[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22708-22711]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09929]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80659; File No. SR-PEARL-2017-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule
519C

May 11, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on May 5, 2017, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 519C.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 519C, Mass Cancellation of
Trading Interest, to adopt new section (c) entitled ``Detection of Loss
of Communication,'' to codify the use of current functionality in the
Exchange's System \3\ which is designed to assist Members \4\ in the
event of a loss of communication with either their assigned MIAX
Express Orders Interface (``MEO Interface'' or ``MEO'') \5\ port or
Financial Information eXchange Interface (``FIX Interface'' or ``FIX'')
\6\ port due to a loss of connectivity. This functionality is designed
to protect Members from inadvertent exposure to excessive risk. The
Exchange also proposes to adopt new Interpretations and Policies .01
and .02 as discussed below. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to make
minor non substantive changes to Rule 100, Definitions, as described
below. The Exchange notes that this filing is substantially similar in
all material respects to a recent filing by the Exchange's affiliate,
Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX Options'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
    \4\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization that
is registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of MIAX PEARL
Rules for the purpose of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ As proposed, the term ``MEO Interface'' means a binary order
interface used for submitting certain order types (as set forth in
MIAX PEARL Rule 516) to the MIAX PEARL System. See proposed Exchange
Rule 100.
    \6\ As proposed, the term ``FIX Interface'' means the Financial
Information Exchange interface used for submitting certain order
types (as set forth in MIAX PEARL Rule 516) to the MIAX PEARL
System. See proposed Exchange Rule 100.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80151 (March 3,
2017), 82 FR 13146 (March 9, 2017) (SR-MIAX-2017-08).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MIAX PEARL Members may connect to the System using the MEO
Interface and/or the FIX Interface. These two connection protocols are
not mutually exclusive and Members, specifically Market Makers
(``MMs'') \8\ on the Exchange, primarily use the MEO Interface for
providing liquidity to the Exchange via their Market Making activities,
while Electronic Exchange Members (``EEMs'') \9\ primarily use the FIX
Interface for submitting orders.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``Market Maker'' or ``MM'' means a Member
registered with the Exchange for the purpose of making markets in
options contracts traded on the Exchange and that is vested with the
rights and responsibilities specified in Chapter VI of MIAX PEARL
Rules. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \9\ The term ``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``EEM'' means the
holder of a Trading Permit who is a Member representing as agent
Public Customer Orders or Non-Customer Orders on the Exchange and
those non-Market Maker Members conducting proprietary trading.
Electronic Exchange Members are deemed ``members'' under the
Exchange Act. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \10\ The term ``order'' means a firm commitment to buy or sell
option contracts. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These Interface ports provide the mechanism by which Members
maintain a connection to the Exchange and through which a Member
communicates its quotes and/or orders to the System. Market Makers may
submit quotes \11\ to the Exchange from one or more MEO ports.
Similarly, Members may submit orders to the Exchange from one or more
FIX ports. When the System detects a loss of communication with a
Member, the System has the capability to remove the Member's quotes
and/or orders, if so elected and configured by the Member. The Exchange
notes that this functionality is mandatory for Members using MEO and
optional for Members using FIX, as discussed in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The term ``quote'' or ``quotation'' means a bid or offer
entered by a Market Maker as a firm order that updates the Market
Maker's previous bid or offer, if any. When the term order is used
in these Rules and a bid or offer is entered by the Market Maker in
the option series to which such Market Maker is registered, such
order shall, as applicable, constitute a quote or quotation for
purposes of these Rules. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

MEO Connections
    Members connect to their assigned MEO port using the MIAX Session
Management Protocol (``SesM''). The SesM protocol uses Heartbeat \12\
packets to detect link failures between the Member and the Exchange.
The SesM protocol requires that the Exchange must send a Heartbeat
packet anytime more than one (1) second has passed since the Exchange
last sent any data. Further, the SesM protocol requires that the Member
must send a Heartbeat packet anytime more than one (1) second has
passed since the Member last sent any data. If a certain number of
consecutive Heartbeats are missed,\13\ or if the Member fails to send
data or Heartbeats within ``xx'' period of time (``Heartbeat
Interval''), the System will automatically close the connection and
listen for the Member to establish a new connection. The default
Heartbeat

Interval setting is determined by the Exchange and configured directly
into the System.\14\ Any change to these settings will be communicated
to Members accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A Heartbeat message is a communication which acts as a
virtual pulse between the Exchange System and the Member's system.
The Heartbeat message sent by the Member and received by the
Exchange allows the Exchange to continually monitor its connection
with the Member.
    \13\ The Exchange notes that the current setting is three (3)
Heartbeats.
    \14\ The Exchange notes that the current setting is three (3)
seconds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers Members three different types of MEO port
connections. A Full Service Port Bulk (``FSPB'') which
supports all message types and binary bulk order entry, a Full Service
Port Single (``FSPS'') which supports all MEO input message
types and binary order entry on a single order by order basis (no bulk
orders), and a Limited Service Port (``LSP''), which supports all MEO
input message types, but does not support bulk order entry and only
supports IOC/ISO order types. The Exchange limits Members to two (2)
Full Service Ports and allows up to eight (8) Limited Service Ports per
MIAX PEARL matching engine.\15\ All Ports can have ``Cancel on
Disconnect'' enabled. By default, Cancel on Disconnect functionality
will be triggered upon establishing a loss of communication to the
Member's last MEO Full Service Port connection to a matching engine.
When Cancel on Disconnect is triggered, the System will close the
session and remove the Member's quotes and orders from the Exchange,
for the impacted matching engine only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A ``matching engine'' is a part of the MIAX PEARL
electronic system that processes options quotes and trades on a
symbol-by-symbol basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Members have the ability to group MEO ports together by port and/or
Market Participant ID (``MPID'') for the purpose of establishing groups
of connections to tailor Cancel on Disconnect functionality to the
Member's business needs.
    Examples for illustration purposes are provided below.
    Example 1: Default Behavior.
    Group 1: MEO Full Service Ports: MEO Port 1 & MEO Port 2.
    Scenario 1: MEO Port 1 disconnects, (MEO Port 2 connected) no
quotes removed.
    Scenario 2: MEO Port 2 disconnects, (MEO Port 1 connected) no
quotes removed.
    Scenario 3: MEO Port 1 disconnects, MEO Port 2 disconnects, Cancel
on Disconnect triggered.
    Scenario 4: MEO Port 2 disconnects, MEO Port 1 disconnects, Cancel
on Disconnect triggered.
    Example 2: A Member requiring a configuration which separates their
orders, Mass-Cancel or Notifications to a separate port.
    Group 1: MEO Full Service Ports: MEO Port 1 & MEO Port 2.
    Group 2: MEO Limited Service Port: MEO Port 3.
    Group 1 is configured for Cancel on Disconnect; Group 2 is not.
    Assuming that the Firm is connected on all ports:
    Scenario 1: MEO Port 1 disconnects, no quotes removed.
    Scenario 2: MEO Port 1 and Port 2 disconnect, Cancel on Disconnect
triggered, quotes removed.
    Scenario 3: MEO Port 3 disconnects, no quotes removed.
    Scenario 4: MEO Port 1 and Port 3 disconnect, no quotes removed.
    Example 3: A Member requiring a configuration to divide the ports
to separate computers or traders.
    Group 1: MEO Full Service Port: MEO Port 1; MEO Limited Service
Port: MEO Port 2
    Group 2: MEO Full Service Port: MEO Port 3; MEO Limited Service
Port: MEO Port 4
    Group 1 MPIDs: MPID_1, MPID_2, MPID_3
    Group 2 MPIDs: MPID_3, MPID_4, MPID_5
    Both groups are configured for Cancel on Disconnect, and MPID_3 is
in both groups.
    Assuming the Member is connected on all ports:
    Scenario 1: MEO Port 1 disconnects, no quotes removed.
    Scenario 2: MEO Port 1 and Port 2 disconnect, Cancel on Disconnect
triggered for MPID_1, MPID_2, and MPID_3.
    Scenario 3: MEO Port 3 disconnects, no quotes removed.
    Scenario 4: MEO Port 1 and MEO Port 3 disconnect, Cancel on
Disconnect triggered for all MPIDs.
FIX Connections
    Members connect to their assigned FIX port using the MIAX PEARL FIX
Orders Interface (``FOI'') which is a flexible interface that uses the
FIX protocol for both application and session level messages. As per
the FIX protocol, a connection is established by the Member submitting
a logon message to the Exchange. This logon message establishes the
Heartbeat interval that will be used by the session. This value must be
greater than zero seconds and the same value must be used by both the
Member and the Exchange.
    Within the logon message a Member can enable ``Auto Cancel on
Disconnect'' for all orders sent through a session by setting a flag in
the logon message. This would result in all eligible orders \16\
submitted through the FIX connection to be canceled upon a loss of
communication. Alternatively, a Member can identify individual orders
on a per order basis that are to be considered for Auto Cancel on
Disconnect treatment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Good `Til Cancelled (``GTC'') orders are not eligible for
Auto Cancel on Disconnect. A GTC Order is an order to buy or sell
which remains in effect until it is either executed, cancelled or
the underlying option expires. See Exchange Rule 516(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon missing a single Heartbeat, FOI will send a Test Request
message \17\ to the Member to check the status of the connection. Upon
missing a certain number of Heartbeats,\18\ FOI will send a logout
message and terminate the connection. When FOI detects a disconnection
for any reason it will trigger the Auto Cancel on Disconnect process,
whereby, if enabled, FOI will cancel all eligible orders. If Auto
Cancel on Disconnect is not enabled for the session or for any orders,
FOI will simply disconnect the FIX session and not cancel any orders.
Once disconnected, a FIX user would have to commence a new session to
add, modify, or cancel its orders. After a disconnect FOI will not
accept connections from the Member for a pre-configured period of
time.\19\ This allows the Exchange to cancel orders without the Member
being able to reconnect and attempt to interact with an order in the
process of being canceled. Any change to this setting will be
communicated to Members accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The test request message is a FIX Protocol message that
forces a heartbeat from the opposing application. The test request
message checks sequence numbers or verifies communication line
status. The opposite application responds to the Test Request with a
Heartbeat containing the Test Request ID. Financial Information
Exchange Protocol (FIX), Version 4.2 with errata. May 1, 2001.
    \18\ The Exchange notes that the current setting is two (2)
Heartbeats.
    \19\ The Exchange notes that the current setting is five (5)
seconds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Auto Cancel on Disconnect functionality is designed to react to
external connection loss scenarios only. Therefore, it does not cancel
orders in the event of a MIAX PEARL system failure. The execution
reports resulting from cancels or trades during the period a Member is
disconnected can be received upon a subsequent reconnection by the
Member on the same trading day.
    The Exchange also proposes to adopt new Interpretations and
Policies .01 to enumerate order types that are not eligible for removal
by the Auto Cancel on Disconnect functionality. Proposed Interpretation
and Policies .01 will state that Good `Til Cancelled (``GTC'') \20\
orders are not eligible for automatic cancellation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Exchange Rule 516.

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

    The Exchange also proposes to adopt new Interpretations and
Policies .02 to define (i) what a ``Heartbeat'' message is and how it
used by the Exchange, and (ii) the requirements for establishing a
``Loss of Communication'' on the Exchange.
    Additionally, the Exchange proposes amending the definition of
``MEO Interface'' and ``FIX Interface,'' in Rule 100, to clarify the
function and capability of each interface.
    The functionality discussed above is designed to mitigate potential
risks associated with a loss of communication to the Exchange. In
today's market, Market Makers' quotes are rapidly changing and can have
a lifespan of only milliseconds. Therefore, if a Member is disconnected
for any period of time, and its quotes remained in the System, it is
very possible that the quotes would be stale by the time the Member was
able to reestablish connectivity. Consequently, any resulting execution
of such quotes is more likely to be erroneous or unintended.
Conversely, the Exchange notes that orders tend to be static in nature
and often rest on the Book. Certain orders, such as GTC orders are
intended to rest on the Book for an extended period of time. As such,
there is a lower risk of erroneous or unintended executions resulting
from orders that remained in the System after a Member experienced a
loss of communication.
    The Exchange believes that while information relating to
connectivity and loss of communication is already available to Members
via technical specifications, codifying this information in the rule
text will provide additional transparency and further reduce the
potential for confusion.
2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX PEARL believes that its proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \21\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \22\ in particular, in that 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule will remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and
protect investors and the public interest by providing Market Makers
with a mechanism by which quotes may be removed in the event of a loss
of connectivity with the System. Market Makers provide liquidity to the
market place and have obligations unlike other Members.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Exchange Rule 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This risk protection feature is important because it will enable
Market Makers to avoid risks associated with inadvertent executions in
the event of a loss of communication with the Exchange. The proposed
rule change is not unfairly discriminatory among Members, as it is
available equally to all Members utilizing MEO. The obligation of
Market Makers on the Exchange to provide continuous two-sided quotes in
their assigned series on a daily basis \24\ is not diminished by the
removal of such quotes triggered by the disconnect. The Exchange will
not be prohibited from taking disciplinary action against a Market
Maker for failing to meet its continuous quoting obligation each
trading day as a result of disconnections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Exchange Rule 604(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The disconnect feature of FIX connections is mandatory, however
Members have the option to enable the cancellation of all orders for an
entire session or select orders for cancellation on an order-by-order
basis, which would result in the cancellation of orders submitted over
a FIX port when such port disconnects. It is appropriate to offer two
different removal features to all Members utilizing FIX, as these
Members may desire that their orders remain on the order book despite a
technical disconnection, so as not to miss any opportunities for
execution of such orders while the FIX session is disconnected.
Offering to cancel all orders, specifically selected orders, or no
orders, upon disconnect allows the Member to customize the
functionality to align to its business needs. Offering this type of
order cancellation functionality to Members is consistent with the Act
because it enables Members to avoid risks associated with inadvertent
executions in the event of a loss of communication with the Exchange.
The order cancellation functionality is designed to mitigate the risk
of missed and/or unintended executions associated with a loss in
communication with the Exchange. The proposed rule change is not
unfairly discriminatory among Members, as it is available equally to
all Members utilizing FIX.
    The disconnect feature is mandatory under the FIX protocol. The
Exchange will disconnect Members from the Exchange and not cancel
orders if the Auto Cancel on Disconnect functionality is not enabled.
This feature is consistent with the Act because it provides FIX users
the ability to disconnect from the Exchange and assess the current
market conditions to make a determination concerning their risk
exposure. The Exchange notes that in the event Auto Cancel on
Disconnect functionality is not enabled and such orders need to be
cancelled after a disconnection occurs, an Exchange participant can
contact Exchange staff to have its orders cancelled from the
System.\25\ The Exchange believes requiring a disconnect when a loss of
communication is detected to be a rational course of action for the
Exchange to alert the Member of the technical connectivity issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Exchange Rule 519C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will assist
with the maintenance of a fair and orderly market by codifying risk
protections for orders and quotes. The Exchange's proposal is
consistent with the Act because it adds another risk protection tool
for Members that may mitigate the risk of potential erroneous or
unintended executions associated with a loss in communication which
protects investors and the public interest. Further, the Exchange
believes clarifying the definition of each interface type provides
clarity and transparency in the Exchange's Rules. The Exchange believes
codifying existing functionality by rule will remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market by adding precision
and ease of reference to the Exchange's Rules, thus promoting
transparency and clarity for Members.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change will not impose any burden on intra-market
competition because every Member of the Exchange has the opportunity to
benefit from the functionality described in the proposed rule.

    The Exchange provides two separate and distinct mechanisms for
communicating with the Exchange, MEO and FIX. MEO Ports support the
submission of quotes to the Exchange and are used primarily by Market
Makers who have heightened quoting obligations because of their role.
Members are provided the ability to configure their MEO Ports to
leverage the functionality provided by the Exchange to remove quotes
and orders to align to their risk tolerance. Because of the volume of
series that a Market Maker is obligated to quote, the Exchange believes
that removing all quotes for an affected matching engine on behalf of a
Market Maker who has lost its last MEO connection to that engine to be
in the best interest of both the Market Maker, to mitigate risk; and
the Exchange, to ensure a fair and orderly market.
    FIX users may set a timeframe for disconnection that is appropriate
for their risk tolerance. Offering functionality to cancel all, some,
or none, of the orders in the System upon establishing a loss of
communication does not create an undue burden on intra-market
competition as Members do not equally bear the same risks of potential
erroneous or unintended executions. Further, FIX users have greater
control over their orders and may designate a number of different Time
in Force instructions which can be used to determine the duration an
order rests on the Book, from Immediate-or-Cancel, which is executed in
whole or part upon receipt, with any unexecuted portion being
cancelled; to a Good `Til Cancelled order, which may rest on the Book
until it is executed, cancelled by the user, or until the underlying
option expires.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on inter-market competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
notes that other option exchanges offer similar functionality.\26\ For
all the reasons stated, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See BOX Rule 8140; CBOE Rule 6.23C; NASDAQ BX Chapter VI,
Section 6; NASDAQ PHLX Rule 1019; and MIAX Options Rule 519C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing 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 after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \27\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \28\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \28\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2017-21 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-PEARL-2017-21. 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 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; 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-PEARL-2017-21 and should be
submitted on or before June 7, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09929 Filed 5-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 56249]
[DOCID:fr30oc09-102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November
3, 2009 at 2 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of
the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
November 3, 2009 will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
An adjudicatory matter;
Regulatory matters regarding financial institutions; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 27, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-26256 Filed 10-28-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3580-3583]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01139]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD14-14-000]

Price Formation in Energy and Ancillary Services Markets Operated
by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System
Operators; Notice Inviting Post-Technical Workshop Comments

    On September 8, October 28, and December 9, 2014, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) staff conducted a series of
technical workshops to evaluate issues regarding price formation in the
energy and ancillary services markets operated by Regional Transmission
Organizations (RTOs) and Independent System Operators (ISOs) (RTOs/
ISOs).
    All interested persons are invited to file post-technical workshop
comments on any or all of the questions listed in the attachment to
this Notice. We emphasize that commenters need not answer all of the
questions. Commenters should organize responses consistent with the
structure of the attached questions and take care to identify to which
RTO/ISO the comment applies. Commenters are also invited to reference
material previously filed in this docket, including technical workshop
transcripts. These comments must be filed with the Commission no later
than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on February 19, 2015.
    For more information about this Notice, please contact:

Mary Wierzbicki (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and
Information, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Joshua Kirstein (Legal Information), Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 16, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Post-Technical Conference Questions for Comment

    The goals of proper price formation are to: Maximize market surplus
for consumers and suppliers; provide correct incentives for parties to
follow commitment and dispatch instructions, make efficient investments
in facilities and equipment, and maintain reliability; provide
transparency so that market participants understand how prices reflect
the actual marginal cost of serving load and the operational
constraints of reliably operating the system; and ensure that all
suppliers have an opportunity to recover their costs. With proper price
formation, the RTO/ISO would ideally not need to commit any additional
resources beyond those resources scheduled economically through the
market processes, and load would reduce consumption in response to
price signals such that market prices would reflect the value of
electricity consumption without the need to curtail load
administratively.

    In reality, RTO/ISO energy and ancillary services market outcomes
are impacted by a number of technical and operational
considerations.\1\ At three workshops on price formation--Uplift
Workshop, held September 8, 2014 (Uplift Workshop); Shortage Pricing,
Offer Price Mitigation, and Offer Price Caps Workshop, held October 28,
2014 (Shortage Pricing/Mitigation Workshop); and Operator Actions
Workshop, held December 9, 2014 (Operator Actions Workshop)--panelists
described software limitations, operational uncertainty, and limited
flexibility of resources as challenges to achieving efficient price
formation. These limitations are to some extent inherent in the
complexity of the electric system and the tools available today to
maintain reliable operations, and are unlikely to be addressed fully
for the foreseeable future.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although the discussion herein focuses on RTO/ISO markets,
similar technical and operational limitations impact the efficient
commitment of resources by electric utilities operating in other
market structures, such as vertically integrated utilities.
    \2\ Other efforts, like Staff's annual meeting with RTO/ISO
operations staff and the annual market software conference, are
intended to make progress on these longer term issues. See http://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus-act/market-planning.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding the foregoing technical limitations and operational
realities, the Commission believes there may be opportunities for RTOs/
ISOs to improve the energy and ancillary service price formation
process.
    Based on discussions during the three price formation workshops,
Staff developed the following questions to better understand the ways
in which to improve price formation in RTOs/ISOs. When responding to
the questions below, please also comment on any relevant differences
among RTOs/ISOs, the time needed to implement any potential solutions,
and impediments to implementing any potential solutions.

1. Offer Caps

    High natural gas prices during the winter of 2013-2014, as
discussed at the price formation workshops, indicated that the current
generic $1,000/MWh cap on energy offers (``offer cap'') might be
insufficient to allow natural gas-fired generators to recover their
costs when natural gas prices spike during constrained winter periods.
    a. Should the $1,000/MWh offer cap be modified?
    i. If the offer cap is modified, what form should the offer cap
take? For instance, should a modified cap be set at a level greater
than the current $1,000/MWh cap and apply even if a resource has costs
greater than the new cap or should the offer cap be replaced with a
structure that allows offers at the higher of marginal cost or the
existing $1,000/MWh cap? Should it be a fixed cap or a floating cap
that varies with the price of fuel (e.g., natural gas)? If a modified
cap were set as a fixed offer cap, what should the new offer cap be?
What should be the basis for determining the fixed offer cap?
    ii. If the offer cap should not be modified or set such that
marginal costs could be greater than $1000/MWh, how should the
Commission ensure that suppliers with costs greater than the cap have
the opportunity to recover those costs?
    iii. Do the real-time and day-ahead market clearing processes allow
sufficient time to verify the cost-basis of the marginal resources that
exceed the offer cap? Does the settlement process allow sufficient time
to verify costs of resources that receive uplift associated with offers
that exceed the offer cap?
    b. What are the advantages and disadvantages of having offer caps
be set at the same level across all RTOs/ISOs? Would different offer
caps across the RTOs/ISOs exacerbate interface pricing issues at RTO/
ISO borders? If so, how? Would an offer cap that takes the form of the
higher of marginal cost or $1,000/MWh create the same issues as setting
different offer caps across RTOs/ISOs?
    c. What impact would adjusting the offer cap have on other aspects
of RTO/ISO price formation (e.g., mitigation rules or shortage pricing
rules)? Would other market rule changes be necessary if offer cap
levels were adjusted? Do other challenges associated with modifying
offer cap rules exist? If so, what are they? If offer cap rules are
adjusted, how quickly could RTOs/ISOs incorporate adjusted offer cap
rules into their software and the market clearing process?
    d. Should the same offer cap that applies to generation also apply
to load bids? What are the advantages and disadvantages of applying an
offer cap to load bids?

2. Transparency

    At the Uplift and Operator Actions Workshops, some panelists
addressed issues concerning insufficient transparency of uplift and
operator actions.\3\ Improved transparency could inform resource entry
and exit and market rule discussions; improved transparency could also
improve market understanding, predictability, and confidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-
000, Tr. 180:8-183:4 (Dec. 9, 2014); Uplift Workshop, Docket No.
AD14-14-000, Tr. 168:1-16 (Sept. 8, 2014). For this purpose we are
defining uplift credits as payments made to resources whose
commitment and dispatch by an RTO/ISO result in a shortfall between
the resource's offer and the revenue earned through market clearing
prices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. What should RTOs/ISOs do to improve transparency of uplift
credits and charges, unit commitment, and other operator actions?
Please comment on the type of information that would be useful, why it
is necessary, whether it should be shared with specific resources or
available to all, the timing of its release, and whether it is feasible
to release the information in real-time.
    b. What types of information should not be shared publicly? Why?
What are the concerns with commercially sensitive information?
    c. Commission Staff's August 2014 report on uplift noted several
issues with the consistency and granularity of uplift data provided as
part of the Electric Quarterly Reports.\4\ What steps could be taken to
improve the quality of uplift data required to be reported as part of
the Electric Quarterly Reports?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ FERC, Staff Analysis of Uplift in RTO and ISO Markets,
Docket No. AD14-14-000, at 21-28 (Aug. 2014), available at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/2014/08-13-14-uplift.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Pricing Fast-Start Resources

    Commission Staff's December 2014 paper about operator-initiated
commitments discussed how RTOs/ISOs relax the minimum operating level
of resources to make certain block-loaded fast-start resources appear
dispatchable to the pricing software, and thus eligible to set the
market clearing price as the marginal resource.\5\ The paper also
discussed how some RTOs/ISOs have modified the locational marginal
price (LMP) framework to include start-up and no-load costs of certain
fast start resources (e.g., New York Independent System Operator,
Inc.'s (NYISO's) Hybrid Pricing).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ FERC, Price Formation in Organized Wholesale Electricity
Markets: Staff Analysis of Operator-Initiated Commitments in RTO and
ISO Markets, Docket No. AD14-14-000, at 28-30 (Dec. 2014), available
at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/2014/AD14-14-operator-actions.pdf.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. During the Operator Actions Workshop, panelists explained that
relaxing resource minimum operating limits can lead to incentive and
operational issues such as over-generation.\7\ What tradeoffs are
involved with relaxing the minimum operating limits of block-loaded
resources to zero for purposes of price setting? Should relaxing the
minimum operating level be limited to block-loaded fast-start

resources, or should relaxation be available to a larger set of
resources?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.
282:9-25 (Dec. 9, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. What are the merits of expanding the set of costs included in
the energy component of LMP (i.e., start-up and no-load costs)? What
factors should be considered when expanding the set of costs included
in the energy component of LMP? If the start-up and no-load costs of
block-loaded fast-start resources are included in the LMP, how should
they be included? For example, should start-up costs only be included
during intervals when the resource starts up?
    c. Should off-line resources be eligible to set the LMP? If so,
should start-up and no-load costs be included in the price, or just
incremental energy costs?

4. Settlement Intervals

    Panelists at the Shortage Pricing/Mitigation and Operator Actions
Workshops generally supported sub-hourly, rather than hourly,
settlement intervals as providing better incentives for resources to
perform during shortage events and to make investments to enhance
resource flexibility.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.
253:23-254:2 (Dec. 9, 2014); Scarcity and Shortage Pricing, Offer
Mitigation and Offer Price Caps Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000,
Tr. 52:21-22, 53:11-16, 54:10-17 (Oct. 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. What are the advantages and disadvantages of moving to sub-
hourly settlements for the real-time market as they relate to price
signals, market efficiency, and operations?
    b. What metering and RTO/ISO software changes would be needed to
change settlement intervals from hourly to sub-hourly for the real-time
market, and how long would these changes take to implement? Are there
significant costs to RTOs/ISOs, and to market participants, of such
changes? Are there any other impediments to adjusting settlement
intervals?
    c. What are the advantages and disadvantages of changing from
hourly to sub-hourly settlements in the day-ahead market?

5. New Products To Incent Flexibility

    Flexible resources that are capable of ramping up and down and/or
starting up quickly provide value to the electric system. Panelists at
the Operator Actions Workshop said that market designs which reward
flexibility may stimulate investment in flexible capacity and provide
resources more incentive to submit flexible offers.\9\ One panelist at
the Operator Actions Workshop commented that existing market rules can
create disincentives for resources to submit supply offers that reflect
the full flexibility (for example, ramp rate, minimum run time, minimum
operating level, maximum operating level, minimum down time) of their
resources.\10\ In addition, panelists at the workshops discussed the
need for locational reserve products to better reflect local needs for
flexibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.
149:7-11; 151:3-6; 291:6-8 (Dec. 9, 2014).
    \10\ See id. at 291:9-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. How do RTOs/ISOs currently ensure that they will have sufficient
flexibility during real-time? Specifically, to what extent are residual
unit commitments used to acquire anticipated needed flexibility?
    b. How are flexible resources compensated for the value that they
provide to the system? Does that compensation reflect the value? Why or
why not? If compensation to flexible resources does not reflect their
value, how should RTOs/ISOs compensate flexible resources for the
service they provide?
    c. What are the tradeoffs between sending a price signal through a
short-duration shortage event versus establishing a ramping product
that is priced separately?
    d. What are the tradeoffs among procuring flexibility through unit
commitments (e.g., headroom requirements) rather than through the ten-
minute reserve products or through ramp products?
    e. Does allowing combined-cycle natural gas resources to submit
different offers for different configurations facilitate more efficient
price formation? \11\ What are the advantages and disadvantages to
generators of bidding these configurations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., Cal. Indep. Sys. Operator Corp., 132 FERC ]
61,087, order on compliance filing, 132 FERC ] 61,273 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Operating Reserve Zones

    A lack of sufficiently granular reserve zones could be muting
efficient price signals. At the Shortage Pricing/Mitigation workshop,
the NYISO panelist noted that NYISO is considering establishing a new
reserve zone \12\ and the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) external
market monitor indicated that he believed PJM's shortage pricing rules
were not sufficiently locational. For instance, last year PJM
experienced shortages in the American Transmission System, Inc. (ATSI)
footprint that did not trigger shortage pricing because the ATSI zone
is not a reserve zone.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Scarcity and Shortage Pricing, Offer Mitigation and Offer
Caps Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.21:16-21 (Oct. 28, 2014).
    \13\ Id. at 133:6-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. How does the establishment, elimination or reconfiguration of
reserve zones affect price formation? What should the triggers be? From
experience, do the RTOs/ISOs have the appropriate reserve zones
defined? Are additional, fewer, or different reserve zones needed?
    b. Are processes in place for adding, removing, or changing reserve
zones adequate for efficient price formation?

7. Uplift Allocation

    Uplift allocation rules might impact resource participation
decisions in RTO/ISO markets. For example, uplift allocation rules
might incent participation in day-ahead markets or drive decisions on
how to use financial products.
    a. Do uplift allocation rules reflect cost causation or mute
potential investment signals? If so, how?
    b. What philosophy should govern uplift allocation? Do any of the
RTOs/ISOs have a best practice? What is it and why is it a best
practice?
    c. Should uplift allocation categories reflect the reasons for
committing a unit and incurring uplift? Would disclosing these reasons
through publicly available data improve uplift transparency and provide
information to facilitate modifications of the allocation of uplift
costs?

8. Market and Modeling Enhancements

    At the Uplift and Operator Actions Workshops, panelists highlighted
various drivers of persistent, concentrated uplift and operator
actions, including constraints that are not incorporated into market
models.\14\ Panelists also noted that certain constraints are difficult
to model accurately or to incorporate into both the day-ahead and real-
time market models.\15\ These include local voltage constraints and
reliability constraints such as N-1-1 contingency constraints.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Uplift Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.
49:7-11 (Sept. 8, 2014); Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No. AD14-
14-000, Tr. 16:5-18 (Dec. 9, 2014).
    \15\ See, e.g., Uplift Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr.
192:12-18 (Sept. 8, 2014); Operator Actions Workshop, Docket No.
AD14-14-000, Tr. 21:7-23 (Dec. 9, 2014).
    \16\ An N-1-1 contingency constraint is a constraint to ensure
that following any single contingency (N-1), the system can
withstand any other contingency (N-1-1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Assuming that RTOs/ISOs should improve their market models to
better reflect the cost of honoring reliability constraints in energy
and ancillary services market clearing prices, what types of
constraints should RTOs/ISOs include in their market models, and

what types of constraints should be handled by manual commitments? Of
those reliability constraints that should be in the market models,
which reliability constraints should RTOs/ISOs prioritize?
    b. In 2013, ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) increased its replacement
reserve requirement to ``reduce the need to schedule additional
resources above the load and reserve requirements'' in its Reserve
Adequacy Analysis.\17\ PJM has a similar proposal to increase day-ahead
and real-time reserve requirements when extreme weather is
expected.\18\ In what circumstances can such practices improve
efficiency of price formation?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ ISO-NE., Transmittal Letter, Docket No. ER13-1736-000 at 10
(filed June 20, 2013).
    \18\ PJM Tariff Filing, Docket No. ER15-643-000 (filed December
17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    c. Do transmission constraint relaxation penalty factors improve
the efficiency of price formation? \19\ If so, should these penalty
factors be allowed to set the energy price if a transmission constraint
is relaxed?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Transmission constraint penalty factors are parameters
within the market model that place a cost, known as a penalty
factor, on a transmission constraint. These parameters allow the
model to ``relax'' the transmission constraint for a short time at a
cost equal to the penalty factor, allowing flow over a given
transmission element to exceed its normal limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    d. Are there any new constraints that represent other physical
characteristics of the system (with corresponding penalty factors),
such as N-1-1 reliability constraints, that could be included in the
model to improve the efficiency of price formation? If so, what types
of constraints should be included and how should the penalty factors be
determined?
    e. Should RTOs/ISOs create new products that procure the capacity
necessary to address reliability constraints that cannot be captured in
market models? If so, what should these products look like, and what
process should RTOs/ISOs use to design these products?
    f. In some cases, creating new products to satisfy system needs
(e.g., ramp capability, local reliability product, or additional
reserves to account for operational uncertainty) may amount to
procuring a level of spinning or non-spinning reserves above the
mandatory reliability requirement. If the ``new product'' can be
satisfied by an existing ancillary service product (e.g., ten minute
reserves), is it necessary to create a new and separate product with
its own price and co-optimization? Rather than developing a new
product, could RTOs/ISOs change the cost allocation of any additional
ancillary services procured above the mandatory reliability
requirement?

9. Shortage Prices

    In the questions below, the term ``shortage pricing'' refers
generically to any pricing action taken in response to a shortage
event. Not all RTOs/ISOs use this phrase in the same way.\20\ In
responding to the questions below, please define terms and distinguish
between ``shortage pricing'' and ``scarcity pricing,'' if such a
distinction is intended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See, e.g., Scarcity and Shortage Pricing, Offer Mitigation
and Offer Price Caps Workshop, Docket No. AD14-14-000, Tr. 20:1-21:7
(Oct. 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. What principles should be used to establish shortage price
levels? Should there be one price for any shortage or a set of
escalating prices for greater levels of shortage? Is it important to
have shortage price levels consistent across adjacent RTOs/ISOs to
avoid seams issues?
    b. What are the advantages and disadvantages of implementing
shortage pricing in the day-ahead market as well as in the real-time
market? If shortage pricing is established only in the real-time market
but not in the day-ahead market, are other policies needed to
facilitate price convergence between the day-ahead and real-time
markets during periods of shortage? If so, what are these other
policies? If not, why not?

10. Transient Shortage Events

    At the Shortage Pricing/Mitigation Workshop, panelists stated
different positions regarding pricing transient, or short-duration,
shortage events.\21\ Transient shortage events are shortage events that
last only a short time, perhaps as short as one or two five-minute
dispatch intervals.\22\ For instance, PJM's market clearing process
will not invoke shortage pricing if it can resolve the shortage within
a certain time.\23\ However, even transient shortage events need a
price signal to provide incentives to develop capabilities to respond
to the shortage.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id. at 38:19-51:8.
    \22\ Id. at 40:19-24; 41:7-10; 44:16-23; 46:1-6.
    \23\ Id. at 48:5-12.
    \24\ Id. at 47:7-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Should there be a minimum duration for a shortage event before
it triggers shortage pricing? Why or why not? How would one determine
that minimum time, and how does it relate to the settlement interval?
    b. Do RTO/ISO rules regarding transient shortage events result in
appropriate price signals? Why or why not? To the extent possible,
please provide empirical evidence supporting your answer.
    c. Should treatment of transient shortages be consistent across all
RTOs/ISOs? Why or why not?

11. Interchange Uncertainty

    Due to the lag between price signals and interchange scheduling for
import and export transactions, trade between RTOs/ISOs can result in
volatile prices and variable system conditions because the ability of
importers to schedule flows across the seam can lag behind actual
system needs, creating uncertainty in interchange and contributing to
operational issues.\25\ Several RTOs/ISOs have instituted new rules,
such as NYISO's and PJM's Coordinated Transaction Scheduling (CTS),
which attempt to better coordinate interchange schedules and price
signals in order to improve inter-RTO/ISO flows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g., the experience of Midcontinent System Operator,
Inc. and PJM on July 6, 2012 as discussed in FERC, Price Formation
in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets: Staff Analysis of
Shortage Pricing, Docket No. AD14-14-000, at 21-22 (Oct. 2014),
available at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/2014/AD14-14-pricing-rto-iso-markets.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. What can the RTOs/ISOs do to reduce interchange uncertainty?
Does CTS help to reduce the uncertainty in interchange created by the
lag between price posting and interchange schedules? Does the ability
to reduce uncertainty depend on whether all interchange spread bids are
incorporated into the RTO/ISO dispatch model (as proposed for the CTS
implementation between NYISO and ISO-NE) rather than simply allowing
interchange spread bids on a voluntary basis (as proposed for the CTS
implementation between NYISO and PJM)? Are there other steps that
should be taken to reduce interchange uncertainty?
    b. What information do market participants need to better respond
to interchange price signals?

12. Next Steps

    a. Are there other price formation issues that, if addressed, would
improve energy and ancillary services price formation in RTO/ISO
markets? What are they?
    b. What are the highest-priority price formation issues to address?
Is the priority of issues different in different RTO/ISO markets? If
so, what are the priorities for each RTO/ISO and are the RTOs/ISOs
currently addressing those issues sufficiently?

[FR Doc. 2015-01139 Filed 1-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 231)]
[Notices]
[Page 75175]
[DOCID:fr02de10-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0182]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Procedures for the Safe and Sanitary
Processing and Importing of Fish and Fishery Products

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Procedures for the Safe and
Sanitary Processing and Importing of Fish and Fishery Products'' has
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, Jr., Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of June 18, 2010 (75
FR 34746), the Agency announced that the proposed information
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44
U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0354.
The approval expires on November 30, 2013. A copy of the supporting
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: November 26, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-30277 Filed 12-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: March 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 42)]
[Notices]
[Page 9964-9968]
[DOCID:fr04mr10-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61605/March 1, 2010]

Order Making Fiscal Year 2010 Mid-Year Adjustment to the Fee
Rates Applicable Under Sections 31(b) and (c) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934

I. Background

    Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'') requires each national securities exchange and national
securities association to pay transaction fees to the Commission.\1\
Specifically, section 31(b) requires each national securities exchange
to pay to the Commission fees based on the aggregate dollar amount of
sales of certain securities transacted on the exchange.\2\ Section
31(c) requires each national securities association to pay to the
Commission fees based on the aggregate dollar amount of sales of
certain securities transacted by or through any member of the
association other than on an exchange.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(b).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sections 31(j)(1) and (3) require the Commission to make annual
adjustments to the fee rates applicable under Sections 31(b) and (c)
for each of the fiscal years 2003 through 2011, and one final
adjustment to fix the fee rates for fiscal year 2012 and beyond.\4\
Section 31(j)(2) requires the Commission, in certain circumstances, to
make a mid-year adjustment to the fee rates in fiscal years 2002
through 2011.\5\ The annual and mid-year adjustments are designed to
adjust the fee rates in a given fiscal year so that, when applied to
the aggregate dollar volume of sales for the fiscal year, they are
reasonably likely to produce total fee collections under Section 31
equal to the ``target offsetting collection amount'' specified in
Section 31(l)(1) for that fiscal year.\6\ For fiscal year 2010, the
target offsetting collection amount is $1,161,000,000.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(j)(1) and (j)(3).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(j)(2).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(l)(1).
    \7\ See id.

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

II. Determination of the Need for a Mid-Year Adjustment in Fiscal 2010

    Under section 31(j)(2) of the Exchange Act, the Commission must
make a mid-year adjustment to the fee rates under Sections 31(b) and
(c) in fiscal year 2010 if it determines, based on the actual aggregate
dollar volume of sales during the first five months of the fiscal year,
that the baseline estimate $84,822,877,437,603 is reasonably likely to
be 10% (or more) greater or less than the actual aggregate dollar
volume of sales for fiscal year 2010.\8\ To make this determination,
the Commission must estimate the actual aggregate dollar volume of
sales for fiscal year 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The amount $84,822,877,437,603 is the baseline estimate of
the aggregate dollar amount of sales for fiscal year 2010 calculated
by the Commission in its Order Making Fiscal 2010 Annual Adjustments
to the Fee Rates Applicable Under Section 6(b) of the Securities Act
of 1933 and Sections 13(e), 14(g), 31(b) and 31(c) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, Rel. No. 33-9030 (April 30, 2009), 74 FR 21018
(May 6, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on data provided by the national securities exchanges and the
national securities association that are subject to section 31,\9\ the
actual aggregate dollar volume of sales during the first four months of
fiscal year 2010 was $19,531,642,600,905.\10\ Using these data and a
methodology for estimating the aggregate dollar amount of sales for the
remainder of fiscal year 2010 (developed after consultation with the
Congressional Budget Office and the OMB),\11\ the Commission estimates
that the aggregate dollar amount of sales for the remainder of fiscal
year 2010 to be $43,755,155,427,595. Thus, the Commission estimates
that the actual aggregate dollar volume of sales for all of fiscal year
2010 will be $63,286,798,028,500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') and each exchange are required to file a monthly report
on Form R31 containing dollar volume data on sales of securities
subject to Section 31. The report is due on the 10th business day
following any month in which the exchange or association has covered
sales.
    \10\ Although section 31(j)(2) indicates that the Commission
should determine the actual aggregate dollar volume of sales for
fiscal 2010 ``based on the actual aggregate dollar volume of sales
during the first 5 months of such fiscal year,'' data are only
available for the first four months of the fiscal year as of the
date the Commission is required to issue this order, i.e., March 1,
2010. Dollar volume data on sales of securities subject to Section
31 for February 2010 will not be available from the exchanges and
FINRA for several weeks.
    \11\ See Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the baseline estimate of $84,822,877,437,603 is more than
10% greater than the $63,286,798,028,500 estimated actual aggregate
dollar volume of sales for fiscal year 2010, Section 31(j)(2) of the
Exchange Act requires the Commission to issue an order adjusting the
fee rates under Sections 31(b) and (c).

III. Calculation of the Uniform Adjusted Rate

    Section 31(j)(2) specifies the method for determining the mid-year
adjustment for fiscal 2010. Specifically, the Commission must adjust
the rates under sections 31(b) and (c) to a ``uniform adjusted rate
that, when applied to the revised estimate of the aggregate dollar
amount of sales for the remainder of fiscal year 2010, is reasonably
likely to produce aggregate fee collections under section 31 (including
fees collected during such 5-month period and assessments collected
under section 31(d)) that are equal to $1,161,000,000.'' \12\ In other
words, the uniform adjusted rate is determined by subtracting fees
collected prior to the effective date of the new rate and assessments
collected under section 31(d) during all of fiscal year 2010 from
$1,161,000,000, which is the target offsetting collection amount for
fiscal year 2010. That difference is then divided by the revised
estimate of the aggregate dollar volume of sales for the remainder of
the fiscal year following the effective date of the new rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee(j)(2). The term ``fees collected'' is not
defined in section 31. Because national securities exchanges and
national securities associations are not required to pay the first
installment of section 31 fees for fiscal 2010 until March 15, the
Commission will not ``collect'' any fees in the first five months of
fiscal 2010. See 15 U.S.C. 78ee(e). However, the Commission believes
that, for purposes of calculating the mid-year adjustment, Congress,
by stating in section 31(j)(2) that the ``uniform adjusted rate * *
* is reasonably likely to produce aggregate fee collections under
section 31 * * * that are equal to [$1,161,000,000],'' intended the
Commission to include the fees that the Commission will collect
based on transactions in the six months before the effective date of
the mid-year adjustment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission estimates that it will collect $598,633,917 in fees
for the period prior to the effective date of the mid-year adjustment
and $18,611 in assessments on round turn transactions in security
futures products during all of fiscal year 2010. Using the methodology
referenced in Part II above, the Commission estimates that the
aggregate dollar volume of sales for the remainder of fiscal year 2010
following the effective date of the new rate will be
$33,260,374,276,849. This amount reflects more recent information on
the dollar amount of sales of securities than was available at the time
of the setting of the initial fee rate for fiscal year 2010, and
indicates a significant reduction in sales. Based on these estimates,
and employing the mid-year adjustment mechanism established by statute,
the uniform adjusted rate must be adjusted to $16.90 per million of the
aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities.\13\ The aggregate
dollar amount of sales of securities subject to Section 31 fees is
illustrated in Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The calculation is as follows: ($1,161,000,000-
$598,633,917-$18,611)/$33,260,374,276,849 = $0.0000169080. Round
this result to the seventh decimal point, yielding a rate of $16.90
per million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Effective Date of the Uniform Adjusted Rate

    Section 31(j)(4)(B) of the Exchange Act provides that a mid-year
adjustment shall take effect on April 1 of the fiscal year in which
such rate applies. Therefore, the exchanges and the national securities
association that are subject to section 31 fees must pay fees under
sections 31(b) and (c) at the uniform adjusted rate of $16.90 per
million for sales of securities transacted on April 1, 2010, and
thereafter until the annual adjustment for fiscal 2011 is effective.

V. Conclusion

    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 31 of the Exchange Act,\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is hereby ordered that each of the fee rates under sections
31(b) and (c) of the Exchange Act shall be $16.90 per $1,000,000 of the
aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities subject to these
sections effective April 1, 2010.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.

`

A. Baseline Estimate of the Aggregate Dollar Amount of Sales

    First, calculate the average daily dollar amount of sales (ADS)
for each month in the sample (January 2000-January 2010). The data
obtained from the exchanges and FINRA are presented in Table A. The
monthly aggregate dollar amount of sales from all exchanges and
FINRA is contained in column C.
    Next, calculate the change in the natural logarithm of ADS from
month-to-month. The average monthly change in the logarithm of ADS
over the entire sample is 0.004 and the standard deviation 0.125.
Assume the monthly percentage change in ADS follows a random walk.
The expected monthly percentage growth rate of ADS is 1.2 percent.
    Now, use the expected monthly percentage growth rate to forecast
total dollar volume. For example, one can use the ADS for January
2010 ($245,357,654,413) to forecast ADS for February 2010
($248,264,845,054 = $245,357,654,413 x 1.012).\15\ Multiply by the
number of trading days in February 2010 (19) to obtain a forecast of
the total dollar volume for the month ($4,717,032,056,030). Repeat

the method to generate forecasts for subsequent months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The value 1.012 has been rounded. All computations are done
with the unrounded value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The forecasts for total dollar volume are in column G of Table
A. The following is a more formal (mathematical) description of the
procedure:
    1. Divide each month's total dollar volume (column C) by the
number of trading days in that month (column B) to obtain the
average daily dollar volume (ADS, column D).
    2. For each month t, calculate the change in ADS from the
previous month as [Delta]t = log (ADSt/
ADSt-1), where log (x) denotes the natural logarithm of
x.
    3. Calculate the mean and standard deviation of the series
{[Delta]1, [Delta]2,* * *,
[Delta]120{time} . These are given by [mu] = 0.004 and
[sigma] = 0.125, respectively.
    4. Assume that the natural logarithm of ADS follows a random
walk, so that [Delta]s and [Delta]t are
statistically independent for any two months s and t.
    5. Under the assumption that [Delta]t is normally
distributed, the expected value of ADSt/ADSt-1
is given by exp ([mu] + [sigma]\2\/2), or on average ADSt
= 1.012 x ADSt-1.
    6. For February 2010, this gives a forecast ADS of 1.012 x
$245,357,654,413 = $248,264,845,054. Multiply this figure by the 19
trading days in February 2010 to obtain a total dollar volume
forecast of $4,717,032,056,030.
    7. For March 2010, multiply the February 2010 ADS forecast by
1.012 to obtain a forecast ADS of $251,206,482,379. Multiply this
figure by the 23 trading days in March 2010 to obtain a total dollar
volume forecast of $5,777,749,094,716.
    8. Repeat this procedure for subsequent months.

B. Using the forecasts from A to calculate the new fee rate

    1. Determine the aggregate dollar volume of sales between 10/1/
09 and 1/14/10 to be $16,715,256,569,641. Multiply this amount by
the fee rate of $25.70 per million dollars in sales during this
period and get $429,582,094 in actual fees collected during 10/1/09
and 1/14/10. Determine the actual and projected aggregate dollar
volume of sales between 1/15/10 and 3/31/10 to be
$13,311,167,182,011. Multiply this amount by the fee rate of $12.70
per million dollars in sales during this period and get an estimate
of $169,051,823 in actual and projected fees collected during 1/15/
10 and 3/31/10.
    2. Estimate the amount of assessments on security futures
products collected during 10/1/09 and 9/30/10 to be $18,611 by
summing the amounts collected through January 2010 of $5,684 with
projections of a 1.2% monthly increase in subsequent months.
    3. Determine the projected aggregate dollar volume of sales
between 4/1/10 and 9/30/10 to be $33,260,374,276,849.
    4. The rate necessary to collect the target $1,161,000,000 in
fee revenues is then calculated as: ($1,161,000,000-$429,582,094 -
$169,051,823-$18,611) / $33,260,374,276,849 = 0.0000169080.
    5. Round the result to the seventh decimal point, yielding a
rate of 0.0000169000 (or $16.90 per million).

 Table A--Estimation of Baseline of the Aggregate Dollar Amount of Sales
[Methodology developed in consultation with the Office of Management and
               Budget and the Congressional Budget Office]
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Fee rate calculation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Baseline estimate of the aggregate dollar amount of        16,715,257
 sales, 10/1/09 to 1/14/10 ($Millions).....................
b. Baseline estimate of the aggregate dollar amount of        13,311,167
 sales, 1/15/00 to 3/31/10 ($Millions).....................
c. Baseline estimate of the aggregate dollar amount of        33,260,374
 sales, 4/1/00 to 9/30/10 ($Millions)......................
d. Estimated collections in assessmests on security futures        0.019
 products in FY 2010 ($Millions)...........................
e. Implied fee rate (($1,161,000,000-0.0000257 x a-               $16.90
 0.0000127 x b-d)/c).......................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Data

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Number of
                                                trading     Aggregate dollar    Average daily     Change in                         Forecast aggregate
                    Month                       days in     amount of sales    dollar amount of   LN of ADS      Forecast ADS     dollar amount of sales
                                                 month                           sales (ADS)
(A)                                                   (B)                (C)                (D)          (E)                (F)                      (G)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan-00......................................           20  3,057,831,397,113    152,891,569,856            -  .................  .......................
Feb-00......................................           20  2,973,119,888,063    148,655,994,403       -0.028  .................  .......................
Mar-00......................................           23  4,135,152,366,234    179,789,233,315        0.190  .................  .......................
Apr-00......................................           19  3,174,694,525,687    167,099,185,562       -0.073  .................  .......................
May-00......................................           22  2,649,273,207,318    120,421,509,424       -0.328  .................  .......................
Jun-00......................................           22  2,883,513,997,781    131,068,818,081        0.085  .................  .......................
Jul-00......................................           20  2,804,753,395,361    140,237,669,768        0.068  .................  .......................
Aug-00......................................           23  2,720,788,395,832    118,295,147,645       -0.170  .................  .......................
Sep-00......................................           20  2,930,188,809,012    146,509,440,451        0.214  .................  .......................
Oct-00......................................           22  3,485,926,307,727    158,451,195,806        0.078  .................  .......................
Nov-00......................................           21  2,795,778,876,887    133,132,327,471       -0.174  .................  .......................
Dec-00......................................           20  2,809,917,349,851    140,495,867,493        0.054  .................  .......................
Jan-01......................................           21  3,143,501,125,244    149,690,529,774        0.063  .................  .......................
Feb-01......................................           19  2,372,420,523,286    124,864,238,068       -0.181  .................  .......................
Mar-01......................................           22  2,554,419,085,113    116,109,958,414       -0.073  .................  .......................
Apr-01......................................           20  2,324,349,507,745    116,217,475,387        0.001  .................  .......................
May-01......................................           22  2,353,179,388,303    106,962,699,468       -0.083  .................  .......................
Jun-01......................................           21  2,111,922,113,236    100,567,719,678       -0.062  .................  .......................
Jul-01......................................           21  2,004,384,034,554     95,446,858,788       -0.052  .................  .......................
Aug-01......................................           23  1,803,565,337,795     78,415,884,252       -0.197  .................  .......................
Sep-01......................................           15  1,573,484,946,383    104,898,996,426        0.291  .................  .......................
Oct-01......................................           23  2,147,238,873,044     93,358,211,871       -0.117  .................  .......................
Nov-01......................................           21  1,939,427,217,518     92,353,677,025       -0.011  .................  .......................
Dec-01......................................           20  1,921,098,738,113     96,054,936,906        0.039  .................  .......................
Jan-02......................................           21  2,149,243,312,432    102,344,919,640        0.063  .................  .......................
Feb-02......................................           19  1,928,830,595,585    101,517,399,768       -0.008  .................  .......................
Mar-02......................................           20  2,002,216,374,514    100,110,818,726       -0.014  .................  .......................
Apr-02......................................           22  2,062,101,866,506     93,731,903,023       -0.066  .................  .......................
May-02......................................           22  1,985,859,756,557     90,266,352,571       -0.038  .................  .......................
Jun-02......................................           20  1,882,185,380,609     94,109,269,030        0.042  .................  .......................
Jul-02......................................           22  2,349,564,490,189    106,798,385,918        0.126  .................  .......................

Aug-02......................................           22  1,793,429,904,079     81,519,541,095       -0.270  .................  .......................
Sep-02......................................           20  1,518,944,367,204     75,947,218,360       -0.071  .................  .......................
Oct-02......................................           23  2,127,874,947,972     92,516,302,086        0.197  .................  .......................
Nov-02......................................           20  1,780,816,458,122     89,040,822,906       -0.038  .................  .......................
Dec-02......................................           21  1,561,092,215,646     74,337,724,555       -0.180  .................  .......................
Jan-03......................................           21  1,723,698,830,414     82,080,896,686        0.099  .................  .......................
Feb-03......................................           19  1,411,722,405,357     74,301,179,229       -0.180  .................  .......................
Mar-03......................................           21  1,699,581,267,718     80,932,441,320        0.085  .................  .......................
Apr-03......................................           21  1,759,751,025,279     83,797,667,870        0.035  .................  .......................
May-03......................................           21  1,871,390,985,678     89,113,856,461        0.062  .................  .......................
Jun-03......................................           21  2,122,225,077,345    101,058,337,016        0.126  .................  .......................
Jul-03......................................           22  2,100,812,973,956     95,491,498,816       -0.057  .................  .......................
Aug-03......................................           21  1,766,527,686,224     84,120,366,011       -0.127  .................  .......................
Sep-03......................................           21  2,063,584,421,939     98,265,924,854        0.155  .................  .......................
Oct-03......................................           23  2,331,850,083,022    101,384,786,218        0.031  .................  .......................
Nov-03......................................           19  1,903,726,129,859    100,196,112,098       -0.012  .................  .......................
Dec-03......................................           22  2,066,530,151,383     93,933,188,699       -0.065  .................  .......................
Jan-04......................................           20  2,390,942,905,678    119,547,145,284        0.241  .................  .......................
Feb-04......................................           19  2,177,765,594,701    114,619,241,826       -0.042  .................  .......................
Mar-04......................................           23  2,613,809,754,550    113,643,858,893       -0.009  .................  .......................
Apr-04......................................           21  2,418,663,760,191    115,174,464,771        0.013  .................  .......................
May-04......................................           20  2,259,243,404,459    112,962,170,223       -0.019  .................  .......................
Jun-04......................................           21  2,112,826,072,876    100,610,765,375       -0.116  .................  .......................
Jul-04......................................           21  2,209,808,376,565    105,228,970,313        0.045  .................  .......................
Aug-04......................................           22  2,033,343,354,640     92,424,697,938       -0.130  .................  .......................
Sep-04......................................           21  1,993,803,487,749     94,943,023,226        0.027  .................  .......................
Oct-04......................................           21  2,414,599,088,108    114,980,908,958        0.191  .................  .......................
Nov-04......................................           21  2,577,513,374,160    122,738,732,103        0.065  .................  .......................
Dec-04......................................           22  2,673,532,981,863    121,524,226,448       -0.010  .................  .......................
Jan-05......................................           20  2,581,847,200,448    129,092,360,022        0.060  .................  .......................
Feb-05......................................           19  2,532,202,408,589    133,273,810,978        0.032  .................  .......................
Mar-05......................................           22  3,030,474,897,226    137,748,858,965        0.033  .................  .......................
Apr-05......................................           21  2,906,386,944,434    138,399,378,306        0.005  .................  .......................
May-05......................................           21  2,697,414,503,460    128,448,309,689       -0.075  .................  .......................
Jun-05......................................           22  2,825,962,273,624    128,452,830,619        0.000  .................  .......................
Jul-05......................................           20  2,604,021,263,875    130,201,063,194        0.014  .................  .......................
Aug-05......................................           23  2,846,115,585,965    123,744,155,912       -0.051  .................  .......................
Sep-05......................................           21  3,009,640,645,370    143,316,221,208        0.147  .................  .......................
Oct-05......................................           21  3,279,847,331,057    156,183,206,241        0.086  .................  .......................
Nov-05......................................           21  3,163,453,821,548    150,640,658,169       -0.036  .................  .......................
Dec-05......................................           21  3,090,212,715,561    147,152,986,455       -0.023  .................  .......................
Jan-06......................................           20  3,573,372,724,766    178,668,636,238        0.194  .................  .......................
Feb-06......................................           19  3,314,259,849,456    174,434,728,919       -0.024  .................  .......................
Mar-06......................................           23  3,807,974,821,564    165,564,122,677       -0.052
Apr-06......................................           19  3,257,478,138,851    171,446,217,834        0.035  .................  .......................
May-06......................................           22  4,206,447,844,451    191,202,174,748        0.109  .................  .......................
Jun-06......................................           22  3,995,113,357,316    181,596,061,696       -0.052  .................  .......................
Jul-06......................................           20  3,339,658,009,357    166,982,900,468       -0.084  .................  .......................
Aug-06......................................           23  3,410,187,280,845    148,269,012,211       -0.119  .................  .......................
Sep-06......................................           20  3,407,409,863,673    170,370,493,184        0.139  .................  .......................
Oct-06......................................           22  3,980,070,216,912    180,912,282,587        0.060  .................  .......................
Nov-06......................................           21  3,933,474,986,969    187,308,332,713        0.035  .................  .......................
Dec-06......................................           20  3,715,146,848,695    185,757,342,435       -0.008  .................  .......................
Jan-07......................................           20  4,263,986,570,973    213,199,328,549        0.138  .................  .......................
Feb-07......................................           19  3,946,799,860,532    207,726,308,449       -0.026  .................  .......................
Mar-07......................................           22  5,245,051,744,090    238,411,442,913        0.138  .................  .......................
Apr-07......................................           20  4,274,665,072,437    213,733,253,622       -0.109  .................  .......................
May-07......................................           22  5,172,568,357,522    235,116,743,524        0.095  .................  .......................
Jun-07......................................           21  5,586,337,010,802    266,016,048,133        0.123  .................  .......................
Jul-07......................................           21  5,938,330,480,139    282,777,641,911        0.061  .................  .......................
Aug-07......................................           23  7,713,644,229,032    335,375,836,045        0.171  .................  .......................
Sep-07......................................           19  4,805,676,596,099    252,930,347,163       -0.282  .................  .......................
Oct-07......................................           23  6,499,651,716,225    282,593,552,879        0.111  .................  .......................
Nov-07......................................           21  7,176,290,763,989    341,728,131,619        0.190  .................  .......................
Dec-07......................................           20  5,512,903,594,564    275,645,179,728       -0.215  .................  .......................
Jan-08......................................           21  7,997,242,071,529    380,821,051,025        0.323  .................  .......................
Feb-08......................................           20  6,139,080,448,887    306,954,022,444       -0.216  .................  .......................
Mar-08......................................           20  6,767,852,332,381    338,392,616,619        0.098  .................  .......................
Apr-08......................................           22  6,150,017,772,735    279,546,262,397       -0.191  .................  .......................
May-08......................................           21  6,080,169,766,807    289,531,893,657        0.035  .................  .......................

Jun-08......................................           21  6,962,199,302,412    331,533,300,115        0.135  .................  .......................
Jul-08......................................           22  8,104,256,787,805    368,375,308,537        0.105  .................  .......................
Aug-08......................................           21  6,106,057,711,009    290,764,652,905       -0.237  .................  .......................
Sep-08......................................           21  8,156,991,919,103    388,428,186,624        0.290  .................  .......................
Oct-08......................................           23  8,644,538,213,244    375,849,487,532       -0.033  .................  .......................
Nov-08......................................           19  5,727,998,341,833    301,473,596,939       -0.221  .................  .......................
Dec-08......................................           22  5,176,041,317,640    235,274,605,347       -0.248  .................  .......................
Jan-09......................................           20  4,670,249,433,806    233,512,471,690       -0.008  .................  .......................
Feb-09......................................           19  4,771,470,184,048    251,130,009,687        0.073  .................  .......................
Mar-09......................................           22  5,885,594,284,780    267,527,012,945        0.063  .................  .......................
Apr-09......................................           21  5,123,665,205,517    243,984,057,406       -0.092  .................  .......................
May-09......................................           20  5,086,717,129,965    254,335,856,498        0.042  .................  .......................
Jun-09......................................           22  5,271,742,782,609    239,624,671,937       -0.060  .................  .......................
Jul-09......................................           22  4,659,599,245,583    211,799,965,708       -0.123  .................  .......................
Aug-09......................................           21  4,582,102,295,783    218,195,347,418        0.030  .................  .......................
Sep-09......................................           21  4,929,211,335,509    234,724,349,310        0.073  .................  .......................
Oct-09......................................           22  5,410,071,946,836    245,912,361,220        0.047  .................  .......................
Nov-09......................................           20  4,770,994,671,867    238,549,733,593       -0.030  .................  .......................
Dec-09......................................           22  4,688,780,548,360    213,126,388,562       -0.113  .................  .......................
Jan-10......................................           19  4,661,795,433,843    245,357,654,413        0.141  .................  .......................
Feb-10......................................           19  .................  .................  ...........    248,264,845,054        4,717,032,056,030
Mar-10......................................           23  .................  .................  ...........    251,206,482,379        5,777,749,094,716
Apr-10......................................           21  .................  .................  ...........    254,182,974,538        5,337,842,465,308
May-10......................................           20  .................  .................  ...........    257,194,734,520        5,143,894,690,405
Jun-10......................................           22  .................  .................  ...........    260,242,180,205        5,725,327,964,515
Jul-10......................................           21  .................  .................  ...........    263,325,734,426        5,529,840,422,940
Aug-10......................................           22  .................  .................  ...........    266,445,825,024        5,861,808,150,526
Sep-10......................................           21  .................  .................  ...........    269,602,884,912        5,661,660,583,153
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2010-4530 Filed 3-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P