[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 83 (Monday, May 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 23478]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09129]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91686; File No. SR-CBOE-2020-075]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2,
To Make Qualified Contingent Cross Orders Available for FLEX Option
Trading

April 27, 2021.
    On August 3, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to make
Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders available for electronic
FLEX option trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on August 20, 2020.\3\ On October 1, 2020, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,\4\ the Commission designated a longer
period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On October 23, 2020, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which
replaced and superseded the proposed rule change as originally
filed.\6\ On November 18, 2020, the Commission instituted proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \7\ to determine whether
to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1.\8\ On February 2, 2021, the Exchange submitted
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change, which replaced and
superseded the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.\9\
On February 12, 2021, the Commission designated a longer period for
Commission action on proceedings to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
2.\10\ On April 14, 2021, the Exchange withdrew the proposed rule
change (SR-CBOE-2020-075).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89564 (August 14,
2020), 85 FR 51531.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90062 (October 1,
2020), 85 FR 63312 (October 7, 2020).
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange provided additional support
for the proposal. The full text of Amendment No. 1 is available on
the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2020-075/srcboe2020075-7940531-224727.pdf.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90457, 85 FR 75071
(November 24, 2020).
    \9\ In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange provided further support
for the proposal. The full text of Amendment No. 2 is available on
the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2020-075/srcboe2020075-8330243-228699.pdf.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91127, 86 FR 10378
(February 19, 2021).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09129 Filed 4-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27318-27322]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12267]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80891; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-054]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Merge the OpenView Depth-of-Book Product Into TotalView

June 8, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 26, 2017, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to merge the OpenView depth-of-book product
into TotalView, and to amend the Exchange's fees at Rules 7023 and 7026
to reflect the merger of these two products, as described further
below. The Exchange has designated the proposed amendments to be
operative on August 1, 2017.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
fees at Rules 7023 and 7026 to merge the OpenView depth-of-book product
into TotalView.
TotalView and OpenView
    TotalView, the Exchange's complete depth data feed product for
Nasdaq-listed securities, provides every eligible order at every price
level for all Nasdaq members, as well as Net Order Imbalance
information.\3\ OpenView--almost universally purchased in conjunction
with Nasdaq's other depth-of-book products, TotalView and Level 2 \4\--
provides the same information as TotalView for stocks listed on other
exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Net Order Imbalance information provides data relating to
buy and sell interest at the open and close of the trading day, in
the context of an Initial Public Offering, and after a trading halt.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79863 (January 23,
2017) 82 FR 8632 (January 27, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-004) (explaining
that Level 2 will be retired as a separate product).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TotalView and OpenView may be purchased through monthly
subscription fees or enterprise license fees. Different fee structures
apply if purchasers opt to view TotalView or OpenView using an Enhanced
Display Solution (``EDS'') or utilize the data in a non-display fashion
using a Managed Data Solution (``MDS''). The current fees associated
with TotalView and OpenView that will be affected by the proposed
changes, set forth in Rules 7023 and 7026, are as follows:
    1. Per Subscriber Fees. Monthly Non-Professional per Subscriber
fees are $14 for TotalView,\5\ and $1 for OpenView.\6\ Monthly
Professional Subscriber fees are $70 for TotalView,\7\ and $6 for
OpenView.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(A).
    \6\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(B). Fees are for Display Usage, or
for Non-Display Usage based upon indirect access.
    \8\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(B). Fees are for Display Usage, or
for Non-Display Usage based upon indirect access.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Professional Subscriber Fees for Non-Display Usage. The
professional Subscriber fees for Non-Display Usage

based upon direct access set forth in Rule 7023(b)(4) allow for the
purchase of all depth-of-book products, including TotalView, Level 2
and OpenView, for one fee.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Rule 7023(b)(4) fees are based on the number of
Subscribers; the fee structure allows a Subscriber to obtain any
combination of TotalView, Level 2 and OpenView, or all three
products, for the same per Subscriber fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Enterprise License Fees. The enterprises [sic] license fees set
forth in Nasdaq Rules 7023(c)(1) and (c)(2) allow for the purchase of
TotalView and OpenView, and the enterprise license fees at 7023(c)(3)
allow for the purchase of all three depth-of-book products, including
TotalView, Level 2 and OpenView, under the same fee structure.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The enterprise license fees set forth in Rules 7023(c)(1)
and 7023(c)(2) are comprised of two components: An enterprise
license fee and per-Subscriber monthly fees. A Distributor may
obtain any combination of TotalView, Level 2 and OpenView, or all
three products, for the same enterprise license and per-Subscriber
monthly fees under Rules 7023(c)(1) and (c)(2). The fee structure
set forth in Rule 7023(c)(3) is an enterprise license fee without
per-Subscriber monthly fees. A Distributor may obtain any
combination of TotalView, Level 2 and OpenView, or all three
products, for the enterprise license fee set forth in Rule
7023(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Per Subscriber Fees for Enhanced Display Solutions. The monthly
fee for Professional Subscribers using EDS under Rule 7026(a)(1)(B) is
$74 for TotalView and Level 2 and $6 for OpenView. Non-Professional
Subscribers of EDS pay the applicable TotalView, Level 2 or OpenView
rates.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Nasdaq Rule 7026(a)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Enhanced Display Solution Enterprise License. The EDS enterprise
license set forth in Rule 7026(a)(1)(C) allows TotalView and Level 2 to
be distributed to an unlimited number of Professional Subscribers for
$70, and OpenView for $6.
    6. Managed Data Solutions. Rule 7026(b) sets forth a fee structure
for MDS that applies the same fees for the distribution of TotalView,
Level 2 and OpenView.
Proposed Changes
    The Exchange proposes to amend the fees at Rules 7023 and 7026 to
merge OpenView into TotalView. In substance, the Exchange will combine
all fees for TotalView and OpenView into a single sum, without
increasing the total price of the two products, and make a number of
conforming changes to delete specific references to OpenView. The
specific fee changes to Rules 7023 and 7026 are as follows:
    1. Per Subscriber Fees. Monthly Non-Professional per Subscriber
fees will be changed from $14 for TotalView \12\ and $1 for OpenView
\13\ to $15 for TotalView, which will be redefined in current Rule
7023(a)(1)(C) to include OpenView data. Monthly Professional Subscriber
fees will be changed from $70 for TotalView \14\ and $6 for OpenView
\15\ to $76 for TotalView, which will include OpenView data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(A).
    \13\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(B). Fees are for Display Usage, or
for Non-Display Usage based upon indirect access.
    \15\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Professional Subscriber Fees for Non-Display Usage. There will
be no substantive change to the Professional Subscriber fees for Non-
Display Usage set forth in Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(4), which already allows
for the purchase of all three depth-of-book products, including
OpenView, TotalView and Level 2, under the same fee structure. Explicit
references to OpenView will be deleted as a technical, conforming
change.
    3. Enterprise License Fees. There will be no substantive change to
the enterprises [sic] license fees set forth in Nasdaq Rules
7023(c)(1), (c)(2) and (c)(3), which already allow for the purchase of
depth-of-book products, including OpenView and TotalView,\16\ for the
same fee. Explicit references to OpenView will be deleted as a
technical, conforming change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Level 2 data is included under Nasdaq Rule 7023(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Per Subscriber Fees for Enhanced Display Solutions. The monthly
fee for Professional Subscribers using EDS will be changed from $74 for
TotalView and Level 2 and $6 for OpenView \17\ to $80 for TotalView,
which will include all OpenView data, and Level 2. Non-Professional
Subscribers of EDS will continue to pay at the applicable TotalView or
Level 2 rates.\18\ Explicit references to OpenView will be deleted as a
technical, conforming change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Nasdaq Rule 7026(a)(1)(B).
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Enhanced Display Solution Enterprise License. The monthly
professional subscriber fee for purchasers of an enterprise license
with EDS will be changed from $70 for TotalView and Level 2 and $6 for
OpenView \19\ to $76 for TotalView, which will include all OpenView
data, and Level 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Nasdaq Rule 7026(a)(1)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Managed Data Solutions. There will be no substantive change to
the fee structure for MDS set forth in Rule 7026(b), which already
allows for the distribution of all three depth-of-book products,
including OpenView, TotalView and Level 2, under the same fee
structure. Explicit references to OpenView will be deleted as a
technical, conforming change.
    In addition to all of these changes, the definition of OpenView
will be removed from the current Rule book at Rule 7023(a)(1)(B), and
the data provided in OpenView will be added to the definition of
TotalView currently in Rule 7023(a)(1)(C), which will be re-designated
as Rule 7023(a)(1)(B).
    The proposed rule change will lower administrative costs and
simplify the purchase of depth-of-book products, with no impact on fees
for most customers. Almost all purchasers of depth products already
purchase OpenView in conjunction with TotalView or Level 2, and prices
will not change for these customers. Most of the limited number of
customers purchasing TotalView or OpenView alone are in the process of
phasing out the practice, and will not be materially affected by the
proposed change.
    Depth-of-book customers that purchase TotalView and OpenView
together have to manage separate reporting, billing and approvals for
two products that they utilize as a single product. The resulting
administrative burden applies to four separate categories of fees: (i)
Non-Professional per Subscriber fees for TotalView \20\ and OpenView;
\21\ (ii) Professional Subscriber fees for TotalView \22\ and OpenView;
\23\ (iii) monthly fees for Professional and Non-Professional
Subscribers using EDS; \24\ and (iv) monthly subscriber fees for
purchasers of an EDS enterprise license.\25\ The proposed change will
lessen the administrative burden on these customers--representing the
bulk of depth-of-book purchasers--while leaving fees and product
quality unaffected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(A).
    \21\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(2)(B).
    \23\ Nasdaq Rule 7023(b)(3)(B).
    \24\ Nasdaq Rule 7026(a)(1)(B).
    \25\ Nasdaq Rule 7026(a)(1)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq has engaged in discussions with Distributors that purchase
OpenView without TotalView or Level 2--or TotalView or Level 2 without
OpenView--and determined that this practice is being phased out. This
practice had its origins before Nasdaq became an Exchange, when Nasdaq
did not trade a significant number of securities listed on other
exchanges. Now, Nasdaq routinely trades the securities of other
exchanges, and the rationale for this practice is obsolete. As such,
Nasdaq does not expect merging OpenView into TotalView to have a long-
term impact on customers that are

already in the process of deciding whether to purchase either both
products, or neither, because of fundamental changes in the economic
environment. The proposed fee change--which leaves the total cost of
OpenView and TotalView unchanged--is unlikely to alter that decision.
    No transition time is needed to merge OpenView into TotalView--they
are already offered in a compatible formats [sic] and Distributors
require no time to modify their systems to accommodate the change.
    The proposed fees are optional in that they apply only to firms
that elect to purchase these products. The proposed changes do not
impact the cost of any other Nasdaq product.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\26\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\27\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, 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.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, in NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission
\29\ (``NetCoalition'') the D.C. Circuit upheld the Commission's use of
a market-based approach in evaluating the fairness of market data fees
against a challenge claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based
approach.\30\ As the court emphasized, the Commission ``intended in
Regulation NMS that `market forces, rather than regulatory
requirements' play a role in determining the market data . . . to be
made available to investors and at what cost.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
    \30\ See NetCoalition, at 534-535.
    \31\ Id. at 537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is
`fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers' . . . .'' \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id. at 539 (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008)
(SR-NYSEArca-2006-21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to integrate Nasdaq
TotalView and OpenView into a single depth-of-book product is an
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees or other charges. Almost
all purchasers of Nasdaq depth-of-book products already treat TotalView
and OpenView as a single, combined product, and the proposed changes
will reduce administrative burden. Customers that do not currently
purchase both products are already in the process of deciding whether
to purchase either both products, or neither, and the proposed fee
change--which leaves the total cost of OpenView and TotalView
unchanged--is unlikely to alter that decision. The fees for TotalView
and OpenView, like all proprietary data fees, are constrained by the
Exchange's need to compete for order flow, and are subject to
competition from other products and among broker-dealers for customers.
If Nasdaq is incorrect in its assessment of these markets, there are no
barriers to entry for competitors with substantially similar products.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes are an
equitable allocation because the fees appropriately reflect the value
of depth-of-market data to customers as well as industry practice in
which most customers purchase the current versions of TotalView and
OpenView concurrently. The proposed fee changes are not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange will apply the same fee to all
similarly-situated subscribers.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In terms of inter-market
competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with
alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance
with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because
market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices,
the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this
market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
    The question of whether the prices of depth-of-view products are
constrained by competitive forces was examined in 2016 by an
Administrative Law Judge in an application for review by the Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association of actions taken by Self-
Regulatory Organizations.\33\ After a four-day hearing and presentation
of substantial evidence, the administrative law judge stated that
``competition plays a significant role in restraining exchange pricing
of depth-of-book products'' \34\ because ``depth-of-book products from
different exchanges function as substitutes for each other,'' \35\ and,
as such, ``the threat of substitution from depth-of-book customers
constrains their depth-of-book prices.'' \36\ In addition, the
administrative law judge stated that ``[s]hifts in order flow and
threats of shifting order flow provide a significant competitive force
in the pricing of . . . depth-of-book data.'' \37\ As such, Nasdaq's
depth-of-book fees are ``constrained by significant competitive
forces.'' \38\ As an example of the impact of market forces on the
price of proprietary data, the Exchange recently lowered the Nasdaq
Basic enterprise license fee for the distribution of certain
information by broker-dealers from $350,000 to $100,000.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association,
Initial Decision Release No. 1015, 2016 SEC LEXIS 2278 (A.L.J. June
1, 2016).
    \34\ Id. at 33.
    \35\ Id.
    \36\ Id.
    \37\ Id. at 37.
    \38\ Id. at 43.
    \39\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79456 (December 2,
2016) 81 FR 88716 (December 8, 2016) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-162) (fee
decrease for an enterprise license for the distribution of Nasdaq
Basic to Non-Professional and Professional Subscribers with whom the
broker-dealer has a brokerage relationship).

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

    The proposed changes will integrate Nasdaq TotalView and OpenView
into a single depth-of-book product. If the proposed product revisions
are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the Exchange
will lose market share.
    Market forces constrain fees for TotalView, like all depth-of-book
products, in three respects. First, all fees related to TotalView are
constrained by competition among exchanges and other entities
attracting order flow. Firms make decisions regarding depth-of-book
products and other proprietary data based on the total cost of
interacting with the Exchange, and order flow would be harmed by the
supracompetitive pricing of any proprietary data product. Second, the
prices of TotalView are constrained by the existence of substitutes
that are offered, or may be offered, by entities that offer proprietary
data. Third, competition among Distributors for customers will further
constrain the cost of TotalView.
Competition for Order Flow
    Fees related to TotalView are constrained by competition among
exchanges and other entities seeking to attract order flow. Order flow
is the ``life blood'' of the exchanges. Broker-dealers currently have
numerous alternative venues for their order flow, including self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') markets, as well as internalizing
broker-dealers (``BDs'') and various forms of alternative trading
systems (``ATSs''), including dark pools and electronic communication
networks (``ECNs''). Each SRO market competes to produce transaction
reports via trade executions, and two FINRA-regulated Trade Reporting
Facilities (``TRFs'') compete to attract internalized transaction
reports. The existence of fierce competition for order flow implies a
high degree of price sensitivity on the part of BDs, which may readily
reduce costs by directing orders toward the lowest-cost trading venues.
    The level of competition and contestability in the market for order
flow is demonstrated by the numerous examples of entrants that swiftly
grew into some of the largest electronic trading platforms and
proprietary data producers: Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook, Island,
RediBook, Attain, TracECN, and the BATS exchanges. A proliferation of
dark pools and other ATSs operate profitably with fragmentary shares of
consolidated market volume. For a variety of reasons, competition from
new entrants, especially for order execution, has increased
dramatically over the last decade.
    Each SRO, TRF, ATS, and BD that competes for order flow is
permitted to produce proprietary data products. Many currently do or
have announced plans to do so, including NYSE, NYSE Amex, NYSE Arca,
the BATS exchanges, and IEX. This is because Regulation NMS deregulated
the market for proprietary data. While BDs had previously published
their proprietary data individually, Regulation NMS encourages market
data vendors and BDs to produce proprietary products cooperatively in a
manner never before possible. Order routers and market data vendors can
facilitate production of proprietary data products for single or
multiple BDs. The potential sources of proprietary products are
virtually limitless.
    The markets for order flow and proprietary data are inextricably
linked: A trading platform cannot generate market information unless it
receives trade orders. As a result, the competition for order flow
constrains the prices that platforms can charge for proprietary data
products. Firms make decisions on how much and what types of data to
consume based on the total cost of interacting with Nasdaq and other
exchanges. Data fees are but one factor in a total platform analysis.
If the cost of the product exceeds its expected value, the broker-
dealer will choose not to buy it. A supracompetitive increase in the
fees charged for either transactions or proprietary data has the
potential to impair revenues from both products. In this manner, the
competition for order flow will constrain prices for proprietary data
products.
Substitute Products
    The price of depth-of-book data is constrained by the existence of
competition from other exchanges, such as NYSE and the BATS exchanges,
which sell proprietary depth-of-book data. While a small number of
highly sophisticated traders purchase depth-of-book products from
multiple exchanges, most customers do not. Because most customers would
not pay an excessive price for TotalView when substitute data is
available from other proprietary sources, the Exchange is constrained
in its pricing decisions.
Competition Among Distributors
    Competition among Distributors provides another form of price
discipline for proprietary data products to ensure that fees are
equitable, fair, reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory. If the
price of TotalView were set above competitive levels, Distributors
purchasing TotalView would be at a disadvantage relative to their
competitors, and would therefore either purchase a substitute or forego
the product altogether.
    In summary, market forces constrain the price of depth-of-book data
such as TotalView through competition for order flow, competition from
substitute products, and in the competition among vendors for
customers.

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 proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \40\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \41\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-054 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-NASDAQ-2017-054. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-054, and should
be submitted on or before July 5, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\42\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-12267 Filed 6-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21336-21338]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

    The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section
3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409), 5 U.S.C.
552b:

AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

TIME AND DATE: May 16, 2019 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: Room 2C, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

STATUS: OPEN.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Agenda
    * NOTE--Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further
notice.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For a recorded message listing items struck from or added to the
meeting, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It
does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on
the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the
Commission's website at http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/ using the
eLibrary link, or may be examined in the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

                                          1056th Meeting--Open Meeting
                                           [May 16, 2019--10:00 a.m.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Item No.                                 Docket No.                                    Company
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Administrative
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A-1...................  AD19-1-000...............................................  Agency Administrative
                                                                                Matters.
A-2...................  AD19-2-000...............................................  Customer Matters,
                                                                                Reliability, Security and
                                                                                Market Operations.
A-3...................  AD19-14-000..............................................  2019 Summer Energy Market and
                                                                                Reliability Assessment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Electric
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-1...................  RM16-23-001..............................................  Electric Storage
                                                                                Participation in Markets
                                                                                Operated by Regional
                                                                                Transmission Organizations
                                                                                and Independent System
                                                                                Operators.
                        AD16-20-001..............................................  Electric Storage
                                                                                Participation in Regions
                                                                                with Organized Wholesale
                                                                                Electric Markets.
E-2...................  EL16-108-000.............................................  Tilton Energy LLC v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                        EL17-29-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. Midcontinent
                                                                                Independent System Operator,
                                                                                Inc.
                        EL17-31-000..............................................  Northern Illinois Municipal
                                                                                Power Agency v. PJM,
                                                                                Interconnection, L.L.C.

                        EL17-37-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. PJM Interconnection,
                                                                                L.L.C.
                        EL17-54-000 (consolidated)...............................  Dynegy Marketing and Trade,
                                                                                LLC and Illinois Power,
                                                                                Marketing Company v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-3...................  EL17-29-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. Midcontinent,
                                                                                Independent System Operator,
                                                                                Inc.
                        EL16-108-000.............................................  Tilton Energy LLC v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                        EL17-31-000..............................................  Northern Illinois Municipal
                                                                                Power Agency v. PJM,
                                                                                Interconnection, L.L.C.
                        EL17-37-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. PJM Interconnection,
                                                                                L.L.C.
                        EL17-54-000 (consolidated)...............................  Dynegy Marketing and Trade,
                                                                                LLC and Illinois Power,
                                                                                Marketing Company v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-4...................  EL17-31-000..............................................  Northern Illinois Municipal
                                                                                Power Agency v. PJM
                                                                                Interconnection, L.L.C.
                        EL17-37-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. PJM Interconnection,
                                                                                L.L.C.
                        EL16-108-000.............................................  Tilton Energy LLC v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                        EL17-29-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. Midcontinent,
                                                                                Independent System Operator,
                                                                                Inc.
                        EL17-54-000 (consolidated)...............................  Dynegy Marketing and Trade,
                                                                                LLC and Illinois Power,
                                                                                Marketing Company v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-5...................  EL17-54-000 (consolidated)...............................  Dynegy Marketing and Trade,
                                                                                LLC and Illinois Power,
                                                                                Marketing Company v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                        EL16-108-000.............................................  Tilton Energy LLC v.
                                                                                Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                        EL17-29-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. Midcontinent,
                                                                                Independent System Operator,
                                                                                Inc.
                        EL17-31-000..............................................  Northern Illinois Municipal
                                                                                Power Agency v. PJM,
                                                                                Interconnection, L.L.C.
                        EL17-37-000..............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc. v. PJM Interconnection,
                                                                                L.L.C.
E-6...................  RM05-5-027...............................................  Standards for Business
                                                                                Practices and Communication,
                                                                                Protocols for Public
                                                                                Utilities.
E-7...................  EL18-138-000.............................................  Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
                                                                                ALLETE, Inc.
                                                                                Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.
                                                                                Northern Indiana Public
                                                                                Service Company
                                                                                Otter Tail Power Company
                                                                                Southern Indiana Gas &
                                                                                Electric Company.
                        ER18-1793-001............................................  Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-8...................  EL18-157-000.............................................  American Transmission Company
                                                                                LLC.
                        ER19-838-000.............................................  Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-9...................  EL18-158-000.............................................  GridLiance West LLC.
                        ER17-706-006.............................................  .............................
E-10..................  EL18-159-000.............................................  International Transmission
                                                                                Company.
                        EL18-160-000.............................................  ITC Midwest, LLC.
                        ER18-2323-002............................................  Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-11..................  EL18-164-000.............................................  Southern California Edison
                                                                                Company.
                        ER19-845-000.............................................  .............................
E-12..................  EL18-165-000.............................................  TransCanyon DCR, LLC.
                        ER15-1682-006............................................  .............................
E-13..................  EL18-167-000.............................................  Virginia Electric and Power
                                                                                Company.
                        ER19-839-001.............................................  PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
E-14..................  EL19-16-000..............................................  Michigan Electric
                                                                                Transmission Company, LLC.
                        ER18-2323-001............................................  Midcontinent Independent
                                                                                System Operator, Inc.
E-15..................  EL18-172-000.............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc.
E-16..................  EL18-174-000.............................................  American Municipal Power,
                                                                                Inc.
E-17..................  EL19-40-000..............................................  Florida Municipal Power
                                                                                Agency v. Duke Energy
                                                                                Florida, LLC.
E-18..................  EL19-30-000..............................................  LS Power Grid New York, LLC.
                                                                                LS Power Grid New York
                                                                                Corporation I.
E-19..................  EC19-68-000..............................................  Clearway Energy Group LLC.
                                                                                Clearway Energy, Inc.
E-20..................  ER19-366-000.............................................  Public Service Company of
                        ER19-366-001.............................................   Colorado.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Miscellaneous
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M-1...................  PL10-2-003...............................................  Enforcement of Statutes,
                                                                                Regulations, and Orders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Gas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-1...................  RP18-923-000.............................................  Enable Mississippi River
                        RP18-923-002.............................................   Transmission, LLC.
                        RP18-923-003.............................................
                        RP18-923-005.............................................
G-2...................  RP19-996-000.............................................  Apache Corporation
                                                                                Red Wolf Acquisitions, LLC.
G-3...................  RP18-987-001.............................................  Transcontinental Gas Pipe
                        RP18-990-001.............................................   Line Company, LLC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                      Hydro
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H-1...................  P-2242-078...............................................  Eugene Water & Electric
                                                                                Board.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Certificates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1...................  CP19-34-000..............................................  Alliance Pipeline L.P.
C-2...................  CP17-470-000.............................................  Freeport LNG Development,
                                                                                L.P.
                                                                                FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued: May 9, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
    A free webcast of this event is available through http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/.Anyone with internet access who desires
to view this event can do so by navigating to www.ferc.gov's
Calendar of Events and locating this event in the Calendar. The
event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection
provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers
access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone
bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/ or contact Shirley Al-Jarani at 703-993-
3104.
    Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting,
a press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room.
Members of the public may view this briefing in the designated
overflow room. This statement is intended to notify the public that
the press briefings that follow Commission meetings may now be
viewed remotely at Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast
through the Capitol Connection service.

[FR Doc. 2019-10044 Filed 5-10-19; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25229-25230]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11387]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Chapter III, Subchapter B

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0037]
RIN 2126-AC17

Safe Integration of Automated Driving Systems-Equipped Commercial
Motor Vehicles; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM); correction.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA is correcting an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on May 28, 2019. The
document requests public comment about Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that may need to be amended, revised, or
eliminated to facilitate the safe introduction of automated driving
systems (ADS) equipped commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) onto our
Nation's roadways. The ANPRM contained an erroneous date for closure of
the comment period.

DATES: The comments due date for the ANPRM published on May 28, 2019
(84 FR 24449), is corrected as of May 28, 2019. Comments on the ANPRM
must be received on or before July 29, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2018-0037 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Submissions Containing Confidential Business Information
(CBI): Mr. Brian Dahlin, Chief, Regulatory Evaluation Division, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting
comments, including collection of information comments for the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Huntley, Division Chief,
Vehicle and Roadside Operations, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle
Safety, MC-PSV, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 by telephone at (202) 366-
9209 or by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2019-11038 appearing on page
24449 in the Federal Register of Tuesday, May 28, 2019, in the first
column, the DATES section is corrected to read as follows:
DATES: Comments on this document must be received on or before July 29,
2019.

    Issued on: May 28, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-11387 Filed 5-28-19; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P