Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices 86193 

40 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3 ‘‘MEO Interface’’ or ‘‘MEO’’ means a binary 

order interface for certain order types as set forth 

in Rule 516 into the MIAX Pearl System. See the 

Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule and 

Exchange Rule 100. 

4The proposed fee change is based on a recent 

proposal by Nasdaq Phlx LLC (‘‘Phlx’’) to adopt fees 

for purge ports. See Securities Exchange Act 

Release No. 97825 (June 30, 2023), 88 FR 43405 

(July 7, 2023) (SR–Phlx–2023–28). 

5The term ‘‘Member’’ means an individual or 

organization that is registered with the Exchange 

pursuant to Chapter II of Exchange Rules for 

purposes of trading on the Exchange as an 

‘‘Electronic Exchange Member’’ or ‘‘Market Maker.’’ 

Members are deemed ‘‘members’’ under the 

Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of the 

Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100. 

6The term ‘‘Market Maker’’ or ‘‘MM’’ means a 

Member registered with the Exchange for the 

purpose of making markets in options contracts 

traded on the Exchange and that is vested with the 

rights and responsibilities specified in Chapter VI 

of the Exchange Rules. See the Definitions Section 

of the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100. 

7The term ‘‘Electronic Exchange Member’’ or 

‘‘EEM’’ means the holder of a Trading Permit who 

is a Member representing as agent Public Customer 

Orders or Non-Customer Orders on the Exchange 

and those non-Market Maker Members conducting 

proprietary trading. Electronic Exchange Members 

are deemed ‘‘members’’ under the Exchange Act. 

See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule and 

Exchange Rule 100. 

8The term ‘‘System’’ means the automated 

trading system used by the Exchange for the trading 

of securities. See Exchange Rule 100. 

9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98733 

(October 12, 2023), 88 FR 71907 (October 18, 2023) 

(SR–PEARL–2023–52). 

10See Cboe BXZ Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BZX’’) Options 

Fee Schedule, Options Logical Port Fees, Purge 

Ports ($750 per purge port per month); Cboe EDGX 

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’) Options Fee Schedule, 

Options Logical Port Fees, Purge Ports ($750 per 

purge port per month); Cboe Exchange, Inc. 

(‘‘Cboe’’) Fee Schedule ($850 per purge port per 

month). See also Nasdaq GEMX, Options 7, Pricing 

Schedule, Section 6.C.(3). Nasdaq GEMX, LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq GEMX’’) assesses its members $1,250 per 

SQF Purge Port per month, subject to a monthly cap 

of $17,500 for SQF Purge Ports and SQF Ports, 

applicable to market makers. See also Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 97825 (June 30, 2023), 88 

FR 43405 (July 7, 2023) (SR–Phlx–2023–28). 

11A Matching Engine is a part of the Exchange’s 

electronic system that processes options quotes and 

trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. Some matching 

engines will process option classes with multiple 

root symbols, and other matching engines will be 

dedicated to one single option root symbol (for 

example, options on SPY will be processed by one 

single matching engine that is dedicated only to 

SPY). A particular root symbol may only be 

assigned to a single designated matching engine. A 

particular root symbol may not be assigned to 

multiple matching engines. 

12See supra note 10. 

13The Exchange notes that each Matching Engine 

corresponds to a specified group of symbols. 

Certain Market Makers choose to only quote in 

certain symbols while other Market Makers choose 

to quote the entire market. 

For the Commission, pursuant to delegated 

authority.40

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27159 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–99090; File No. SR– 

PEARL–2023–65] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX 

PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the MIAX Pearl 

Options Fee Schedule for Purge Ports 

December 6, 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 November 

22, 2023, MIAX PEARL, LLC (‘‘MIAX 

Pearl’’ or ‘‘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 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 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

MIAX Pearl Options Exchange Fee 

Schedule (the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’) to 

amend fees for MIAX Express Network 

(‘‘MEO’’) 3 Purge Ports (‘‘Purge Ports’’).4

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

https://www.miaxglobal.com/markets/ 

us-options/pearl-options/rule-filings at 

MIAX Pearl’s principal office, and at the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

Exchange included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change and discussed 

any comments it received on the 

proposed rule change. The text of these 

statements may be examined at the 

places specified in Item IV below. The 

Exchange has prepared summaries, set 

forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 

the most significant aspects of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange is proposing to amend 

the fees for Purge Ports, which is a 

function enabling the Exchange’s two 

types of Members,5 Market Makers 6 and 

Electronic Exchange Members 7

(‘‘EEMs’’), to cancel all open orders or 

a subset of open orders through a single 

cancel message. The Exchange currently 

provides Members the option to 

purchase Purge Ports to assist in their 

quoting activity. Purge Ports provide 

Members with the ability to send purge 

messages to the Exchange System.8

Purge Ports are not capable of sending 

or receiving any other type of messages 

or information. The use of Purge Ports 

is completely optional and no rule or 

regulation requires that a Market Maker 

utilize them. 

The Exchange initially filed the 

proposal on September 29, 2023 (SR– 

PEARL–2023–52) (the ‘‘Initial 

Proposal’’).9 On November 22, 2023, the 

Exchange withdrew the Initial Proposal 

and replaced it with this filing. 

Unlike other options exchanges that 

charge fees for Purge Ports on a per port 

basis,10 the Exchange assesses a flat fee 

of $750 per month, regardless of the 

number of Purge Ports utilized by a 

Market Maker. Currently, a Market 

Maker may request and be allocated two 

(2) Purge Ports per Matching Engine 11

to which it connects and not all 

Members connect to all of the 

Exchange’s Matching Engines. 

The Exchange now proposes to amend 

the fee for Purge Ports to align more 

closely with other exchanges who 

charge on a per port basis by providing 

two (2) Purge Ports per Matching Engine 

for a monthly flat fee of $600 per month 

per Matching Engine. The only 

difference with a per port structure is 

that Members receive two (2) Purge 

Ports per Matching Engine for the same 

proposed monthly fee, rather than being 

charged a separate fee for each Purge 

Port. The Exchange proposes to charge 

the proposed fee for Purge Ports per 

Matching Engine, instead on a per Purge 

Port basis, due to its System architecture 

which provides two (2) Purge Ports per 

Matching Engine for redundancy 

purposes. In addition, the proposed fee 

is lower than the comparable fee 

charged by competing exchanges that 

also charge on a per port basis, 

notwithstanding that the Exchange is 

providing up to two (2) Purge Ports for 

that same lower fee.12

Similar to a per port charge, Members 

are able to select the Matching Engines 

that they want to connect to,13 based on 

the business needs of each Market 

Maker, and pay the applicable fee based 

on the number of Matching Engines and 

ports utilized. The Exchange believes 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86194 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices 

14Members seeking to become registered as a 

Market Maker must comply with the applicable 

requirements of Chapter VI of the Exchange’s Rules. 

15See Exchange Rule 519C(a) and (b). 

16Current Exchange port functionality supports 

cancelation rates that exceed one thousand 

messages per second and the Exchange’s research 

indicates that certain market participants rely on 

such functionality and at times utilize such 

cancelation rates. 

17See Exchange Rule 519C(c). 

18See Exchange Rule 532. 

19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

22See supra note 3. 

23See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 

98770 (October 18, 2023), 88 FR 73065 (October 24, 

2023) (SR–BX–2023–026); and 98768 (October 18, 

2023), 88 FR 73056 (October 24, 2023) (SR– 

NASDAQ–2023–041). While the Exchange included 

a cost-based justification in a related filing to 

amend fees for connectivity, it does not believe a 

cost-based justification is require here because 

Purge Ports are optional functionality and no costbased justification was provided by Phlx or any of 

its affiliates in their same filings to adopt fees for 

purge ports. Nor does the Commission Staff’s own 

fee guidance include such a requirement. See Staff 

Guidance on SRO Rule Filings Relating to Fees 

(May 21, 2019), available at https://www.sec.gov/ 

tm/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees. 

24See supra notes 4 and 10. See also Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 77613 (April 13, 2016), 

81 FR 23023 (April 19, 2016). See also Securities 

that the proposed fee provides Members 

with flexibility to control their Purge 

Port costs based on the number of 

Matching Engines each Marker Maker 

elects to connect to based on each 

Market Maker’s business needs. 

* * * * * 

A logical port represents a port 

established by the Exchange within the 

Exchange’s System for trading and 

billing purposes. Each logical port 

grants a Member the ability to 

accomplish a specific function, such as 

order entry, order cancellation, access to 

execution reports, and other 

administrative information. 

Purge Ports are designed to assist 

Members 14 in the management of, and 

risk control over, their orders, 

particularly if the firm is dealing with 

a large number of securities. For 

example, if a Market Maker detects 

market indications that may influence 

the execution potential of their orders, 

the Market Maker may use Purge Ports 

to reduce uncertainty and to manage 

risk by purging all orders in a number 

of securities. This allows Members to 

seamlessly avoid unintended 

executions, while continuing to evaluate 

the market, their positions, and their 

risk levels. Purge Ports are used by 

Members that conduct business activity 

that exposes them to a large amount of 

risk across a number of securities. Purge 

Ports enable Members to cancel all open 

orders, or a subset of open orders 

through a single cancel message. The 

Exchange notes that Purge Ports 

increase efficiency of already existing 

functionality enabling the cancellation 

of orders. 

The Exchange operates highly 

performant systems with significant 

throughput and determinism which 

allows participants to enter, update and 

cancel orders at high rates. Members 

may currently cancel individual orders 

through the existing functionality, such 

as through the use of a mass cancel 

message by which a Market Maker may 

request that the Exchange remove all or 

a subset of its quotations and block all 

or a subset of its new inbound 

quotations.15 Other than Purge Ports 

being a dedicated line for cancelling 

quotations, Purge Ports operate in the 

same manner as a mass cancel message 

being sent over a different type of port. 

For example, like Purge Ports, mass 

cancellations sent over a logical port 

may be done at either the firm or MPID 

level. As a result, Members can 

currently cancel orders in rapid 

succession across their existing logical 

ports 16 or through a single cancel 

message, all open orders or a subset of 

open orders. 

Similarly, Members may also use 

cancel-on-disconnect control when they 

experience a disruption in connection to 

the Exchange to automatically cancel all 

orders, as configured or instructed by 

the Member or Market Maker.17 In 

addition, the Exchange already provides 

similar ability to mass cancel orders 

through the Exchange’s risk controls, 

which are offered at no charge and 

enables Members to establish predetermined levels of risk exposure, and 

can be used to cancel all open orders.18

Accordingly, the Exchange believes that 

the Purge Ports provide an efficient 

option as an alternative to already 

available services and enhance the 

Member’s ability to manage their risk. 

The Exchange believes that market 

participants benefit from a dedicated 

purge mechanism for specific Members 

and to the market as a whole. Members 

will have the benefit of efficient risk 

management and purge tools. The 

market will benefit from potential 

increased quoting and liquidity as 

Members may use Purge Ports to 

manage their risk more robustly. Only 

Members that request Purge Ports would 

be subject to the proposed fees, and 

other Members can continue to operate 

in exactly the same manner as they do 

today without dedicated Purge Ports, 

but with the additional purging 

capabilities described above. 

Implementation Date 

The proposed fees are immediately 

effective. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

section 6(b) of the Act,19 in general, and 

furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 

of the Act,20 in particular, in that it is 

not designed to permit unfair 

discrimination among customers, 

brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also 

believes that its proposed fee is 

consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the 

Act 21 because it represents an equitable 

allocation of reasonable dues, fees and 

other charges among market 

participants. 

The Exchange supports the proposed 

fee change with the below justification 

because a similar justification was used 

in a recent 2023 proposal filed with the 

Commission by another national 

securities exchange, Phlx, to adopt fees 

for purge ports, which the Commission 

deemed acceptable by not suspending 

that filing during the applicable 60-day 

review period.22 In fact, the same 

justification Phlx utilized was also used 

in similar recent proposals to adopt fees 

for purge ports by two of Phlx’s 

affiliated exchanges.23 Therefore, the 

Exchange utilized the below 

justification based on this recent 

Commission precedent from 

approximately one month ago. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change would promote 

just and equitable principles of trade 

and remove impediments to and perfect 

the mechanism of a free and open 

market because offering Members 

optional service and flexible fee 

structures which promotes choice, 

flexibility, efficiency, and competition. 

The Exchange believes Purge Ports 

enhance Members’ ability to manage 

orders, which would, in turn, improve 

their risk controls to the benefit of all 

market participants. The Exchange 

believes that Purge Ports foster 

cooperation and coordination with 

persons engaged in facilitating 

transactions in securities because 

designating Purge Ports for purge 

messages may encourage better use of 

such ports. This may, concurrent with 

the ports that carry orders and other 

information necessary for market 

making activities, enable more efficient, 

as well as fair and reasonable, use of 

Members’ resources. Similar 

connectivity and functionality is offered 

by options exchanges, including the 

Exchange’s own affiliated options 

exchanges, and other equities 

exchanges.24 The Exchange believes that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices 86195 

Exchange Act Release Nos. 79956 (February 3, 

2017), 82 FR 10102 (February 9, 2017) (SR– 

BatsBZX–2017–05); 79957 (February 3, 2017), 82 FR 

10070 (February 9, 2017) (SR–BatsEDGX–2017–07); 

83201 (May 9, 2018), 83 FR 22546 (May 15, 2018) 

(SR–C2–2018–006). 

25See Exchange Rule 604. See also generally 

Chapter VI of the Exchange’s Rules. 

26 Id. 

27See supra notes 4 and 10. 

28See supra note 10. 

29Current Exchange port functionality supports 

cancellation rates that exceed one thousand 

messages per second and the Exchange’s research 

indicates that certain Participants rely on such 

functionality and at times utilize such cancellation 

rates. 

30See Exchange Rule 532. 

31See Exchange Rule 519C(a). 32See Exchange Rule 519C(c). 

proper risk management, including the 

ability to efficiently cancel multiple 

orders quickly when necessary, is 

similarly valuable to firms that trade in 

the equities market, including Members 

that have heightened quoting 

obligations that are not applicable to 

other market participants. 

Purge Ports do not relieve Members of 

their quoting obligations or firm quote 

obligations under Regulation NMS Rule 

602.25 Specifically, any interest that is 

executable against a Member’s or Market 

Maker’s orders that is received by the 

Exchange prior to the time of the 

removal of orders request will 

automatically execute. Members that 

purge their orders will not be relieved 

of the obligation to provide continuous 

two-sided orders on a daily basis, nor 

will it prohibit the Exchange from 

taking disciplinary action against a 

Market Maker for failing to meet their 

continuous quoting obligation each 

trading day.26

The Exchange is not the only 

exchange to offer this functionality and 

to charge associated fees.27 The 

Exchange believes the proposed fee for 

Purge Ports is reasonable because it is 

lower than the fees currently charged by 

other exchanges for similar port 

functionality. For example, BZX and 

EDGX charge a fee of $750 per purge 

port per month, Cboe charges $850 per 

purge port per month, Nasdaq GEMX 

assesses its members $1,250 per SQF 

Purge Port per month, subject to a 

monthly cap of $17,500 for SQF Purge 

Ports and SQF Ports.28

The Exchange believes it is reasonable 

to charge $600 per month for Purge 

Ports as proposed because such ports 

were specially developed to allow 

Members to send a single message to 

cancel multiple orders, thereby assisting 

firms in effectively managing risk. The 

Exchange also believes that a Member 

that chooses to utilize Purge Ports may, 

in the future, reduce their need for 

additional ports by consolidating cancel 

messages to their dedicated Purge Port 

and thus freeing up some capacity of the 

existing logical ports and, therefore, 

allowing for increased message traffic 

without paying for additional logical 

ports. Purge Ports provide the ability to 

cancel multiple orders with a single 

message over a dedicated port, and, 

therefore, may create efficiencies for 

firms and provide a more efficient 

solution for them based on their risk 

management needs. In addition, Purge 

Port requests may cancel orders 

submitted over numerous ports and 

contain added functionality to purge 

only a subset of these orders. Effective 

risk management is important both for 

individual market participants that 

choose to utilize risk features provided 

by the Exchange, as well as for the 

market in general. As a result, the 

Exchange believes that it is appropriate 

to charge fees for such functionality as 

doing so aids in the maintenance of a 

fair and orderly market. 

The Exchange also believes that its 

ability to set fees for Purge Ports is 

subject to significant substitution-based 

forces because Members are able to rely 

on currently available services both free 

and those they receive when using 

existing trading protocols. If the value of 

the efficiency introduced through the 

Purge Port functionality is not worth the 

proposed fees, Members will simply 

continue to rely on the existing 

functionality and not pay for Purge 

Ports. In that regard, Members may 

currently cancel individual orders 

through the existing functionality, such 

as through the use of a mass cancel 

message by which a Market Maker may 

request that the Exchange remove all or 

a subset of its quotations and block all 

or a subset of its new inbound 

quotations. Already Members can also 

cancel orders individually and by 

utilizing Exchange protocols that allow 

them to develop proprietary systems 

that can send cancel messages at a high 

rate.29 In addition, the Exchange already 

provides similar ability to mass cancel 

orders through the Exchange’s risk 

controls, which are offered at no charge 

that enables Members to establish predetermined levels of risk exposure, and 

can be used to cancel all open orders.30

Further, like Purge Ports, Members 

may also cancel all or a subset of its 

orders in the System, by firm name or 

by MPID, over their existing ports, or by 

requesting the Exchange staff to effect 

such cancellations.31

Similarly, Members may use cancelon-disconnect control when they 

experience a disruption in their 

connection to the Exchange and 

immediately cancel all pending quotes 

in the Exchange’s System.32 Finally, this 

existing purging functionality will allow 

Members to achieve essentially the same 

outcome in canceling orders as they 

would by utilizing the Purge Ports. 

Accordingly, the Exchange believes that 

the proposed Purge Ports fee is 

reasonable because it is related to the 

efficiency of Purge Ports and to other 

means and services already available 

which are either free or already a part 

of a fee assessed to the Members for 

existing connectivity. Accordingly, 

because Purge Ports provide additional 

optional functionality, excessive fees 

would simply serve to reduce or 

eliminate demand for this optional 

product. 

The Exchange also believes that 

offering Purge Ports at the Matching 

Engine level promotes risk management 

across the industry, and thereby 

facilitates investor protection. Some 

market participants, in particular the 

larger firms, could and do build similar 

risk functionality (as described above) 

in their trading systems that permit the 

flexible cancellation of orders entered 

on the Exchange at a high rate. Offering 

Matching Engine level protections 

ensures that such functionality is 

widely available to all firms, including 

smaller firms that may otherwise not be 

willing to incur the costs and 

development work necessary to support 

their own customized mass cancel 

functionality. 

As noted above, the Exchange is not 

the only exchange to offer dedicated 

Purge Ports, and the proposed rate is 

lower than that charged by other 

exchanges for similar functionality. The 

Exchange also believes that moving to a 

per Matching Engine fee is reasonable 

due to the Exchange’s architecture that 

provides it the ability to provide two (2) 

Purge Ports per Matching Engine for a 

fee that would still be lower than 

competing exchanges that charge on a 

per port basis. Generally speaking, 

restricting the Exchange’s ability to 

charge fees for these services 

discourages innovation and 

competition. Specifically in this case, 

the Exchange’s inability to offer similar 

services to those offered by other 

exchanges, and charge reasonable and 

equitable fees for such services, would 

put the Exchange at a significant 

competitive disadvantage and, therefore, 

serve to restrict competition in the 

market—especially when other 

exchanges assess comparable fees higher 

than those proposed by the Exchange. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed Purge Port fees are equitable 

because the proposed Purge Ports are 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86196 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices 

33See letter from Thomas M. Merritt, Deputy 

General Counsel, Virtu Financial, Inc. (‘‘Virtu’’), to 

Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated 

November 8, 2023. 

34 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 

35 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

completely voluntary as they relate 

solely to optional risk management 

functionality. 

The Exchange also believes that the 

proposed amendments to its Fee 

Schedule are not unfairly 

discriminatory because they will apply 

uniformly to all Members that choose to 

use the optional Purge Ports. Purge Ports 

are completely voluntary and, as they 

relate solely to optional risk 

management functionality, no Market 

Maker is required or under any 

regulatory obligation to utilize them. All 

Members that voluntarily select this 

service option will be charged the same 

amount for the same services. All 

Members have the option to select any 

connectivity option, and there is no 

differentiation among Members with 

regard to the fees charged for the 

services offered by the Exchange. 

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. Purge Ports 

are completely voluntary and are 

available to all Members on an equal 

basis at the same cost. While the 

Exchange believes that Purge Ports 

provide a valuable service, Members can 

choose to purchase, or not purchase, 

these ports based on their own 

determination of the value and their 

business needs. No Member is required 

or under any regulatory obligation to 

utilize Purge Ports. Accordingly, the 

Exchange believes that Purge Ports offer 

appropriate risk management 

functionality to firms that trade on the 

Exchange without imposing an 

unnecessary or inappropriate burden on 

competition. 

Furthermore, the Exchange operates 

in a highly competitive environment, 

and its ability to price the Purge Ports 

is constrained by competition among 

exchanges that offer similar 

functionality. As discussed, there are 

currently a number of similar offers 

available to market participants for 

higher fees at other exchanges. 

Proposing fees that are excessively 

higher than established fees for similar 

functionality would simply serve to 

reduce demand for the Purge Ports, 

which as discussed, market participants 

are under no obligation to utilize. It 

could also cause firms to shift trading to 

other exchanges that offer similar 

functionality at a lower cost, adversely 

impacting the overall trading on the 

Exchange and reducing market share. In 

this competitive environment, potential 

purchasers are free to choose which, if 

any, similar product to purchase to 

satisfy their need for risk management. 

As a result, the Exchange believes this 

proposed rule change permits fair 

competition among national securities 

exchanges. 

The Exchange also does not believe 

the proposal would cause any 

unnecessary or inappropriate burden on 

intermarket competition as other 

exchanges are free to introduce their 

own purge port functionality and lower 

their prices to better compete with the 

Exchange’s offering. The Exchange does 

not believe the proposed rule change 

would cause any unnecessary or 

inappropriate burden on intramarket 

competition. Particularly, the proposal 

would apply uniformly to any market 

participant, in that it does not 

differentiate between Members. The 

proposal would allow any interested 

Members to purchase Purge Port 

functionality based on their business 

needs. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange received one comment 

letter on the proposal.33 This comment 

letter was submitted not only on this 

proposal, but also the proposals by the 

Exchange and its affiliates to amend fees 

for 10Gb ULL connectivity and certain 

ports. Overall, the Exchange believes 

that the issues raised by the commenter 

are not germane to this proposal because 

they apply primarily to the other fee 

filings. Also, the commenter’s raised 

concerns with the current environment 

surrounding exchange non-transaction 

fee proposals that should be addressed 

by the Commission through rule 

making, or Congress, more holistically 

and not through an individual exchange 

fee filings. However, the commenter 

does raise one issue that concerns this 

proposal whereby it asserts that the 

Exchange’s comparison to fees charged 

by other exchanges for similar ports is 

irrelevant and unpersuasive. The core of 

the issue raised is regarding the cost to 

connect to one exchange compared to 

the cost to connect to others. A thorough 

response to this comment would require 

the Exchange to obtain competitively 

sensitive information about other 

exchange architecture and how their 

members connect. The Exchange is not 

privy to this information. Further, the 

commenter compares the Exchange’s 

proposed rate to other exchanges that 

offer purge port functionality across all 

matching engines for a single fee, but 

fails to provide the same comparison to 

other exchanges that charge for purge 

functionality like proposed here. The 

Exchange does not have insight into the 

technical architecture of other 

exchanges so it is difficult to ascertain 

the number of purge ports a firm would 

need to connect to another exchange’s 

entire market. Therefore, the Exchange 

is limited to comparing its proposed fee 

to other exchanges’ purge port fees as 

listed in their fee schedules. 

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)(ii) of the Act,34 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(2) 35 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 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 (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

PEARL–2023–65 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to file 

number SR–PEARL–2023–65. 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices 86197 

36 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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–PEARL–2023–65 and should be 

submitted on or before January 2, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.36

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27161 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

National Women’s Business Council; 

Notice of Public Meeting 

AGENCY: Small Business Administration, 

National Women’s Business Council. 

ACTION: Notice of open public meeting. 

DATES: The public meeting will be held 

on Tuesday, January 23, 2024, from 

12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. EDT. 

ADDRESSES: This meeting is hybrid and 

will be held via Zoom, a web 

conferencing platform as well as inperson. The access link will be provided 

to attendees upon registration. For those 

attending in-person, the event will take 

place at the U.S. Small Business 

Administration Headquarters (409 3rd 

St. SW, Washington, DC 20416) in 

Eisenhower Conference Room on the 

Concourse Level. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

more information, please visit the 

NWBC website at www.nwbc.gov, email 

info@nwbc.gov or call Jordan Chapman, 

Public Affairs Manager, at 202–941– 

6001. 

The meeting is open to the public; 

however, advance notice of attendance 

is requested. To RSVP, please visit the 

NWBC website at www.nwbc.gov. The 

‘‘Public Meetings’’ section will feature a 

link to register on Eventbrite. 

This event will be held over Zoom 

and in-person, with a link being 

provided closer to the date of the event 

for Zoom attendees. During the live 

event, attendees will be in listen-only 

mode. For technical assistance, please 

visit the Zoom Support Page. The 

meeting record, including a recording 

and a recap, will be made available on 

www.nwbc.gov under the ‘‘Public 

Meetings’’ section after the meeting has 

concluded. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act, the National 

Women’s Business Council (NWBC) 

announces its first public meeting of 

Fiscal Year 2024. The 1988 Women’s 

Business Ownership Act established 

NWBC to serve as an independent 

source of advice and policy 

recommendations to the President, 

Congress, and the Administrator of the 

U.S. Small Business Administration 

(SBA) on issues of importance to 

women entrepreneurs. 

This meeting will allow Council 

Members to review what was 

accomplished in 2023 and preview what 

may be accomplished over the next 

year. The event will include guest 

speakers and will allow Council 

Members to respond to a selection of 

questions and comments from the 

public. 

Dated: December 7, 2023. 

Andrienne Johnson, 

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27235 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 12286] 

Notice of Determinations; Culturally 

Significant Objects Being Imported for 

Exhibition—Determinations: ‘‘Matisse 

and the Sea’’ Exhibition 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the 

following determinations: I hereby 

determine that certain objects being 

imported from abroad pursuant to 

agreements with their foreign owners or 

custodians for temporary display in the 

exhibition ‘‘Matisse and the Sea’’ at the 

Saint Louis Art Museum, St. Louis, 

Missouri, and at possible additional 

exhibitions or venues yet to be 

determined, are of cultural significance, 

and, further, that their temporary 

exhibition or display within the United 

States as aforementioned is in the 

national interest. I have ordered that 

Public Notice of these determinations be 

published in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 

Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. 

Department of State (telephone: 202– 

632–6471; email: section2459@

state.gov). The mailing address is U.S. 

Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street 

NW (SA–5), Suite 5H03, Washington, 

DC 20522–0505. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

foregoing determinations were made 

pursuant to the authority vested in me 

by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 

985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 

12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign 

Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 

1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 

6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 

Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, 

Delegation of Authority No. 236–3 of 

August 28, 2000, and Delegation of 

Authority No. 523 of December 22, 

2021. 

Nicole L. Elkon, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional 

and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department 

of State. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27199 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Maritime Administration 

[Docket No. MARAD–2023–0221] 

Coastwise Endorsement Eligibility 

Determination for a Foreign-Built 

Vessel: ENVA 1 (Motor); Invitation for 

Public Comments 

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary of 

Transportation, as represented by the 

Maritime Administration (MARAD), is 

authorized to issue coastwise 

endorsement eligibility determinations 

for foreign-built vessels which will carry 

no more than twelve passengers for hire. 

A request for such a determination has 

been received by MARAD. By this 

notice, MARAD seeks comments from 

interested parties as to any effect this 

action may have on U.S. vessel builders 

or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.- 

flag vessels. Information about the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1