Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Provide Users With Connectivity to Three Additional Third Party Data Feeds and Change Its Price List Related to These Co-Location Services, 23014-23020 [2018-10504]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
23014
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed
rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 18 and Rule
19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.19 Because the
proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of
investors or the public interest; (ii)
impose any significant burden on
competition; and (iii) become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it
was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent
with the protection of investors and the
public interest, the proposed rule
change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 20 and
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.21
A proposed rule change filed under
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 22 normally does not
become operative for 30 days after the
date of filing. However, pursuant to
Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),23 the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such
action is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. The
Exchange has asked the Commission to
waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative
immediately upon filing. The Exchange
stated its belief that immediate
implementation of the proposed rule
changes would allow Users to have the
benefit of connectivity to the Additional
Third Party Data Feed without delay. In
so doing, the immediate implementation
would help Users tailor their data center
operations to the requirements of their
business operations without delay. In
addition, the Exchange stated that the
proposed changes to the Price List
would provide Users with more
complete information regarding their
Connectivity options and the
availability of products and services.
The Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, as it
will allow Users to have the benefit of
Additional Third Party Feed sooner and
will allow User additional flexibility in
tailoring their data center operations.
18 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
21 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b–
4(f)(6) requires the Exchange 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.
22 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
23 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
19 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
For this reason, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to
be operative upon filing.24
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 shall institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
should be approved or disapproved.
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 rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
NYSEAMER–2018–19 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–NYSEAMER–2018–19. 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,
24 For purposes only of waiving the operative
delay for this proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSEAMER–2018–19 and
should be submitted on or before June
7, 2018.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.25
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–10502 Filed 5–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–83221; File No. SR–NYSE–
2018–20]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New
York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
a Proposed Rule Change To Provide
Users With Connectivity to Three
Additional Third Party Data Feeds and
Change Its Price List Related to These
Co-Location Services
May 11, 2018.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that on April 30,
2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC
(‘‘NYSE’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to provide
Users with connectivity to three
additional third party data feeds and
change its Price List related to these co25 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) and (59).
U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
2 15 U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
location services. Additionally, the
Exchange proposes to make nonsubstantive corrections to the Price List.
The proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange’s website at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, 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
self-regulatory organization 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 those 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 parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend the
co-location 4 services offered by the
Exchange to provide Users 5 with
connectivity to three additional third
party data feeds and change its Price
List related to these co-location services.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to
make non-substantive corrections to the
Price List.
Third Party Data Feeds
The Exchange charges fees for
connectivity to data feeds from third
party markets and other content service
providers (‘‘Third Party Data Feeds’’).6
The list of the Third Party Data Feeds
and related connectivity fees is set forth
in the Price List. The Exchange proposes
to add three ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feed Shared Farm feeds
(the ‘‘Additional Third Party Data
Feeds’’) to the list of Third Party Data
Feeds.
The Additional Third Party Data
Feeds are produced by an entity owned
by the Exchange’s ultimate parent,
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (‘‘ICE’’),
and so the Exchange has an indirect
interest in the Additional Third Party
Data Feeds. The Additional Third Party
Data Feeds include data drawn from the
Exchange, the Affiliate SROs, and third
party exchanges, including stock and
futures exchanges. Because it includes
third party data, the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds are considered Third
Party Data Feeds.7
The list of available Third Party Data
Feeds presently includes three ICE Data
Services Consolidated Feeds.8 The
Additional Third Party Data Feeds are
similar to the previously filed ICE Data
Services Consolidated Feeds in terms of
the underlying content, which,
according to the content service
provider, includes normalized, real-time
and intraday data feeds from over 600
sources. The difference between them
lies with what data a User actually
receives.
23015
More specifically, when a User
requests connectivity to one of the
previously filed ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feeds, it receives
connectivity to all the data in the
relevant ICE Data Services Consolidated
Feeds. The User uses its processor to
narrow down the feed to the specific
data it wants. In contrast, when a User
requests connectivity to an Additional
Third Party Data Feed, it will specify to
the content service provider what
specific information, out of the data
from the roughly 600 sources, it wants
to receive. The content service provider
will use its own processor to narrow
down the data feeds, so that the User
will only receive the information it
requests. A User may choose whether it
wants connectivity to one of the
previously filed ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feeds or to one of the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds
based on whether it wants to process the
data, and what level of control it wants
over the processing. In both cases, the
User will only receive data the relevant
third party data provider authorizes it to
receive.
As it does with the existing Third
Party Data Feeds, the Exchange
proposes to charge a monthly recurring
fee for connectivity to each Additional
Third Party Data Feed. The monthly
recurring fee would vary by the
bandwidth of the connection.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to
revise the Price List to provide that
Users may obtain connectivity to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds for a
monthly fee, as follows:
Monthly
recurring
connectivity
fee per
third party
data feed
Third party data feed
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm ≤100 Mb ..........................................................................................................
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm >100 Mb to ≤1 Gb ..........................................................................................
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm >1 Gb ..............................................................................................................
$200
500
1,000
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Depending on its needs and
bandwidth, a User may opt to receive all
or some of the feeds or services
included in the Additional Third Party
Data Feeds.
The Exchange would provide
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds (‘‘Connectivity’’) as a
convenience to Users. Use of
Connectivity would be completely
voluntary. The Exchange is not aware of
any impediment to third parties offering
Connectivity.
The Exchange does not have visibility
into whether third parties currently
4 The Exchange initially filed rule changes
relating to its co-location services with the
Commission in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 62960 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR
59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR–NYSE–2010–56).
The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah,
New Jersey (the ‘‘data center’’) from which it
provides co-location services to Users.
5 For purposes of the Exchange’s co-location
services, a ‘‘User’’ means any market participant
that requests to receive co-location services directly
from the Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR
60190 (October 5, 2015) (SR–NYSE–2015–40). As
specified in the Price List, a User that incurs colocation fees for a particular co-location service
pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location
fees for the same co-location service charged by the
Exchange’s affiliates NYSE American LLC (‘‘NYSE
American’’) and NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’
and, together with NYSE American, the ‘‘Affiliate
SROs’’). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70206 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR 51765 (August 21,
2013) (SR–NYSE–2013–59).
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80311
(March 24, 2017), 82 FR 15741 (March 30, 2017)
(SR–NYSE–2016–45).
7 Id., at 15749.
8 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
23016
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
offer, or intend to offer, Users
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds, as such third parties
are not required to make that
information public. However, if one or
more third parties presently offer, or in
the future opt to offer, such
Connectivity to Users, a User may
utilize the Secure Financial Transaction
Infrastructure (‘‘SFTI’’) network, a third
party telecommunication network, third
party wireless network, a cross connect,
or a combination thereof to access such
services and products through a
connection to an access center outside
the data center (which could be a SFTI
access center, a third-party access
center, or both), another User, or a third
party vendor.
The Exchange would receive the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds from
the content service provider, at its data
center. It would then provide
connectivity to that data to Users for a
fee. Users would connect to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds over
the internet protocol (‘‘IP’’) network, a
local area network available in the data
center.
In order to connect to an Additional
Third Party Data Feed, a User would
enter into a contract with the content
service provider, pursuant to which the
content service provider would charge
the User for the Third Party Data Feed.
The Exchange would receive the
Additional Third Party Data Feed over
its fiber optic network and, after the
content service provider and User
entered into the contract and the
Exchange received authorization from
the content service provider, the
Exchange would re-transmit the data to
the User over the User’s port. The
Exchange would charge the User for the
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feed. A User would only
receive, and would only be charged for,
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feed for which it entered
into contracts.
The Exchange would have no right to
use an Additional Third Party Data Feed
other than as a redistributor of the data.
9 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71122
(December 18, 2013), 78 FR 77739 (December 24,
2013) (SR–NYSE–2013–81). Users may develop
their hardware infrastructure within a particular
cabinet in such a way that, if expansion of such
hardware is needed, it can be accomplished within
the space constraints of that particular cabinet. If
this type of User requires additional power
allocation, it would likely want to modify its
existing cabinet in this manner, rather than taking
an additional dedicated cabinet due to the expense
of re-developing its infrastructure within such
additional dedicated cabinet. See id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
The Additional Third Party Data Feeds
would not provide access or order entry
to the Exchange’s execution system. The
Additional Third Party Data Feeds
would not provide access or order entry
to the execution systems of the party
generating the feed. The Exchange
would receive the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds via arms-length
agreements and it would have no
inherent advantage over any other
distributor of such data.
Additional Changes
The Exchange proposes to make
additional, non-substantive changes to
add definitions, correct a typographical
error, remove obsolete text and update
third party exchange names
(collectively, the ‘‘Non-Substantive
Changes’’). The proposed additional
changes would have no effect on
pricing.
General Note 1
General Note 1 in the Price List
references the Affiliate SROs. The
Exchange proposes to add short-hand
definitions of each of the Affiliate SROs,
which terms are used later in the Price
List. The revised references would be to
‘‘NYSE American LLC (NYSE American)
and NYSE Arca, Inc. (NYSE Arca).’’
Cabinet Upgrade Fee
The Exchange offers Users the option
of a ‘‘Cabinet Upgrade’’ and related fee,
pursuant to which the Exchange
accommodates requests for additional
power allocation beyond the typical
amount that the Exchange allocates per
dedicated cabinet, at which point the
Exchange must upgrade the cabinet’s
power capacity.9 The Cabinet Upgrade
Fee in the Price List has a parenthetical
setting forth lower fees for a User that
submits a written order for a Cabinet
Upgrade by January 31, 2014, provided
that the Cabinet Upgrade becomes fully
operational by March 31, 2014. For the
avoidance of confusion, the Exchange
proposes to put the text in the past
tense. Accordingly, the parenthetical
would read as follows: ‘‘($4,600 for a
User that submitted a written order for
10 See
80 FR 60190, supra note 5, at 60191.
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65973
(December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79232 (December 21,
2011) (SR–NYSE–2011–53).
12 See 80 FR 60190, supra note 5, at 60191.
13 See id., at note 11, and Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 76009 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR
60213 (October 5, 2015) (SR–NYSEMKT–2015–67);
and 76010 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60197
(October 5, 2015) (SR–NYSEArca–2015–82).
14 Compare File No. SR–NYSE–2015–40
(September 18, 2015) (initial filing), at 27, available
11 See
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a Cabinet Upgrade by January 31, 2014,
provided that the Cabinet Upgrade
became fully operational by March 31,
2014)’’.
Hosting Fees
A User may provide hosting services
to its customers in the User’s co-location
space at the data center. As stated in the
Price List, ‘‘Hosting User’’ means a User
that hosts a Hosted Customer in the
User’s co-location space, and ‘‘Hosted
Customer’’ means a customer of a
Hosting User that is hosted in a Hosting
User’s co-location space.10
In 2011, the Exchange filed a ‘‘Hosting
Fee’’ applicable to Hosting Users.11 In
2015, the Exchange modified such
Hosting Fee to provide that, effective
January 1, 2016, ‘‘the Hosting Fee would
be assessed to a Hosting User on a per
Hosted Customer basis and for each
cabinet in which the Hosting User hosts
the Hosted Customer.’’ 12
The Affiliate SROs submitted
substantially the same proposed rule
change.13 However, the Exchange’s rule
filing included a typographical error in
the proposed text in its Exhibit 5.
Specifically, although the descriptions
of the fees in the description of the fee
change were identical in all three
filings, unlike the filings submitted by
the Affiliate SROs, the Exchange’s filing
omitted ‘‘per cabinet’’ in the proposed
text in its Exhibit 5.14 The Exchange
proposes to correct the error by
amending the text for the Hosting Fee
under ‘‘Amount of Charge’’ to add ‘‘per
cabinet.’’
In addition, as noted above, the
change in the Hosting Fee was effective
January 1, 2016. That date has passed,
but the Price List continues to include
both the Hosting Fee that was in effect
through December 31, 2015 and the date
of the change. The Exchange proposes to
delete the obsolete references to these
dates and the amount of the previous
hosting fee.
The amended text would be as
follows (additional text underscored,
deletions in strikethrough):
at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/
nyse/rule-filings/filings/2015/NYSE-201540.pdf;File No. SR–NYSEMKT–2015–67 (September
18, 2015) (initial filing), at 27–28, available at
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/
nyse-american/rule-filings/filings/2015/NYSEMKT2015-67.pdf; and File No. SR–NYSEArca–2015–82
(September 18, 2015) (initial filing), at 28 and 29,
available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/
markets/nyse-arca/rule-filings/filings/2015/
NYSEArca-2015-82.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
Obsolete Availability Dates and
Exchange References
EN17MY18.006</GPH>
‘‘Note: Service is expected to be
available no later than June 30, 2017.’’
would be deleted.
• In the table under ‘‘Third Party Data
Feeds,’’ ‘‘Bats BZX Exchange (BZX) and
Bats BYX Exchange (BYX)’’ and ‘‘Bats
EDGX Exchange (EDGX) and Bats EDGA
Exchange (EDGA)’’ and their related
monthly recurring connectivity fees
would be deleted, and lines for ‘‘Cboe
BZX Exchange (CboeBZX) and Cboe
BYX Exchange (CboeBYX)’’ and ‘‘Cboe
EDGX Exchange (CboeEDGX) and Cboe
EDGA Exchange (CboeEDGA)’’ added
with their related monthly recurring
connectivity fees, which would remain
unchanged, as follows (additional text
underscored, deletions in
strikethrough):
15 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81962
(October 26, 2017), 82 FR 50711, 50713 (November
1, 2017) (SR–BatsBZX–2017–70).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
EN17MY18.005</GPH>
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Certain services in the data center that
are described in the Price List identify
dates by which they were expected to be
available. These dates have passed.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to
eliminate the obsolete references to
these dates. In addition, the Exchange
proposes to update the references to
certain exchanges that have changed
their names.15
To that end, the Exchange proposes to
make the following changes:
• For the wireless connection of Bats
Pitch BZX Gig shaped data and Bats
Pitch BYX Gig shaped data, the
description would be revised as follows:
(a) The text would read ‘‘Wireless
connection of Cboe Pitch BZX Gig
shaped data and Cboe Pitch BYX Gig
shaped data’’; and (b) the text ‘‘Note:
Connection to Bats Pitch BYX Gig
shaped data is expected to be available
no later than December 31, 2016.’’
would be deleted.
• For the wireless connection of Bats
EDGX Gig shaped data and Bats EDGA
Gig shaped data, the description would
be revised as follows: (a) The text would
read ‘‘Wireless connection of Cboe
EDGX Gig shaped data and Cboe EDGA
Gig shaped data’’; and (b) the text ‘‘Note:
Connection to Bats EDGA Gig shaped
data is expected to be available no later
than December 31, 2016.’’ would be
deleted.
• For the wireless connection of
Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX), the text
23017
23018
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
General
The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes would remove
impediments to, and perfect the
mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in
general, protect investors and the public
interest because, by offering additional
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds, the Exchange would
give each User additional options for
addressing its connectivity needs,
responding to User demand for
connectivity options. Providing the
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds would help each User
tailor its data center operations to the
requirements of its business operations
by allowing it to select the form and
latency of connectivity that best suits its
needs.
The Exchange would provide
Connectivity as a convenience to Users.
Use of Connectivity would be
completely voluntary. The Exchange is
not aware of any impediment to third
parties offering Connectivity. The
Exchange does not have visibility into
whether third parties currently offer, or
intend to offer, Users connectivity to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds.
However, if one or more third parties
presently offer, or in the future opt to
offer, such Connectivity to Users, a User
may utilize the SFTI network, a third
party telecommunication network, third
party wireless network, a cross connect,
or a combination thereof to access such
services and products through a
connection to an access center outside
the data center (which could be a SFTI
access center, a third-party access
center, or both), another User, or a third
party vendor.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes would remove
impediments to, and perfect the
mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in
general, protect investors and the public
interest because, by offering
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feed to Users, the Exchange
would give Users additional options for
connectivity to new services,
responding to User demand for
connectivity options.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed Non-Substantive Changes
would remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and
open market and a national market
system and, in general, protect investors
and the public interest because the
changes would clarify Exchange rules
and alleviate any possible market
participant confusion caused by the
disparity of the description of the
Hosting Fee between the Price List and
the price lists and fee schedules of the
As is the case with all Exchange colocation arrangements, (i) neither a User
nor any of the User’s customers would
be permitted to submit orders directly to
the Exchange unless such User or
customer is a member organization, a
Sponsored Participant or an agent
thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing
order entry services); (ii) use of the colocation services proposed herein would
be completely voluntary and available
to all Users on a non-discriminatory
basis; 16 and (iii) a User would only
incur one charge for the particular colocation service described herein,
regardless of whether the User connects
only to the Exchange or to the Exchange
and one or both the Affiliate SROs.17
The proposed change is not otherwise
intended to address any other issues
relating to co-location services and/or
related fees, and the Exchange is not
aware of any problems that Users would
have in complying with the proposed
change.
2. Statutory Basis
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
The Exchange believes that the
proposed fee change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,18 in general, and
furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(5) of the Act,19 in particular,
because it is 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 mechanisms of, a free
and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest and
because it is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
16 As is currently the case, Users that receive colocation services from the Exchange will not receive
any means of access to the Exchange’s trading and
execution systems that is separate from, or superior
to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange’s trading and
execution systems through the same order gateway,
regardless of whether the sender is co-located in the
data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do
not receive any market data or data service product
that is not available to all Users, although Users that
receive co-location services normally would expect
reduced latencies in sending orders to, and
receiving market data from, the Exchange.
17 See 78 FR 51765, supra note 5, at 51766. The
Affiliate SROs have also submitted substantially the
same proposed rule change to propose the changes
described herein. See SR–NYSEAMER–2018–19
and SR–NYSEArca–2018–28.
18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Affiliate SROs or by the obsolete dates
and exchange names.
The Exchange also believes that the
proposed fee change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,20 in
particular, because it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its
members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly
discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed fee changes are consistent
with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act for
multiple reasons. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market
in which exchanges offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the
trading and other market activities of
those market participants who believe
that co-location enhances the efficiency
of their operations. Accordingly, fees
charged for co-location services are
constrained by the active competition
for the order flow of, and other business
from, such market participants. If a
particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected
market participants will opt to terminate
their co-location arrangements with that
exchange, and adopt a possible range of
alternative strategies, including placing
their servers in a physically proximate
location outside the exchange’s data
center (which could be a competing
exchange), or pursuing strategies less
dependent upon the lower exchange-toparticipant latency associated with colocation. Accordingly, the exchange
charging excessive fees would stand to
lose not only co-location revenues but
also the liquidity of the formerly colocated trading firms, which could have
additional follow-on effects on the
market share and revenue of the affected
exchange.
The Exchange believes that the
additional services and fees proposed
herein would be equitably allocated and
not unfairly discriminatory because, in
addition to the services being
completely voluntary, they would be
available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e., the same products and services
would be available to all Users). All
Users that voluntarily selected to
receive Connectivity would be charged
the same amount for the same services.
Users that opted to use Connectivity
would not receive connectivity that is
not available to all Users, as all market
participants that contracted with the
relevant content provider would receive
connectivity.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed charges would be reasonable,
20 15
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
17MYN1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
equitably allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange
would offer the Connectivity as
conveniences to Users, but in order to
do so must provide, maintain and
operate the data center facility hardware
and technology infrastructure. The
Exchange must handle the installation,
administration, monitoring, support and
maintenance of such services, including
by responding to any production issues.
Since the inception of co-location, the
Exchange has made numerous
improvements to the network hardware
and technology infrastructure and has
established additional administrative
controls. The Exchange has expanded
the network infrastructure to keep pace
with the increased number of services
available to Users, including resilient
and redundant feeds. In addition, in
order to provide Connectivity, the
Exchange would maintain multiple
connections to each Additional Third
Party Data Feed, allowing the Exchange
to provide resilient and redundant
connections; adapt to any changes made
by the relevant third party; and cover
any applicable fees charged by the
relevant third party, such as port fees.
In addition, Users would not be
required to use any of their bandwidth
for Connectivity unless they wish to do
so.
The Exchange believes the proposed
fee for connectivity to each Additional
Third Party Data Feed is reasonable
because the proposed monthly recurring
fee varies by the bandwidth of the
connection, and so is generally
proportional to the bandwidth required.
In addition, the proposed fees are
consistent with the fees for connectivity
to the previously filed ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feeds, which feeds are
similar to the Additional Third Party
Data Feeds in terms of the underlying
content. The Exchange notes that the
proposed monthly recurring fees are
also generally consistent with the
monthly recurring fees for connectivity
to the SR Labs-SuperFeed Third Party
Data Feeds, which also vary by
bandwidth. The Exchange believes that
the proposed difference in pricing
between the Additional Third Party
Data Feeds and SR Labs-SuperFeed
options is reasonable, equitably
allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because, although the
bandwidth may be similar, the
competitive considerations and the
costs the Exchange incurs in providing
such connections may differ.
The Exchange believes the proposed
fees for Connectivity would be
reasonable because they would allow
the Exchange to defray or cover the
costs associated with offering Users
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:36 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
connectivity to Additional Third Party
Data Feeds while providing Users the
convenience of receiving such
Connectivity within co-location, helping
them tailor their data center operations
to the requirements of their business
operations.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed Non-Substantive Changes
would be reasonable because the
changes would have no impact on
pricing. Rather, the changes would
remove obsolete text and update
references, thereby clarifying the
Exchange rules and alleviating possible
market participant confusion.
For the reasons above, the proposed
changes would not unfairly discriminate
between or among market participants
that are otherwise capable of satisfying
any applicable co-location fees,
requirements, terms and conditions
established from time to time by the
Exchange.
For these reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposal is consistent
with the Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of
the Act,21 the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will not impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act because all of
the proposed services are completely
voluntary.
The Exchange believes that providing
Users with additional options for
connectivity to new services would not
impose any burden on competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because such proposed Connectivity
would satisfy User demand for
connectivity options. The Exchange
would provide Connectivity as a
convenience equally to all Users. All
Users that voluntarily selected to
receive Connectivity would be charged
the same amount for the same services.
The Exchange does not have visibility
into whether third parties currently
offer, or intend to offer, Users
connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds, as such third parties
are not required to make that
information public. However, if one or
more third parties presently offer, or in
the future opt to offer, such
Connectivity to Users, a User may
utilize the SFTI network, a third party
telecommunication network, third party
wireless network, a cross connect, or a
combination thereof to access such
services and products through a
21 15
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23019
connection to an access center outside
the data center (which could be a SFTI
access center, a third-party access
center, or both), another User, or a third
party vendor. Users that opt to use the
proposed Connectivity would not
receive connectivity that is not available
to all Users, as all market participants
that contract with the content provider
may receive connectivity. In this way,
the proposed changes would enhance
competition by helping Users tailor
their Connectivity to the needs of their
business operations by allowing them to
select the form and latency of
connectivity that best suits their needs.
The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which exchanges
offer co-location services as a means to
facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants
who believe that co-location enhances
the efficiency of their operations.
Accordingly, fees charged for colocation services are constrained by the
active competition for the order flow of,
and other business from, such market
participants. If a particular exchange
charges excessive fees for co-location
services, affected market participants
will opt to terminate their co-location
arrangements with that exchange, and
adopt a possible range of alternative
strategies, including placing their
servers in a physically proximate
location outside the exchange’s data
center (which could be a competing
exchange), or pursuing strategies less
dependent upon the lower exchange-toparticipant latency associated with colocation. Accordingly, the exchange
charging excessive fees would stand to
lose not only co-location revenues but
also the liquidity of the formerly colocated trading firms, which could have
additional follow-on effects on the
market share and revenue of the affected
exchange. For the reasons described
above, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment.
Finally, the Exchange believes that
the proposed Non-Substantive Changes
would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes are not designed to
address any competitive issue but rather
to remove obsolete text and update
references, thereby clarifying Exchange
rules and alleviating any possible
market participant confusion caused by
the disparity of the description between
the Price List and the price lists and fee
schedules of the Affiliate SROs, or by
the obsolete dates and exchange names.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
23020
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2018 / Notices
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited
or received with respect to the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed
rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 22 and Rule
19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.23 Because the
proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of
investors or the public interest; (ii)
impose any significant burden on
competition; and (iii) become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it
was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent
with the protection of investors and the
public interest, the proposed rule
change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 24 and
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.25
A proposed rule change filed under
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 26 normally does not
become operative for 30 days after the
date of filing. However, pursuant to
Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),27 the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such
action is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. The
Exchange has asked the Commission to
waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative
immediately upon filing. The Exchange
stated its belief that immediate
implementation of the proposed rule
changes would allow Users to have the
benefit of connectivity to the Additional
Third Party Data Feed without delay. In
so doing, the immediate implementation
would help Users tailor their data center
operations to the requirements of their
business operations without delay. In
addition, the Exchange stated that the
proposed changes to the Price List
would provide Users with more
complete information regarding their
Connectivity options and the
availability of products and services.
22 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
25 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b–
4(f)(6) requires the Exchange 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.
26 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
27 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
23 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:37 May 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
The Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, as it
will allow Users to have the benefit of
Additional Third Party Feed sooner and
will allow User additional flexibility in
tailoring their data center operations.
For this reason, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to
be operative upon filing.28
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 shall institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
should be approved or disapproved.
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSE–2018–20 and should
be submitted on or before June 7, 2018.
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:
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.29
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
NYSE–2018–20 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–NYSE–2018–20. 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
28 For purposes only of waiving the operative
delay for this proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[FR Doc. 2018–10504 Filed 5–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–83223; File No. SR–FICC–
2018–801]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Notice
of No Objection To Advance Notice
Filing, as Modified by Amendment No.
1, To Implement Changes to the
Method of Calculating Netting
Members’ Margin in the Government
Securities Division Rulebook
May 11, 2018.
The Fixed Income Clearing
Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) on January 12, 2018
advance notice SR–FICC–2018–801
(‘‘Advance Notice’’) pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, entitled the Payment,
Clearing, and Settlement Supervision
Act of 2010 (‘‘Clearing Supervision
Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4(n)(1)(i) under
29 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) and (59).
U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). The Financial Stability
Oversight Council (‘‘FSOC’’) designated FICC a
systemically important financial market utility on
July 18, 2012. See Financial Stability Oversight
1 12
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23014-23020]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10504]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-83221; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-20]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Provide Users With Connectivity to Three Additional Third Party Data
Feeds and Change Its Price List Related to These Co-Location Services
May 11, 2018.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on April 30, 2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
\2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to provide Users with connectivity to three
additional third party data feeds and change its Price List related to
these co-
[[Page 23015]]
location services. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make non-
substantive corrections to the Price List. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend the co-location \4\ services offered
by the Exchange to provide Users \5\ with connectivity to three
additional third party data feeds and change its Price List related to
these co-location services. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make
non-substantive corrections to the Price List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Commission in 2010. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59310
(September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56). The Exchange operates a data
center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the ``data center'') from which it
provides co-location services to Users.
\5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60190
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-40). As specified in the Price List,
a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location
service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees
for the same co-location service charged by the Exchange's
affiliates NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'') and NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca'' and, together with NYSE American, the ``Affiliate
SROs''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70206 (August 15,
2013), 78 FR 51765 (August 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third Party Data Feeds
The Exchange charges fees for connectivity to data feeds from third
party markets and other content service providers (``Third Party Data
Feeds'').\6\ The list of the Third Party Data Feeds and related
connectivity fees is set forth in the Price List. The Exchange proposes
to add three ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm feeds (the
``Additional Third Party Data Feeds'') to the list of Third Party Data
Feeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80311 (March 24,
2017), 82 FR 15741 (March 30, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2016-45).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Additional Third Party Data Feeds are produced by an entity
owned by the Exchange's ultimate parent, Intercontinental Exchange,
Inc. (``ICE''), and so the Exchange has an indirect interest in the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds. The Additional Third Party Data
Feeds include data drawn from the Exchange, the Affiliate SROs, and
third party exchanges, including stock and futures exchanges. Because
it includes third party data, the Additional Third Party Data Feeds are
considered Third Party Data Feeds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Id., at 15749.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of available Third Party Data Feeds presently includes
three ICE Data Services Consolidated Feeds.\8\ The Additional Third
Party Data Feeds are similar to the previously filed ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feeds in terms of the underlying content, which, according
to the content service provider, includes normalized, real-time and
intraday data feeds from over 600 sources. The difference between them
lies with what data a User actually receives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More specifically, when a User requests connectivity to one of the
previously filed ICE Data Services Consolidated Feeds, it receives
connectivity to all the data in the relevant ICE Data Services
Consolidated Feeds. The User uses its processor to narrow down the feed
to the specific data it wants. In contrast, when a User requests
connectivity to an Additional Third Party Data Feed, it will specify to
the content service provider what specific information, out of the data
from the roughly 600 sources, it wants to receive. The content service
provider will use its own processor to narrow down the data feeds, so
that the User will only receive the information it requests. A User may
choose whether it wants connectivity to one of the previously filed ICE
Data Services Consolidated Feeds or to one of the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds based on whether it wants to process the data, and
what level of control it wants over the processing. In both cases, the
User will only receive data the relevant third party data provider
authorizes it to receive.
As it does with the existing Third Party Data Feeds, the Exchange
proposes to charge a monthly recurring fee for connectivity to each
Additional Third Party Data Feed. The monthly recurring fee would vary
by the bandwidth of the connection. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes
to revise the Price List to provide that Users may obtain connectivity
to the Additional Third Party Data Feeds for a monthly fee, as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monthly
recurring
connectivity
Third party data feed fee per third
party data
feed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm <=100 Mb $200
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm >100 Mb 500
to <=1 Gb..............................................
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm >1 Gb... 1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depending on its needs and bandwidth, a User may opt to receive all
or some of the feeds or services included in the Additional Third Party
Data Feeds.
The Exchange would provide connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds (``Connectivity'') as a convenience to Users. Use of
Connectivity would be completely voluntary. The Exchange is not aware
of any impediment to third parties offering Connectivity.
The Exchange does not have visibility into whether third parties
currently
[[Page 23016]]
offer, or intend to offer, Users connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds, as such third parties are not required to make that
information public. However, if one or more third parties presently
offer, or in the future opt to offer, such Connectivity to Users, a
User may utilize the Secure Financial Transaction Infrastructure
(``SFTI'') network, a third party telecommunication network, third
party wireless network, a cross connect, or a combination thereof to
access such services and products through a connection to an access
center outside the data center (which could be a SFTI access center, a
third-party access center, or both), another User, or a third party
vendor.
The Exchange would receive the Additional Third Party Data Feeds
from the content service provider, at its data center. It would then
provide connectivity to that data to Users for a fee. Users would
connect to the Additional Third Party Data Feeds over the internet
protocol (``IP'') network, a local area network available in the data
center.
In order to connect to an Additional Third Party Data Feed, a User
would enter into a contract with the content service provider, pursuant
to which the content service provider would charge the User for the
Third Party Data Feed. The Exchange would receive the Additional Third
Party Data Feed over its fiber optic network and, after the content
service provider and User entered into the contract and the Exchange
received authorization from the content service provider, the Exchange
would re-transmit the data to the User over the User's port. The
Exchange would charge the User for the connectivity to the Additional
Third Party Data Feed. A User would only receive, and would only be
charged for, connectivity to the Additional Third Party Data Feed for
which it entered into contracts.
The Exchange would have no right to use an Additional Third Party
Data Feed other than as a redistributor of the data. The Additional
Third Party Data Feeds would not provide access or order entry to the
Exchange's execution system. The Additional Third Party Data Feeds
would not provide access or order entry to the execution systems of the
party generating the feed. The Exchange would receive the Additional
Third Party Data Feeds via arms-length agreements and it would have no
inherent advantage over any other distributor of such data.
Additional Changes
The Exchange proposes to make additional, non-substantive changes
to add definitions, correct a typographical error, remove obsolete text
and update third party exchange names (collectively, the ``Non-
Substantive Changes''). The proposed additional changes would have no
effect on pricing.
General Note 1
General Note 1 in the Price List references the Affiliate SROs. The
Exchange proposes to add short-hand definitions of each of the
Affiliate SROs, which terms are used later in the Price List. The
revised references would be to ``NYSE American LLC (NYSE American) and
NYSE Arca, Inc. (NYSE Arca).''
Cabinet Upgrade Fee
The Exchange offers Users the option of a ``Cabinet Upgrade'' and
related fee, pursuant to which the Exchange accommodates requests for
additional power allocation beyond the typical amount that the Exchange
allocates per dedicated cabinet, at which point the Exchange must
upgrade the cabinet's power capacity.\9\ The Cabinet Upgrade Fee in the
Price List has a parenthetical setting forth lower fees for a User that
submits a written order for a Cabinet Upgrade by January 31, 2014,
provided that the Cabinet Upgrade becomes fully operational by March
31, 2014. For the avoidance of confusion, the Exchange proposes to put
the text in the past tense. Accordingly, the parenthetical would read
as follows: ``($4,600 for a User that submitted a written order for a
Cabinet Upgrade by January 31, 2014, provided that the Cabinet Upgrade
became fully operational by March 31, 2014)''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71122 (December 18,
2013), 78 FR 77739 (December 24, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-81). Users may
develop their hardware infrastructure within a particular cabinet in
such a way that, if expansion of such hardware is needed, it can be
accomplished within the space constraints of that particular
cabinet. If this type of User requires additional power allocation,
it would likely want to modify its existing cabinet in this manner,
rather than taking an additional dedicated cabinet due to the
expense of re-developing its infrastructure within such additional
dedicated cabinet. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hosting Fees
A User may provide hosting services to its customers in the User's
co-location space at the data center. As stated in the Price List,
``Hosting User'' means a User that hosts a Hosted Customer in the
User's co-location space, and ``Hosted Customer'' means a customer of a
Hosting User that is hosted in a Hosting User's co-location space.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 80 FR 60190, supra note 5, at 60191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2011, the Exchange filed a ``Hosting Fee'' applicable to Hosting
Users.\11\ In 2015, the Exchange modified such Hosting Fee to provide
that, effective January 1, 2016, ``the Hosting Fee would be assessed to
a Hosting User on a per Hosted Customer basis and for each cabinet in
which the Hosting User hosts the Hosted Customer.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65973 (December 15,
2011), 76 FR 79232 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSE-2011-53).
\12\ See 80 FR 60190, supra note 5, at 60191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Affiliate SROs submitted substantially the same proposed rule
change.\13\ However, the Exchange's rule filing included a
typographical error in the proposed text in its Exhibit 5.
Specifically, although the descriptions of the fees in the description
of the fee change were identical in all three filings, unlike the
filings submitted by the Affiliate SROs, the Exchange's filing omitted
``per cabinet'' in the proposed text in its Exhibit 5.\14\ The Exchange
proposes to correct the error by amending the text for the Hosting Fee
under ``Amount of Charge'' to add ``per cabinet.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See id., at note 11, and Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 76009 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60213 (October 5, 2015) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2015-67); and 76010 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60197
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-82).
\14\ Compare File No. SR-NYSE-2015-40 (September 18, 2015)
(initial filing), at 27, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/rule-filings/filings/2015/NYSE-2015-40.pdf;File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2015-67 (September 18, 2015) (initial
filing), at 27-28, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-american/rule-filings/filings/2015/NYSEMKT-2015-67.pdf; and File No. SR-NYSEArca-2015-82 (September 18, 2015)
(initial filing), at 28 and 29, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/rule-filings/filings/2015/NYSEArca-2015-82.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, as noted above, the change in the Hosting Fee was
effective January 1, 2016. That date has passed, but the Price List
continues to include both the Hosting Fee that was in effect through
December 31, 2015 and the date of the change. The Exchange proposes to
delete the obsolete references to these dates and the amount of the
previous hosting fee.
The amended text would be as follows (additional text underscored,
deletions in strikethrough):
[[Page 23017]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY18.005
Obsolete Availability Dates and Exchange References
Certain services in the data center that are described in the Price
List identify dates by which they were expected to be available. These
dates have passed. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the
obsolete references to these dates. In addition, the Exchange proposes
to update the references to certain exchanges that have changed their
names.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81962 (October 26,
2017), 82 FR 50711, 50713 (November 1, 2017) (SR-BatsBZX-2017-70).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To that end, the Exchange proposes to make the following changes:
For the wireless connection of Bats Pitch BZX Gig shaped
data and Bats Pitch BYX Gig shaped data, the description would be
revised as follows: (a) The text would read ``Wireless connection of
Cboe Pitch BZX Gig shaped data and Cboe Pitch BYX Gig shaped data'';
and (b) the text ``Note: Connection to Bats Pitch BYX Gig shaped data
is expected to be available no later than December 31, 2016.'' would be
deleted.
For the wireless connection of Bats EDGX Gig shaped data
and Bats EDGA Gig shaped data, the description would be revised as
follows: (a) The text would read ``Wireless connection of Cboe EDGX Gig
shaped data and Cboe EDGA Gig shaped data''; and (b) the text ``Note:
Connection to Bats EDGA Gig shaped data is expected to be available no
later than December 31, 2016.'' would be deleted.
For the wireless connection of Toronto Stock Exchange
(TSX), the text ``Note: Service is expected to be available no later
than June 30, 2017.'' would be deleted.
In the table under ``Third Party Data Feeds,'' ``Bats BZX
Exchange (BZX) and Bats BYX Exchange (BYX)'' and ``Bats EDGX Exchange
(EDGX) and Bats EDGA Exchange (EDGA)'' and their related monthly
recurring connectivity fees would be deleted, and lines for ``Cboe BZX
Exchange (CboeBZX) and Cboe BYX Exchange (CboeBYX)'' and ``Cboe EDGX
Exchange (CboeEDGX) and Cboe EDGA Exchange (CboeEDGA)'' added with
their related monthly recurring connectivity fees, which would remain
unchanged, as follows (additional text underscored, deletions in
strikethrough):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY18.006
[[Page 23018]]
General
As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof
(e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of
the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary
and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; \16\ and
(iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location
service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only
to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or both the Affiliate
SROs.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders
to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.
\17\ See 78 FR 51765, supra note 5, at 51766. The Affiliate SROs
have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule change to
propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSEAMER-2018-19 and
SR-NYSEArca-2018-28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed fee change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\18\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ in particular, because
it is 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 mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because, by offering additional connectivity to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds, the Exchange would give each User
additional options for addressing its connectivity needs, responding to
User demand for connectivity options. Providing the connectivity to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds would help each User tailor its data
center operations to the requirements of its business operations by
allowing it to select the form and latency of connectivity that best
suits its needs.
The Exchange would provide Connectivity as a convenience to Users.
Use of Connectivity would be completely voluntary. The Exchange is not
aware of any impediment to third parties offering Connectivity. The
Exchange does not have visibility into whether third parties currently
offer, or intend to offer, Users connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feeds. However, if one or more third parties presently
offer, or in the future opt to offer, such Connectivity to Users, a
User may utilize the SFTI network, a third party telecommunication
network, third party wireless network, a cross connect, or a
combination thereof to access such services and products through a
connection to an access center outside the data center (which could be
a SFTI access center, a third-party access center, or both), another
User, or a third party vendor.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because, by offering connectivity to the Additional
Third Party Data Feed to Users, the Exchange would give Users
additional options for connectivity to new services, responding to User
demand for connectivity options.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Non-Substantive Changes
would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and
open market and a national market system and, in general, protect
investors and the public interest because the changes would clarify
Exchange rules and alleviate any possible market participant confusion
caused by the disparity of the description of the Hosting Fee between
the Price List and the price lists and fee schedules of the Affiliate
SROs or by the obsolete dates and exchange names.
The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\20\ in particular, because
it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes are consistent
with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act for multiple reasons. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market in which exchanges offer co-
location services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. Accordingly, fees charged
for co-location services are constrained by the active competition for
the order flow of, and other business from, such market participants.
If a particular exchange charges excessive fees for co-location
services, affected market participants will opt to terminate their co-
location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt a possible range of
alternative strategies, including placing their servers in a physically
proximate location outside the exchange's data center (which could be a
competing exchange), or pursuing strategies less dependent upon the
lower exchange-to-participant latency associated with co-location.
Accordingly, the exchange charging excessive fees would stand to lose
not only co-location revenues but also the liquidity of the formerly
co-located trading firms, which could have additional follow-on effects
on the market share and revenue of the affected exchange.
The Exchange believes that the additional services and fees
proposed herein would be equitably allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because, in addition to the services being completely
voluntary, they would be available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e., the same products and services would be available to all Users).
All Users that voluntarily selected to receive Connectivity would be
charged the same amount for the same services. Users that opted to use
Connectivity would not receive connectivity that is not available to
all Users, as all market participants that contracted with the relevant
content provider would receive connectivity.
The Exchange believes that the proposed charges would be
reasonable,
[[Page 23019]]
equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange would offer the Connectivity as conveniences to Users, but in
order to do so must provide, maintain and operate the data center
facility hardware and technology infrastructure. The Exchange must
handle the installation, administration, monitoring, support and
maintenance of such services, including by responding to any production
issues. Since the inception of co-location, the Exchange has made
numerous improvements to the network hardware and technology
infrastructure and has established additional administrative controls.
The Exchange has expanded the network infrastructure to keep pace with
the increased number of services available to Users, including
resilient and redundant feeds. In addition, in order to provide
Connectivity, the Exchange would maintain multiple connections to each
Additional Third Party Data Feed, allowing the Exchange to provide
resilient and redundant connections; adapt to any changes made by the
relevant third party; and cover any applicable fees charged by the
relevant third party, such as port fees. In addition, Users would not
be required to use any of their bandwidth for Connectivity unless they
wish to do so.
The Exchange believes the proposed fee for connectivity to each
Additional Third Party Data Feed is reasonable because the proposed
monthly recurring fee varies by the bandwidth of the connection, and so
is generally proportional to the bandwidth required. In addition, the
proposed fees are consistent with the fees for connectivity to the
previously filed ICE Data Services Consolidated Feeds, which feeds are
similar to the Additional Third Party Data Feeds in terms of the
underlying content. The Exchange notes that the proposed monthly
recurring fees are also generally consistent with the monthly recurring
fees for connectivity to the SR Labs-SuperFeed Third Party Data Feeds,
which also vary by bandwidth. The Exchange believes that the proposed
difference in pricing between the Additional Third Party Data Feeds and
SR Labs-SuperFeed options is reasonable, equitably allocated and not
unfairly discriminatory because, although the bandwidth may be similar,
the competitive considerations and the costs the Exchange incurs in
providing such connections may differ.
The Exchange believes the proposed fees for Connectivity would be
reasonable because they would allow the Exchange to defray or cover the
costs associated with offering Users connectivity to Additional Third
Party Data Feeds while providing Users the convenience of receiving
such Connectivity within co-location, helping them tailor their data
center operations to the requirements of their business operations.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Non-Substantive Changes
would be reasonable because the changes would have no impact on
pricing. Rather, the changes would remove obsolete text and update
references, thereby clarifying the Exchange rules and alleviating
possible market participant confusion.
For the reasons above, the proposed changes would not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\21\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because all of the proposed services are completely
voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that providing Users with additional options
for connectivity to new services would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because such proposed Connectivity would satisfy
User demand for connectivity options. The Exchange would provide
Connectivity as a convenience equally to all Users. All Users that
voluntarily selected to receive Connectivity would be charged the same
amount for the same services.
The Exchange does not have visibility into whether third parties
currently offer, or intend to offer, Users connectivity to the
Additional Third Party Data Feeds, as such third parties are not
required to make that information public. However, if one or more third
parties presently offer, or in the future opt to offer, such
Connectivity to Users, a User may utilize the SFTI network, a third
party telecommunication network, third party wireless network, a cross
connect, or a combination thereof to access such services and products
through a connection to an access center outside the data center (which
could be a SFTI access center, a third-party access center, or both),
another User, or a third party vendor. Users that opt to use the
proposed Connectivity would not receive connectivity that is not
available to all Users, as all market participants that contract with
the content provider may receive connectivity. In this way, the
proposed changes would enhance competition by helping Users tailor
their Connectivity to the needs of their business operations by
allowing them to select the form and latency of connectivity that best
suits their needs.
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer co-location services as a means to facilitate the
trading and other market activities of those market participants who
believe that co-location enhances the efficiency of their operations.
Accordingly, fees charged for co-location services are constrained by
the active competition for the order flow of, and other business from,
such market participants. If a particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected market participants will opt to
terminate their co-location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt
a possible range of alternative strategies, including placing their
servers in a physically proximate location outside the exchange's data
center (which could be a competing exchange), or pursuing strategies
less dependent upon the lower exchange-to-participant latency
associated with co-location. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only co-location revenues but
also the liquidity of the formerly co-located trading firms, which
could have additional follow-on effects on the market share and revenue
of the affected exchange. For the reasons described above, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change reflects this competitive
environment.
Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed Non-Substantive
Changes would not impose any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because the proposed changes are not designed to address any
competitive issue but rather to remove obsolete text and update
references, thereby clarifying Exchange rules and alleviating any
possible market participant confusion caused by the disparity of the
description between the Price List and the price lists and fee
schedules of the Affiliate SROs, or by the obsolete dates and exchange
names.
[[Page 23020]]
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \22\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\23\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \26\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\27\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange stated its
belief that immediate implementation of the proposed rule changes would
allow Users to have the benefit of connectivity to the Additional Third
Party Data Feed without delay. In so doing, the immediate
implementation would help Users tailor their data center operations to
the requirements of their business operations without delay. In
addition, the Exchange stated that the proposed changes to the Price
List would provide Users with more complete information regarding their
Connectivity options and the availability of products and services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, as
it will allow Users to have the benefit of Additional Third Party Feed
sooner and will allow User additional flexibility in tailoring their
data center operations. For this reason, the Commission designates the
proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
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-NYSE-2018-20 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-NYSE-2018-20. 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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2018-20 and should be submitted on
or before June 7, 2018.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) and (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-10504 Filed 5-16-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
