Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 9093 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) 

(File No. S7–10–04) (Final Rule) (‘‘Regulation 

NMS’’). 

4See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61358, 

75 FR 3594, 3597 (January 21, 2010) (File No. S7– 

02–10) (Concept Release on Equity Market 

Structure). 

5See Cboe U.S Equities Market Volume 

Summary, available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/ 

equities/market_share. See generally https://

www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmr

exchangesshtml.html. 

6See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at 

https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/ 

AtsIssueData. A list of alternative trading systems 

registered with the Commission is available at 

https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm. 

7See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market 

Volume Summary, available at http://

markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/. 

8See id. 

9A Retail Order is an agency order that originates 

from a natural person and is submitted to the 

Exchange by an ETP Holder, provided that no 

change is made to the terms of the order to price 

or side of market and the order does not originate 

from a trading algorithm or any other computerized 

methodology. See Securities Exchange Act Release 

No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August 3, 

2012) (SR–NYSEArca–2012–77). 

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).: MC2022–39 and 

CP2022–46; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail & First-Class 

Package Service Contract 214 to 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing 

Acceptance Date: February 10, 2022; 

Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 

3040.130 through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 

3035.105; Public Representative: Katalin 

K. Clendenin; Comments Due: February 

18, 2022. 

This Notice will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Erica A. Barker, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03382 Filed 2–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–94233; File No. SR– 

NYSEArca–2022–08] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE 

Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca 

Equities Fees and Charges 

February 11, 2022. 

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 January 31, 

2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’ or 

the ‘‘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. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

NYSE Arca Equities Fees and Charges 

(‘‘Fee Schedule’’) to adopt an alternative 

requirement to qualify for the Retail 

Order Step-Up Tier 1 pricing tier. The 

Exchange proposes to implement the fee 

change effective February 1, 2022. The 

proposed rule change is available on the 

Exchange’s website at www.nyse.com, at 

the principal office of the Exchange, and 

at the Commission’s Public Reference 

Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

self-regulatory organization included 

statements concerning the purpose of, 

and basis for, the proposed rule change 

and discussed any comments it received 

on the proposed rule change. The text 

of those statements may be examined at 

the places specified in Item IV below. 

The Exchange has prepared summaries, 

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

of the most significant parts of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

Fee Schedule to adopt an alternative 

requirement to qualify for the Retail 

Order Step-Up Tier 1 pricing tier. The 

Exchange proposes to implement the fee 

change effective February 1, 2022. 

Background 

The Exchange operates in a highly 

competitive market. The Commission 

has repeatedly expressed its preference 

for competition over regulatory 

intervention in determining prices, 

products, and services in the securities 

markets. In Regulation NMS, 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.’’ 3

While Regulation NMS has enhanced 

competition, it has also fostered a 

‘‘fragmented’’ market structure where 

trading in a single stock can occur 

across multiple trading centers. When 

multiple trading centers compete for 

order flow in the same stock, the 

Commission has recognized that ‘‘such 

competition can lead to the 

fragmentation of order flow in that 

stock.’’ 4 Indeed, equity trading is 

currently dispersed across 16 

exchanges,5 numerous alternative 

trading systems,6 and broker-dealer 

internalizers and wholesalers, all 

competing for order flow. Based on 

publicly-available information, no 

single exchange currently has more than 

20% market share.7 Therefore, no 

exchange possesses significant pricing 

power in the execution of equity order 

flow. More specifically, the Exchange 

currently has less than 10% market 

share of executed volume of equities 

trading.8

The Exchange believes that the evershifting market share among the 

exchanges from month to month 

demonstrates that market participants 

can move order flow, or discontinue or 

reduce use of certain categories of 

products. While it is not possible to 

know a firm’s reason for shifting order 

flow, the Exchange believes that one 

such reason is because of fee changes at 

any of the registered exchanges or nonexchange venues to which a firm routes 

order flow. The competition for Retail 

Orders 9 is even more stark, particularly 

as it relates to exchange versus offexchange venues. 

The Exchange thus needs to compete 

in the first instance with non-exchange 

venues for Retail Order flow, and with 

the 15 other exchange venues for that 

Retail Order flow that is not directed 

off-exchange. Accordingly, competitive 

forces compel the Exchange to use 

exchange transaction fees and credits, 

particularly as they relate to competing 

for Retail Order flow, because market 

participants can readily trade on 

competing venues if they deem pricing 

levels at those other venues to be more 

favorable. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9094 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 

10See Retail Order Tier, Retail Order Step-Up 

Tier 1, Retail Order Step-Up Tier 2, and Retail 

Order Step-Up Tier 3 under Retail Tiers on the Fee 

Schedule. 

11Pursuant to footnote (d) under Retail Tiers, ETP 

Holders that qualify for Retail Order Step-Up Tier 

1 are subject to the following rates in Tape C: 

($0.0035) for Adding displayed liquidity; $0.0027 

for Removing; and Additional ($0.0002) for Adding 

non-displayed liquidity. See Fee Schedule. 

12Pursuant to footnote (e) under Retail Tiers, ETP 

Holders that qualify for Retail Order Step-Up Tier 

1, Retail Order Step-Up Tier 2 and Retail Order 

Step-Up Tier 3 are not charged a fee or provided 

a credit for Retail Orders where each side of the 

executed order (1) shares the same MPID and (2) is 

a Retail Order with a time-in-force of Day. See Fee 

Schedule. 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). 

15See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 

(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005). 

To respond to this competitive 

environment, the Exchange has 

established Retail Order Step-Up tiers,10

which are designed to provide an 

incentive for ETP Holders to route Retail 

Orders to the Exchange by providing 

higher credits for adding liquidity 

correlated to an ETP Holder’s higher 

trading volume in Retail Orders on the 

Exchange. Under the Retail Order StepUp Tiers, ETP Holders also do not pay 

a fee when such Retail Orders have a 

time-in-force of Day that add and 

remove liquidity from the Exchange. 

Proposed Rule Change 

Currently, to qualify for the Retail 

Order Step-Up Tier 1 credit, an ETP 

Holder must execute an average daily 

volume (ADV) per month of Retail 

Orders with a time-in-force of Day that 

add or remove liquidity that is an 

increase of 0.40% of CADV above its 

April 2018 ADV taken as a percentage 

of CADV, and have Adding ADV of 

1.00% or more of CADV. ETP Holders 

that meet the Retail Order Step-Up Tier 

1 requirement are eligible to earn a 

credit of $0.0038 per share for Retail 

Orders that add liquidity in Tape A, 

Tape B and Tape C securities.11 As 

noted above, ETP Holders are not a 

charged a fee for Retail Orders with a 

time-in-force of Day that add and 

remove liquidity.12

The Exchange proposes to modify the 

requirements to qualify for Retail Order 

Step-Up Tier 1 by adopting an 

alternative qualification basis for the 

Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 fees and 

credits. As proposed, in addition to 

providing an ADV of 1.00% or more of 

CADV, an ETP Holder would qualify for 

the current fees and credits by executing 

an ADV per month of Retail Orders with 

a time-in-force of Day that add or 

remove liquidity that is an increase of 

0.40% of CADV above its April 2018 

ADV taken as a percentage of CADV, or 

by executing an ADV per month of 55 

million shares of Retail Orders with a 

time-in-force of Day that add or remove 

liquidity. The Exchange does not 

propose any change to the level of fees 

and credits under Retail Order Step-Up 

Tier 1. 

The purpose of the proposed rule 

change is to encourage greater 

participation from ETP Holders and 

promote additional liquidity in Retail 

Orders. As described above, ETP 

Holders with liquidity-providing orders 

have a choice of where to send those 

orders. Given the overall decline of 

Retail Orders, as a percentage of total 

volume in the equity markets, the 

Exchange believes introducing 

alternative criteria for ETP Holders to 

qualify for Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 

will allow greater number of ETP 

Holders to potentially qualify for the 

tier, and will incentivize more ETP 

Holders to route their liquidityproviding Retail Orders to the Exchange 

rather than to a competing exchange. 

The proposed changes are not 

otherwise intended to address any other 

issues, and the Exchange is not aware of 

any significant problems that market 

participants would have in complying 

with the proposed changes 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b) of the Act,13 in general, and 

furthers the objectives of Sections 

6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,14 in particular, 

because it provides for the equitable 

allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and 

other charges among its members, 

issuers and other persons using its 

facilities and does not unfairly 

discriminate between customers, 

issuers, brokers or dealers. 

The Proposed Fee Change Is Reasonable 

As discussed above, the Exchange 

operates in a highly fragmented and 

competitive market. The Commission 

has repeatedly expressed its preference 

for competition over regulatory 

intervention in determining prices, 

products, and services in the securities 

markets. Specifically, in Regulation 

NMS, the Commission highlighted the 

importance of market forces in 

determining prices and SRO revenues 

and, 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.’’ 15

The Exchange believes that the evershifting market share among the 

exchanges from month to month 

demonstrates that market participants 

can shift order flow, or discontinue to 

reduce use of certain categories of 

products, in response to fee changes. 

With respect to Retail Orders, ETP 

Holders can choose from any one of the 

16 currently operating registered 

exchanges, and numerous off-exchange 

venues, to route such order flow. 

Accordingly, competitive forces 

reasonably constrain exchange 

transaction fees that relate to Retail 

Orders on an exchange. Stated 

otherwise, changes to exchange 

transaction fees can have a direct effect 

on the ability of an exchange to compete 

for order flow. 

In particular, the Exchange believes 

that the proposed new alternative 

threshold to qualify for Retail Order 

Step-Up Tier 1 is reasonable because it 

is designed to encourage greater 

participation from ETP Holders and 

promote additional liquidity in Retail 

Orders. The Exchange believes it is 

reasonable to require ETP Holders to 

meet the applicable volume threshold to 

qualify for the Retail Order Step-Up Tier 

1 credit. Further, the proposed change is 

reasonable as it would allow ETP 

Holders an additional method to qualify 

for the credit payable under the pricing 

tier if ETP Holders are unable to meet 

the existing requirement, particularly 

when there has been an overall decline 

of Retail Orders as a percentage of total 

volume in the equity markets, and yet 

sustained high consolidated daily 

volumes. The Exchange believes that the 

proposal represents a reasonable effort 

to promote price improvement and 

enhanced order execution opportunities 

for ETP Holders. All ETP Holders would 

benefit from the greater amounts of 

liquidity on the Exchange, which would 

represent a wider range of execution 

opportunities. The Exchange notes that 

market participants are free to shift their 

order flow to competing venues if they 

believe other markets offer more 

favorable fees and credits. 

The Proposed Fee Change Is an 

Equitable Allocation of Fees and Credits 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change to introduce alternative 

criteria for ETP Holders to qualify for 

Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 equitably 

allocates its fees among its market 

participants. The Exchange believes the 

Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 pricing tier 

is equitable because it would apply to 

all similarly situated ETP Holders on an 

equal basis and provides an alternative 

path to qualify for a per share credit that 

is reasonably related to the value of an 

exchange’s market quality associated 

with higher volumes. The Exchange 

believes it is equitable to require ETP 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 9095 

16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 

17See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 

70 FR 37495, 37498–99 (June 29, 2005) (S7–10–04) 

(Final Rule). 

Holders to meet the applicable volume 

thresholds to qualify for the Retail Order 

Step-Up Tier 1 credit. Further, the 

proposed change is also equitable as it 

would allow ETP Holders an alternative 

method to qualify for the credit payable 

under the pricing tier if ETP Holders are 

unable to meet the current requirement. 

The Exchange believes that modifying 

Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 would 

encourage the submission of additional 

liquidity to the Exchange, thus 

enhancing order execution 

opportunities for ETP Holders from the 

substantial amounts of liquidity present 

on the Exchange. All ETP Holders 

would benefit from the greater amounts 

of liquidity that would be present on the 

Exchange, which would provide greater 

execution opportunities. 

The Exchange does not know how 

much Retail Order flow ETP Holders 

choose to route to other exchanges or to 

off-exchange venues. Without having a 

view of ETP Holders’ activity on other 

markets and off-exchange venues, the 

Exchange has no way of knowing 

whether this proposed rule change 

would result in ETP Holders sending 

more of their Retail Orders to the 

Exchange to qualify for the Retail Order 

Step-Up Tier 1 credit of $0.0038 per 

share, which is among the highest 

credits offered by the Exchange. The 

Exchange believes that its fee structure 

for Retail Orders, in particular the Retail 

Order Step-Up Tier 1 pricing tier, 

should incentivize ETP Holders to send 

such orders to the Exchange. The 

Exchange cannot predict with certainty 

how many ETP Holders would avail 

themselves of this opportunity but 

additional Retail Orders would benefit 

all market participants because it would 

provide greater execution opportunities 

on the Exchange. 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is equitable 

because maintaining the proportion of 

Retail Orders in exchange-listed 

securities that are executed on a 

registered national securities exchange 

(rather than relying on certain available 

off-exchange execution methods) would 

contribute to investors’ confidence in 

the fairness of their transactions and 

would benefit all investors by 

deepening the Exchange’s liquidity 

pool, supporting the quality of price 

discovery, promoting market 

transparency and improving investor 

protection. 

The Proposed Fee Change Is Not 

Unfairly Discriminatory 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change to introduce 

alternative criteria for ETP Holders to 

qualify for Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 

is not unfairly discriminatory. In the 

prevailing competitive environment, 

ETP Holders are free to disfavor the 

Exchange’s pricing if they believe that 

alternatives offer them better value. 

Moreover, the proposal neither targets 

nor will it have a disparate impact on 

any particular category of market 

participant. The Exchange believes that 

the proposal does not permit unfair 

discrimination because the proposal 

would be applied to all similarly 

situated ETP Holders and all ETP 

Holders would be subject to the same 

modified Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1. 

Accordingly, no ETP Holder already 

operating on the Exchange would be 

disadvantaged by the proposed 

allocation of fees. The Exchange further 

believes that the proposed changes 

would not permit unfair discrimination 

among ETP Holders because the general 

and tiered rates are available equally to 

all ETP Holders. 

As described above, in today’s 

competitive marketplace, order flow 

providers have a choice of where to 

direct liquidity-providing order flow, 

and the Exchange believes there are 

additional ETP Holders that could 

qualify for Retail Order Step-Up Tier 1 

if they chose to direct their order flow 

to the Exchange. Lastly, the submission 

of Retail Orders is optional for ETP 

Holders in that they could choose 

whether to submit Retail Orders and, if 

they do, the extent of its activity in this 

regard. The Exchange believes that it is 

subject to significant competitive forces, 

as described below in the Exchange’s 

statement regarding the burden on 

competition. 

For the foregoing reasons, the 

Exchange believes that the proposal is 

consistent with the Act. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of 

the Act,16 the Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change would not impose 

any burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. Instead, as 

discussed above, the Exchange believes 

the proposed change would encourage 

the submission of additional liquidity to 

a public exchange, thereby promoting 

market depth, price discovery and 

transparency and enhancing order 

execution opportunities for all market 

participants. As a result, the Exchange 

believes that the proposed change 

furthers the Commission’s goal in 

adopting Regulation NMS of fostering 

competition among orders, which 

promotes ‘‘more efficient pricing of 

individual stocks for all types of orders, 

large and small.’’ 17

Intramarket Competition. The 

Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change does not impose any burden on 

intramarket competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. The 

Exchange does not believe that the 

proposed change represents a significant 

departure from previous pricing offered 

by the Exchange or its competitors. The 

proposed change is designed to attract 

Retail Orders to the Exchange. The 

Exchange believes that amending 

criteria of established tiers would 

incentivize market participants to direct 

liquidity adding order flow to the 

Exchange, bringing with it additional 

execution opportunities for market 

participants and improved price 

transparency. Greater overall order flow, 

trading opportunities, and pricing 

transparency benefits all market 

participants on the Exchange by 

enhancing market quality and 

continuing to encourage ETP Holders to 

send orders, thereby contributing 

towards a robust and well-balanced 

market ecosystem. 

Intermarket Competition. The 

Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change does not impose any burden on 

intermarket competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. The 

Exchange operates in a highly 

competitive market in which market 

participants can readily choose to send 

their orders to other exchanges and offexchange venues if they deem fee levels 

at those other venues to be more 

favorable. As noted above, the 

Exchange’s market share of intraday 

trading (i.e., excluding auctions) is 

currently less than 10%. In such an 

environment, the Exchange must 

continually adjust its fees and rebates to 

remain competitive with other 

exchanges and with off-exchange 

venues. Because competitors are free to 

modify their own fees and credits in 

response, and because market 

participants may readily adjust their 

order routing practices, the Exchange 

does not believe this proposed fee 

change would impose any burden on 

intermarket competition. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9096 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 

20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 21 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were solicited 

or received with respect to the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The foregoing rule change is effective 

upon filing pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A) 18 of the Act and 

subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 19

thereunder, because it establishes a due, 

fee, or other charge imposed by the 

Exchange. 

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of such 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 

under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 20 of the Act 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 (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 

NYSEArca–2022–08 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–NYSEArca–2022–08. This 

file number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

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

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

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

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549 on official 

business days between the hours of 

10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

offices of the Exchange. All comments 

received will be posted without change. 

Persons submitting comments are 

cautioned that we do not redact or edit 

personal identifying information from 

comment submissions. You should 

submit only information that you wish 

to make available publicly. All 

submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–NYSEArca–2022–08, and 

should be submitted on or before March 

10, 2022. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.21

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03392 Filed 2–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–94226; File No. SR– 

NASDAQ–2022–012] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Amend 

Equity 7, Section 115 of the Fee 

Schedule 

February 11, 2022. 

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 January 

31, 2022, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 

(‘‘Nasdaq’’ 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 

Exchange’s pricing schedule at Equity 7, 

Section 115, as described further below. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is detailed below: proposed new 

language is italicized and proposed 

deletions are in brackets. 

* * * * * 

The Nasdaq Stock Market Rules 

* * * * * 

Equity Rules 

* * * * * 

Equity 7 Pricing Schedule 

* * * * * 

Section 115. Ports and Services† 

The charges under this section are assessed 

by Nasdaq for connectivity to services and 

the following systems operated by Nasdaq or 

FINRA: The Nasdaq Market Center, FINRA 

Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine 

(TRACE), the FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting 

Facility, and the FINRA OTC Reporting 

Facility (ORF). The following fees are not 

applicable to The Nasdaq Options Market 

LLC. For related options fees for Ports and 

other Services refer to Options 7, Section 3 

of the Options Rules. 

(a)–(d) No change. 

(e) Specialized Services Related to FINRA/ 

Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1