Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2023 / Notices 73889 

1See Docket No. RM2018–3, Order Adopting 

Final Rules Relating to Non-Public Information, 

June 27, 2018, Attachment A at 19–22 (Order No. 

4679). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee 

changes on July 3, 2023 (SR–C2–2023–014). On 

September 1, 2023, the Exchange withdrew that 

filing and submitted SR–C2–2023–020. On 

September 29, 2023, the Securities and Exchange 

Commission issued a Suspension of and Order 

Instituting Proceedings to Determine whether to 

Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change to 

Amend its Fees Schedule Related to Physical Port 

Fees (the ‘‘OIP’’). On September 29, 2023, the 

Exchange filed the proposed fee change (SR–C2– 

2023–021). On October 13, 2023, the Exchange 

withdrew that filing and submitted this filing. No 

comment letters were received in connection with 

any of the foregoing rule filings. 

modification of an existing product 

currently appearing on the Market 

Dominant or the Competitive product 

list. 

Section II identifies the docket 

number(s) associated with each Postal 

Service request, the title of each Postal 

Service request, the request’s acceptance 

date, and the authority cited by the 

Postal Service for each request. For each 

request, the Commission appoints an 

officer of the Commission to represent 

the interests of the general public in the 

proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 

(Public Representative). Section II also 

establishes comment deadline(s) 

pertaining to each request. 

The public portions of the Postal 

Service’s request(s) can be accessed via 

the Commission’s website (https://

www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of 

the Postal Service’s request(s), if any, 

can be accessed through compliance 

with the requirements of 39 CFR 

3011.301.1

The Commission invites comments on 

whether the Postal Service’s request(s) 

in the captioned docket(s) are consistent 

with the policies of title 39. For 

request(s) that the Postal Service states 

concern Market Dominant product(s), 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3030, and 39 

CFR part 3040, subpart B. For request(s) 

that the Postal Service states concern 

Competitive product(s), applicable 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and 

39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. Comment 

deadline(s) for each request appear in 

section II. 

II. Docketed Proceeding(s) 

1. Docket No(s).: MC2024–21 and 

CP2024–21; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 81 to Competitive 

Product List and Notice of Filing 

Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance 

Date: October 20, 2023; Filing Authority: 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 

through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; 

Public Representative: Jennaca D. 

Upperman; Comments Due: October 30, 

2023. 

2. Docket No(s).: MC2024–22 and 

CP2024–22; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 82 to Competitive 

Product List and Notice of Filing 

Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance 

Date: October 20, 2023; Filing Authority: 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 

through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; 

Public Representative: Jennaca D. 

Upperman; Comments Due: October 30, 

2023. 

3. Docket No(s).: MC2024–23 and 

CP2024–23; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 83 to Competitive 

Product List and Notice of Filing 

Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance 

Date: October 20, 2023; Filing Authority: 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 

through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; 

Public Representative: Kenneth R. 

Moeller; Comments Due: October 30, 

2023. 

4. Docket No(s).: MC2024–24 and 

CP2024–24; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground 

Advantage Contract 84 to Competitive 

Product List and Notice of Filing 

Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance 

Date: October 20, 2023; Filing Authority: 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 

through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; 

Public Representative: Kenneth R. 

Moeller; Comments Due: October 30, 

2023. 

This Notice will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Mallory S. Richards, 

Attorney-Advisor. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23709 Filed 10–26–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–98784; File No. SR–C2– 

2023–022] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe 

C2 Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Its Fees 

Schedule Related to Physical Port 

Fees 

October 23, 2023. 

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 October 

13, 2023, Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘C2’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘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. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘C2 Options’’) proposes 

to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of 

the proposed rule change is provided in 

Exhibit 5. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is also available on the Exchange’s 

website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/ 

options/regulation/rule_filings/ctwo/), 

at the Exchange’s Office of the 

Secretary, 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 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend its 

fee schedule relating to physical 

connectivity fees.3

By way of background, a physical port 

is utilized by a Member or non-Member 

to connect to the Exchange at the data 

centers where the Exchange’s servers are 

located. The Exchange currently 

assesses the following physical 

connectivity fees for Trading Permit 

Holders (‘‘TPHs’’) and non-TPHs on a 

monthly basis: $2,500 per physical port 

for a 1 gigabit (‘‘Gbps’’) circuit and 

$7,500 per physical port for a 10 Gbps 

circuit. The Exchange proposes to 

increase the monthly fee for 10 Gbps 

physical ports from $7,500 to $8,500 per 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
73890 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2023 / Notices 

4See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq’’), General 8, Connectivity to the 

Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges 

charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10Gbps 

Ultra fiber connection to the respective exchange, 

which is analogous to the Exchange’s 10Gbps 

physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange 

LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE 

Chicago Inc., NYSE National, Inc. Connectivity Fee 

Schedule, which provides that 10 Gbps LX LCN 

Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange’s 10 

Gbps physical port) are assessed $22,000 per 

month, per port. 

5The Affiliate Exchanges are also submitting 

contemporaneous identical rule filings. 

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

8 Id. 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

10See Securities and Exchange Release No. 83455 

(June 15, 2018), 83 FR 28892 (June 21, 2018) (SR– 

C2–2018–014). 

11See https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/ 

2010?amount=1. 

12See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq’’), General 8, Connectivity to the 

Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges 

charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10 Gbps 

Ultra fiber connection to the respective exchange, 

which is analogous to the Exchange’s 10 Gbps 

physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange 

LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE 

Chicago Inc., NYSE National, Inc. Connectivity Fee 

Schedule, which provides that 10 Gbps LX LCN 

Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange’s 10 

Gbps physical port) are assessed $22,000 per 

month, per port. 13 Id. 

port. The Exchange notes the proposed 

fee change better enables it to continue 

to maintain and improve its market 

technology and services and also notes 

that the proposed fee amount, even as 

amended, continues to be in line with, 

or even lower than, amounts assessed by 

other exchanges for similar 

connections.4 The physical ports may 

also be used to access the Systems for 

the following affiliate exchanges and 

only one monthly fee currently (and 

will continue) to apply per port: Cboe 

BZX Exchange, Inc. (options and 

equities platforms), Cboe EDGX 

Exchange, Inc. (options and equities 

platforms), Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., 

and Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., 

(‘‘Affiliate Exchanges’’).5

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations 

thereunder applicable to the Exchange 

and, in particular, the requirements of 

Section 6(b) of the Act.6 Specifically, 

the Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Section 

6(b)(5) 7 requirements that the rules of 

an exchange be designed to prevent 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, to promote just and equitable 

principles of trade, to foster cooperation 

and coordination with persons engaged 

in regulating, clearing, settling, 

processing information with respect to, 

and facilitating transactions in 

securities, to remove impediments to 

and perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. 

Additionally, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the Section 6(b)(5) 8 requirement that 

the rules of an exchange not be designed 

to permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The Exchange also believes the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(4) 9 of the Act, which 

requires that Exchange rules provide for 

the equitable allocation of reasonable 

dues, fees, and other charges among its 

TPHs and other persons using its 

facilities. 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

fee change is reasonable as it reflects a 

moderate increase in physical 

connectivity fees for 10 Gbps physical 

ports. Further, the current 10 Gbps 

physical port fee has remained 

unchanged since June 2018.10 Since its 

last increase 5 years ago however, there 

has been notable inflation. Particularly, 

the dollar has had an average inflation 

rate of 3.9% per year between 2018 and 

today, producing a cumulative price 

increase of approximately 21.1% 

inflation since the fee for the 10 Gbps 

physical port was last modified.11

Moreover, the Exchange historically 

does not increase fees every year, 

notwithstanding inflation. Accordingly, 

the Exchange believes the proposed fee 

is reasonable as it represents only an 

approximate 13% increase from the 

rates adopted five years ago, 

notwithstanding the cumulative rate of 

21.1%. 

The Exchange also believes the 

proposed fee is reasonable as it is still 

in line with, or even lower than, 

amounts assessed by other exchanges 

for similar connections.12 Indeed, the 

Exchange believes assessing fees that are 

a lower rate than fees assessed by other 

exchanges for analogous connectivity 

(which were similarly adopted via the 

rule filing process and filed with the 

Commission) is reasonable. As noted 

above, the proposed fee is also the same 

as is concurrently being proposed for its 

Affiliate Exchanges. Further, TPHs are 

able to utilize a single port to connect 

to any of the Affiliate Exchanges with 

no additional fee assessed for that same 

physical port. Particularly, the Exchange 

believes the proposed monthly per port 

fee is reasonable, equitable and not 

unfairly discriminatory as it is assessed 

only once, even if it connects with 

another affiliate exchange since only 

one port is being used and the Exchange 

does not wish to charge multiple fees for 

the same port. Indeed, the Exchange 

notes that several ports are in fact 

purchased and utilized across one or 

more of the Exchange’s affiliated 

Exchanges (and charged only once). 

The Exchange also believes that the 

proposed fee change is not unfairly 

discriminatory because it would be 

assessed uniformly across all market 

participants that purchase the physical 

ports. The Exchange believes increasing 

the fee for 10 Gbps physical ports and 

charging a higher fee as compared to the 

1 Gbps physical port is equitable as the 

1 Gbps physical port is 1/10th the size 

of the 10 Gbps physical port and 

therefore does not offer access to many 

of the products and services offered by 

the Exchange (e.g., ability to receive 

certain market data products). Thus, the 

value of the 1 Gbps alternative is lower 

than the value of the 10 Gbps 

alternative, when measured based on 

the type of Exchange access it offers. 

Moreover, market participants that 

purchase 10 Gbps physical ports utilize 

the most bandwidth and therefore 

consume the most resources from the 

network. As such, the Exchange believes 

the proposed fee change for 10 Gbps 

physical ports is reasonably and 

appropriately allocated. 

The Exchange also notes TPHs and 

non-TPHs will continue to choose the 

method of connectivity based on their 

specific needs and no broker-dealer is 

required to become a TPH of, let alone 

connect directly to, the Exchange. There 

is also no regulatory requirement that 

any market participant connect to any 

one particular exchange. Moreover, 

direct connectivity is not a requirement 

to participate on the Exchange. The 

Exchange also believes substitutable 

products and services are available to 

market participants, including, among 

other things, other options exchanges 

that a market participant may connect to 

in lieu of the Exchange, indirect 

connectivity to the Exchange via a thirdparty reseller of connectivity, and/or 

trading of any options product, such as 

within the Over-the-Counter (OTC) 

markets which do not require 

connectivity to the Exchange. Indeed, 

there are currently 17 registered options 

exchanges that trade options (13 of 

which are not affiliated with Cboe), 

some of which have similar or lower 

connectivity fees.13 Based on publicly 

available information, no single options 

exchange has more than approximately 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2023 / Notices 73891 

14See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market 

Volume Summary (October 13, 2023), available at 

https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_

statistics/. 

15See https://www.nyse.com/markets/americanoptions/membership#directory. 

16See https://www.nyse.com/markets/arcaoptions/membership#directory. 

17See https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/ 

files/page-files/MIAX_Options_Exchange_

Members_April_2023_04282023.pdf. 

18See https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/ 

files/page-files/MIAX_Pearl_Exchange_Members_

01172023_0.pdf. 

19Third-party resellers of connectivity play an 

important role in the capital markets infrastructure 

ecosystem. For example, third-party resellers can 

help unify access for customers who want exposure 

to multiple financial markets that are 

geographically dispersed by establishing 

connectivity to all of the different exchanges, so the 

customers themselves do not have to. Many of the 

third-party connectivity resellers also act as 

distribution agents for all of the market data 

generated by the exchanges as they can use their 

established connectivity to subscribe to, and 

redistribute, data over their networks. This may 

remove barriers that infrastructure requirements 

may otherwise pose for customers looking to access 

multiple markets and real-time data feeds. This 

facilitation of overall access to the marketplace is 

ultimately beneficial for the entire capital markets 

ecosystem, including the Exchange, on which such 

firms transact business. 

20See, e.g., Nasdaq Price List—U.S. Direct 

Connection and Extranet Fees, available at, US 

Direct-Extranet Connection (nasdaqtrader.com); and 

Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74077 

(January 16, 2022), 80 FR 3683 (January 23, 2022) 

(SR–NASDAQ–2015–002); and 82037 (November 8, 

2022), 82 FR 52953 (November 15, 2022) (SR– 

NASDAQ–2017–114). 

21For example, a third-party reseller may 

purchase one 10 Gbps physical port from the 

Exchange and resell that connectivity to three 

different market participants who may only need 3 

Gbps each and leverage the same single port. 

22See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq’’), General 8, Connectivity to the 

Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges 

charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10 Gbps 

Ultra fiber connection to the respective exchange, 

which is analogous to the Exchange’s 10 Gbps 

physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange 

LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE 

Chicago Inc., NYSE National, Inc. Connectivity Fee 

Schedule, which provides that 10 Gbps LX LCN 

Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange’s 10 

Gbps physical port) are assessed $22,000 per 

month, per port. 

20% of the market share.14 Further, low 

barriers to entry mean that new 

exchanges may rapidly enter the market 

and offer additional substitute platforms 

to further compete with the Exchange 

and the products it offers. For example, 

there are 4 exchanges that have been 

added in the U.S. options markets in the 

last 5 years (i.e., Nasdaq MRX, LLC, 

MIAX Pearl, LLC, MIAX Emerald LLC, 

and most recently, MEMX LLC). 

As noted above, there is no regulatory 

requirement that any market participant 

connect to any one options exchange, 

nor that any market participant connect 

at a particular connection speed or act 

in a particular capacity on the 

Exchange, or trade any particular 

product offered on an exchange. 

Moreover, membership is not a 

requirement to participate on the 

Exchange. Indeed, the Exchange is 

unaware of any one options exchange 

whose membership includes every 

registered broker-dealer. By way of 

example, while the Exchange has 52 

TPHs, Cboe BZX has 61 members that 

trade options, and Cboe EDGX has 51 

members that trade options. There is 

also no firm that is a Member of C2 

Options only. Further, based on 

publicly available information regarding 

a sample of the Exchange’s competitors, 

NYSE American Options has 71 

members,15 and NYSE Arca Options has 

69 members,16 MIAX Options has 46 

members 17 and MIAX Pearl Options has 

40 members.18

A market participant may also submit 

orders to the Exchange via a Member 

broker or a third-party reseller of 

connectivity. The Exchange notes that 

third-party non-TPHs also resell 

exchange connectivity. This indirect 

connectivity is another viable 

alternative for market participants to 

trade on the Exchange without 

connecting directly to the Exchange 

(and thus not pay the Exchange 

connectivity fees), which alternative is 

already being used by non-TPHs and 

further constrains the price that the 

Exchange is able to charge for 

connectivity to its Exchange.19 The 

Exchange notes that it could, but 

chooses not to, preclude market 

participants from reselling its 

connectivity. Unlike other exchanges, 

the Exchange also chooses not to adopt 

fees that would be assessed to thirdparty resellers on a per customer basis 

(i.e., fee based on number of TPHs that 

connect to the Exchange indirectly via 

the third-party).20 Particularly, these 

third-party resellers may purchase the 

Exchange’s physical ports and resell 

access to such ports either alone or as 

part of a package of services. The 

Exchange notes that multiple TPHs are 

able to share a single physical port (and 

corresponding bandwidth) with other 

non-affiliated TPHs if purchased 

through a third-party reseller.21 This 

allows resellers to mutualize the costs of 

the ports for market participants and 

provide such ports at a price that may 

be lower than the Exchange charges due 

to this mutualized connectivity. These 

third-party sellers may also provide an 

additional value to market participants 

as they may also manage and monitor 

these connections, and clients of these 

third-parties may also be able to connect 

from the same colocation facility either 

from their own racks or using the thirdparty’s managed racks and 

infrastructure which may provide 

further cost-savings. As such, even firms 

that wish to utilize a single, dedicated 

10 Gbps port (i.e., use one single 10 

Gbps port themselves instead of sharing 

a port with other firms), may still realize 

cost savings via a third-party reseller 

because such reseller may be providing 

additional services and infrastructure 

support alongside the physical port 

offering (e.g., providing space, hosting, 

power, and other long-haul connectivity 

options). Further, as noted above, the 

Exchange does not receive any 

connectivity revenue when connectivity 

is resold by a third-party, which often 

is resold to multiple customers, some of 

whom are agency broker-dealers that 

have numerous customers of their own. 

Therefore, given the availability of 

third-party providers that also offer 

connectivity solutions, the Exchange 

believes participation on the Exchange 

remains affordable (notwithstanding the 

proposed fee change) for all market 

participants, including trading firms 

that may be able to take advantage of 

lower costs that result from mutualized 

connectivity and/or from other services 

provided alongside the physical port 

offerings. Because third-party resellers 

also act as a viable alternative to direct 

connectivity to the Exchange, the price 

that the Exchange is able to charge for 

direct connectivity to its Exchange is 

constrained. Further, the Exchange 

believes its offerings are more affordable 

as compared to similar offerings at 

competitor exchanges.22

Accordingly, the vigorous 

competition among national securities 

exchanges provides many alternatives 

for firms to voluntarily decide whether 

direct connectivity to the Exchange is 

appropriate and worthwhile, and as 

noted above, no broker-dealer is 

required to become a Member of the 

Exchange, let alone connect directly to 

it. In the event that a market participant 

views the Exchange’s proposed fee 

change as more or less attractive than 

the competition, that market participant 

can choose to connect to the Exchange 

indirectly or may choose not to connect 

to that exchange and connect instead to 

one or more of the other 13 non-Cboe 

affiliated options markets. Indeed, 

market participants are free to choose 

which exchange or reseller to use to 

satisfy their business needs. Moreover, 

if the Exchange charges excessive fees, 

it may stand to lose not only 

connectivity revenues but also revenues 

associated with the execution of orders 

routed to it, and, to the extent 

applicable, market data revenues. The 

Exchange believes that this competitive 

dynamic imposes powerful restraints on 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
73892 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2023 / Notices 

23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

24 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f). 

25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

the ability of any exchange to charge 

unreasonable fees for connectivity. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the 

Exchange still believes that the 

proposed fee increase is reasonable, 

equitably allocated and not unfairly 

discriminatory, even for market 

participants that determine to connect 

directly to the Exchange for business 

purposes, as those business reasons 

should presumably result in revenue 

capable of covering the proposed fee. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Exchange does not believe that 

the proposed rule change will impose 

any burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. The 

proposed fee change will not impact 

intramarket competition because it will 

apply to all similarly situated TPHs 

equally (i.e., all market participants that 

choose to purchase the 10 Gbps physical 

port). Additionally, the Exchange does 

not believe its proposed pricing will 

impose a barrier to entry to smaller 

participants and notes that its proposed 

connectivity pricing is associated with 

relative usage of the various market 

participants. For example, market 

participants with modest capacity needs 

can continue to buy the less expensive 

1 Gbps physical port (which cost is not 

changing) or may choose to obtain 

access via a third-party reseller. While 

pricing may be increased for the larger 

capacity physical ports, such options 

provide far more capacity and are 

purchased by those that consume more 

resources from the network. 

Accordingly, the proposed connectivity 

fees do not favor certain categories of 

market participants in a manner that 

would impose a burden on competition; 

rather, the allocation reflects the 

network resources consumed by the 

various size of market participants— 

lowest bandwidth consuming members 

pay the least, and highest bandwidth 

consuming members pays the most. 

The Exchange’s proposed fee is also 

still lower than some fees for similar 

connectivity on other exchanges and 

therefore may stimulate intermarket 

competition by attracting additional 

firms to connect to the Exchange or at 

least should not deter interested 

participants from connecting directly to 

the Exchange. Further, if the changes 

proposed herein are unattractive to 

market participants, the Exchange can, 

and likely will, see a decline in 

connectivity via 10 Gbps physical ports 

as a result. The Exchange operates in a 

highly competitive market in which 

market participants can determine 

whether or not to connect directly to the 

Exchange based on the value received 

compared to the cost of doing so. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange neither solicited nor 

received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The foregoing rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 

of the Act 23 and paragraph (f) of Rule 

19b–4 24 thereunder. At any time within 

60 days of the filing of the proposed rule 

change, the Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission will institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

change should be approved or 

disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s internet 

comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

C2–2023–022 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–C2–2023–022. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–C2–2023–022 and should be 

submitted on or before November 17, 

2023. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.25

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23706 Filed 10–26–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–98780; File No. SR– 

NYSEARCA–2023–70] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE 

Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed 

Rule Change To List and Trade Shares 

of the Grayscale Ethereum Trust Under 

NYSE Arca Rule 8.201–E (CommodityBased Trust Shares) 

October 23, 2023. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3

notice is hereby given that, on October 

10, 2023, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE 

Arca’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I, II, and 

III below, which Items have been 

prepared by the self-regulatory 

organization. The Commission is 

publishing this notice to solicit 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1