[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 153 (Friday, August 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48039-48044]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17251]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89461; File No. SR-NYSECHX-2020-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Chicago, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Partial Amendment No. 1 to Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Schedule of Wireless Connectivity Fees and Charges To Add Wireless
Connectivity Services

August 3, 2020.

I. Introduction

    On February 11, 2020, NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'' or ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change (SR-NYSECHX-2020-05) to amend the
schedule of Wireless Connectivity Fees and Charges (``Wireless Fee
Schedule'') to add wireless connectivity services that transport the
market data of certain affiliates of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Commission published the proposed rule change for public
comment in the Federal Register on February 25, 2020.\3\ The Commission
received several comments on the proposed rule change, and a response
from the Exchange.\4\ On April 1, 2020, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of
the Act,\5\ the Commission designated a longer period within which to
either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule
change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the
proposed rule change.\6\ On May 18, 2020, the Commission instituted
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.\7\ The Commission received additional comments in response
to the Order Instituting Proceedings.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88240 (February 19,
2020), 85 FR 10795 (February 25, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-05)
(``Wireless II Notice''). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 88237 (February 19, 2020), 85 FR 10752 (February 25, 2020) (SR-
NYSE-2020-11); 88238 (February 19, 2020), 85 FR 10776 (February 25,
2020) (SR-NYSEAMER-2020-10); 88239 (February 19, 2020), 85 FR 10786
(February 25, 2020) (SR-NYSEArca-2020-15); and 88241 (February 19,
2020), 85 FR 10738 (February 25, 2020) (SR-NYSENAT-2020-08).
    \4\ Comments received on the Wireless II Notice and the
Exchange's response are available on the Commission's website at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysechx-2020-05/srnysechx202005.htm.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88540 (April 1,
2020), 85 FR 19562 (April 7, 2020). The Commission designated May
25, 2020, as the date by which it should approve, disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the
proposed rule changes.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88901 (May 18,
2020), 85 FR 31273 (May 22, 2020) in which the Commission instituted
proceedings (``Order Instituting Proceedings'' or ``OIP'').
    \8\ Comments received on the Wireless II Notice following the
OIP also are available on the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysechx-2020-05/srnysechx202005.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 27, 2020, the Exchange filed Partial Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change in response to certain comments on the proposed
rule change. Partial Amendment No. 1 is described in Item II below,
which has been substantially prepared by the Exchange.\9\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on Partial
Amendment No. 1 from interested persons.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission has reformatted the Exchange's presentation
of the footnotes.
    \10\ Partial Amendment No. 1 is also available on the
Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysechx-2020-05/srnysechx202005.htm. The Commission also refers interested
persons to Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88172 (February 11,
2020), 85 FR 8923 (February 18, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-02) (wherein
the Exchange filed a proposed rule change to establish the Wireless
Fee Schedule listing available wireless bandwidth connections
between the Mahwah, New Jersey data center and other data centers
(``Wireless I'') and concurrently proposes to partially amend
Wireless I). Partial Amendment No. 1 to Wireless I is available on
the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysechx-2020-02/srnysechx202002.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Amendment

    NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago'' or the ``Exchange'') hereby
submits this Partial Amendment No. 1 to the above-referenced filing
(``Filing'') in connection with the proposed rule change to add
wireless connectivity that transport the market data of certain
affiliates of the Exchange to the schedule of Wireless Connectivity
Fees and Charges (the ``Wireless Fee Schedule''). With this Partial
Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposes a new rule to place restrictions
on the use of a pole on the grounds of the Mahwah, New Jersey data
center that is used for wireless connectivity services that transport
the market data of certain of affiliates of the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes the following amendments to the Filing:
    1. The Exchange proposes to amend the first paragraph in Item 1(a)
on page 3 of the Filing:
    The wireless connectivity services do not transport market data of
the Exchange. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the first
paragraph of Item 1(a) on page 3 of the Filing to reflect that fact and
to add text to describe the proposed rule change. Specifically, it
proposes to add ``(a)'' before ``wireless connectivity services'';
delete ``the Exchange and''; add ``of the Exchange'' after ``certain
affiliates''; and add new text at the end of the paragraph to describe
the proposed rule change, as follows (new text underlined, deletions in
[brackets]):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN07AU20.006

    The Exchange proposes to add (a) wireless connectivity services
that transport market data of three Exchange affiliates, New York Stock
Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') and NYSE
National, Inc. (``NYSE National'') to the Wireless Fee
Schedule[.],3/4 and (b) a new rule to place restrictions on
the use of a pole on the grounds of the Mahwah, New Jersey data center
that is used for such wireless connectivity services. A market
participant is not able to use the wireless connectivity services to
connect to Exchange market data.
    2. The Exchange proposes to amend the carryover paragraph on pages
3 and

4 of the Filing (second full paragraph on page 24 of the Exhibit 1):
    The Exchange proposes to add amend the carryover paragraph on pages
3 and 4 of the Filing (second full paragraph on page 24 of the Exhibit
1) to add ``(a)'' before ``wireless connectivity services'' and add new
text to describe the proposed rule change, as follows (new text
underlined, deletion in [brackets]:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN07AU20.007

    3. The Exchange proposes to add a new section titled ``Proposed New
Rule'' and accompanying footnotes after the first full paragraph on
page 14 of the Filing (carryover paragraph on pages 40 and 41 of the
Exhibit 1):
    The Exchange proposes a new rule to place restrictions on the use
of a pole on the grounds of the Mahwah, New Jersey data center that is
used for wireless connectivity services. Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to add a new section titled ``Proposed New Rule'' and
accompanying footnotes (subsequent footnotes would be renumbered in a
conforming change) after the first full paragraph on page 14 of the
Filing (carryover paragraph on pages 40 and 41 of the Exhibit 1), after
the end of the section titled ``The Proposed Service and Fees,'' as
follows (all text is new):

Proposed New Rule

    Since 2016, IDS has had the use of a pole on the grounds of the
Mahwah data center.27/28 The data center pole is part of
the network utilized for the Wireless Market Data Connections to the
Carteret and Secaucus Third Party Data Centers.28/29 At
the data center pole, the wireless connection to the Third Party
Data Centers converts to a fiber connection, and the fiber
connection travels from the data center pole into the Mahwah data
center.29/30 The equipment on the data center pole
belongs to IDS and Anova Technologies, LLC (``Anova''), the non-ICE
entity that owns the wireless network used for the Wireless Market
Data Connections to Secaucus and Carteret.30/31
    Other third parties that offer wireless services utilize
commercial poles located outside the grounds of the Mahwah, New
Jersey data center for their wireless networks. A third party's
wireless connections to the Third Party Data Center convert to fiber
connections at the commercial pole, and the fiber connects the
commercial pole to the Mahwah data center.
    Several such third parties have objected to the use of the data
center pole for the Wireless Market Data Connections. They argue
that IDS has an advantage over its competitors because third parties
are not allowed access to the data center pole,31/32 and
the data center pole is closer to the Mahwah data center than any
commercial pole.32/33 At least one third party has raised
the additional concern that the Wireless Market Data Connections may
benefit from ``less obvious and more discreet types of latency
advantages'' due to infrastructure inside the Mahwah data center,
noting that ``some connections may have a longer fiber route than
others within a data center or may have to go through various
equipment or meet me rooms that an affiliate or preferred provider
of an exchange do not.'' 33/34
    The Exchange is proposing a new Rule 3.14 (Data Center Pole
Latency Restrictions--Connectivity to Production of Exchange Market
Data) that would require that the length of the connection from the
data center pole to the point inside the Mahwah data center where
Exchange market data is produced be no less than the length of the
connection from the closest commercial pole to the same point. By
requiring that the compared connections both extend to where
Exchange market data is produced, the proposed rule would take
distances within the Mahwah data center into account.

    The proposed rule would include the following definitions:

     ``Commercial Pole'' would mean a pole (a) on which one
or more third parties locate wireless equipment used to offer
wireless connectivity to other third parties, and (b) from which a
fiber connection extends from third party equipment on the pole to
the Data Center.
     ``Data Center'' would mean the Mahwah, New Jersey data
center where the Exchange's matching engine is located, or its
successor.
     ``Data Center Pole'' would mean a pole that (a) holds
wireless equipment, (b) is located within the grounds of the Data
Center, and (c) cannot be used by third parties other than third
parties with which the Exchange or an ICE Affiliate has an agreement
to provide services in the name of the Exchange or an ICE Affiliate.
     ``ICE Affiliate'' would mean Intercontinental Exchange,
Inc. (``ICE'') and any entity that directly or indirectly, through
one or more intermediaries, controls, is controlled by, or is under
common control with ICE, where ``control'' means that one entity
possesses, directly or indirectly, voting control of the other
entity either through ownership of capital stock or other equity
securities or through majority representation on the board of
directors or other management body of such entity.

    The proposed rule would require that:

the length of the connection between (a) the base of the Data Center
Pole and (b) the point inside the Data Center where Exchange market
data is produced shall be no less than the length of the connection
between (x) the base of the closest Commercial Pole and (y) the
point inside the Data Center where Exchange market data is produced.

27/28 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76748
(December 23, 3015), 80 FR 81609 (December 30, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-
52) (order approving proposed rule change to the co-location
services offered by the NYSE (the offering of a wireless connection
to allow users to receive market data feeds from third party
markets) and to reflect changes to the NYSE's price list related to
these services).
28/29 The Wireless Market Data Connections with Markham,
Canada do not use equipment on the data center pole.
29/30 The wireless network similarly converts to a fiber
connection for its connection into the Third Party Data Centers.
30/31 Equipment for services Anova offers

under its own name is not allowed on the data center pole.
31/32 IDS does not sell rights to third parties to
operate wireless equipment on the data center pole due to space
limitations, security concerns, and the interference that would
arise between equipment placed too closely together.
32/33 See letter from Gregory Babyak, Global Head of
Regulatory Affairs, Bloomberg L.P., to Ms. Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
dated June 12, 2020; letter from Stephen John Berger, Managing
Director, Global Head of Government and Regulatory Policy, Citadel
Securities, to Ms. Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 12, 2020; letter from Jim Considine, Chief Financial Officer,
McKay Brothers LLC (``McKay Brothers''), to Ms. Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 12, 2020 (``McKay Letter''); and
letter from Thomas M. Merritt, Deputy General Counsel, Virtu
Financial, Inc. to Ms. Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
dated March 10, 2020.
33/34 McKay Letter, supra note 32/33, at 9.

    4. The Exchange proposes to add new text after the first full
paragraph on page 16 of the Filing (first full paragraph on page 43 of
the Exhibit 1):
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Filing to include additional
analysis on the competitive environment for wireless connections.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add a paragraph and accompanying
footnotes (subsequent footnotes would be renumbered in a conforming
change) after the first full paragraph on page 16 of the Filing (first
full paragraph on page 43 of the Exhibit 1), as follows (all text is
new):

    Such competitors can offer wireless connectivity to Selected
Market Data or other Exchange market data in the Third Party Data
Centers by obtaining the market data at the Mahwah data center and
sending it over their wireless network to the Third Party Data
Centers.37/38 The Exchange believes that its competitors'
wireless connections provide connectivity at the same or similar
speed as the Wireless Market Data Connections, and at the same or
similar cost. Indeed, the McKay Letter acknowledges that McKay
Brothers has the fastest wireless network.38/39

37/38 A market participant in any of the Third Party Data
Centers or the Mahwah data center also may create a proprietary
wireless market data connection, connect through another market
participant, or utilize fiber connections offered by the Exchange,
ICE Affiliates, and other service providers and third party
telecommunications providers.
38/39 McKay Letter, supra note 32/33, at 4.

    5. The Exchange proposes to amend the Statutory Basis section of
the Filing after the fourth full paragraph on page 18 of the Filing
(carryover paragraph on pages 46 and 47 of the Exhibit 1):
    The Exchange proposes to include information in the Filing
regarding why it believes the proposed new rule is reasonable. The
Exchange proposes to amend the Statutory Basis section of the Filing to
add new paragraphs and accompanying footnotes (subsequent footnotes
would be renumbered in a conforming change) after the fourth full
paragraph on page 18 of the Filing (carryover paragraph on pages 46 and
47 of the Exhibit 1), at the end of the section titled ``The Proposed
Change is Reasonable,'' as follows (all text is new):

    The Exchange believes that the proposed new Rule 3.14 would be
reasonable as, pursuant to the rule, the networks for the Wireless
Market Data Connections, and future wireless connections that use a
Data Center Pole, would ``operat[e] in the same manner as
competitors do today without a latency subsidy or other advantage
provided by the Exchanges. . . .'' 43/44 Accordingly, the
proposed new rule would promote just and equitable principles of
trade and, in general, protect investors and the public interest by
ensuring that the subscribers to services using the IDS wireless
network do not benefit from any physical proximity ``on the segment
[of the network] closest to the Exchanges' data center that no
competitor can replicate.'' 44/45 By ending both of the
compared connections at the point inside the Data Center where
Exchange market data is produced, the proposed rule would take
distances within the Mahwah data center into
account.45/46
    The proposed new rule would not apply differently to distinct
types or sizes of market participants. The Exchange would be
required to ensure that the length of the connection between (a) the
base of the Data Center Pole and (b) the point inside the Data
Center where Exchange market data is produced, would be no less than
the length of the connection between (x) the base of the closest
Commercial Pole and (y) the point inside the Data Center where
Exchange market data is produced.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of
``Commercial Pole'' is reasonable and would promote just and
equitable principles of trade because it would encompass any pole on
which a third party locates its wireless equipment in order to offer
wireless connectivity to customers. The Exchange believes that such
third parties are the direct competitors for the Wireless Market
Data Connections, as they also offer wireless connections to
customers. If a third party used a pole for a proprietary wireless
network and that pole does not have one or more third parties'
wireless equipment used to offer wireless connectivity to other
third parties, that pole would not fall within the scope of the
definition of Commercial Pole.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of ``Data
Center'' is reasonable and would promote just and equitable
principles of trade because it would capture any data center to
which the Exchange locates its matching engine.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of ``Data
Center Pole'' is reasonable and would promote just and equitable
principles of trade because it would encompass not just the current
pole, but also any additional or successor pole on the grounds of
the Data Center, so long as such pole could not be used by third
parties other than third parties with which the Exchange or an ICE
Affiliate had an agreement to provide services in the name of the
Exchange or an ICE Affiliate, such as Anova.
    The Exchange believes that the definition of ``ICE Affiliate''
is reasonable and would promote just and equitable principles of
trade because the same definition is used in Article 22, Rule 28
(Additional Requirements for Listed Securities Issued by
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. or its Affiliates) and so using it
would add transparency, clarity and internal consistency to Exchange
rules.

43/44 McKay Letter, supra note 32/33, at 7.
44/45 Id, at note 33.
45/46 Each of the Affiliate SROs is filing for a rule
change that is substantially similar to the proposed Exchange rule.
Assuming such filings are approved by the Commission, to the extent
that the market data of an Affiliate SRO is produced separately from
where the Exchange market data is produced, the wireless connection
to that Affiliate SRO's market data would be captured by that
Affiliate SRO's rule.

    6. The Exchange proposes to amend the Statutory Basis section of
the Filing after the carryover paragraph on pages 19 and 20 of the
Filing (carryover paragraph on pages 48 and 49 of the Exhibit 1):
    The Exchange proposes to include information in the Filing
regarding why it believes the proposed new rule is not unfairly
discriminatory. The Exchange proposes to amend the Statutory Basis
section of the Filing to add new paragraphs and accompanying footnotes
(subsequent footnotes would be renumbered in a conforming change) after
the carry-over paragraph on pages 19 and 20 of the Filing (carryover
paragraph on pages 48 and 49 of the Exhibit 1), immediately prior to
the last paragraph of the section titled ``The Proposed Change is Not
Unfairly Discriminatory,'' as follows (all text is new):

    The Exchange believes that the proposed new Rule 3.14 would not
be unfairly discriminatory, as pursuant to the rule, the networks
for the Wireless Market Data Connections, and future wireless
connections that use the Data Center Pole, would ``operat[e] in the
same manner as competitors do today without a latency subsidy or
other advantage provided by the Exchanges. . . .'' 46/47
Accordingly, the proposed new rule would ensure that the IDS
wireless network does not benefit from physical proximity ``on the
segment [of the network] closest to the Exchanges' data center that
no competitor can replicate.'' 47/48 By ending both of
the compared connections at the point inside the Data Center where
Exchange market data is produced, the

proposed rule would take distances within the Mahwah data center
into account.
    The proposed new rule would not apply differently to distinct
types or sizes of market participants. The Exchange would be
required to ensure that the length of the connection between (a) the
base of the Data Center Pole and (b) the point inside the Data
Center where Exchange market data is produced, would be no less than
the length of the connection between (x) the base of the closest
Commercial Pole and (y) the point inside the Data Center where
Exchange market data is produced.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of
``Commercial Pole'' would not be unfairly discriminatory because it
would encompass any pole on which a third party locates its wireless
equipment in order to offer wireless connectivity to customers. The
Exchange believes that such third parties are the direct competitors
for the Wireless Market Data Connections, as they also offer
wireless connections to customers. If a third party used a pole for
a proprietary wireless network and that pole does not have one or
more third parties' wireless equipment used to offer wireless
connectivity to other third parties, that pole would not fall within
the scope of the definition of Commercial Pole.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of ``Data
Center'' would not be unfairly discriminatory because it would
capture any data center to which the Exchange locates its matching
engine.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed definition of ``Data
Center Pole'' would not be unfairly discriminatory because it would
encompass not just the current pole, but also any additional or
successor pole on the grounds of the Data Center, so long as such
pole could not be used by third parties other than third parties
with which the Exchange or an ICE Affiliate had an agreement to
provide services in the name of the Exchange or an ICE Affiliate,
such as Anova.
    The Exchange believes that the definition of ``ICE Affiliate''
would not be unfairly discriminatory because the same definition is
used in Article 22, Rule 28 and so using it would add transparency,
clarity and internal consistency to Exchange rules.

46/47 McKay Letter, supra note 32/33, at 7.
47/48 Id., at note 33.

    7. The Exchange proposes to amend the section of the Filing titled
``Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition''
in the following two ways:
    The Exchange proposes to include information in the Filing
regarding why it believes the proposed new rule would impose any burden
on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of Section 6(b)(8) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'').\11\ Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the
section of the Filing titled ``Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement
on Burden on Competition'' in the following two ways.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, to set the new text apart from the previous discussion
regarding the burden on competition, the Exchange proposes to add the
heading ``Wireless Market Data Connectivity'' immediately before the
first full paragraph under the heading on page 20 of the Filing (page
49 of the Exhibit 1). The new heading would apply to the current text
of the Filing.
    Second, after the first full paragraph on page 22 of the Filing
(second full paragraph on page 51 of the Exhibit 1), the Exchange
proposes to add the heading ``Proposed New Rule'' and new paragraphs
and accompanying footnotes (subsequent footnotes would be renumbered in
a conforming change), as follows (all text is new):

Proposed New Rule

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed new rule would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Section 6(b)(8) of the
Act.50/51
    With the exception of Anova, third parties do not have access to
the data center pole. Under the proposed rule, the Exchange would
always be obligated to ensure that the length of the connection
between (a) the base of the Data Center Pole and (b) the point
inside the Data Center where Exchange market data is produced, would
be no less than the length of the connection between (x) the base of
the closest Commercial Pole and (y) the point inside the Data Center
where Exchange market data is produced.
    IDS, not the Exchange, provides the Wireless Market Data
Connections to market participants, and so it would be IDS that
would have to slow its connection down as required by the rule.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the only burden on
competition of the proposed change would be on IDS.
    Nonetheless, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate because the proposed change would ensure that the IDS
wireless network did not benefit from physical proximity ``on the
segment [of the network] closest to the Exchanges' data center that
no competitor can replicate.'' 51/52 The networks for the
Wireless Market Data Connections, and future wireless connections
that use the Data Center Pole, would ``operat[e] in the same manner
as competitors do today without a latency subsidy or other advantage
provided by the Exchanges. . . .'' 52/53
    The proposed rule would not otherwise put a burden on
competition. As noted above, access to the data center pole is not
required for third parties to establish wireless networks that can
compete with the Wireless Market Data Connections to the Carteret
and Secaucus Third Party Data Centers, as evidenced by the existing
wireless connections offered by third party
competitors.53/54 Such competitors can offer wireless
connectivity to Selected Market Data or other Exchange market data
in the Third Party Data Centers by obtaining the market data at the
Mahwah data center and sending it over their wireless network to the
Third Party Data Centers.54/55 Indeed, the Exchange
believes that its competitors' wireless connections provide
connectivity at the same or similar speed as the Wireless Market
Data Connections, and at the same or similar cost. The McKay Letter
acknowledges that McKay Brothers has the fastest wireless
network.55/56
    The Exchange notes that proximity to a data center is not the
only determinant of a wireless network's latency. Rather, the
latency of a wireless network depends on several factors. Variables
include the wireless equipment utilized; the route of, and number of
towers or buildings in, the network; and the fiber equipment used at
either end of the connection. Moreover, latency is not the only
consideration that a customer may have in selecting a wireless
network to connect to for market data. Other considerations may
include the amount of network uptime; the equipment that the network
uses; the cost of the connection; and the applicable contractual
provisions.
    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.

50/51 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
51/52 McKay Letter, supra note 32/33, at note 33.
52/53 Id., at 7.
53/54 Based on the information available to it, the
Exchange believes that a market participant in the Carteret or
Secaucus Third Party Data Center may purchase a wireless connection
to the NYSE and NYSE Arca Integrated Feed data feeds from at least
two other providers of wireless connectivity.
54/55 A market participant in any of the Third Party Data
Centers or the Mahwah data center also may create a proprietary
wireless market data connection, connect through another market
participant, or utilize fiber connections offered by the Exchange,
ICE Affiliates, and other service providers and third party
telecommunications providers.
55/56 Id., at 4.

    8. The Exchange proposes to add a list under ``Exhibit 5--Text of
the Proposed Rule Change'' on page 23 of the Filing:
    The Exchange proposes to add a new Exhibit 5B. Accordingly, the
Exchange proposes to add a list under ``Exhibit 5--Text of Proposed
Rule Change'' on page 23 of the Filing, as follows (new text
underlined):

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN07AU20.008

    9. The Exchange proposes to add new text to the first full
paragraph of Section I on page 23 of the Exhibit 1:
    The Exchange proposes to add new text to the first full paragraph
of Section I on page 24 of the Exhibit 1, as follows (new text
underlined):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN07AU20.009

    10. The Exchange proposes to amend ``Exhibit 5'' to ``Exhibit 5A''
on page 55 of the Exhibit 5:
    To reflect the addition of a new Exhibit 5B, the Exchange proposes
to add ``A'' to ``EXHIBIT 5'' on page 55 of the Exhibit 5, to make it
``EXHIBIT 5A''.
* * * * *
    All other representations in the Filing remain as stated therein
and no other changes are being made.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change as Modified by
Partial Amendment No. 1 and Timing for Commission Action

    Within 180 days after the date of publication of the initial Notice
of Filing in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to an
additional 60 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 issue an order approving or disapproving such
proposed rule change, as amended.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended by Partial Amendment No. 1, 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-NYSECHX-2020-05 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-NYSECHX-2020-05. 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-NYSECHX-2020-05, and should be submitted
on or before August 28, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-17251 Filed 8-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 13372-13373]
[DOCID:fr15mr06-87]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-246-000]

Southern LNG Inc.; Notice of Proposed Changes to FERC Gas Tariff

March 8, 2006.
    Take notice that on March 1, 2006, Southern LNG Inc. (SLNG)
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No.
1, First Revised Sheet No. 8 and First Revised Sheet No. 133, to become
effective March 31, 2006.
    SLNG states that it files the proposed changes to its Tariff to
delete redundant text on the above-referenced sheets.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance

with the provisions of section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations
(18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention
or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-3660 Filed 3-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request USEPA/ Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/ Office of Emergency Prevention, Planning and Response 2. OMB control number b. X None a. 2050 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. X New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. G E xtension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title : CAMEO Software Usability Evaluation Survey 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) EPA ICR No. 2132.01 9. Keywords CAMEO, Emergency Response, OEPPR, Emergency Planning, Chemical Emergencies, Listserv, Software 10. Abstract: The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), Office of Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response ( OEPPR), is requesting an Information Collection Request ( ICR) to conduct a nationwide survey of Computer aided Management of Emergency Operations ( CAMEO) Web site listserv members and users to determine user satisfaction with the CAMEO software and its features. CAMEO is a system of software applications used widely to plan for and respond to chemical emergencies. It is one of the tools developed by EPA to assist front line chemical emergency planners and responders. CAMEO has been in use by local emergency planners, first responders, state and tribal groups, and industry personnel since 1988. During the intervening years, EPA surveyed CAMEO users in 1994 and 1997 to identify needed changes and enhancements. While these previous surveys were the starting point of the current CAMEO survey, survey materials have been modified to capture emerging needs of users, particularly as they relate to the availability of Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know ( EPCRA) and Risk Management Program Rule data.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. P State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. P Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. G Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 200 b. Total annual responses 200 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 100 % c. Total hours requested 100 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference 100 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 100 2. Adjustment 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 0 c. Total annualized cost requested 0 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 0 2. Adjustment 0 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Application for benefits e. Program planning or management b. Program evaluation f. P Research c. General purpose statistics g. Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. Q Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) One time 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Sherry Fielding Phone: ( 202) 564 6174 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3):

( i) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Deborah Y. Dietrich, Director Office of Emergency Prevention, Planning and Response Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 178 (Friday, September 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56690-56691]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22280]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER13-2318-000]

All Dams Generation, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of All Dams Generation, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and

385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is September 30, 2013.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 9, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-22280 Filed 9-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Basil (Fresh)

Residues(ppm)
                                    15.200
                                    20.800
                                    43.400
                                     9.880
                                    19.200

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                  Fresh basil

                                      USA

                             1 lb ai/A, 1-day PHI

Total number of data (n)
                                       5

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                       5

Lowest residue
                                     9.880

Highest residue
                                    43.400

Median residue
                                    19.200

Mean
                                    21.696

Standard deviation (SD)
                                    12.844

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                    43.400

- Mean + 4 SD
                                    73.074

- CF x 3 Mean
                                    65.088

Unrounded MRL
                                    73.074

Rounded MRL
                                      80

 High uncertainty of MRL estimate.

[Small dataset]

Caneberries

Residues (ppm)
                                     0.680
                                     2.500
                                     1.200
                                     1.800
                                     2.200
                                     2.000

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                   Caneberry

                                      USA

                            0.75 lb ai/A, 3-day PHI

Total number of data (n)
                                       6

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                       6

Lowest residue
                                     0.680

Highest residue
                                     2.500

Median residue
                                     1.900

Mean
                                     1.730

Standard deviation (SD)
                                     0.675

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                     2.500

- Mean + 4 SD
                                     4.428

- CF x 3 Mean
                                     5.190

Unrounded MRL
                                     5.190

Rounded MRL
                                       6

 High uncertainty of MRL estimate.

[Small dataset]

Dates

Residues (ppm)
                                     4.000
                                     1.600
                                     2.300

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                     Date

                                      USA

                                   1 lb ai/A

Total number of data (n)
                                       3

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                       3

Lowest residue
                                     1.600

Highest residue
                                     4.000

Median residue
                                     2.300

Mean
                                     2.633

Standard deviation (SD)
                                     1.234

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                     4.000

- Mean + 4 SD
                                     7.570

- CF x 3 Mean
                                     7.900

Unrounded MRL
                                     7.900

Rounded MRL
                                       8

 High uncertainty of MRL estimate.

[Small dataset]

Sorghum Forage

Residues (ppm)
                                     2.550
                                     1.155
                                     6.000
                                     3.000
                                     2.400
                                     2.550
                                     6.750
                                     7.500
                                     2.700
                                     3.600
                                     4.650
                                     7.200

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                Sorghum forage

                                      USA

                            0.5 lb ai/A, 3-day PHI

Total number of data (n)
                                      12

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                      12

Lowest residue
                                     1.155

Highest residue
                                     7.500

Median residue
                                     3.300

Mean
                                     4.171

Standard deviation (SD)
                                     2.171

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                     7.500

- Mean + 4 SD
                                    12.854

- CF x 3 Mean
                                    12.514

Unrounded MRL
                                    12.854

Rounded MRL
                                      15

Sorghum Grain

Residues (ppm)
                                     3.000
                                     0.930
                                     0.255
                                     0.435
                                     0.390
                                     0.795
                                     3.450
                                     2.100
                                     0.225
                                     0.480
                                     0.510
                                     0.690

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                 Sorghum grain

                                      USA

                            0.5 lb ai/A, 21-day PHI

Total number of data (n)
                                      12

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                      12

Lowest residue
                                     0.225

Highest residue
                                     3.450

Median residue
                                     0.600

Mean
                                     1.105

Standard deviation (SD)
                                     1.111

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                     3.450

- Mean + 4 SD
                                     5.550

- CF x 3 Mean
                                     3.315

Unrounded MRL
                                     5.550

Rounded MRL
                                       6

Sorghum Stover

Residues (ppm)
                                     5.700
                                     0.675
                                     3.300
                                     1.425
                                     1.230
                                     2.550
                                     7.800
                                     9.750
                                     1.395
                                     6.450
                                    11.400
                                     6.000

                                Methoxyfenozide

                                Sorghum stover

                                      USA

                            0.5 lb ai/A, 21-day PHI

Total number of data (n)
                                      12

Percentage of censored data
                                      0%

Number of non-censored data
                                      12

Lowest residue
                                     0.675

Highest residue
                                    11.400

Median residue
                                     4.500

Mean
                                     4.806

Standard deviation (SD)
                                     3.594

Correction factor for censoring (CF)
                                     1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue
                                    11.400

- Mean + 4 SD
                                    19.183

- CF x 3 Mean
                                    14.419

Unrounded MRL
                                    19.183

Rounded MRL
                                      20