[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 52 (Wednesday, March 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14103-14104]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-158-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: eTariff filing per 35.19a(b): 1765R11 KCPL-GMO Refund
Report to be effective N/A under ER15-158.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-164-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: eTariff filing per 35.19a(b): 1636R13 Kansas Electric
Power Cooperative, Inc. Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5065.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-350-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: eTariff filing per 35.19a(b): 1883R3 Westar (City of
Alma) Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-820-001.
    Applicants: Zone One Energy, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Baseline New to be
effective 4/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5010.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-883-001.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to GIA and
Distrib Serv Agmt San Gorgonio Weswinds II, Difwind Farms to be
effective 1/20/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5083.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-900-001.
    Applicants: Marshfield Utilities.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to 1 to be
effective 4/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1219-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Service
Agreement Nos. 190, 192, 194, 195 Revisions--ANPP to be effective 3/11/
2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1222-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Unexecuted GIA and Distribution Service Agreement with Edom Hills
Project 1, LLC to be effective 3/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5216.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1223-000.
    Applicants: Power Contract Financing II, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Notice of Cancellation to
be effective 3/12/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5258.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1224-000.
    Applicants: New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Concurrence in Amended and Restated LGIA among NYISO, NYSEG and Sheldon
Energy to be effective 2/18/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5284.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1225-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Updates
to Section 2.2.2 of Attachment C to be effective 5/10/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5287.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1226-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(1): TFO Tariff
Interim Rate Revision to Conform with PUCT-Approved ERCOT Rate to be
effective 2/25/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5289.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1227-000.
    Applicants: California Clean Power Corp.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 California Clean Power
Corp. Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/20/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150311-5290.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1228-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1670R2
Transmission Interchange Agreement to be effective 2/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150312-5058.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/15.

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

    Dated: March 12, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06165 Filed 3-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 8, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 152)]
[Notices]
[Page 44599-44600]
[DOCID:fr08au07-116]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56182; File No. SR-FICC-2006-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Membership,
Definitions, and the Electronic Pool Notification Service

August 1, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On December 13, 2006, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
(``FICC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder \2\ to restructure FICC's Government Securities Division's
(``GSD'') membership standards and membership requirements, update
various definitions, and make technical changes to GSD's rules and to
FICC's Mortgage-Backed Securities Division's (``MBSD'') Electronic Pool
Notification (``EPN'') rules. The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on March 29, 2007.\3\ No comment
letters were received on the proposal. This order approves the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55515 (Mar. 22, 2006),
72 FR 14839.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

A. Membership Rules

    FICC is revising its rules concerning membership types, the
membership application process, and the ongoing requirements of GSD
members into a format that FICC believes will make such rules easier to
locate and to understand by applicants and members. To accomplish this,
FICC is amending current Rule 2 (retitled ``Members''), is moving much
of the content of current Rule 2 into a new Rule 2A (``Initial
Membership Requirements''), and is revising Rule 3 (retitled ``Ongoing
Membership Requirements''). Other rules and provisions are being
modified to make technical corrections where necessary and to be in
harmony with analogous rules of FICC's affiliated clearing agency, the
National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'').
1. Membership Types
    FICC's current Rule 2 (``Comparison-Only and Netting Members'')
sets forth the types of GSD memberships, eligibility requirements,
application procedures, and member reporting requirements. FICC is
revising Rule 2 to establish each GSD membership type: Comparison-Only
Members, Netting Members, Sponsoring Members, Sponsored Members, and
Funds-Only Settling Bank Members. Substantially all other provisions
contained in the current Rule 2 are being moved to either new Rule 2A
or revised Rule 3.
    One exception to this is that FICC is deleting current Rule 2,
Section 4 (``Financial Reports by Netting Applicants). FICC states that
the rationale for such deletion is that FICC already advises applicants
during the application process of the required financial reports
depending on the category of membership for which is being applied and
on the applicant entity type. In addition, FICC is setting forth in
revised Rule 3 the financial reports that must be submitted by members
to FICC on an ongoing basis.
    FICC is also deleting section 1(f) of Rule 2, which provides that
applicants that have been approved for membership must execute and
deliver to FICC a membership agreement. This provision is redundant
with existing Rule 2, Section 3, which will now appear in new Rule 2A,
Section 7.
2. Consolidation of Membership Standards and Requirements
    Prior to this rule change, the membership qualifications, financial
standards, and operational requirements for each membership type were
set forth in Rule 2 (``Comparison-Only and Netting Members''), Rule 3
(``Financial Responsibility, Operational Capability and Other
Membership Standards of Comparison-Only and Netting Members''), and
Rule 4 (``Clearing Fund, Watch List and Loss Allocation''). To
consolidate this information, FICC is creating a new Rule 2A (``Initial
Membership Requirements'') that will establish the initial membership
eligibility requirements for all membership types and will set forth
the process of membership application and evaluation. In addition, FICC
is restructuring Rule 3 (``Ongoing Membership Requirements'') to
contain all current GSD rule provisions regarding the continuing
requirements of members.
    The restructuring will encompass three substantive changes:
    (a) Immediate Placement on the Watch List. FICC is deleting current
Rule 3, Section 1(d)(iii) that automatically disqualifies an applicant
from becoming a member if the applicant is subject to any action or
condition, the existence of which would require the applicant to be
placed on FICC's Watch List if it were already a member. FICC believes
that eliminating such provision will not diminish FICC's ability to
deny membership to an unworthy applicant because FICC will still retain
under other sections of its rules the discretion to deny membership
based on the applicant's underlying financial, operational, or
character issues. Moreover, FICC's credit risk matrix enables FICC to
place such applicant directly on FICC's watch list for closer
monitoring.
    (b) Additional Reporting Requirements. FICC is adding new language
to proposed Rule 3, Section 2 (``Reports by Netting Members'') that
will require members to provide FICC with (i) reports from their
independent auditors on internal controls [in revised Rule 3, Section
2(b)(ii)] and (ii) a copy of any letter granting an extension of time
by a regulatory authority to a member with respect to the submission of
a report [in revised Rule 3, Section 2(h), para. 2].
    (c) Annual Audited Financial Statements. FICC is removing the
current requirement in Rule 2, Section 4(a) that audited annual
financial statements submitted by netting members be ``without
qualification.'' FICC believes that a qualification in an annual
audited financial statement should not warrant automatic denial of
membership because a qualification may not always be material. In
addition, the event that triggered a qualification may have been
corrected by the applicant or member by the time the applicant or
member submits its financial statement for review by FICC. Going
forward, FICC will analyze qualifications in GSD netting member
financial statements on a case-by-case basis.
    Other conforming and non-substantive changes are being made within
the rules to accommodate this restructuring and to update cross-
references where applicable.

B. Non-Substantive Changes and Technical Corrections

1. Definition of ``Person''
    FICC is amending the current definition of Person contained in GSD
Rule 1 (``Definitions'') to indicate that the term will be used
throughout the rules to mean a partnership, corporation, limited
liability corporation, or other organization, entity, or individual.
2. Definition of ``Eligible Security''
    FICC is amending the definition of Eligible Security to make clear
that any security of an issuer that is on the Office of Foreign Assets
and Control's (``OFAC'') Specially Designated Nationals list or a
security from a country that is subject to OFAC sanctions may not be an
eligible security at GSD. FICC is making the same change to the
definition of Eligible Security in MBSD's Clearing and EPN rules.
3. Definition of ``Bond Market Association''
    The Bond Market Association is now known as the Securities Industry
and Financial Markets Association. GSD is removing the definition of
and references to The Bond Market Association from its rules and is
replacing it with a definition for and references to The Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association.
4. Governing Law Provision
    FICC is clarifying the Governing Law provision contained in GSD's
and MBSD's Clearing and EPN rules to state that the Clearing and EPN
rules of GSD and MBSD are subject to New York law as applicable to
contracts executed and performed in New York.
5. Insurance Company Netting Member Eligibility Requirements
    FICC is removing from GSD's rules the eligibility requirements for
Insurance Company Netting Members because GSD does not currently have
any such members. FICC will, however, retain the definition of
Insurance Company Netting Member in its rules in the event that such an
entity applies for membership in the future. Appropriate eligibility
requirements would be reviewed at that time and proposed as additions
to the rules.

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a registered clearing agency. In particular,
the Commission believes the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of section 17A(b)(3)(F),\4\ which, among other things,
requires the rules of a clearing agency be designed to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds that are in the custody or control
of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible. In addition to
making the rules more logically structured, more consistent with the
rules of FICC's clearing agency affiliate, and less redundant, the
proposal should improve FICC's ability to responsibly administer its
membership application process by providing FICC with a more flexible
and risk-based approach to review applications for membership. Although
FICC is eliminating certain factors that would previously have resulted
in the automatic disqualification of an applicant, FICC has retained
explicit rights to deny membership to an unworthy applicant based upon
FICC's qualitative review, based in part on new required documentation,
of an applicant's underlying financial, operational, or character
issues. Accordingly, the proposed rule change is consistent with FICC's
obligation to assure ability to safeguard securities and funds in its
possession or control or for which it is responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of section 17A of the Act \5\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FICC-2006-19) be,
and hereby is, approved.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \7\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-15371 Filed 8-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 76 (Thursday, April 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21393-21401]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08306]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91602; File No. SR-NYSENAT-2021-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Wireless,
Circuits, and Non-Colocation Connectivity Services Available at the
Mahwah Data Center

April 16, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on April 9, 2021, NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the schedule of wireless, circuits,
and non-colocation connectivity services available at the Mahwah data
center (the ``Fee Schedule'') to add services available to customers in
the meet me rooms in the Mahwah data center and procedures for the
allocation of cabinets and power to such customers. The proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to add services
available to customers in the two meet me rooms on the north and south
sides of the Mahwah data center (``MMRs'') and procedures for the
allocation of cabinets and power to MMR customers.
    The Exchange makes the current proposal solely as a result of its
determination that the Commission's recent interpretations of the Act's
definitions of the terms ``exchange'' and ``facility,'' as expressed in
the Wireless Approval Order,\4\ apply to the connectivity services
described herein that are offered by entities other than the Exchange.
The Exchange disagrees with the Commission's interpretations,

denies the services covered herein (and in the Wireless Approval Order)
are offerings of an ``exchange'' or a ``facility'' thereof, and has
sought review of the Commission's interpretations, as expressed in the
Wireless Approval Order, in the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit.\5\ Pending resolution of such appeal, however, the
Exchange is making this proposed rule change in recognition that the
Commission's current interpretation brings certain offerings of the
Exchange's affiliates into the scope of the terms ``exchange'' or
``facility.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90209 (October 15,
2020), 85 FR 67044 (October 21, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-05, SR-NYSEAMER-
2020-05, SR-NYSEArca-2020-08, SR-NYSECHX-2020-02, SR-NYSENAT-2020-
03, SR-NYSE-2020-11, SR-NYSEAMER-2020-10, SR-NYSEArca-2020-15, SR-
NYSECHX-2020-05, SR-NYSENAT-2020-08) (``Wireless Approval Order'').
    \5\ Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. v. SEC, No. 20-1470 (D.C.
Cir. 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Through its ICE Data Services (``IDS'') business, Intercontinental
Exchange, Inc. (``ICE'') \6\ operates a data center in Mahwah, New
Jersey (the ``Mahwah Data Center''), from which the Exchange provides
co-location services to any market participant that requests to receive
co-location services directly from the Exchange (``Users'').\7\
Services are also available to customers that are not colocation Users
(``NCL Customers'' and, together with Users, ``Mahwah Customers'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange is an indirect subsidiary of ICE and is an
affiliate of New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE
Arca, Inc., and NYSE Chicago, Inc. (together, the ``Affiliate
SROs''). Each Affiliate SRO has submitted substantially the same
proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See
SR-NYSE-2021-25, SR-NYSEAMER-2021-21, SR-NYSEArca-2021-24, and SR-
NYSECHX-2021-07.
    \7\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2018. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
83351 (May 31, 2018), 83 FR 26314 (June 6, 2018) (SR-NYSENAT-2018-
07) (``NYSE National Co-location Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mahwah Customers require circuits connecting into and out of the
Mahwah Data Center in order to connect their equipment outside of the
Mahwah Data Center to their equipment or port within the Mahwah Data
Center. IDS and numerous third-party telecommunications service
providers offer these connections to the Mahwah Customers in the form
of wired circuits \8\ into and out of the Mahwah Data Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A Mahwah Customer may use a third party wireless connection,
including a proprietary wireless connection, to the Mahwah Data
Center. In such a case, the portion of the connection closest to the
Mahwah Data Center is wired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A third-party telecommunications service provider that provides
wired circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center (a ``Telecom'')
\9\ completes a circuit by placing equipment in a MMR and installing
carrier circuits between its MMR equipment and one or more points
outside the Mahwah Data Center.\10\ Mahwah Customers that have
contracted with the Telecom to use the circuit connect to the Telecom's
MMR equipment using a cross connect. Once connected to the Telecom's
equipment, the Mahwah Customers can use the Telecom's circuit to
transport data into and out of the Mahwah Data Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Telecoms are licensed by the Federal Communications
Commission (``FCC'') and are not required to be, or be affiliated
with, a member of the Exchange or of an Affiliate SRO.
    \10\ Neither IDS nor the Exchange knows the termination point of
a Telecom's circuit or the content of any data sent on a circuit. A
Telecom elects which MMR it will use, or if it will use both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, a Telecom may sell access to its circuits to a second
Telecom, which allows the second Telecom to use the first Telecom's
circuit to access the Mahwah Data Center. In this way, the second
Telecom gains access to the Mahwah Data Center, where it installs its
equipment in an MMR, without incurring the cost of installing its own
proprietary circuits to the Mahwah Data Center. IDS does not consent
to, and need not be informed of, a Telecom's sale of a circuit to
another Telecom.
    By making it possible for Telecoms to offer their customers
circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center, the MMR services that
are the subject of the present filing allow Telecoms to compete with
IDS. If the MMR services were not available, IDS circuits would be the
only option for all Mahwah Customers and third-party telecommunications
service providers.
MMR Services
    The Exchange proposes to add change the title of the Fee Schedule
to ``Wireless and Meet-Me-Room Connectivity Fees and Charges'' and add
the following MMR services and fees to the end of the Fee Schedule,
under the heading ``C. Meet-Me-Room (`MMR') Services.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange recently filed proposed rule changes regarding
the IDS circuits and services offered to NCL Customers. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91215 (February 26, 2021), 86 FR
12752 (March 4, 2021) (SR-NYSENAT-2021-04). If such filing is
approved by the Commission, the Exchange expects to file an
amendment to the present filing to conform to the relevant changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cabinet-Related Services
    The Exchange proposes to add the following services and fees
relating to the cabinets that IDS provides to Telecoms for them to set
up their servers in the MMRs (collectively, the ``Cabinet-Related
Services''). The Cabinet-Related Services are substantially similar to
co-location services and related fees that the Exchange and the
Affiliate SROs offer to Users, which are set forth in their price lists
and fee schedules (the ``Affiliate SRO Price Lists'').\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See ``Co-Location Fees'' in ``New York Stock Exchange Price
List 2021'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Price_List.pdf; ``NYSE American Equities Price List'' at
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-american/NYSE_America_Equities_Price_List.pdf; ``NYSE American Options Fee
Schedule'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/american-options/NYSE_American_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf; ``NYSE Arca Equities
Fees and Charges'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/NYSE_Arca_Marketplace_Fees.pdf; ``NYSE Arca Options Fees
and Charges'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf; ``Fee Schedule of NYSE
Chicago, Inc.'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/NYSE_Chicago_Fee_Schedule.pdf; and ``NYSE National, Inc. Schedule of
Fees and Rebates'' at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/regulation/nyse/NYSE_National_Schedule_of_Fees.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Initial Fee per MMR Cabinet and MMR Monthly Fee for Cabinets: IDS
offers Telecoms dedicated cabinets in the MMRs to house their
equipment. The cabinets come in sizes based on the number of kilowatts
(``kW'') allocated, subject to a maximum of 8 kW per cabinet. Telecoms
pay an initial fee for each cabinet and a monthly fee based on the
number of kW allocated to all the Telecom's cabinets.\13\ To indicate
how the fee is calculated, the Exchange proposes to add a note stating
that the monthly fee is based on total kWs allocated to all of a
Telecom's cabinets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For example, a Telecom that had two cabinets with a total
power allocation of 12 kW would have a monthly charge of $1,200 per
kW for the first eight kW and $1,050 per kW for the next four kW
(between 9 kW and 12 kw), for a total of $13,800, irrespective of
how it divided the 12 kW between its cabinets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add the following fees and language to the
Fee Schedule for the Cabinet-Related Services:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Fee per MMR Cabinet:
  Dedicated Cabinet of up to 8 kW.......................          $5,000
MMR Monthly Fee for Cabinets:
  Monthly fee is based on total kWs allocated to all of
   a Telecom's cabinets.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Number of kWs                         Monthly Fee
                                                              per kW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4-8.....................................................          $1,200
9-20....................................................           1,050
21-40...................................................             950
41 +....................................................             900
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Access and Service Fees
    The Exchange proposes to add the following services and fees
relating to the access and services IDS provides to Telecoms
(collectively, the ``Access and Service Fees'') to the Fee Schedule.
Most of the Access and Service Fees are substantially similar to
services and related fees that the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs
offer to Users, which are

set forth in the Affiliate SRO Price Lists.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 12, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Data Center Fiber Cross Connect: IDS offers fiber cross connects
for an initial and monthly charge. Cross connects may run between a
Telecom's cabinets, between its cabinet and the cabinet of another
Telecom, or between its cabinet and its customer's cabinet or port.\15\
Cross connects may be bundled (i.e., multiple cross connects within a
single sheath) such that a single sheath can hold either one cross
connect or six cross connects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A cross connect to MMR cabinets may be purchased by the
Telecom or the Telecom's customer. The same fee applies irrespective
of which entity purchases the cross connect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Conduit Sleeve Fee: A Telecom's circuits into and out of the Mahwah
Data Center run through IDS conduits. There are currently three IDS
conduit paths leading into the Mahwah Data Center. A Telecom determines
which conduit or conduits it will use to carry its circuits, which are
carried in individual conduit sleeves. The Telecom is charged an
initial charge for the installation of circuits in the IDS conduit,
which covers up to five hours of work, and a monthly fee per conduit
sleeve for using the IDS conduit.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The number of conduit sleeves a Telecom uses is dependent
on the equipment and technology it uses and the size of the circuits
it sells to Mahwah Customers. Most Telecoms that use them have one
conduit sleeve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Carrier Connection Fee: Telecoms contract with their customers for
circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center. A Telecom is charged a
monthly fee for providing such circuits to Mahwah Customers, on a per
connection basis.
    Connection to Time Protocol Feed: IDS offers Telecoms the option to
purchase connectivity to the Precision Time Protocol, with monthly and
initial charges. Telecoms may make use of time feeds to receive time
and to synchronize clocks between computer systems or throughout a
computer network, and time feeds may assist Telecoms in other
functions, including record keeping or measuring response times.
    Expedite Fee: IDS offers Telecoms the option to expedite the
completion of MMR services purchased or ordered by the Telecoms, for
which the Exchange charges an ``Expedite Fee.''
    The Exchange proposes to add the following fees and language to the
Fee Schedule:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Type of service             Description        Amount of charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Center Fiber Cross       Furnish and install   $500 initial charge
 Connect.                      1 cross connect.      plus $600 monthly
                                                     charge.
                              Furnish and install   $500 initial charge
                               bundle of 6 cross     plus $1,800 monthly
                               connects.             charge.
Conduit Sleeve Fee..........  Install (5 hrs) and   $1,000 initial
                               maintain conduit      charge plus $2,000
                               sleeve supporting     monthly charge per
                               Telecom circuit       conduit sleeve.
                               into data center.
Carrier Connection Fee......  Maintain Telecom's    $1,150 monthly
                               connections to its    charge per
                               non-Telecom data      connection.
                               center customers.
Connection to Time Protocol   Precision Time        $1,000 initial
 Feed.                         Protocol.             charge plus $250
                                                     monthly charge.
Expedite Fee................  Expedited             $4,000 per request.
                               installation/
                               completion of MMR
                               service.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service-Related Fees
    The Exchange proposes to add the following services and fees
relating to services IDS provides to Telecoms (collectively, the
``Service-Related Fees'') to the Fee Schedule. The Service-Related Fees
are substantially similar to services and related fees that the
Exchange and the Affiliate SROs offer to Users, which are set forth in
the Affiliate SRO Price Lists.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See note 12, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Change Fee: IDS charges a Telecom a ``Change Fee'' if the Telecom
requests a change to one or more existing MMR services that IDS has
already established or completed for the Telecom. The Change Fee is
charged per order. If a Telecom orders two or more services at one time
(for example, through submitting an order form requesting multiple
services) the Telecom is charged a one-time Change Fee, which would
cover the multiple services.
    Hot Hands Service: IDS offers Telecoms a ``Hot Hands Service,''
which allows Telecoms to use on-site data center personnel to maintain
Telecom equipment, support network troubleshooting, rack and stack a
server in a Telecom's cabinet, power recycling, and install and
document the fitting of cable in a Telecom's cabinet(s). The Hot Hands
fee is charged per half hour.
    Shipping and Receiving: IDS offers shipping and receiving services
to Telecoms, with a per shipment fee for the receipt of one shipment of
goods at the Mahwah Data Center from the Telecom or supplier.
    Visitor Security Escort: Telecom representatives are required to be
accompanied by a visitor security escort during visits to the Mahwah
Data Center. A fee per visit is charged.
    To reflect the above IDS services and fees, the Exchange proposes
to add the following to the Fee Schedule:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Type of service                         Description                      Amount of charge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change Fee..............................  Change to a service that has      $950 per request.
                                           already been installed/
                                           completed for a Telecom.
Hot Hands Service.......................  Allows Telecom to use on-site     $100 per half hour.
                                           data center personnel to
                                           maintain Telecom equipment,
                                           support network
                                           troubleshooting, rack and
                                           stack, power recycling, and
                                           install and document cable.
Shipping and Receiving..................  Receipt of one shipment of goods  $100 per shipment.
                                           at data center on behalf of
                                           Telecom (includes coordination
                                           of shipping and receiving).
Visitor Security Escort.................  All Telecom representatives are   $75 per visit.
                                           required to be accompanied by a
                                           visitor security escort during
                                           visits to the data center.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allocation of Cabinets and Power
    The Exchange proposes to establish procedures for the allocation of
cabinets and power to Telecoms. The Exchange believes it would be
prudent to have procedures in place for the allocation of cabinets and
power to Telecoms (``Proposed Procedures''), should such allocation be
necessary. The Exchange proposes to add the Proposed Procedures to the
Fee Schedule under the heading ``MMR Notes.''
    As noted above, IDS offers dedicated cabinets in the MMRs to
Telecoms to house their equipment. A Telecom pays an initial fee for
each cabinet and a monthly fee based on the number of kW allocated to
the Telecom's cabinets. The Exchange allocates cabinets on a first-
come/first-serve basis.
    A Telecom may request power upgrades to a dedicated cabinet in
addition to the power allocated to such cabinet (the ``Standard Cabinet
Power''), subject to a maximum of 8 kW per cabinet. A Telecom may
request that such additional power (``Additional Power'') be allocated
to a cabinet when it is first set up or later.\18\ A Telecom with a
dedicated cabinet, for example, may develop its infrastructure in a
manner that allows it to expand the hardware within that cabinet by
adding Additional Power. Because it could add Additional Power to its
existing cabinet, the Telecom would not need an additional cabinet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ For example, a Telecom with a 4 kW cabinet may purchase an
additional 1 kW of Additional Power. It would then have a cabinet
with 5 kW of power. It could not, however, purchase more than 4 kW
of Additional Power, as that would take the cabinet to above 8 kW.
The smallest Standard Cabinet Power is 4 kW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Proposed Procedures would be set forth in Notes 1 and 2. Note 1
would provide that, if the amount of power or cabinets available fell
below specified thresholds, Telecoms would be subject to purchasing
limits. Note 1 would also specify when the purchasing limits would
cease to apply and would provide that if a Telecom requests a number of
cabinets and/or amount of Additional Power that would cause the
unallocated capacity to be below the specified power and cabinet
thresholds, the purchasing limits would apply only to the portion of
the Telecoms's order below the relevant threshold.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For example, if there was 10 kW unallocated power capacity
in the MMR and a Telecom requested to purchase cabinets and
Additional Power that would, together, total 9 kW, the purchasing
limits in MMR Note 1 would not apply to the Telecom's purchase of
the first 2 kW, whether those kW were in the form of cabinets or
Additional Power. Once the power threshold was reached, the combined
limits would be activated, limiting the Telecom's purchase of
additional cabinets and Additional Power. In all, the Telecom would
be permitted to purchase a total of 6 kW out of its original order
of 9 kW. The Telecom could choose whether the 6 kW was in the form
of cabinets, Additional Power, or both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 2 would provide that, if the amount of power or cabinets
available fell to zero, Telecoms seeking to purchase power or cabinets
would be put on a waitlist. In both Notes 1 and 2, the Proposed
Procedures would also state how the procedures regarding cabinets and
the procedures regarding power would relate to each other. In each
case, the Proposed Procedures would state what the threshold amount of
power and cabinets would be to discontinue the limits.
Proposed MMR Note 1
    The Exchange proposes to add the following under the heading ``Note
1: Cabinet and Power Purchasing Limits'':
    If (i) unallocated cabinet inventory is at or below 3 cabinets
(``Cabinet Threshold''), or (ii) the unallocated power capacity in the
MMRs is at or below 8 kW (the ``Power Threshold''), the following
limits on the purchase of new cabinets (``Purchasing Limits'') will
apply:
    a. Cabinet Limits. If only the Cabinet Threshold is reached, the
following measures (the ``Cabinet Limits'') will apply:
     The Exchange will limit each Telecom's purchase of new
cabinets to a maximum of one dedicated cabinet.
     If a Telecom requests, in writing, a number of cabinets
that, if provided, would cause the available cabinet inventory to be
below 3 cabinets, the Cabinet Limits will only apply to the portion of
the Telecom's order below the Cabinet Threshold.
     A Telecom will have to wait 30 days from the date of its
signed order form before purchasing a new cabinet again.
     When unallocated cabinet inventory for the MMRs is more
than 3 cabinets, the Exchange will discontinue the Cabinet Limits.
    b. Combined Limits. If only the Power Threshold is reached or both
the Cabinet Threshold and the Power Threshold are reached, the
following measures (the ``Combined Limits'') will apply:
     A Telecom may purchase either or both of the following, so
long as the combined power usage of such purchases is no more than a
maximum of 4 kW:
    a. One new cabinet, subject to a maximum standard power allocation
of 4 kW (``Standard Cabinets'').
    b. Additional power for new or existing cabinets.
     If a Telecom requests, in writing, a number of Standard
Cabinets and/or an amount of additional power that, if provided, would
cause the unallocated power capacity to be below the Power Threshold or
Cabinet Threshold, the Combined Limits would apply only to the portion
of the Telecom's order below the relevant threshold.
     A Telecom will have to wait 30 days from the date of its
signed order form before purchasing a new Standard Cabinet or
additional power again.
     When unallocated power capacity is above the Power
Threshold, the Exchange will discontinue the Combined Limits. If at
that time the unallocated cabinet inventory is 3 or fewer cabinets, the
Cabinet Limits would enter into effect.
    c. Applicability. If the Cabinet Threshold is reached before the
Power Threshold, the Cabinet Limits will be in effect until the Power
Threshold is reached, after which the Combined Limits will apply.
Proposed MMR Note 2
    The Exchange proposes to add the following under the heading ``Note
2: Cabinet and Combined Waitlists'':
    a. Cabinet Waitlist. The Exchange will create a cabinet waitlist
(``Cabinet Waitlist'') if the available cabinet inventory is zero, or a
Telecom requests, in writing, a number of cabinets that, if provided,
would cause the available inventory to be zero. The Exchange will place
Telecoms seeking cabinets on a Cabinet Waitlist, as follows:
     A Telecom will be placed on the Cabinet Waitlist based on
the date its signed order is received. A Telecom may only have one
order for a new cabinet on the Cabinet Waitlist at a time, and the
order is subject to the Cabinet Limits. If a Telecom changes the size
of its order while it is on the Cabinet Waitlist, it will maintain its
place on the Cabinet Waitlist, provided that the Telecom may not
increase the size of its order such that it would exceed the Cabinet
Limits.
     As cabinets become available, the Exchange will offer a
cabinet to the Telecom at the top of the Cabinet Waitlist. If the
Telecom's order is completed, it will be removed from the Cabinet
Waitlist.
     A Telecom will be removed from the Cabinet Waitlist (a) at
the Telecom's request or (b) if the Telecom turns down an offer of a
cabinet of the same size it requested in its order. If the Exchange
offers the Telecom a cabinet of a different size than the Telecom
requested in its order, the Telecom may turn down the offer and remain
at the

top of the Cabinet Waitlist until its order is completed.
     A Telecom that is removed from the Cabinet Waitlist but
subsequently submits a new written order for a cabinet will be added
back to the bottom of the Cabinet Waitlist.
     When unallocated cabinet inventory is more than 3
cabinets, the Exchange will cease use of the Cabinet Waitlist.
    b. Combined Waitlist. The Exchange will create a power and cabinet
waitlist (``Combined Waitlist'') if the unallocated power capacity is
zero, or if a Telecom requests, in writing, an amount of power (whether
power allocated to a Standard Cabinet or additional power) that, if
provided, would cause the unallocated power capacity to be below zero.
The Exchange will place Telecoms seeking cabinets or power on the
Combined Waitlist, as follows:
     If a Cabinet Waitlist exists when the requirements to
create a Combined Waitlist are met, the Cabinet Waitlist will
automatically convert to the Combined Waitlist. If a Combined Waitlist
exists when the requirements to create a Cabinet Waitlist are met, no
new waitlist will be created, and the Combined Waitlist will continue
in effect.
     A Telecom will be placed on the Combined Waitlist based on
the date its signed order for a cabinet and/or additional power is
received. A Telecom may only have one order for a new cabinet and/or
additional power on the Combined Waitlist at a time, and the order
would be subject to the Combined Limits. If a Telecom changes the size
of its order while it is on the Combined Waitlist, it will maintain its
place on the Combined Waitlist, provided that the Telecom may not
increase the size of its order such that it would exceed the Combined
Limits.
     As additional power and/or cabinets become available, the
Exchange will offer them to the Telecom at the top of the Combined
Waitlist. If the Telecom's order is completed, the order will be
removed from the Combined Waitlist. If the Telecom's order is not
completed, it will remain at the top of the Combined Waitlist.
     A Telecom will be removed from the Combined Waitlist (a)
at the Telecom's request; or (b) if the Telecom turns down an offer
that is the same as its order (e.g., the offer includes a cabinet of
the same size and/or the amount of additional power that the Telecom
requested in its order). If the Exchange offers the Telecom an offer
that is different than its order, the Telecom may turn down the offer
and remain at the top of the Combined Waitlist until its order is
completed.
     A Telecom that is removed from the Combined Waitlist but
subsequently submits a new written order for a cabinet and/or
additional power will be added back to the bottom of the waitlist.
     If the Combined Waitlist is in effect, when unallocated
power capacity in co-location is at 8 kW or more, the Exchange will
cease use of the Combined Waitlist. If at that time the unallocated
cabinet inventory is 3 or fewer cabinets, the Cabinet Waitlist would
enter into effect.
Application and Impact of the Proposed Changes
    The existing Telecoms are currently subject to the described
services and fees. Accordingly, the Exchange expects that if it is
approved, the impact of the proposed change would be minimal.
    The proposed change applies to all market participants and does not
apply differently to distinct types or sizes of licensed
telecommunications service providers. Rather, it applies to all
equally.
    Use of the services proposed in this filing is completely voluntary
and available to all market participants on a non-discriminatory basis.
Competitive Environment
    By making it possible for Telecoms to offer their customers
circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center, the MMR services that
are the subject of the present filing allow Telecoms to compete with
IDS. Due to the MMR services, the market for circuits into and out of
the Mahwah Data Center is competitive, with market participants able to
choose between various Telecom and IDS options. Each market participant
considering whether to purchase a circuit can choose which circuit to
purchase based on which combination of provider, latency, bandwidth,
price, and route diversity best meets its business needs.
    The Exchange understands that most of the Telecoms that provide
circuits do so at fees lower than those of IDS, and that most Mahwah
Customers use Telecom circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center.
If the MMR services were not available, all Mahwah Customers and third-
party telecommunications service providers would be required to use IDS
circuits if they wanted access to the Mahwah Data Center, thereby
reducing competition.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Exchange recently filed proposed rule changes regarding
the IDS circuits and services offered to NCL Customers. See note 11,
supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not expect that IDS would attract any new
customers as a result of the proposed change.
    IDS operates in a highly competitive market in which exchanges,
third party telecommunications providers, Hosting Users,\21\ and other
third-party vendors offer connectivity services as a means to
facilitate the trading and other market activities of market
participants. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference
for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically, in
Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and recognized that
current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ ``Hosting'' is a service offered by a User to another
entity In the User's space within the Mahwah Data Center. The
Exchange allows Users to act as Hosting Users for a monthly fee. See
NYSE National Co-location Notice, supra note 7, at 26318.
    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues relating to services related to the Mahwah Data Center
and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that
market participants would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\23\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\24\ in particular, because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange further believes
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act,\25\ because it provides for the equitable allocation of

reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers
and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Change Is Reasonable
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
and would perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a
national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest, for the following reasons.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
because, by making it possible for Telecoms to continue to offer their
customers circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center, the MMR
services that are the subject of the present filing would allow
Telecoms to continue to compete with IDS.
    The benefit is not just to the Telecoms themselves. The Exchange
understands that most Mahwah Customers use Telecom circuits into and
out of the Mahwah Data Center. If the MMR services were not available,
all Mahwah Customers and third-party telecommunications service
providers would be required to use IDS circuits to access the Mahwah
Data Center, thereby reducing competition for connectivity into the
Mahwah Data Center. So long as the MMR services are available, such
market participants have more choices with respect to the provider,
latency, bandwidth, price, and route diversity of the circuits they
use, allowing market participants to select the circuits that better
suit their needs, thereby helping them tailor their circuits to the
requirements of their businesses.
    Use of any MMR service is completely voluntary. Each third-party
telecommunications provider is able to determine whether to use MMR
services based on the requirements of its business operations, and each
Mahwah Customer is able to determine whether to use Telecom or IDS
services based on the requirements of their business operations.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
because only the market participants that voluntarily select to receive
the MMR services described herein are charged for them, and those
services are available to all telecommunications service providers
licensed by the FCC. Furthermore, the IDS services described in this
filing are available to all such market participants on an equal basis.
All Telecoms that voluntarily select a specific MMR service are charged
the same amount for that service as all other Telecoms purchasing that
service. A Telecom could change what services it receives at any time.
    The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable because, to
the extent the services IDS offers to Telecoms are substantially the
same as the services offered by the Exchange to Users, the fees are the
same. With respect to the two services not offered to Users, the
Conduit Sleeve Fee and Carrier Connection Fee, the Exchange believes
the fees IDS charges Telecoms are reasonable because the services
correspond to the Telecoms' usage of the IDS conduits and the Telecoms'
ability to offer their circuits to their customers. The Exchange
believes the proposed fees are reasonable because to offer the MMRs,
IDS must provide, maintain and operate the Mahwah Data Center
technology infrastructure, including the installation, monitoring,
support, and maintenance of the MMR services. Also in connection with
providing the MMR services, IDS needs to expand the network
infrastructure to keep pace with the services available to Telecoms,
including any increasing demand for bandwidth and conduit space, and to
establish any additional administrative controls. Finally, IDS has to
handle the installation, administration, monitoring, support and
maintenance of the MMR services, including by responding to any
production issues.
    The Exchange believes that IDS's fees for different MMR services
are reasonable because not all Telecoms need, or choose, to utilize the
same services. The variety of services offered by IDS, particularly
with respect to cabinets and power, allows Telecoms to select which
services to use, based on their business needs, and Telecoms are only
charged for the services that they select. By charging only those
Telecoms that utilize a service, those Telecoms that directly benefit
from a service support it.
    The Exchange believes the proposed MMR Notes 1 and 2 are reasonable
because it would be reasonable for it to put in place the Proposed
Procedures to establish the allocation of power and cabinets on an
equitable basis.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable that, if a shortage in
power or in both power and cabinets should arise, the Proposed
Procedures would address the allocation of both power and cabinets, as
the Exchange would not be able to provide cabinets if no power were
available. If Telecoms purchased sufficient Additional Power to trigger
the Combined Waitlist, the Exchange would be unable to provide Telecoms
with cabinets, even if it did not have a shortage in cabinets, because
cabinets come with power. For the same reason, if Telecoms purchased
sufficient Additional Power to trigger the Combined Limits, it would be
reasonable to have limits that apply to both power and cabinets.
    The Exchange believes that integrating the procedures for the
allocation of cabinets and power would be reasonable, because cabinets
are provided with power. Having both power and cabinets covered by the
Proposed Procedures would ensure that the procedures for all relevant
services are consistent and coordinated. Having the Proposed Procedures
state what would occur if the Cabinet Threshold and Power Threshold are
reached at different times, and how the Cabinet Waitlist and Combined
Waitlist interrelate, is reasonable for the same reason.
    The Exchange believes that having a two-tier structure of
establishing, first, a purchasing limitation on order size, and second,
a waitlist, would be a reasonable method to respond to increasing
demand for power and cabinets in the future. The Exchange notes that
the Proposed Procedures are consistent with both the Nasdaq procedures
for allocating cabinets and the Exchange procedures for allocating
cabinets and power in colocation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62397 (June 28,
2010), 75 FR 38860 (July 6, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-019) and 91515
(February 18, 2021), 86 FR 11350 (February 24, 2021) (SR-NYSE-2021-
12; SR-NYSEAmer-2021-08; SR-NYSEArca-2021-11; SR-NYSECHX-2021-02;
and SR-NYSENAT-2021-03).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed thresholds are reasonable.
Based on experience, the Exchange believes that the Cabinet Threshold
and Power Threshold are both reasonable and appropriate because they
are sufficiently low that they would not be triggered repeatedly, yet
offer a reasonable buffer during which the purchase limits would apply
before a waitlist would become effective.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed purchase limits are
reasonable. Based on its experience with the MMR and purchasing trends
over the last few years, the Exchange believes that in most cases one
cabinet would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs and leave a margin
for potential growth. For the same reason, the Exchange believes that
the amount of power that a Telecom would be allowed to buy under the
proposed limitations, whether in the form of a cabinet or Additional
Power, would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs while leaving a margin
for potential growth.

    Further, the Exchange believes that, by establishing a waitlist on
the basis of the date it receives signed orders, limiting the size and
number of orders a Telecom may have on the waitlist at any one time,
stating what happens if a Telecom changes its order while on the
waitlist, and removing a Telecom from the waitlist if it turns down an
offer that is the same as what it requested, the Proposed Procedures
are reasonably designed to prevent Telecoms from utilizing the waitlist
as a method to obtain a greater portion of the power and cabinets
available, and facilitating a more equitable distribution. Similarly,
the Exchange believes that by requiring a 30-day delay before a Telecom
subject to the Cabinet Limits or Combined Limits could purchase a
cabinet or Additional Power again, the Proposed Procedures are
reasonably designed to prevent a Telecom from obtaining a greater
portion of the power and cabinets available.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is reasonable
because the Exchange would only place limits on Telecoms' ability to
purchase cabinets or Additional Power if either or both the Power
Threshold and Cabinet Threshold are reached. Similarly, the Exchange
believes that the proposed change is reasonable because a waitlist
would only be created if unallocated cabinet inventory or power
capacity fell to zero, or if a Telecom requests, in writing, a number
of cabinets or amount of power that, if provided, would cause the
available inventory of cabinets and/or unallocated power capacity to be
below zero, and because there would be an established threshold for
cessation of the waitlists.
The Proposed Change Is Equitable
    The Exchange believes that IDS's fees for MMR services are
equitably allocated among market participants.
    By making it possible for Telecoms to continue to offer their
customer circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data Center, the MMR
services that are the subject of the present filing would allow
Telecoms to continue to compete with IDS.
    The benefit is not just to the Telecoms themselves. The Exchange
understands that most Mahwah Customers use Telecom circuits into and
out of the Mahwah Data Center. If the MMR services were not available,
all Mahwah Customers and third-party telecommunications service
providers would be required to use IDS circuits, thereby reducing
competition for connectivity into the Mahwah Data Center. So long as
the MMR services are available, such market participants have more
choices with respect to the provider, latency, bandwidth, price, and
route diversity of the circuits they use, allowing market participants
to select the circuits that better suit their needs, thereby helping
them tailor their circuits to the requirements of their businesses.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is equitable because
it would apply to all market participants and would not apply
differently to distinct types or sizes of licensed telecommunications
service providers. It would apply to all equally.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is equitable
because only the market participants that voluntarily select to receive
the MMR services described herein are charged for them, and those
services are available to all telecommunications service providers
licensed by the FCC. Furthermore, the IDS services described in this
filing are available to all such market participants on an equal basis
(i.e., the same products and services are available to all
telecommunications service providers licensed by the FCC). All Telecoms
that voluntarily select a specific MMR service are charged the same
amount for that service as all other Telecoms purchasing that service.
A Telecom could change what services it receives at any time.
    The Exchange believes the proposed MMR Notes 1 and 2 are equitable
because the Proposed Procedures would establish a rational, objective
procedure that would be applied uniformly by the Exchange to all
Telecoms that requested new cabinets or Additional Power.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed thresholds are equitable.
Based on experience, the Exchange believes that the Cabinet Threshold
and Power Threshold are both reasonable and appropriate because they
are sufficiently low that they would not be triggered repeatedly, yet
offer a reasonable buffer during which the purchase limits would apply
before a waitlist would become effective.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed purchase limits are
equitable. Based on its experience with the MMR and purchasing trends
over the last few years, the Exchange believes that in most cases one
cabinet would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs while leaving a
margin for potential growth. For the same reason, the Exchange believes
that the amount of power that a Telecom would be allowed to buy under
the proposed limitations, whether in the form of a cabinet or
Additional Power, would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs while
leaving a margin for potential growth.
    Further, the Exchange believes that the Proposed Procedures
facilitate an equitable distribution of cabinets and power, as they are
reasonably designed to prevent Telecoms from utilizing the waitlist as
a method to obtain a greater portion of the power and cabinets
available, and because they would require a 30-day delay before a
Telecom subject to the Cabinet Limits or Combined Limits could purchase
a cabinet or Additional Power again. The Exchange would only place
limits on Telecoms' ability to purchase cabinets or Additional Power if
either or both the Power Threshold and Cabinet Threshold are reached. A
waitlist would only be created if unallocated cabinet inventory or
power capacity fell to zero, or if a Telecom requests, in writing, a
number of cabinets or amount of power that, if provided, would cause
the available inventory of cabinets and/or unallocated power capacity
to be below zero.
The Proposed Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes its proposal is not unfairly discriminatory.
The proposed change would apply to all market participants and would
not apply differently to distinct types or sizes of licensed
telecommunications service providers. It would apply to all equally.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not unfairly
discriminatory because only the market participants that voluntarily
select to receive the MMR services described herein are charged for
them, and those services are available to all telecommunications
service providers licensed by the FCC. Furthermore, the IDS services
described in this filing are available to all such market participants
on an equal basis (i.e., the same products and services are available
to all telecommunications service providers licensed by the FCC). All
Telecoms that voluntarily select a specific MMR service are charged the
same amount for that service as all other Telecoms purchasing that
service. A Telecom could change what services it receives at any time.
    Due to the MMR services, the market for circuits into and out of
the Mahwah Data Center is competitive, with market participants able to
choose between various Telecom and IDS options. Each of the Telecoms
offers circuits to market participants in competition with the IDS
offerings. Each market participant considering whether to purchase a
circuit can weigh whether to purchase an IDS or Telecom circuit, and
can choose which circuit to purchase based on which combination of
provider,

latency, bandwidth, price, and route diversity best meets its business
needs.
    If the MMR services were not available, all Mahwah Customers and
third-party telecommunications service providers would be required to
use IDS circuits, thereby reducing competition for connectivity into
the Mahwah Data Center. So long as the MMR services are available, such
market participants have more choices with respect to the provider,
latency, bandwidth, price, and route diversity of the circuits they
use, allowing market participants to select the circuits that better
suit their needs, thereby helping them tailor their circuits to the
requirements of their businesses.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not unfairly
discriminatory because, if the Proposed Procedures were in place, all
Telecoms would be able to identify the permitted cabinet and power
options and the procedures that would apply to them in the event that
unallocated cabinet or power supply runs low in the future. The
Proposed Procedures would assist the Exchange in accommodating demand
for MMR services, and power and cabinets in particular, on an equitable
basis.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable fees, requirements, terms and
conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    The proposed change does not affect competition among national
securities exchanges or among members of the Exchange, but rather
between IDS and its commercial competitors.
    As noted above, the Exchange is making the current proposal solely
as a result of the Commission's recent interpretation of the
definitions of ``exchange'' and ``facility'' in the Wireless Approval
Order, which the Exchange is presently challenging on appeal to the
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.\27\ The Exchange
has nevertheless proposed this rule change in order to preserve the
ability of IDS to offer the services described herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See note 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If IDS were compelled to stop offering such services, Telecoms
would not be able to provide circuits into and out of the Mahwah Data
Center, and all Mahwah Customers and third-party telecommunications
service providers would be required to use IDS circuits, thereby
reducing competition for connectivity into the Mahwah Data Center,
which would be a detriment to competition overall. Indeed, the Exchange
understands that most Mahwah Customers use Telecom circuits into and
out of the Mahwah Data Center. That option would be removed if IDS were
compelled to stop offering MMR services.
    The Exchange notes that IDS competes with the Telecoms to provide
circuits for Mahwah Customers, as well as other Telecoms, and that none
of the Telecoms have been compelled to file their services or fees with
the Commission. Requiring IDS to do so puts IDS at a competitive
disadvantage vis-[agrave]-vis its competitors. Requiring the Exchange
to file IDS services and fees is therefore a burden on competition.
    The Exchange believes competition would be best served by allowing
IDS to freely compete with the other providers of connectivity services
into and out of the Mahwah Data Center, without the additional burden
on IDS alone to file any proposed changes to services and fees with the
Commission.
    With respect to the proposed MMR Notes 1 and 2, the Exchange
believes that, if triggered, the imposition of the purchase limits or
waitlist provisions would not impose a burden on a Telecom's ability to
compete that is not necessary or appropriate. The Exchange believes
that it would be reasonable for it to put in place the Proposed
Procedures to establish a method for allocating not just cabinets but
also power on an equitable basis.
    The Exchange would only follow the Proposed Procedures and place
limits on Telecoms' ability to purchase new power and cabinets if
either or both the proposed Power Threshold and Cabinet Threshold were
met. Similarly, a waitlist would only be created if unallocated cabinet
inventory or power capacity fell to zero, or if a Telecom requests, in
writing, a number of cabinets or amount of power that, if provided,
would cause the available inventory of cabinets and/or unallocated
power capacity to be below zero.
    Based on its experience with the MMR and purchasing trends over the
last few years, the Exchange believes that in most cases one cabinet
would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs while leaving a margin for
potential growth. For the same reason, the Exchange believes that the
amount of power that a Telecom would be allowed to buy under the
proposed limitations, whether in the form of a cabinet or Additional
Power, would be sufficient for a Telecom's needs while leaving a margin
for potential growth.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed MMR Notes would articulate
rational, objective procedures, and would serve to reduce any potential
for confusion on how cabinets and power would be allocated if a
shortage in one or the other were to arise in the future, and would
thereby make the Price List more transparent and reduce any potential
ambiguity.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register, or such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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-NYSENAT-2021-09 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-NYSENAT-2021-09. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will

post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSENAT-2021-09, and should be submitted on or before May 13, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\

J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-08306 Filed 4-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 113)]
[Notices]
[Page 32695-32697]
[DOCID:fr13jn07-123]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55860; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to the Modification of Phlx Rule 185A

June 5, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on May 25, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II, below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\
which rendered the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx proposes to amend Phlx Rule 185A, which clarified the
entry, routing and other requirements of certain orders on XLE, the
Exchange's electronic equity trading system, prior to March 5, 2007,
the Trading Phase Date,\5\ to make certain provisions of the rule
applicable until the All Stocks Phase Date.\6\ The text of the proposed
rule change is available on Phlx's Web site, http://www.phlx.com, at

Phlx's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Trading Phase Date was the ``[f]inal date for full
operation of Regulation NMS-compliant trading systems [by exchanges]
that intend[ed] to qualify their quotations for trade-through
protection under Rule 611 [during the roll-out of Regulation NMS].''
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55160 (January 24, 2007), 72
FR 4202 (January 30, 2007).
    \6\ The All Stocks Phase Date is the date that full industry
compliance with Rules 610 and 611 of Regulation NMS, 17 CFR 242.610
and 611, begins. Currently, the All Stocks Phase Date is scheduled
to be August 20, 2007. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55160
(January 24, 2007), 72 FR 4202 (January 30, 2007). However, should
the Commission change the All Stocks Phase Date, the changes to Phlx
Rule 185A adopted in this proposed rule change will remain in effect
until that new date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Phlx 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 Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to clarify the
obligation of XLE Participants when submitting certain XLE order types
before the All Stocks Phase Date. Phlx Rule 185A, Orders and Order
Execution--Temporary, was adopted in November 2006, to clarify the
entry, routing and other requirements of certain orders on XLE in the
period before the Trading Phase Date.\7\ Phlx Rule 185A was
subsequently amended twice.\8\ Each amendment addressed the period
before the Trading Phase Date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54760 (November 15,
2006), 71 FR 67687 (November 22, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-76).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55044 (January 5,
2007), 72 FR 1361 (January 11, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2006-92) and 54788
(November 20, 2006), 71 FR 68877 (November 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-
77).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx Rule 185A clarified the routing of orders from XLE to other
marketplaces,\9\ the entry of Intermarket Sweep Orders and IOC Cross
Orders marked by the XLE Participant entering the order as meeting the
requirement of an intermarket sweep order,\10\ the requirements for
certain IOC Cross Orders marked as Benchmark,\11\ and the requirements
for certain IOC Cross Orders marked as Qualified Continent Trades.\12\
At this time, Phlx proposes to delete the provisions of Phlx Rule 185A
that applied to routing and modify the remaining provisions of the rule
to make them applicable to the period prior to the All Stocks Phase
Date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Phlx Rule 185A(a).
    \10\ See Phlx Rule 185A(b).
    \11\ See Phlx Rule 185A(c).
    \12\ See Phlx Rule 185A(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically Phlx Rule 185A(a) is being modified to delete
provisions

regarding routing of orders on XLE since intermarket sweep orders have
been available at all venues to which XLE will route an order since the
Trading Phase Date. In its place, Phlx Rule 185A(a) will define the
term ``All Stocks Phase Date.'' Additionally, Phlx Rule 185A(b)-(d) are
being amended to substitute the term ``All Stocks Phase Date'' for
``Trading Phase Date'' as the provisions of these sections of the rule
will apply until the All Stocks Phase Date. At that time, Phlx will
delete Phlx Rule 185A from its rulebook as it will no longer have any
effect.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing rule (i) does not significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms, does not
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest, provided that the
Exchange has given 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 proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\ As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under
the Act,\17\ Phlx provided the Commission with written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description
and text of the proposed rule change, prior to the date of the filing
of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
\18\ normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date
of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act \19\ permits
the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay,
which would make the rule change effective and operative upon filing.
In its filing, the Exchange stated its belief that waiver of the
operative delay would be consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest because the amended temporary rule should
eliminate potential confusion relating to orders on XLE and clarify XLE
Participant obligations when submitting certain order types to the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposed rule change clarifies the obligations of XLE
Participants when submitting certain order types to the Exchange before
the All Stocks Phase Date. In particular, the proposal amends the text
of Phlx Rule 185A, which had previously been applicable to the Trading
Phase Date, to reflect the applicability of those provisions which will
remain in effect until the All Stocks Phase Date. Once the All Stocks
Phase Date arrives, the applicable provisions of Phlx Rule 185 will be
operative and the Exchange will no longer need temporary Rule 185A.\20\
Accordingly, consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing with the Commission.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ As the Exchange has made clear in its filing, it intends to
delete Phlx Rule 185A from its rulebook upon the All Stocks Phase
Date. Given the definitively limited application of the amended rule
and the specified removal date, the Exchange does not intend to file
a separate proposed rule change to remove the rule text from its
rulebook, but rather will remove the rule as specified.
    \21\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2007-41 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2007-41. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Phlx. 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-Phlx-2007-41 and should be
submitted on or before July 5, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-11368 Filed 6-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P