80 FR 66951 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, Adopting New Equity Trading Rules Relating to Orders and Modifiers and the Retail Liquidity Program To Reflect the Implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology Platform
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 210 (October 30, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 210 (October 30, 2015)
| Page Range | 66951-66955 | |
| FR Document | 2015-27656 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 210 (Friday, October 30, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 66951-66955] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-27656] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76267; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2015-56] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, Adopting New Equity Trading Rules Relating to Orders and Modifiers and the Retail Liquidity Program To Reflect the Implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology Platform October 26, 2015. I. Introduction On July 7, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to adopt new equity trading rules relating to Orders and Modifiers, and the Retail Liquidity Program, to reflect the implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's new trading technology platform. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July 28, 2015.\3\ On July 29, 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\4\ On September 1, [[Page 66952]] 2015, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ the Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.\6\ On October 15, 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change.\7\ The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comment on Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 from interested persons, and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, on an accelerated basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4 \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75497 (July 21, 2015), 80 FR 45022 (``Notice''). \4\ Amendment No. 1 deletes references to IOC Routable Cross Orders and states that the Exchange has determined not to offer this order type when it implements Pillar. \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75801, 80 FR 53905 (September 8, 2015). \7\ In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange proposes to: (i) Correct a cross reference in proposed Rule 7.31P(a)(2)(B) from Rule 7.10 to Rule 7.10P; (ii) add a new sentence to proposed Rule 7.31P(b)(2)(A) to specify that an incoming Limit IOC Order with a minimum trade size (``MTS'') must be at least a round lot and, if the MTS is larger than the size of the Limit IOC Order, the order would be rejected on arrival; (iii) to add a hard paragraph return between proposed Rule 7.31P(i)(1) and 7.31P(i)(2); and (iv) remove an extraneous reference to ``500'' in the sixth paragraph in the first example of proposed Rule 7.44P(l). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt new equity trading rules relating to the implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's new trading technology platform. The Exchange proposes to adopt two new Pillar rules: 1) NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31P (``Rule 7.31P'') related to orders and modifiers; and 2) NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.44P (``Rule 7.44P'') related to the Retail Liquidity Program (``RLP''). According to the Exchange, these rules would set forth the RLP for Pillar and describe how orders and modifiers in Pillar would be priced, ranked, traded, and/or routed, using the terminology and priority categories that were approved in the Pillar I Filing.\8\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75494 (July 20, 2015), 80 FR 44170 (July 24, 2015) (``Pillar I Filing''); see also Notice at 45022. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Background The Exchange represents that Pillar is an integrated trading technology platform designed to use a single specification for connecting to the equities and options markets operated by Arca and its affiliates, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') and NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'').\9\ On July 24, 2015, the Commission approved Pillar rules relating to Trading Sessions, Order Ranking and Display, and Order Execution.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ See Notice at 45022. \10\ See Pillar I Filing, supra note 8. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This filing is the second set of proposed rule changes to support Pillar implementation. As proposed, the new rules governing trading on Pillar would have the same numbering as current rules, but with the modifier ``P'' appended to the rule number. The Exchange proposes that rules with a ``P'' modifier would operate for symbols that are trading on the Pillar trading platform. If a symbol is trading on the Pillar trading platform, a rule with the same number as a rule with a ``P'' modifier would no longer operate for that symbol and the Exchange would announce by Trader Update when symbols are trading on the Pillar trading platform. Definitions that do not have a companion version with a ``P'' modifier would continue to operate for all symbols. B. Proposed Modifications As described in detail in the Notice, Rules 7.31P, and 7.44P incorporate much of the substance of current NYSE Arca Rules 7.31 and 7.44, respectively. However, with Pillar, the Exchange would introduce new terminology, reorganize and redraft certain provisions to improve clarity, and provide additional detail to other current provisions being redesignated. The Exchange also proposes to make several changes that are more substantive in nature, as follows:Market Orders: To reduce the potential for clearly erroneous executions, Market Order Trading Collars would prevent Market Orders from executing at the Trading Collar, which are based on the clearly erroneous execution numerical guidelines, and not just through the Trading Collar as under the current trading rules; \11\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(a)(1)(B). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limit Orders: Resting Limit Orders that would lock or cross a protected quotation if they become the best bid or offer (``BBO'') would be re-priced; \12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(a)(2). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Limit Order designated IOC: A Limit Order designated with an immediate-or-cancel (``IOC'') modifier that is not eligible to route may be designated with an optional MTS. On entry, a Limit IOC Order with an MTS must have a minimum of one round lot and will be rejected on arrival if the MTS is larger than the size of the Limit IOC Order; \13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(b)(2)(A). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Auction-Only Orders: Market-on-Open (``MOO'') and Limit- on-Open (``LOO'') Orders would be eligible to participate in trading halt auctions and the Exchange would accept Auction-Only Orders in non- auction eligible symbols; \14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(c). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reserve Orders: The displayed portion of Reserve Orders would be replenished following any execution that reduces the display quantity below the size designated to be displayed, at which point the replenished quantity would receive a new working time; \15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(d)(1). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Passive Liquidity Orders: Passive Liquidity Orders would be renamed ``Limit Non-Displayed Orders,'' would no longer be ranked behind other non-displayed orders, and an optional Non-Display Remove Modifier would be available for this order type; \16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(d)(2). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- MPL Orders: Mid-point Passive Liquidity Orders would be renamed ``Mid-point Liquidity Orders'' (``MPL Order''). On arrival, MPL Orders (and MPL-Adding Liquidity Only (``ALO'' Orders) would be eligible to trade with resting non-displayed interest that provides price improvement over the midpoint of the protected best bid or offer (``PBBO''). As under current rules, an MPL Order may be designated with an MTS, but in Pillar, the MTS would have to be a minimum of a round lot instead of one share. In addition, an MPL with an MTS would be rejected if, on arrival, the MTS is larger than the size of the order and would be cancelled at any point the MTS is larger than the residual size of the order; \17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(d)(3). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tracking Orders: Tracking Orders would peg to the PBBO instead of the national best bid or offer (``NBBO'') and Self-Trade Prevention (``STP'') Modifiers for Tracking Orders would no longer be ignored; \18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(d)(4). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PNP Orders: Post No Preference (``PNP'') Orders would no longer be offered; \19\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ See Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PNP Blind Orders: PNP Blind Orders would be renamed ``Arca Only Orders'' and an optional Non-Display Remove Modifier would be available for this order type; \20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(e)(1). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALO Orders: The current form of ALO Orders, which are based on PNP Orders and are rejected on arrival if [[Page 66953]] marketable, would no longer be offered. ALO Orders in Pillar would no longer be rejected on arrival if marketable and instead would be re- priced both on arrival and after updates to the PBBO. In addition, an ALO Order would trade with resting contra-side non-displayed orders that would provide price improvement; \21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(e)(2). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Intermarket Sweep Order: Intermarket Sweep Orders (``ISO'') designated Day and IOC would be renamed ``Day ISO'' and ``IOC ISO,'' respectively, and ALO modifier functionality available for Day ISOs would be based on the proposed ALO Order in Pillar; \22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(e)(3). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Primary Only Orders: Primary Only Orders designated for the Core Trading Session would be accepted and routed directly to the primary listing market on arrival and the Exchange would not validate whether the primary listing market would be accepting such orders. Primary Only Orders that are designated Day may be designated as a Reserve Order; \23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(f)(1). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pegged Orders: Pegged Orders would peg to the PBBO instead of the NBBO, would require a limit price, and would be accepted during a Short Sale Period, as defined in Rule 7.16(f). Market Pegged Orders would no longer be displayed and an offset value would no longer be required, and Primary Pegged Orders could not include an offset value. In addition, in Pillar, Pegged Orders would not be assigned a working price if the PBBO is locked or crossed; \24\ and --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ See proposed Rule 7.31P(h). See also Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q Orders: Auto Q Orders would be eliminated.\25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ See Notice at 45023. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the RLP, Retail Orders may not be designated with a ``No Midpoint Execution'' Modifier.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ See proposed Rule 7.44P(k); see also Notice at 45044. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- All orders in the RLP would be ranked based on their priority category, pursuant to Rule 7.36P, and would not have different ranking in the Program. Accordingly, odd-lot orders ranked Priority 2-- Display Orders would have priority over orders ranked Priority 3--Non- Display Orders, and Limit Non-Displayed Orders would no longer be ranked behind other non-display orders.\27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ See proposed Rule 7.44P(l); see also Notice at 45044. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Retail Price Improvement Orders (``RPIs'') would be accepted before the start of Core Trading Hours.\28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ See proposed Rule 7.44P(m); see also Notice at 45047. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Discussion and Commission Findings After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act \29\ and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\30\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\31\ which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and that the rules are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f. \30\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposed rules would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market because the proposed rule set would promote transparency by using consistent terminology governing equities trading, and by clearly denoting the rules that govern once a symbol has been migrated to the Pillar platform.\32\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ See Notice at 45047. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- With respect to proposed Rule 7.31P, the Exchange states that it believes that the proposed substantive differences to functionality being proposed for Pillar would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market for the following reasons: \33\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \33\ See Notice at 45047-45049 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Market Orders: The proposed substantive difference to prevent Market Orders from trading at the Trading Collar, and not just through the Trading Collar, would reduce the potential for Market Orders to trade at prices that would be considered clearly erroneous executions. Limit Orders: The proposed substantive difference to re- price resting Limit Orders would reduce the potential for the Exchange to publish a BBO that would lock or cross an Away Market PBBO that was locking or crossing a prior BBO of the Exchange. Limit Order Designated IOC: The proposed substantive difference to add optional MTS functionality for Limit IOC Orders would provide ETP Holders with greater certainty regarding the trade size of an IOC Order, and is based on existing order types available on another market. Auction-Only Orders: The proposed substantive difference to accept Auction-Only Orders in non-auction-eligible symbols and route them to the primary listing market would promote liquidity on the primary listing markets for their respective auctions. The proposed change would also protect investors and the public interest by enabling such orders to reach a destination where it is more likely to obtain an execution opportunity or participate in an auction. In addition, the proposed substantive difference to accept Auction-Only Orders for Trading Halt Auctions on the Exchange would promote liquidity for Exchange Trading Halt Auctions by adding additional order types that an ETP Holder could use that would participate only in an auction. Reserve Orders: The proposed substantive difference to replenish the display quantity of a Reserve Order after any trade that depletes the display quantity would promote the display of liquidity on the Exchange, because the Exchange would not wait for the display quantity to be depleted before replenishing from reserve interest. In addition, this proposed functionality is similar to how Reserve Orders function on another market. Limit Non-Displayed Orders: The proposed substantive difference to rank Limit Non-Displayed Orders with all other orders ranked Priority 3--Non-Display Orders would streamline the Exchange's priority and allocation methodology and eliminate a separate allocation category for a single order type. In addition, the proposed substantive difference to add an optional Non-Display Remove Modifier would provide ETP Holders with a tool to enable a Limit Non-Displayed Order to trade with an incoming ALO Order rather than have its working price be locked by the display price of an ALO Order. The proposed Non-Display Remove Modifier would also provide price improvement to the contra-side ALO Order with which it would trade. MPL Orders: The proposed substantive difference to provide that arriving MPL and MPL-ALO Orders [[Page 66954]] would trade with contra-side orders priced better than the midpoint of the PBBO would provide price improvement opportunities for MPL Orders and is consistent with how orders priced at the midpoint operate on other markets. In addition, the proposed substantive differences to the optional MTS functionality to cancel or reject an MPL Order with an MTS smaller than the size of the order would eliminate the possibility for an MPL Order to trade in a size smaller than the MTS. Finally, the proposed substantive difference to require a minimum of a round lot for the MTS would align the MTS functionality with the proposed MTS functionality for Limit IOC Orders, thereby streamlining the Exchange's rules and making the available modifiers consistent across multiple order types. Tracking Orders: The proposed substantive difference to price Tracking Orders based on the PBBO instead of the NBBO would conform how Tracking Orders are priced to how other orders at the Exchange are priced in Pillar, e.g., Limit Orders, MPL Orders, and Pegged Orders. In addition, this proposed change may increase the opportunity for Tracking Orders to trade because by being priced based on the same-side PBBO, a Tracking Order would not be restricted from trading because a price based on the NBBO would trade-through the PBBO. The proposed substantive difference to allow STP Modifiers for Tracking Orders would provide additional tools for ETP Holders to prevent wash sales between orders entered from the same ETP ID. Arca Only Orders: The proposed substantive difference to add an optional Non-Display Remove Modifier for Arca Only Orders would provide ETP Holders with a tool to enable an Arca Only Order to trade with an incoming ALO Order rather than have its working price be locked by the display price of an ALO Order. The proposed Non-Display Remove Modifier would also provide price improvement to the contra-side ALO Order with which it would trade. The proposed substantive difference to not offer PNP Orders in Pillar would streamline the order types available at the Exchange. ALO Orders: The proposed substantive difference to re- price ALO Orders that would trade with the BBO or lock or cross the PBBO, rather than reject such orders if marketable, would promote additional displayed liquidity on a publicly registered exchange, and therefore promote price discovery. The Exchange further believes that the proposed re-pricing and re-displaying of an ALO Order would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market because it assures that such order would meet its intended goal to be available on the Exchange's NYSE Arca Book as displayed liquidity without locking or crossing a protected quotation in violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS.\34\ The proposed re-pricing and re-displaying of ALO Orders is consistent with how other exchanges currently operate. In addition, any time the working price of an order changes, it receives a new working time.\35\ The proposed re-pricing of ALO Orders would be subject to this general requirement, and therefore re-priced ALO Orders would not have time priority over orders in the same priority category that may have an earlier working time. The Exchange further believes that the proposed substantive differences for ALO Orders to trade on arrival with non-displayed orders that would provide price improvement over the limit price of the ALO Order, but not trade with non-displayed orders priced equal to the limit price of the ALO Order, is consistent with how other exchanges operate, and therefore offering this functionality in Pillar would promote competition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ 17 CFR 242.610(d). \35\ See Rule 7.36P(f)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ISO: The proposed substantive difference to use the ALO Order functionality proposed for Pillar for ISOs would similarly promote additional displayed liquidity on the Exchange by allowing Day ISO ALO Orders to be re-priced for display rather than rejected if they are marketable against the BBO on arrival and is consistent with functionality on another exchange. Primary Only Orders: The proposed substantive difference to route all Primary Only Orders to the primary listing market would promote liquidity on the primary listing market and provide an opportunity for ETP Holders to participate in trading on the primary listing market. In addition, the proposed substantive difference to permit Primary Only Day Orders to be designated as a Reserve Order would provide ETP Holders with more options of order types that could be routed directly to the primary listing market, which would promote liquidity on the primary listing market. Pegged Orders: The proposed substantive difference to use the PBBO instead of the NBBO as the dynamic reference price for Pegged Orders would conform how Pegged Orders are priced consistent with how other orders are priced in Pillar, e.g., Limit Orders, MPL Orders, and Tracking Orders. The proposed substantive differences for Market Pegged Orders in Pillar, to provide that they would be undisplayed and no longer require an offset, would be consistent with how other exchanges operate. Finally, the proposed substantive difference for Market Pegged Orders--not to assign a working price to such orders or have them eligible to trade when the PBBO is locked or crossed--would reduce the potential for a Market Pegged Order to trade when the market is locked or crossed. The proposed substantive difference for Primary Pegged Orders to no longer permit an offset value would promote the additional display of liquidity at the PBBO, rather than at prices inferior to the PBBO. The additional proposed substantive difference for Primary Pegged Orders to reject an arrival when the PBBO is locked or crossed, or to not assign a new working price to a resting Primary Pegged Order if the market becomes locked or crossed, would reduce the potential for the Exchange to display an order that would lock or cross the PBBO. Because Primary Pegged Orders would be displayed orders, the Exchange further proposes that if the PBBO locks or crosses, a resting Primary Pegged Order could remain displayed at its prior working price, which is consistent with how displayed orders that are locked or crossed by another market function on the Exchange. Q Orders: The proposed substantive difference to eliminate Auto Q Orders would streamline the Exchange's rules and reduce complexity regarding how orders and modifiers function on the Exchange. With respect to proposed Rule 7.44P, the Commission notes that the Exchange represents that proposed substantive difference to the priority and allocation of orders that trade against Retail Orders in proposed Rule 7.44P(l) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market because it would align the priority and allocation of orders in the RLP with the priority and allocation of orders outside of the RLP.\36\ The Exchange further states the proposed substantive difference would therefore promote transparency in Exchange rules and reduce potential confusion because the RLP would no longer operate differently from the priority and allocation of orders outside the RLP.\37\ The Exchange also states that the proposed substantive difference for proposed Rule 7.44P(m), to accept RPIs before the Core Trading Session begins, would remove [[Page 66955]] impediments to and perfect the mechanism and a free and open market by allowing the entry of RPIs to build a book of liquidity that would be available to provide price improvement to incoming Retail Orders as soon as the Core Trading Session begins.\38\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \36\ See Notice at 45049. \37\ Id. \38\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Based on the Exchange's representations, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change does not raise any novel regulatory considerations and should provide greater specificity with respect to the functionality available on the Exchange as symbols are migrated to the Pillar platform. For these reasons, the Commission believes that the proposal should help to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest. IV. Accelerated Approval of Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposes to delete references to IOC Routable Cross Orders because the Exchange has determined not to offer this order type when it implements Pillar. In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange proposes to: (i) Correct a cross reference in proposed Rule 7.31P(a)(2)(B) from Rule 7.10 to Rule 7.10P; (ii) add a new sentence to proposed Rule 7.31P(b)(2)(A) to specify that an incoming Limit IOC Order with a MTS must be at least a round lot and, if the MTS is larger than the size of the Limit IOC Order, the order would be rejected on arrival; (iii) to add a hard paragraph return between proposed Rule 7.31P(i)(1) and 7.31P(i)(2); and (iv) remove an extraneous reference to ``500'' in the sixth paragraph in the first example of proposed Rule 7.44P(l). The Commission believes that the changes proposed in Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 are non-substantive and further clarify the operation of the proposed rules governing Pillar. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\39\ to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, on an accelerated basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 are consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-56 on the subject line. Paper Comments Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-56. 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 also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-56, and should be submitted on or before November 20, 2015. VI. Conclusion It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\40\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2015-56), as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 thereto, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\41\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015-27656 Filed 10-29-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 210 / Friday, October 30, 2015 / Notices 66951
reducing the likelihood of a potentially III. Date of Effectiveness of the Washington, DC 20549 on official
disruptive system failure in the live Proposed Rule Change and Timing for business days between the hours of
trading environment, which has the Commission Action 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
potential to affect all market The foregoing rule change has become filing also will be available for
participants. effective pursuant to Section inspection and copying at the principal
Finally, the Exchange will continue to office of the Exchange. All comments
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.10
offer Options Participants certain received will be posted without change;
At any time within 60 days of the
limited testing capabilities free of charge the Commission does not edit personal
filing of the proposed rule change, the
at Carteret through VPN. While this identifying information from
feature offers limited capability in terms Commission summarily may
submissions. You should submit only
of functionality, the Exchange continues temporarily suspend such rule change if
information that you wish to make
to offer a free of charge alternative to it appears to the Commission that such
available publicly. All submissions
Options Participants desiring to utilize action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in
should refer to File Number SR–BX–
the NTF. the public interest; (ii) for the protection
2015–059, and should be submitted on
of investors; or (iii) otherwise in
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s or before November 20, 2015.
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Statement on Burden on Competition If the Commission takes such action, the For the Commission, by the Division of
Commission shall institute proceedings Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
BX does not believe that the proposed authority.11
rule change will result in any intra- to determine whether the proposed rule
Robert W. Errett,
market or inter-market burdens on should be approved or disapproved.
Deputy Secretary.
competition that are not necessary or IV. Solicitation of Comments [FR Doc. 2015–27649 Filed 10–29–15; 8:45 am]
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act, as amended. The Interested persons are invited to BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
proposed fees for access to the Carteret submit written data, views, and
test environment more closely arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
approximate the live trading
change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION
environment, subscribing member firms
will be able to more accurately test their Comments may be submitted by any of [Release No. 34–76267; File No. SR–
trading systems and avoid potentially the following methods: NYSEArca–2015–56]
disruptive system failures in the live Electronic Comments
trading environment. Despite the fee Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
that will now be assessed to Options • Use the Commission’s Internet Arca, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed
Participants for testing, the Exchange comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Rule Change, and Notice of Filing and
believes that Options Participants rules/sro.shtml); or Order Granting Accelerated Approval
utilizing this service will benefit from • Send an email to rule-comments@ of Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto,
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Adopting New Equity Trading Rules
the move to Carteret because the test
BX–2015–059 on the subject line. Relating to Orders and Modifiers and
environment is designed to closely
the Retail Liquidity Program To Reflect
mirror the live trading environment for Paper Comments the Implementation of Pillar, the
Options Participants, including
• Send paper comments in triplicate Exchange’s New Trading Technology
matching the capacity of each Options
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities Platform
Participant’s live environment switch
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
port. Subscribing to the test facility is October 26, 2015.
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
optional.
Also, the connectivity provided under All submissions should refer to File I. Introduction
this rule also provides connectivity to Number SR–BX–2015–059. This file On July 7, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the
the other test environments of The number should be included on the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Arca’’) filed with the
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC and subject line if email is used. To help the Securities and Exchange Commission
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC. Members Commission process and review your (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
that are already connected for equities comments more efficiently, please use 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
testing would not incur an additional only one method. The Commission will of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
charge. This connectivity may be post all comments on the Commission’s thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
utilized for either equities or options Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ adopt new equity trading rules relating
testing. Finally, subscribing to the test rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the to Orders and Modifiers, and the Retail
facility is optional. submission, all subsequent Liquidity Program, to reflect the
Additionally, the Exchange does not amendments, all written statements implementation of Pillar, the Exchange’s
believe that the move to Carteret and with respect to the proposed rule new trading technology platform. The
imposition of connectivity fees to the change that are filed with the proposed rule change was published for
NTF creates an undue burden on Commission, and all written comment in the Federal Register on July
competition because the Exchange will communications relating to the 28, 2015.3 On July 29, 2015, the
continue to offer Options Participants proposed rule change between the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
certain limited testing capabilities free Commission and any person, other than proposed rule change.4 On September 1,
of charge at Carteret through VPN. those that may be withheld from the
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
public in accordance with the 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
Statement on Comments on the available for Web site viewing and
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4
Proposed Rule Change Received From printing in the Commission’s Public
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75497
Members, Participants, or Others (July 21, 2015), 80 FR 45022 (‘‘Notice’’).
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 4 Amendment No. 1 deletes references to IOC
No written comments were either Routable Cross Orders and states that the Exchange
solicited or received. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:37 Oct 29, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM 30OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_67161/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 210 / Friday, October 30, 2015 / Notices 66955
impediments to and perfect the and 2 are consistent with the Act. For the Commission, by the Division of
mechanism and a free and open market Comments may be submitted by any of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
by allowing the entry of RPIs to build the following methods: authority.41
a book of liquidity that would be Robert W. Errett,
Electronic Comments
available to provide price improvement Deputy Secretary.
to incoming Retail Orders as soon as the • Use the Commission’s Internet [FR Doc. 2015–27656 Filed 10–29–15; 8:45 am]
Core Trading Session begins.38 comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Based on the Exchange’s rules/sro.shtml); or
representations, the Commission
• Send an email to rule-comments@
believes that the proposed rule change SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
does not raise any novel regulatory COMMISSION
NYSEArca-2015–56 on the subject line.
considerations and should provide
[Release No. 34–76260; File No. SR–Phlx–
greater specificity with respect to the Paper Comments 2015–81]
functionality available on the Exchange
as symbols are migrated to the Pillar • Send paper comments in triplicate
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities Self-Regulatory Organizations;
platform. For these reasons, the NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Commission believes that the proposal and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
should help to prevent fraudulent and Proposed Rule Change to Options
manipulative acts and practices, All submissions should refer to File Testing Facility
promote just and equitable principles of Number SR–NYSEArca–2015–56. This
trade, remove impediments to and file number should be included on the October 26, 2015.
perfect the mechanism of a free and subject line if email is used. To help the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
open market and a national market Commission process and review your Securities Exchange Act of 1934
system, and, in general, protect comments more efficiently, please use (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
investors and the public interest. only one method. The Commission will notice is hereby given that, on October
post all comments on the Commission’s 16, 2015, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC
IV. Accelerated Approval of (‘‘Phlx’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Securities and Exchange Commission
In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange submission, all subsequent (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
proposes to delete references to IOC amendments, all written statements change as described in Items I, II, and
Routable Cross Orders because the with respect to the proposed rule III below, which Items have been
Exchange has determined not to offer change that are filed with the prepared by the Exchange. The
this order type when it implements Commission, and all written Commission is publishing this notice to
Pillar. In Amendment No. 2, the communications relating to the solicit comments on the proposed rule
Exchange proposes to: (i) Correct a cross proposed rule change between the change from interested persons.
reference in proposed Rule Commission and any person, other than
7.31P(a)(2)(B) from Rule 7.10 to Rule I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
those that may be withheld from the Statement of the Terms of the Substance
7.10P; (ii) add a new sentence to public in accordance with the
proposed Rule 7.31P(b)(2)(A) to specify of the Proposed Rule Change
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
that an incoming Limit IOC Order with available for Web site viewing and The Exchange proposes to amend its
a MTS must be at least a round lot and, printing in the Commission’s Public Pricing Schedule at Chapter VII to adopt
if the MTS is larger than the size of the Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., a new Section E, entitled ‘‘Testing
Limit IOC Order, the order would be Washington, DC 20549 on official Facilities’’ which describes fees in
rejected on arrival; (iii) to add a hard business days between the hours of connection with the use of the Testing
paragraph return between proposed 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Facility (‘‘NTF’’) test environment
Rule 7.31P(i)(1) and 7.31P(i)(2); and (iv) filing also will be available for located in Carteret, New Jersey.
remove an extraneous reference to inspection and copying at the principal While the changes proposed herein
‘‘500’’ in the sixth paragraph in the first office of the Exchange. All comments are effective upon filing, the Exchange
example of proposed Rule 7.44P(l). received will be posted without change; has designated that the amendments be
The Commission believes that the the Commission does not edit personal operative on October 26, 2015.
changes proposed in Amendment Nos. 1 identifying information from The text of the proposed rule change
and 2 are non-substantive and further submissions. You should submit only is available on the Exchange’s Web site
clarify the operation of the proposed information that you wish to make at http://
rules governing Pillar. Accordingly, the available publicly. All submissions nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at
Commission finds good cause, pursuant should refer to File Number SR– the principal office of the Exchange, and
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,39 to NYSEArca–2015–56, and should be at the Commission’s Public Reference
approve the proposed rule change, as submitted on or before November 20, Room.
modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, 2015. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
on an accelerated basis.
VI. Conclusion Statement of the Purpose of, and
V. Solicitation of Comments on Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Change
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Interested persons are invited to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,40 that the In its filing with the Commission, the
submit written data, views, and proposed rule change (SR–NYSEArca– Exchange included statements
arguments concerning the foregoing, 2015–56), as modified by Amendment concerning the purpose of and basis for
including whether Amendment Nos. 1 Nos. 1 and 2 thereto, be, and hereby is,
approved on an accelerated basis. 41 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
38 Id. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
39 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 40 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:37 Oct 29, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM 30OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_67161/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-14 15:30:16
Document Modified: 2015-12-14 15:30:16
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 66951 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR