Document ID: SEC-2015-1105-0001
Agency: sec
Document Type: Notice
Title: Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BATS Exchange, Inc.
Posted Date: 2015-07-02T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38247-38251]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16271]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75313; File No. SR-BATS-2015-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to 
Fees for Use of BATS Exchange, Inc.

June 26, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given 
that on June 19, 2015, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``BATS'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and 
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange 
has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing 
a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange under 
section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon 
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to 
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend its fee schedule applicable 
to its equity options platform to: (i) Establish fees for the Multicast 
PITCH market data feed; and (ii) add definitions for terms that apply 
to market data fees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's 
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the 
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements 
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and 
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The 
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in 
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in 
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 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 its fee schedule applicable to its 
equity options platform to: (i) Establish fees for the Multicast PITCH 
market data feed; and (ii) add definitions for terms that apply to 
market data fees.

Definitions Applicable to Market Data Fees

    The Exchange proposes to include in its fee schedule the following 
defined terms that relate to the Exchange's

[[Page 38248]]

market data fees. The proposed definitions are designed to provide 
greater transparency with regard to how the Exchange assesses fees for 
market data.
    First, the Exchange proposes to define a ``Distributor'' as ``any 
entity that receives an Exchange Market Data product directly from the 
Exchange or indirectly through another entity and then distributes it 
internally or externally to a third party.'' \5\ In turn, an Internal 
Distributor and External Distributor will be separately defined. An 
Internal Distributor will be defined as a ``Distributor that receives 
the Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to one 
or more Users within the Distributor's own entity.'' \6\ An External 
Distributor will be defined as a ``Distributor that receives the 
Exchange Market Data product and then distributes that data to a third 
party or one or more Users outside the Distributor's own entity.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The proposed definition of ``Distributor'' is based on the 
definition of Distributor in fee schedules of the BATS Exchange, 
Inc. (``BATS Equities''), the BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (``BYX''), the 
EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), and the EDGA Exchange, Inc. 
(``EDGA'' together with BATS Equities, BYX, and EDGX, the ``BATS 
Exchanges''). See the BATS Equities fee schedule available at http://batstrading.com/support/fee_schedule/bzx/, BYX fee schedule 
available at http://batstrading.com/support/fee_schedule/byx/, EDGX 
fee schedule available at http://batstrading.com/support/fee_schedule/edgx/, and EDGA fee schedule available at http://batstrading.com/support/fee_schedule/edga/ (collectively, the ``BATS 
Exchange Fee Schedules'').
    \6\ The proposed definition of ``Internal Distributor'' is 
similar to the definition of Internal Distributor in fee schedules 
of the BATS Exchanges. Id.
    \7\ The proposed definition of ``External Distributor'' is 
similar to the definition of External Distributor in fee schedules 
of the BATS Exchanges. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Secondly, the Exchange proposes to add a definition of ``User'' to 
its fee schedule. A User will be defined as a ``natural person, a 
proprietorship, corporation, partnership, or entity, or device 
(computer or other automated service), that is entitled to receive 
Exchange data.'' For purposes of its market data fees, the Exchange 
will distinguish between ``Non-Professional Users'' and ``Professional 
Users.'' Specifically, a Non-Professional User will be defined as ``a 
natural person who is not: (i) Registered or qualified in any capacity 
with the Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, any 
state securities agency, any securities exchange or association; any 
commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii) engaged as 
an ``investment adviser'' as that term is defined in section 202(a)(11) 
of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (whether or not registered or 
qualified under that Act); or (iii) employed by a bank or other 
organization exempt from registration under federal or state securities 
laws to perform functions that will require registration or 
qualification if such functions were performed for an organization not 
so exempt.'' \8\ A Professional User will be defined as ``any User 
other than a Non-Professional User.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The proposed definition of ``Professional User'' is similar 
to the definition of Professional User in fee schedules of the BATS 
Exchanges. Id.
    \9\ The proposed definition of ``Non-Professional User'' is 
similar to the definition of Professional User in fee schedules of 
the BATS Exchanges. See BATS Exchange Fee Schedules, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Multicast PITCH Fees

    Multicast PITCH is a market data feed that includes depth of book 
quotations and execution information based on options orders traded on 
the Exchange.\10\ Currently, the Exchange does not charge any fees for 
receipt of Multicast PITCH. The Exchange now proposes to amend its fee 
schedule to incorporate fees related to Multicast PITCH. These fees 
include the following, each of which are described in detail below: (i) 
A Distribution Fee; (ii) Usage Fees for both Professional and Non-
Professional Users; and (iii) an Enterprise Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Exchange Rule 21.15(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Distribution Fee. As proposed, each Distributor that receives 
Multicast PITCH shall pay a fee of $1,500 per month. The proposed 
Distribution Fee would apply equally to both Internal Distributors and 
External Distributors.
    User Fees. The Exchange proposes to charge those who receive 
Multicast PITCH from either an Internal or External Distributor 
different fees for both their Professional Users and Non-Professional 
Users. The Exchange will assess a monthly fee for Professional Users of 
$30.00 per User. Non-Professional Users will be assessed a monthly fee 
of $1.00 per User.
    Both Internal and External Distributors would be required to count 
every Professional User and Non-Professional User to which they provide 
Multicast PITCH, the requirements for which are similar to that 
currently in place for the BATS One Feed.\11\ Thus, the Distributor's 
count will include every person and device that accesses the data 
regardless of the purpose for which the individual or device uses the 
data. Distributors must report all Professional and Non-Professional 
Users in accordance with the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74285 (February 
18, 2015), 80 FR 9828 (February 24, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-11); 74283 
(February 18, 2015), 80 FR 9809 (February 24, 2015) (SR-EDGA-2015-
09); 74282 (February 17, 2015), 80 FR 9487 (February 23, 2015) (SR-
EDGX-2015-09); and 74284 (February 18, 2015), 80 FR 9792 (February 
24, 2015) (SR-BYX-2015-09) (``Initial BATS One Feed Fee Filings''). 
The only difference is that the counting requirements proposed 
herein would require the counting of Users receiving Multicast PITCH 
through both internal and external distribution. Because Usage Fees 
are solely charged to recipient firms who's Users receive the BATS 
One Feed from an External Distributor and not through internal 
distribution, the BATS One Feed counting requirements only require 
the counting of Users by Distributors that disseminate the BATS One 
Feed externally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     In connection with a Distributor's distribution of 
Multicast PITCH, the Distributor should count as one User each unique 
User that the Distributor has entitled to have access to Multicast 
PITCH. However, where a device is dedicated specifically to a single 
individual, the Distributor should count only the individual and need 
not count the device.
     The Distributor should identify and report each unique 
User. If a User uses the same unique method to gain access to Multicast 
PITCH, the Distributor should count that as one User. However, if a 
unique User uses multiple methods to gain access to Multicast PITCH 
(e.g., a single User has multiple passwords and user identifications), 
the Distributor should report all of those methods as an individual 
User.
     Distributors should report each unique individual person 
who receives access through multiple devices as one User so long as 
each device is dedicated specifically to that individual.
     If a Distributor entitles one or more individuals to use 
the same device, the Distributor should include only the individuals, 
and not the device, in the count.
    Enterprise Fee. The Exchange also proposes to establish a $3,500 
per month Enterprise Fee that will permit a recipient firm who receives 
Multicast PITCH from a Distributor to receive the data for an unlimited 
number of Professional and Non-Professional Users. For example, if a 
recipient firm had 500 Professional Users who each receive Multicast 
PITCH at $30.00 per month, then that recipient firm will pay $15,000 
per month in Professional Users fees. Under the proposed Enterprise 
Fee, the recipient firm will pay a flat fee of $3,500 per month for an 
unlimited number of Professional and Non-Professional Users for 
Multicast PITCH. A recipient firm must pay a separate Enterprise Fee 
for each Distributor that controls display of Multicast PITCH if it 
wishes such User to be covered by an Enterprise Fee rather than by per 
User fees. A recipient firm that pays the Enterprise Fee will not have 
to report its

[[Page 38249]]

number of Users on a monthly basis. However, every six months, a 
recipient firm must provide the Exchange with a count of the total 
number of natural person users of each product, including both 
Professional and Non-Professional Users.

Implementation Date

    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee 
schedule on July 1, 2015.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent 
with the objectives of section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and 
furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4),\13\ in particular, as it is 
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, 
fees and other charges among its members and other recipients of 
Exchange data. The Exchange believes that the proposed rates are 
equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply uniformly to all 
recipients of Exchange data. The Exchange believes the proposed fees 
are competitive with those charged by other venues and, therefore, 
reasonable and equitably allocated to recipients. Lastly, the Exchange 
also believes that the proposed fees are reasonable and non-
discriminatory because they will apply uniformly to all recipients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is 
consistent with section 11(A) of the Act \14\ in that it supports (i) 
fair competition among brokers and dealers, among exchange markets, and 
between exchange markets and markets other than exchange markets and 
(ii) the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors of information 
with respect to quotations for and transactions in securities. 
Furthermore, the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 603 of 
Regulation NMS,\15\ which provides that any national securities 
exchange that distributes information with respect to quotations for or 
transactions in an NMS stock do so on terms that are not unreasonably 
discriminatory. In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted 
self-regulatory organizations and broker-dealers increased authority 
and flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. It 
was believed that this authority would expand the amount of data 
available to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition for 
the provision of market data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \15\ See 17 CFR 242.603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed fees would not permit unfair 
discrimination because all of the Exchange's customers and market data 
vendors will be subject to the proposed fees on an equivalent basis. 
Multicast PITCH is distributed and purchased on a voluntary basis, in 
that neither the Exchange nor market data distributors are required by 
any rule or regulation to make this data available. Accordingly, 
Distributors and Users can discontinue use at any time and for any 
reason, including due to an assessment of the reasonableness of fees 
charged. Firms have a wide variety of alternative market data products 
from which to choose, such as similar proprietary data products offered 
by other exchanges and consolidated data. Moreover, the Exchange is not 
required to make any proprietary data products available or to offer 
any specific pricing alternatives to any customers.
    In addition, the fees that are the subject of this rule filing are 
constrained by competition. As explained below in the Exchange's 
Statement on Burden on Competition, the existence of alternatives to 
Multicast PITCH further ensures that the Exchange cannot set 
unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably discriminatory, when 
vendors and subscribers can elect such alternatives. That is, the 
Exchange competes with other exchanges (and their affiliates) that 
provide similar market data products. If another exchange (or its 
affiliate) were to charge less to consolidate and distribute its 
similar product than the Exchange charges to consolidate and distribute 
Multicast PITCH, prospective Users likely would not subscribe to, or 
would cease subscribing to, the Multicast PITCH.
    The Exchange notes that the Commission is not required to undertake 
a cost-of-service or rate-making approach. The Exchange believes that, 
even if it were possible as a matter of economic theory, cost-based 
pricing for non-core market data would be so complicated that it could 
not be done practically.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange believes that cost-based pricing would be 
impractical because it would create enormous administrative burdens 
for all parties, including the Commission, to cost-regulate a large 
number of participants and standardize and analyze extraordinary 
amounts of information, accounts, and reports. In addition, it is 
impossible to regulate market data prices in isolation from prices 
charged by markets for other services that are joint products. Cost-
based rate regulation would also lead to litigation and may distort 
incentives, including those to minimize costs and to innovate, 
leading to further waste. Under cost-based pricing, the Commission 
would be burdened with determining a fair rate of return, and the 
industry could experience frequent rate increases based on 
escalating expense levels. Even in industries historically subject 
to utility regulation, cost-based ratemaking has been discredited. 
As such, the Exchange believes that cost-based ratemaking would be 
inappropriate for proprietary market data and inconsistent with 
Congress's direction that the Commission use its authority to foster 
the development of the national market system, and that market 
forces will continue to provide appropriate pricing discipline. See 
Appendix C to NYSE's comments to the Commission's 2000 Concept 
Release on the Regulation of Market Information Fees and Revenues, 
which can be found on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov/rules/concept/s72899/buck1.htm. See also Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 73816 (December 11, 2014), 79 FR 75200 
(December 17, 2014) (SR-NYSE-2014-64) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Establish an 
Access Fee for the NYSE Best Quote and Trades Data Feed, Operative 
December 1, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    User Fees. The Exchange believes that implementing the Professional 
and Non-Professional User fees for Multicast PITCH is equitable and 
reasonable because it will result in greater availability to 
Professional and Non-Professional Users. Moreover, introducing a modest 
Non-Professional User fee for Multicast PITCH is reasonable because it 
provides an additional method for retail investors to access Multicast 
PITCH data by providing the same data that is available to Professional 
Users. The Exchange believes that the proposed fees are equitable and 
not unfairly discriminatory because they will be charged uniformly to 
recipient firms and Users. The fee structure of differentiated 
Professional and Non-Professional fees is utilized for by the Exchange 
for the BATS One Feed and has long been used by other exchanges for 
their proprietary data products, and by the Nasdaq UTP and the CTA and 
CQ Plans in order to reduce the price of data to retail investors and 
make it more broadly available.\17\ Offering Multicast PITCH to Non-
Professional Users with the same data available to Professional Users 
results in greater equity among data recipients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See the Initial BATS One Feed Fee Filings, supra note 12. 
See also, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 20002, File No. 
S7-433 (July 22, 1983) (establishing nonprofessional fees for CTA 
data); Nasdaq Rules 7023(b), 7047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed fees are reasonable when compared to 
similar fees for comparable products offered by the NYSE Arca, Inc. 
(``NYSE Arca''). Specifically, NYSE Arca offers NYSE ArcaBook for Arca 
Options--Depth of Book, which includes depth of book information for 
options traded on NYSE Arca, for a monthly fee of $50.00 per 
professional subscriber and $1.00 per

[[Page 38250]]

non-professional subscriber.\18\ The Exchange's proposed per User Fees 
for Multicast PITCH is less than or equal to the NYSE Arca's fees for 
NYSE ArcaBook for Arca Options--Depth of Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See NYSE Market Data Pricing dated May 2015 available at 
http://www.nyxdata.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Enterprise Fee. The proposed Enterprise Fee for Multicast PITCH is 
equitable and reasonable as the fees proposed are less than the 
enterprise fees currently charged for NYSE ArcaBook for Arca Options--
Depth of Book. NYSE Arca provides a fee cap $5,000 per month for NYSE 
ArcaBook for Arca Options--Depth of Book for non-professional user 
only,\19\ while the Exchange is proposing a monthly Enterprise Fee of 
$3,500 per month for both Professional and Non-Professional Users. In 
addition, the Enterprise Fee proposed by the Exchange could result in a 
fee reduction for recipient firms with a large number of Professional 
and Non-Professional Users. If a recipient firm has a smaller number of 
Professional Users of the Multicast PITCH, then it may continue using 
the per User structure and benefit from the per User Fee reductions. By 
reducing prices for recipient firms with a large number of Professional 
and Non-Professional Users, the Exchange believes that more firms may 
choose to receive and to distribute the Multicast PITCH, thereby 
expanding the distribution of this market data for the benefit of 
investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that the proposed Enterprise Fee is 
reasonable because it will simplify reporting for certain recipients 
that have large numbers of Professional and Non-Professional Users. 
Firms that pay the proposed Enterprise Fee will not have to report the 
number of Users on a monthly basis as they currently do, but rather 
will only have to count natural person users every six months, which is 
a significant reduction in administrative burden. Finally, the Exchange 
believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to 
establish an Enterprise Fee because it reduces the Exchange's costs and 
the Distributor's administrative burdens in tracking and auditing large 
numbers of Users.
    Distributor Fee. The Exchange believes that the proposed 
Distributor Fees are also reasonable, equitably allocated, and not 
unreasonably discriminatory. The fees for Members and non-Members are 
uniform except with respect to reasonable distinctions between internal 
and external distribution.\20\ The Exchange believes that the 
Distributor Fees for Multicast PITCH are reasonable and fair in light 
of alternatives offered by other market centers. For example, NYSE Arca 
charges an internal distribution fee of $3,000 per month and an 
external distribution fee of $2,000 per month for NYSE ArcaBook for 
Arca Options--Depth of Book,\21\ while the Exchange is proposing a 
monthly Distribution Fee of $1,500 per month for both Internal and 
External Distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Exchange notes that distinctions based on external 
versus internal distribution have been previously filed with the 
Commission by Nasdaq, Nasdaq OMX BX, and Nasdaq OMX PSX. See BATS 
Exchange Fee Schedules, supra note 6. See also Nasdaq Rule 019(b); 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62876 (September 9, 2010), 75 FR 
56624 (September 16, 2010) (SR-PHLX-2010-120); Securities Exchange 
Act Release No. 62907 (September 14, 2010), 75 FR 57314 (September 
20, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-110); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 
63442 (December 6, 2010), 75 FR 77029 (December 10, 2010) (SR-BX-
2010-081).
    \21\ See NYSE Market Data Pricing dated May 2015 available at 
http://www.nyxdata.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions Applicable to Market Data Fees

    The Exchange believes that the proposed definitions are consistent 
with section 6(b) of the Act,\22\ in general, and section 6(b)(4) of 
the Act,\23\ in particular, in that it provides for an equitable 
allocation of reasonable fees among recipients of the data and is not 
designed to permit unfair discrimination among customers, brokers, or 
dealers. The Exchange believes that the proposed definitions are 
reasonable because they are designed to provide greater transparency 
with regard to how the Exchange assesses fees for market data. The 
Exchange believes that recipients of Exchange data would benefit from 
clear guidance in its fee schedule that describes the manner in which 
the Exchange would assess fees. These definitions are intended to make 
the fee schedule clearer and less confusing for investors, thereby 
removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open 
market and a national market system, and, in general, protecting 
investors and the public interest. Lastly, the proposed definitions are 
based on existing definitions in fee schedules of the BATS 
Exchanges.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \24\ See BATS Exchange Fee Schedules, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

Multicast PITCH Fees

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The 
Exchange's ability to price Multicast PITCH is constrained by: (i) 
Competition among exchanges, other trading platforms, and Trade 
Reporting Facilities (``TRF'') that compete with each other in a 
variety of dimensions; (ii) the existence of inexpensive real-time 
consolidated data and market-specific data and free delayed data; and 
(iii) the inherent contestability of the market for proprietary data.
    The Exchange and its market data products are subject to 
significant competitive forces and the proposed fees represent 
responses to that competition. To start, the Exchange competes 
intensely for order flow. It competes with the other national 
securities exchanges that currently trade equities, with electronic 
communication networks, with quotes posted in FINRA's Alternative 
Display Facility, with alternative trading systems, and with securities 
firms that primarily trade as principal with their customer order flow.
    In addition, Multicast PITCH competes with a number of alternative 
products. For instance, Multicast PITCH does not provide a complete 
picture of all trading activity in a security. Rather, the other 
national securities exchanges, the Options Price Reporting Authority
    (``OPRA''), the several TRFs, and Electronic Communication Networks 
(``ECN'') that produce proprietary data all produce trades and trade 
reports. Each is currently permitted to produce similar data products, 
and many currently do, including the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 
(``Nasdaq'') and the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'').
    In sum, the availability of a variety of alternative sources of 
information imposes significant competitive pressures on Exchange data 
products and the Exchange's compelling need to attract order flow 
imposes significant competitive pressure on the Exchange to act 
equitably, fairly, and reasonably in setting the proposed data product 
fees. The proposed data product fees are, in part, responses to that 
pressure. The

[[Page 38251]]

Exchange believes that the proposed fees would reflect an equitable 
allocation of its overall costs to users of its facilities.
    In addition, when establishing the proposed fees, the Exchange 
considered the competitiveness of the market for proprietary data and 
all of the implications of that competition. The Exchange believes that 
it has considered all relevant factors and has not considered 
irrelevant factors in order to establish fair, reasonable, and not 
unreasonably discriminatory fees and an equitable allocation of fees 
among all Users. The existence of alternatives to Multicast PITCH, 
including existing similar feeds by other exchanges, consolidated data, 
and proprietary data from other sources, ensures that the Exchange 
cannot set unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably 
discriminatory, when vendors and subscribers can elect these 
alternatives or choose not to purchase a specific proprietary data 
product if its cost to purchase is not justified by the returns any 
particular vendor or subscriber would achieve through the purchase.

Definitions Applicable to Market Data Fees

    The proposed definitions applicable to market data fees will not 
result in any burden on competition. The proposed definitions are not 
designed to amend any fee, nor alter the manner in which it assesses 
fees. The Exchange believes that recipients of Exchange data would 
benefit from clear guidance in its fee schedule that describes the 
manner in which the Exchange would assess fees for market data. These 
definitions are intended to make the Fee Schedule clearer and less 
confusing for investors and are not designed to have a competitive 
impact.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written 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 \25\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 
thereunder.\26\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BATS-2015-46 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-BATS-2015-46. This file 
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help 
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all 
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are 
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to 
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other 
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the 
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and 
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All 
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does 
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should 
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All 
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2015-46 and should be 
submitted on or before July 23, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-16271 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P