
Customer, Non-Strategy, Floor Broker orders in multiply-listed options.
The Exchange does not believe that the continued application of Floor
Broker Sliding Scale Rebate Program to Non-Customer orders will impose
any significant burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
Exchange recognizes that Non-Customer participation in the markets is
essential to a robust hybrid market ecosystem as each contributes
unique and important liquidity to the Exchange's trading floor, as
described above. Such Non-Customer order flow may result in overall
tighter spreads, attracting order flow from other market participants,
more execution opportunities at improved prices, and/or deeper levels
of liquidity, which may ultimately improve price transparency, provide
continuous trading opportunities and enhance market quality on the
Exchange, to the benefit of all market participants.
    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the Act because, as noted above,
competing options exchanges have similar incentive programs and
discount opportunities in place in connection with floor broker order
flow.\14\ Additionally, and as previously discussed, the Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market. TPHs have numerous alternative
venues that they may participate on and direct their order flow,
including 15 other options exchanges, many of which offer substantially
similar volume-based incentive programs.\15\ Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 15% of
the market share.\16\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of option order flow. Indeed,
participants can readily choose to send their orders to other exchange,
and, additionally off-exchange venues, if they deem fee levels at those
other venues to be more favorable. Moreover, the Commission has
repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the
securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \17\ The fact that this market is competitive
has also long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v.
Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows:
``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . .
As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and
sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-
routing agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders
for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers' . . . . ''.\18\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed fee change imposes any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 13.
    \15\ See supra note 13.
    \16\ See supra note 3.
    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \18\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \20\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-CBOE-2023-030 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

    All submissions should refer to file number SR-CBOE-2023-030. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-CBOE-2023-030 and should be
submitted on or before July 5, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-12575 Filed 6-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42291-42292]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17871]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0311; FRL-9982-17-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Emission Guidelines for Sewage Sludge
Incinerators (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR),

Emission Guidelines for Sewage Sludge Incinerators (EPA ICR No.
2403.04, OMB Control No. 2060-0661), to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through August 31, 2018. Public comments were
previously requested, via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, during
a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days
for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below,
including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may
neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid
OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 20,
2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2013-0311, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed either
online at www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center,
WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The
telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Emission Guidelines for Sewage Sludge Incinerators
(SSI) for Sewage Sludge Incinerators (40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM)
apply to the administrators of air quality programs in a state or U.S.
protectorate with one or more SSI units that commenced construction
either on or before the date of proposal. States may choose to
incorporate the model rule text directly in their state plan. If a
State does not develop, adopt, and submit an approvable State plan, the
EPA must develop a Federal plan to implement the emission guidelines.
These regulations do not directly apply to SSI unit owners and
operators. However, SSI unit owners and operators must comply with the
state plan to implement the emission guidelines contained in this
Subpart. These standards only affect existing units constructed on or
before October 14, 2010; therefore, no new units will become subject to
these same standards. This information is being collected to assure
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM.
    In general, all emission guidelines require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to emission guidelines.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Sewage sludge incinerators
constructed on or before October 14, 2010.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart MMMM).
    Estimated number of respondents: 86 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, semiannually and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 32,800 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $4,790,000 (per year), which includes
$1,350,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
labor hours and costs as compared to the previously-approved ICR. The
increase is not due to any program changes. The increase in labor
burden and costs occurred for two reasons: (1) This ICR assumes all
respondents will have to familiarize with the regulatory requirements
each year; and (2) this ICR fixes an error in the previous ICR, which
did not include recordkeeping burden for operating parameters. However,
there is also an adjustment decrease in the total capital and O&M costs
and number of responses as compared to the previous ICR. The decrease
occurred for two reasons: (1) The total number of SSI units has
decreased since the previous ICR; and (2) this ICR assumes that all
facilities will meet the requirements for testing every three years
rather than annual testing.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-17871 Filed 8-20-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P