[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 181 (Friday, September 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56525-56530]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23394]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75913; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-076]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule

September 14, 2015.
    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 September 1, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (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 make certain amendments to its Fees
Schedule, effective September 1, 2015.
Extended Trading Hour Fees
    First, the Exchange proposes to amend the Fees Schedule with
respect to Extended Trading Hours fees. The Exchange notes that it
recently amended its rules to offer trading in two exclusively listed
options (SPX, including SPXW, and VIX) during extended trading hours
from 2:00 a.m. to 8:15 a.m. Chicago time Monday through Friday
(``Extended Trading Hours'' or ``ETH''). In conjunction with the
adoption of ETH, the Exchange established fees for the trading of SPX,
SPXW and VIX options during ETH, including fees for ETH Trading Permits
and Bandwidth Packets, as well as for CMI and FIX login IDs. In order
to promote and encourage trading during the ETH session, the Exchange
had waived ETH Trading Permit and Bandwidth Packet fees for one (1) of
each initial Trading Permits and one (1) of each initial Bandwidth
Packet, per affiliated TPH, through the first six (6) calendar months
immediately following the implementation of ETH, including the month
ETH was launched (i.e., through August 31, 2015). The Exchange also
waived fees through August 31, 2015 for a CMI and FIX login ID if the
CMI and/or FIX login ID is related to a waived ETH Trading Permit and/
or waived Bandwidth packet. In order to continue promoting trading
during ETH, the Exchange wishes to extend these waivers through
December 31, 2015.
Qualified Contingent Cross Transactions
    The Exchange next proposes to amend its Fees Schedule with respect
to Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') \3\ orders. Currently, the Fees
Schedule provides for a transaction fee for all non-customer QCC orders
of $0.15 per contract side (customer orders are not assessed a charge)
and a $0.10 per contract credit for the initiating order side,
regardless of origin code. The Exchange proposes to further provide
that the $0.10 per contract credit will not be available for customer-
to-customer transactions. Particularly, the Exchange notes that it does
not collect QCC transaction fees on customer-to-customer transactions
(since customers are not assessed QCC transaction fees) and it would
not be economically feasible or viable to provide a credit on an order
that is trading with an order that is not generating a fee. The
Exchange notes that another Exchange also excludes customer-to-customer
QCC orders from receiving a rebate.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A QCC order is comprised of an order to buy or sell at least
1,000 contracts (or 10,000 mini-option contracts) that is identified
as being part of a qualified contingent trade, coupled with a contra
side order to buy or sell an equal number of contracts.
    \4\ See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``PHLX'') Pricing Schedule, Section
II, Multiply Listed Options Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Linkage
    The Exchange proposes to (i) adopt a $0.05 per contract Linkage fee
(in addition to the applicable away fees) for customer orders and (ii)
increase the Linkage fee for non-customer orders from $0.65 per
contract to $0.70 per contract. The Fees Schedule currently provides
that, in addition to the customary CBOE execution charges, for each
customer order that is routed, in whole or in part, to one or more
exchanges in connection with the Options Order Protection and Locked/
Crossed Market Plan referenced in Rule 6.80, CBOE shall pass through
the actual transaction fee assessed by the exchange(s) to which the
order was routed. The Exchange proposes to assess an additional $0.05
per contract for customer orders routed away in addition to the
applicable pass through fees. The purpose of these proposed changes is
to help recoup costs incurred by the Exchange associated with routing
customer and non-customer orders through linkage. The Exchange notes
that other exchanges also assess an additional fee on top of passing
through transaction fees for customer orders and that the proposed
amount of the fee is in line with the amount assessed at another
exchange.\5\ The Exchange also notes that the amount of the proposed
non-customer linkage fee is still lower than corresponding non-customer
Linkage fees assessed by other exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See e.g., PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section V, Customer Routing
Fees.
    \6\ See e.g., PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section V, Non-Customer
Routing Fee of $0.99 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Volume Incentive Program
    Next, the Exchange proposes to amend its Volume Incentive Program
(``VIP''). Under VIP, the Exchange credits each Trading Permit Holder
(``TPH'') the per contract amount set forth in the VIP table resulting
from each public customer (``C'' origin code) order transmitted by that
TPH (with certain exceptions) which is executed electronically on the
Exchange in all underlying symbols excluding Underlying Symbol List
A,\7\ DJX, MXEA, MXEF, XSP, XSPAM, and mini-options, provided the TPH
meets certain volume thresholds in a month.\8\ The Exchange first
proposes to change the different fee tier thresholds in the VIP.
Currently, qualification for the different fee rates at different tiers
in the VIP is based on a TPH's percentage of national customer volume
in all products, excluding Underlying Symbol List A, DJX, MXEA, MXEF,
XSP, XSPAM and mini-options. The current qualification tiers are set
to, in ascending order, 0% through 0.75%, above 0.75% through 2.0%,
above 2.0% through 2.75%, and above 2.75%. The Exchange proposes to
adjust the threshold percentages for Tiers 2 through 4. Specifically,
the Exchange is proposing to amend the

tiers to be, in ascending order, 0% through 0.75%, above 0.75% through
1.50%, above 1.50% through 3.0%, and above 3.0%. The Exchange also
proposes to increase the VIP credit for simple orders in Tier 3 from
$0.11 per contract to $0.12 per contract and in Tier 4 from $0.14 per
contract to $0.15 per contract. The Exchange proposes to increase the
VIP credit for complex orders in Tier 3 from $0.22 per contract to
$0.24 per contract and in Tier 4 from $0.23 per contract to $0.25 per
contract. The purpose of these changes is to incentivize the sending of
both simple and complex orders to the Exchange and to adjust the
incentive tiers accordingly as competition requires while maintaining
an incremental incentive for TPH's to strive for the highest tier
level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The following products are included in ``Underlying Symbol
List A'': OEX, XEO, RUT, SPX (including SPXw), SPXpm, SRO, VIX,
VXST, VOLATILITY INDEXES and binary options.
    \8\ Excluded from the VIP credit are options in Underlying
Symbol List A, DJX, MXEA, MXEF, XSP, XSPAM, mini-options, QCC
trades, public customer to public customer electronic complex order
executions, and executions related to contracts that are routed to
one or more exchanges in connection with the Options Order
Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan referenced in Rule 6.80
(see CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strategy Orders and Fee Cap
    The Exchange also proposes to amend the Fees Schedule with respect
to rebates offered on strategy executions and make certain
clarifications with regards to the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Fee
Cap (``Fee Cap''). By way of background, the Fee Cap provides for a cap
up to $75,000 on certain order executions in all products except those
in Underlying Symbol List A excluding binary options, on Clearing
Trading Permit Holder Proprietary (origin code ``F'' or ``L'') orders.
For example, transaction fees for Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'')
\9\ orders count towards the $75,000 fee cap. The Exchange notes that
transaction fees resulting from certain strategy orders also apply
towards reaching the Fee Cap.\10\ For all non-customer orders, the
Exchange notes that fees are capped at $1,000 for all merger strategies
and short stock interest strategies and $700 for reversals, conversions
and jelly roll strategies executed on the same trading day in the same
option class, excluding any option class on which the Exchange charges
the Index License surcharge fee under Footnote 14 of the Fees Schedule.
The Fees Schedule also currently provides that these transaction fees
are further capped at $25,000 per month per initiating Trading Permit
Holder (excluding Clearing Trading Permit Holders, who instead are
subject to the $75,000 Fee Cap). Additionally, the Fees Schedule states
that floor brokerage fees assessed on these strategies are eligible for
a full rebate. In order to qualify for the fee caps and floor brokerage
fees rebate, a rebate request with supporting documentation must be
submitted to the Exchange within three (3) business days of the
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A QCC order is comprised of an order to buy or sell at least
1,000 contracts (or 10,000 mini-option contracts) that is identified
as being part of a qualified contingent trade, coupled with a contra
side order to buy or sell an equal number of contracts.
    \10\ For details about strategy executions, see Footnote 13 of
the Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to make a number of amendments and
clarifications with respect to the Fee Cap table and Footnote 13 of the
Fees Schedule. First, the Exchange proposes to provide that the
strategy rebates described in Footnote 13 of the Fees Schedule apply
only to equities, Exchange-Traded Funds (``ETFs'') and Exchange-Traded
Notes (``ETNs'') options. As such, the Exchange proposes adding this
language directly into Footnote 13, as well as appending Footnote 13 to
the ETF and ETN Options Rate Table to clarify its applicability.\11\
The Exchange also proposes to eliminate the following language from
Footnote 13 in conjunction with this change: ``. . . excluding any
option class on which the Exchange charges the Index License surcharge
fee under footnote 14 of this Fees Schedule.'' The Exchange notes that
while the strategy rebates always applied to ETF and ETN options,
strategy rebates for reversals, conversations and jelly roll strategies
also applied to any index option for which an Index License surcharge
fee (under Footnote 14) was not assessed (e.g., XSP). The Exchange
notes that it no longer seeks to incentivize strategy orders on index
options (that weren't otherwise already excluded) and as such, proposes
to exclude all indexes from the rebate. Additionally, the Exchange
seeks to eliminate the following language from Footnote 13: ``Floor
brokerage fees assessed on any of these strategies are eligible for a
full rebate (see below)'', as floor brokerage fees are only assessed
for products for which strategy order rebates do not apply and
therefore it is unnecessary to maintain this language in the Fees
Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Footnote 13 is already appended to the Equities Rate Table.
See CBOE Fees Schedule, Equity Options Rate Table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to add clarifying language to the Notes
section of the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Fee Cap table.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to clarify that transaction fees
assessed as part of the strategies cap described in Footnote 13 are
including in the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Cap. The Exchange also
seeks to make clear that a Clearing Trading Permit Holder that has
reached the Fee Cap in a given month would no longer be eligible for
the strategy rebates, as no transaction fees would have been assessed
on those additional transactions. The Exchange believes the proposed
clarifications maintain clarity in the Fees Schedule and reduces
potential confusion.
    The Exchange next notes that strategy orders can be executed as
part of a QCC transaction. The Exchange also notes that, as previously
mentioned, all non-customer QCC transactions are subject to a $0.15 per
contract transaction fee and a $0.10 per contract credit for the
initiating side of the QCC transaction. As QCC transactions already
receive a credit, the Exchange seeks to amend the Fees Schedule to
provide that any strategies described in Footnote 13 of the Fees
Schedule that is tied to a QCC transaction will not be eligible for the
rebates provided for in Footnote 13 of the Fees Schedule. The Exchange
notes that another exchange currently excludes these transactions from
similar caps.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Option Fees, which provides that all dividend, merger, short stock
interest, reversal and conversion strategy executions are excluded
from the Monthly Firm Fee Cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange lastly proposes to clarify in Footnote 11 of the Fees
Schedule and the Notes section of the CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale (``Sliding Scale'') that contract volume resulting from any
strategies defined in Footnote 13 for which the strategy cap is applied
will not apply towards reaching the qualifying ADV thresholds for the
Sliding Scale. The Exchange notes that these contracts are not counted
towards these thresholds because such contracts have already received
the benefit of the strategy fee cap.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\13\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \14\ 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
facilitation 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 Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\15\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes extending the waiver of ETH Trading Permit
and Bandwidth Packet fees for one of each type of Trading Permit and
Bandwidth Packet, per affiliated TPH through December 31, 2015 is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory, because it
promotes and encourages trading during the ETH session and applies to
all ETH TPHs. The Exchange believes it's also reasonable, equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to waive fees for Login IDs related to
waived Trading Permits and/or Bandwidth Packets in order to promote and
encourage ongoing participation in ETH and also applies to all ETH
TPHs.
    The Exchange believes it's reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to exclude customer-to-customer transactions from the
QCC credit because these transactions, unlike customer-to-non customer
or non-customer to non-customer transactions, are not assessed a QCC
transaction fee. The Exchange notes that other exchanges also exclude
customer-to-customer transactions from available rebates.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Option Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Linkage fee from $0.65 per
contract to $0.70 per contract for non-customer orders and to adopt a
$0.05 per contract fee (in addition to applicable transaction fees) for
customer orders is reasonable because the increase non-customer fee and
adoption of the customer fee will help offset the costs associated with
routing orders through Linkage. Additionally, the proposed amounts are
reasonable as they are in line with amounts charged by other Exchanges
for similar transactions.\17\ The Exchange believes it's equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to assess higher linkage rates to non-
customers as opposed to customers because if a non-customer market
participant wishes to avoid the Linkage fee, it may choose to specify
that the Exchange not route orders away on its behalf or designate the
order as Immediate or Cancel, which would prevent the order from
linking away to another Exchange. Moreover, a non-customer market
participant may route directly to exchanges posting the best market if
desired to avoid Linkage routing fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section V, Non-Customer and
Customer Routing Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed change to amend the fee tier
thresholds in VIP are reasonable. Specifically, the Exchange believes
it's reasonable to decrease the upper threshold in the second tier (and
thus the corresponding lower threshold in the third tier) and increase
the upper threshold in the third tier (and therefore the corresponding
threshold in the fourth tier) because the slight change is designed to
provide TPHs a greater ability to reach higher tiers and therefore
receive higher credits as well as adjust the incentive tiers
accordingly as competition requires while maintaining an incremental
incentive for TPH's to strive for the highest tier level. This change
is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it will be
applied to all TPHs uniformly. The Exchange believes that increasing
the VIP simple and complex order credits in the third and fourth tiers
is reasonable because it will allow all TPHs transmitting public
customer simple and complex orders that reach certain volume thresholds
to receive an increased credit for doing so. The amounts of the credits
being proposed are also closer to the amounts of credits paid to market
participants by another exchange for similar transactions.\18\
Additionally, the Exchange notes that increasing the credit (and
providing higher credits for complex orders than for simple orders) is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it is
intended to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to the
Exchange. This should provide greater liquidity and trading
opportunities, including for market participants who send simple orders
to the Exchange (as simple orders can trade with the legs of complex
orders). The greater liquidity and trading opportunities should benefit
not just public customers (whose orders are the only ones that qualify
for the VIP) but all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See e.g., International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'')
Schedule of Fees, Section II (which lists complex order fees and
rebates). For each public customer order transmitted by a market
participant (with certain exceptions) a rebate of between $0.30 per
contract and $0.46 per contract in Select Symbols and between $0.63
per contract and $0.83 per contract is given to that market
participant, depending on the qualifying thresholds that market
participant meets. For each public customer complex order. [sic] See
also, PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II.B [sic], Multiply Listed
Options Fees [sic], Customer Rebate Program, which provides for a
rebate of between $0.10 per contract and $0.21 per contract for
electronically delivered customer simple orders in Penny and Non-
Penny Pilot multiply-listed equity and ETF options (excluding SPY)
classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it's reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to apply the strategy rebates described in Footnote 13
of the Fees Schedule to equities, ETFs and ETNs because the Exchange no
longer seeks to incentivize sending of strategy orders in index options
classes and the proposed change applies to all TPHs. The Exchange
believes that removing language relating to index options in Footnote
13 serves 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 by preventing any potential
confusion regarding which option classes the strategy rebates apply.
Similarly, the Exchange believes that eliminating reference to floor
brokerage rebates, which apply only to products for which strategy
rebates do not apply, alleviates potential confusion, thereby
protecting investors and public interest.
    The Exchange believes that adding clarifying language to the Fees
Schedule to specify that once a Clearing Trading Permit Holder reaches
the Fee Cap they are no longer eligible for additional strategy rebates
also prevents potential confusion, which removes impediments to and
perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and national market
system.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable to exclude strategies tied
to a QCC transaction from the strategy rebates described in Footnote 13
because those transactions already receive the benefit of a credit
under the QCC incentive program and the Exchange does not believe an
additional incentive is required. Additionally, another Exchange
already excludes these transactions from similar caps.\19\ The Exchange
believes it's equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to exclude QCC
strategy orders from the strategy rebates because the proposed change
applies to all TPHs uniformly for these types of transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Option Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes that explicitly clarifying in the
Fees Schedule that that contract volume for which a strategy cap (as
defined in Footnote 13 of the Fees Schedule) has been applied is not
included for purposes of reaching the qualifying ADV thresholds for the
CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding Scale maintains clarity in the Fees
Schedule

and serves 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 by preventing any potential
confusion regarding whether or not the volume is included towards the
Sliding Scale.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change to extend certain ETH
fee waivers will impose any burden on intramarket competition because
the proposed waiver would apply equally to all CBOE ETH TPHs.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will
continue to encourage trading during ETH, which will provide additional
liquidity and enhance competition during ETH. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on
intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed rule change
applies only to CBOE.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to
exclude customer-to-customer transactions from receiving the $0.10 QCC
credit imposes a burden on intramarket competition because although
customer-to-customer transactions will not be receive a rebate, these
transactions are not assessed QCC transaction fees (unlike customer-to-
non customer or non-customer to non-customer QCC transactions). The
Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed rule change applies only to CBOE and because other Exchanges
have similar exclusions.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Option Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change to the non-
customer Linkage fees will impose a burden on intramarket competition
because the increase to the non-customer Linkage fee will apply equally
to all non-customer orders routed via linkage and will help offset
costs associated with routing non-customer orders via linkage. The
Exchange does not believe that the proposed change to the customer
Linkage fee will impose a burden on intramarket competition because it
will apply equally to all customer orders routed via linkage and will
help offset costs associated with routing customer orders via linkage.
Additionally, the Exchange notes that while the Linkage fee assessed to
non-customers is higher than that assessed to customers, non-customer
market participants wishing to avoid the Linkage fee may choose to
specify that the Exchange not route orders away on its behalf or
designate the order as Immediate or Cancel, which would prevent the
order from linking away to another Exchange. The Exchange believes the
proposed changes will not impose any burden on intermarket competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act because it only applies to trading on the Exchange and orders
sent from the Exchange to other exchanges via Linkage. Additionally,
the Exchange notes that the proposed changes remain generally in line
with routing fees assessed at other options exchanges.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section V, Customer and Non-
Customer [sic] Routing Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to amend the tier
thresholds in VIP, as well as increase the VIP credits for simple and
complex orders in Tiers 3 and 4 do not impose a burden on intramarket
competition because it applies uniformly to all TPHs and incentivizes
the sending of more simple and complex orders to the Exchange, which
provides greater liquidity and trading opportunities.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change to exclude
index option classes from the strategy rebates described in Footnote 13
of the Fees Schedule will impose any burden on intramarket competition
because it applies to all TPHs executing strategy orders. To the extent
that the proposed changes make CBOE a more attractive marketplace for
market participants at other exchanges, such market participants are
welcome to become CBOE market participants.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposal to exclude strategy
orders tied to a QCC transaction from the strategy rebates described in
Footnote 13 of the Fees Schedule will impose a burden on intramarket
competition because the proposed change applies to all TPHs uniformly
and because these transactions already receive the benefit of a credit
under the QCC incentive program. To the extent that the proposed
changes make CBOE a more attractive marketplace for market participants
at other exchanges, such market participants are welcome to become CBOE
market participants.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing venues. In such an
environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the various proposed rule changes promote a competitive environment. To
the extent that the proposed changes make CBOE a more attractive
marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market
participants are welcome to become CBOE market participants. Finally,
the Exchange notes that the remaining proposed changes are clarifying
in nature and are intended to alleviate confusion and are not intended
for competitive purposes.

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 \22\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \23\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2015-076 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-2015-076. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-076, and should be
submitted on or before October 9, 2015.

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

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23394 Filed 9-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16133-16134]
[DOCID:fr30mr06-48]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC06-714-000; FERC Form 714]

Commission Information Collection Activities, Proposed
Collection; Comment Request; Extension

March 23, 2006.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(a)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is soliciting public comment
on the specific aspects of the information collection described below.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due May 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Copies of sample filings of the proposed collection of
information can be obtained from the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp
) or from the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Attn: Michael Miller, Office of the Executive
Director, ED-34, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments
may be filed either in paper format or electronically. Those parties
filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. For paper
filing, the original and 14 copies of such comments should be submitted
to the Secretary of the Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 and refer to
Docket No. IC06-714-000.
    Documents filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in
WordPerfect, MS Word, Portable Document Format, or ASCII format. To
file the document, access the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 and click on ``Make an E-filing'', and then follow the

instructions for each screen. First time users will have to establish a
user name and password. The Commission will send an automatic
acknowledgement to the sender's e-mail address upon receipt of
comments.
    All comments may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely via the
Internet through FERC's homepage using the eLibrary link. For user
assistance, contact<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at (866)
208-3676. or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Miller may be reached by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collected under the
requirements of FERC Form-714 ``Annual Electric Control and Planning
Area Report'' (OMB No. 1902-0140, expiration date October 31, 2006) is
used by the Commission to carry out its responsibilities in
implementing the statutory provisions of sections 202, 207, 210, 211-
213 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended (49 Stat. 838; 16 U.S.C.
791a-825r) and particularly sections 304-309 and 311, as well as Energy
Policy Act sections 1211, 1221, 1231, 1241 and 1242. The Commission
implements the Form 714 filing requirements in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) under 18 CFR section 141.51.
    Through FERC Form 714, the Commission gathers electric transmission
system operating and planning information, from control area operations
and from utilities charged with resource planning and demand
forecasting for planning areas that have an annual peak demand greater
than 200 megawatts. This information is used in evaluating transmission
system reliability and performance, wholesale rate investigations, and
wholesale market under emerging competitive forces.
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current expiration date, with no changes to the existing collection of
data.
    Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this collection is
estimated as:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Number of          Number of       Average burden     Total annual
   respondents       responses per        hours per       burden hours
   annually (1)      respondent (2)     response (3)       (1)x(2)x(3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
215                              1                 50            10,750
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimated total annual cost to respondents is $606,347. (10,750
burden hours/2080 work hours per year x $117,321 annual average salary
per employee). The estimated annual cost per respondent is $2,820.
    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways
to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5)
searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of
information; and (7) transmitting, or otherwise disclosing the
information.
    The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for
professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect
overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to
providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost
for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs
incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs
apply to activities, which benefit the whole organization rather than
any one particular function or activity.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-4592 Filed 3-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P