82 FR 13889 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Amending the NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 49 (March 15, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 49 (March 15, 2017)
| Page Range | 13889-13893 | |
| FR Document | 2017-05090 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 13889-13893] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-05090] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-80189; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-01] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Amending the NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series March 9, 2017. I. Introduction On January 6, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``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 amend the NYSE Arca Equities Rule (``Rule'') 5 and Rule 8 Series to add specific continued listing standards for exchange-traded products (``ETPs'') and to specify the delisting procedures for these products. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on January 25, 2017.\3\ On February 10, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which amended and replaced the original proposal. On March 6, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change, which amended and replaced the original proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1.\4\ The Commission received nine comment letters on the proposed rule change.\5\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 2 from interested persons, and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 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. 79834 (January 18, 2017), 82 FR 8444. \4\ In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange: (i) Further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to reflect that certain listing requirements (including certain statements or representations in rule filings for the listing and trading of specific products) apply on an initial and ongoing basis; (ii) further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to consistently state that the Exchange will maintain surveillance procedures for listed products and will initiate delisting proceedings if continued listing requirements are not maintained; (iii) further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to provide that, in a rule filing to list and trade a product, all statements or representations regarding the applicability of Exchange listing rules (including, for example, statements and representations related to the dissemination of the intraday indicative value and index value, as applicable) specified in such rule filing constitute continued listing requirements; (iv) specified an implementation date for the proposed changes; and (v) made other technical, clarifying, and conforming changes throughout the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. Amendment No. 2 is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-01/nysearca201701-1618319-137048.pdf. \5\ See Letters to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, from David W. Blass, General Counsel, Investment Company Institute, dated January 12, 2017 (``ICI Letter''); Anna Paglia, Head of Legal, Invesco PowerShares Capital Management LLC, dated February 10, 2017 (``PowerShares Letter''); Steven Price, SVP, Director of Distribution Services and Chief Compliance Officer, ALPS Distributors, Inc., ALPS Portfolio Solutions Distributor, Inc., dated February 10, 2017 (``ALPS Letter''); James E. Ross, Executive Vice President and Chairman, Global SPDR Business, State Street Global Advisors, dated February 13, 2017 (``SSGA Letter''); Samara Cohen, Managing Director, U.S. Head of iShares Capital Markets, Joanne Medero, Managing Director, Government Relations & Public Policy, and Deepa Damre, Managing Director, Legal & Compliance, BlackRock, Inc., dated February 14, 2017 (``BlackRock Letter''); Peter K. Ewing, Senior Vice President, Northern Trust Investments, Inc., dated February 14, 2017 (``NTI Letter''); Ryan Louvar, General Counsel, WisdomTree Asset Management, Inc., dated February 15, 2017 (``WisdomTree Letter''); Kevin McCarthy, Senior Managing Director, Nuveen Fund Advisors, LLC, dated February 15, 2017 (``Nuveen Letter''); and Matthew B. Farber, Assistant General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P., dated February 23, 2017 (``First Trust Letter''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 13890]] II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2 The Exchange proposes to amend the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to specify continued listing requirements for ETPs listed under those rules, which include products listed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act (``generically-listed products'') and products listed pursuant to proposed rule changes filed with the Commission (``non-generically- listed products'').\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ See infra notes 29-31 and accompanying text. The Exchange also proposes to amend the requirement to delist a product if, following the initial 12-month period following commencement of trading on the Exchange, there are fewer than 50 record and/or beneficial holders of the listed product for 30 or more consecutive trading days, by deleting the threshold of ``30 or more consecutive trading days.'' See, e.g., proposed changes to Rule 5.5(g)(2)(a)(1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange also proposes to amend the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to specify issuer notification requirements related to failures to comply with continued listing requirements. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.2(b) to require an issuer with securities listed under Rule 5.2 or Rule 8 to promptly notify the Exchange after the issuer becomes aware of any non-compliance by the issuer with the applicable continued listing requirements of Rule 5.2, Rule 5.5, or Rule 8.\7\ As proposed, the Exchange would initiate delisting proceedings for a product listed under the Rule 5 or Rule 8 Series if any of its continued listing requirements (including those set forth in an Exchange Rule and those set forth in an applicable proposed rule change) is not continuously maintained. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ The Exchange also proposes to specify issuer notification requirements in the product listing rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. See, e.g., proposed Rules 5.2(j)(2)(G) and 8.100(e). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 5.5(m) to specify the delisting procedures for products listed under the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. According to the Exchange, listed ETPs are currently subject to the delisting procedures in Rule 5.5(m). The Exchange notes that, under Rule 5.5(m), it has the discretion to offer non-compliant issuers the opportunity to submit a plan to regain compliance.\8\ If such a plan is accepted, non-compliant issuers are afforded a cure period to regain compliance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Similarly, other exchanges' delisting procedures for ETPs provide that, under certain circumstances, the exchange may accept and review an issuer's plan to regain compliance. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79784 (January 12, 2017), 82 FR 6664, 6665 (January 19, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-135). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Exchange proposes to make conforming and technical changes throughout the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to maintain consistency in its rules. For example, the Exchange proposes to consistently use the language ``initiate delisting proceedings under Rule 5.5(m)'' when describing the delisting procedures for a product that fails to meet continued listing requirements; \9\ and consistently reflect that delisting ``following the initial twelve month period following . . . commencement of trading on the Corporation'' only applies to the record/beneficial holder, number of shares issued and outstanding, and the market value of shares issued and outstanding requirements.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ See, e.g., proposed changes to Rules 5.5(g)(2)(a) and 8.100(f)(2)(i). \10\ See, e.g., proposed changes to Rule 8.200(d)(2); see also, e.g., Rule 8.200, Commentary .02(d)(2) (currently applying the twelve month threshold only to the record/beneficial holder, number of shares issued and outstanding, and market value of shares issued and outstanding requirements for certain Trust Issued Receipts). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange proposes to implement the rule changes by October 1, 2017. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\11\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ 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 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ 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). \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission received nine comment letters that express concerns regarding the proposal.\13\ First, commenters question how an ETF, especially one that uses indexes established and maintained by unaffiliated third parties, would comply with the proposed rules, and how the Exchange would enforce them.\14\ Commenters assert that it would be unrealistic to anticipate that an ETF could ensure that an unaffiliated index complies with the initial listing standards on an ongoing basis, and express concern that an equity-index ETF, through no action of its own, could see certain of the constituent securities of the unaffiliated index fall below the listing requirements.\15\ One commenter believes that even if a third party index provider was amenable to changes to an underlying index that would allow an ETF to regain compliance with the continued listing standards, it is unlikely that the ETF would be able to formulate a compliance plan within 45 calendar days of the Exchange staff's notification.\16\ Second, commenters argue that the proposal would provide for unfair discrimination because the proposed rules would result in differential treatment of ETFs as compared to other securities (e.g., common stock).\17\ Commenters believe that the continued listing standards for equity securities generally differ from the initial listing standards, whereas the proposed ETF continued listing standards would be the same as the initial listing standards.\18\ Third, commenters assert that the proposal provides no explanation or evidence regarding the potential manipulation of ETFs under the current rules, or how the proposal would reduce the potential for manipulation.\19\ One commenter also believes that significant compliance enhancements could be required to ensure proper and continuous testing of securities held in an index, and questions how this type of testing would enhance investor protection.\20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ See supra note 5. \14\ See ICI Letter at 1-2; see also PowerShares Letter at 1; SSGA Letter at 1; BlackRock Letter at 1-2; and Nuveen Letter at 1. The Commission notes that the ALPS Letter, NTI Letter, WisdomTree Letter, and First Trust Letter also express general support for all the views expressed in the ICI Letter. \15\ See ICI Letter at 1-3; see also PowerShares Letter at 2; SSGA Letter at 1; BlackRock Letter at 2; and Nuveen Letter at 2. \16\ See BlackRock Letter at 2. \17\ See ICI Letter at 2; see also PowerShares Letter at 1; SSGA Letter at 1; and Nuveen Letter at 1-2. \18\ See ICI Letter at 2; see also Nuveen Letter at 1-2. \19\ See ICI Letter at 2; see also PowerShares Letter at 1-2; SSGA Letter at 1; and Nuveen Letter at 2. \20\ See BlackRock Letter at 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act. As the Commission previously stated, the development, implementation, and enforcement of standards governing the initial and continued listing of securities on an exchange are activities of critical importance to financial markets and the investing public.\21\ Once a security has been approved for initial listing, continued listing criteria allow an exchange to monitor the status and trading characteristics of that issue [[Page 13891]] to ensure that it continues to meet the exchange's standards for market depth and liquidity so that fair and orderly markets can be maintained. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August 30, 2011), 76 FR 55148, 55152 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS- 2011-018). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- With respect to commenters' concerns regarding the inability of certain ETFs to assure compliance with the proposal, the Commission believes that a variety of means are available to ETP (including ETF) issuers to monitor for a product's compliance with the continued listing standards. For example, information regarding the composition of a third party index may be publicly available, or may be obtained from the index provider pursuant to provisions in the index licensing agreement, so that the ETP issuer can monitor its compliance on an ongoing basis. If an index approaches the thresholds set forth in the continued listing standards, the issuer may decide to engage in discussions with the index provider regarding potential modifications to the index so that the ETP can continue to be listed on the Exchange. If an index provider is unwilling to modify the index in order to comply with the Exchange's listing requirements, the Exchange may submit a rule proposal to continue to list the product based on the index.\22\ Moreover, as noted below, the listing standards that address the index composition with respect to certain index-based ETPs already apply equally on an initial and ongoing basis,\23\ so some ETP issuers should have experience complying with these requirements. With respect to commenters' questions regarding the Exchange's enforcement of the proposed continued listing requirements, the Commission notes that the Exchange is proposing to apply its existing delisting procedures to products listed under the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series, rather than adopting new delisting procedures for these products. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ The Commission also notes that the Exchange may preemptively submit a rule proposal to provide for the continued listing of a specific product where the underlying index is approaching thresholds in the continued listing requirements, but has not yet fallen below those thresholds (i.e., submit a rule proposal before the delisting procedures are triggered). For an example of an exchange rule proposal to continue the listing of a product that no longer meets generic listing standards, see Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57320 (February 13, 2008), 73 FR 9395 (February 20, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2008-15). \23\ See infra note 26 and accompanying text. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- With respect to commenters' concerns that the proposed listing standards would treat ETPs fundamentally differently than other types of listed equity securities, the Commission notes that ETPs and other types of equity securities each have certain listing standards that are higher on an initial basis and lower on a continuing basis.\24\ Similarly, ETPs and other types of equity securities each have certain listing standards that are the same on an initial and continuing basis.\25\ In fact, the listing standards that address the index composition with respect to certain index-based ETPs already apply equally on an initial and ongoing basis.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ See, e.g., Rule 8.202, Commentary .04(a) (requiring a minimum of 100,000 shares of a series of Currency Trust Shares to be outstanding at commencement of trading); and Rule 8.202(e)(2)(ii) (requiring 50,000 Currency Trust Shares issued and outstanding for continued listing). \25\ See, e.g., Rule 5.2(c) (requiring at least 400 public beneficial holders for the initial listing of common stock on the Exchange under the Alternate Listing Requirements); and Rule 5.5(b) (requiring at least 400 public beneficial holders as one option for the continued listing of common stock on the Exchange). \26\ See Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(IV) (setting forth the initial and continued listing requirements for Fixed Income Index-Linked Securities and stating that ``[t]he Corporation will commence delisting or removal proceedings if any of the initial listing criteria described above are not continuously maintained''). The Commission also notes that ETPs are structurally different from other types of equity securities. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53142 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4182 and 4187 (January 25, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-001) (approving generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities, stating that ``[a]n Index Security, just like an ETF, derives its value by reference to the underlying index. For this reason, the Commission has required that markets that list index based securities monitor the qualifications of not just the actual security (e.g., the ETF, index option, or Index Securities), but also of the underlying indexes (and of the index providers),'' and where the NASD stated that ``[i]n contrast to a typical corporate security (e.g., a share of common stock of a corporation), whose value is determined by the interplay of supply and demand in the marketplace, the fair value of an index-based security can be determined only by reference to the underlying index itself, which is a proprietary creation of the particular index provider. For this reason, the Commission has always required that markets that list or trade index-based securities continuously monitor the qualifications of not just the actual securities being traded (e.g., exchange-traded funds (`ETF'), index options, or Index Securities), but also of the underlying indexes and of the index providers.''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, with respect to commenters' questions regarding the purpose of the proposal and its impact on the potential for manipulation and investor protection, the Commission notes that, in approving a wide variety of ETP listing standards, including standards that apply to underlying indexes or portfolios, the Commission has consistently explained that these standards, among other things,\27\ are intended to reduce the potential for manipulation by assuring that the ETP is sufficiently broad-based, and that the components of an index or portfolio underlying an ETP are adequately capitalized, sufficiently liquid, and that no one stock dominates the index.\28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54739 (November 9, 2006), 71 FR 66993, 66997 (November 17, 2006) (SR-AMEX- 2006-78) (approving generic listing standards for Portfolio Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares based on international or global indexes, and stating that ``the proposed listing standards are designed to preclude ETFs from becoming surrogates for trading in unregistered securities'' and that ``the requirement that each component security underlying an ETF be listed on an exchange and subject to last-sale reporting should contribute to the transparency of the market for ETFs'' and that ``by requiring pricing information for both the relevant underlying index and the ETF to be readily available and disseminated, the proposal is designed to ensure a fair and orderly market for ETFs''); 53142 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4186 (January 25, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-001) (approving generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities and stating that ``[t]he Commission believes that by requiring pricing information for both the relevant underlying index or indexes and the Index Security to be readily available and disseminated, the proposed listing standards should help ensure a fair and orderly market for Index Securities''); 34758 (September 30, 1994), 59 FR 50943, 50945- 46 (October 6, 1994) (SR-NASD-94-49) (approving listing standards for Selected Equity-Linked Debt Securities (``SEEDS'') and stating that ``the listing standards and issuance restrictions should help to reduce the likelihood of any adverse market impact on the securities underlying SEEDS,'' and where the NASD stated that ``the proposed numerical, quantitative listing standards should ensure that only substantial companies capable of meeting their contingent obligations created by SEEDS are able to list such products on Nasdaq''). \28\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54739 (November 9, 2006), 71 FR 66993, 66996-97 (November 17, 2006) (SR- AMEX-2006-78) (approving generic listing standards for Portfolio Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares based on international or global indexes, and stating that standards related to the composition of an index or portfolio underlying an ETF ``are designed, among other things, to require that components of an index or portfolio underlying an ETF are adequately capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one stock dominates the index'' and that ``[t]aken together, the Commission finds that these standards are reasonably designed to ensure that stocks with substantial market capitalization and trading volume account for a substantial portion of any underlying index or portfolio, and that when applied in conjunction with the other applicable listing requirements, will permit the listing only of ETFs that are sufficiently broad-based in scope to minimize potential manipulation''); 53142 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4186 (January 25, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-001) (approving generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities and stating that the listing standards for Index-Linked Securities, including minimum market capitalization, monthly trading volume, and relative weight requirements ``are designed to ensure that the trading markets for index components underlying Index Securities are adequately capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one stock dominates the index. The Commission believes that these requirements should significantly minimize the potential for [[hairsp]] manipulation.''); 78397 (July 22, 2016), 81 FR 49320, 49324-25 (July 27, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-110) (approving generic listing standards for Managed Fund Shares, noting the Exchange's statement that the proposed requirements for Managed Fund Shares are based in large part on the generic listing criteria currently applicable to Investment Company Units and stating that ``the Commission believes that this is an appropriate approach with respect to underlying asset classes covered by the existing generic standards, because the mere addition of active management to an ETF portfolio that would qualify for generic listing as an index-based ETF should not affect the portfolio's susceptibility to manipulation''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 13892]] For exchange listing standards to effectively achieve their goals, including to effectively address the potential for manipulation of a listed ETP, their application cannot be linked to only a single point in time (i.e., the time of initial listing). Instead, they must be applied on an ongoing basis. The Commission notes that, currently, certain provisions within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series impose specific listing requirements on an initial basis, without imposing ongoing listing requirements that are intended to achieve the same goals as these initial listing requirements.\29\ To fill this gap, the proposal would specify that certain listing requirements in the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series apply both on an initial and ongoing basis, rather than only at the time of initial listing.\30\ Also, with respect to non- generically listed products, the Exchange proposes to amend the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to state that all statements or representations in the proposed rule change regarding: (i) The description of the index, portfolio, or reference asset (as applicable to a specific product); (ii) limitations on index, portfolio holdings, or reference assets (as applicable to a specific product); or (iii) the applicability of Exchange listing rules (including, for example, statements and representations related to the dissemination of the intraday indicative value and index value, as applicable) specified in the proposed rule change constitute continued listing requirements.\31\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ Moreover, certain of the listing requirements do not explicitly state that they apply on an ongoing, as well as initial, basis. In these cases, the proposal would make explicit that the requirements apply both on an initial and ongoing basis. See, e.g., proposed changes to Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(b) and (c) (making explicit that, for Portfolio Depository Receipts overlying an equity index or portfolio, requirements related to index methodology and index value dissemination, as well as intraday indicative value dissemination, apply on an initial and ongoing basis); proposed changes to Rule 5.2(j)(6)(A)(e) (making explicit that, for Index- Linked Securities, the requirement related to tangible net worth applies on an initial and ongoing basis); proposed changes to Rule 5.2(j)(7), Commentary .03 (making explicit that, for Trust Certificates, requirements related to the qualifications of a trustee and changes to a trustee apply on an initial and ongoing basis). \30\ For example, current Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(a) sets forth requirements for component stocks of an index or portfolio underlying a series of generically-listed Portfolio Depository Receipts, which apply upon initial listing. These requirements include, for example, minimum market value, minimum monthly trading volume, and concentration limits for the component stocks. The proposal would specify that these requirements apply both on an initial and continued basis. \31\ The Commission notes that it has approved proposed rule changes for the listing and trading of ETPs that included similar representations. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77548 (April 6, 2016), 81 FR 21626, 21630 (April 12, 2016) (SR- NASDAQ-2015-161). The Commission also notes that similar types of requirements exist in the Exchange's rules. See, e.g., Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(b) and (c) (setting forth, among other things, index value dissemination and intraday indicative value dissemination requirements for certain generically-listed Portfolio Depository Receipts). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because the proposal specifies continued listing requirements for products listed pursuant to the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series, the Commission believes the proposal is designed to achieve on a continuing basis the goals of the listing requirements, including ensuring that the Exchange lists products that are not susceptible to manipulation and maintaining fair and orderly markets for the listed products. In particular,\32\ the Commission believes that the proposal is designed to ensure that stocks with substantial market capitalization and trading volume account for a substantial portion of the weight of an index or portfolio underlying a listed product; \33\ provide transparency regarding the components of an index or portfolio underlying a listed product; \34\ ensure that there is adequate liquidity in the listed product itself; \35\ and provide timely and fair disclosure of useful information that may be necessary to price the listed product.\36\ Moreover, the Commission believes that the proposal to require an issuer to notify the Exchange of its failures to comply with continued listing requirements would supplement the Exchange's own surveillance of the listed products.\37\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ See also supra notes 27-28 (noting additional goals of the ETP listing standards). \33\ For example, as proposed, the requirements under Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(a)(A), including minimum market value and minimum monthly trading volume requirements for components of the index or portfolio underlying Portfolio Depository Receipts, would apply both on an initial and ongoing basis. Also, for non- generically listed products, the proposal would provide that statements or representations made in the proposed rule changes relating to the description of the index or portfolio, among other things, constitute continued listing requirements. See, e.g., proposed Rule 8.100(e). \34\ For example, as proposed, the requirements under Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(a)(A), including the requirement that components of the index or portfolio underlying Portfolio Depository Receipts be exchange-listed and NMS stocks, would apply both on an initial and ongoing basis. \35\ For example, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.2(j)(2) to explicitly provide that listing requirements for Equity-Linked Notes (``ELNs'') apply both on an initial and ongoing basis, including, for example, the minimum public distribution of an issue of ELNs. The Commission also believes that the proposal to delete the threshold of ``30 or more consecutive trading days'' in the requirements for the number of beneficial and/or record holders is consistent with the goal of ensuring that there is adequate liquidity in the listed product on an ongoing basis. As proposed, the Exchange would initiate delisting proceedings for a product if it fails to comply with the minimum number of beneficial and/or record holder requirement, even if the non-compliance does not continue for 30 consecutive trading days. See supra note 6. \36\ For example, the proposed changes to Rule 8.100, Commentary .01(b) and (c) would make explicit that the requirements related to the dissemination of the value of the index underlying Portfolio Depository Receipts and the intraday indicative value for Portfolio Depository Receipts apply on an initial and ongoing basis. \37\ The Commission notes that the concept of issuer notification is not novel. For example, in connection with its proposal to adopt generic listing standards for Managed Fund Shares, the Exchange stated that, prior to listing pursuant to the generic listing standards, an issuer would be required to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a series of Managed Fund Shares to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78397 (July 22, 2016), 81 FR 49320, 49324 (July 27, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-110). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As noted above, the proposal specifies the delisting procedures for products listed pursuant to the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. The Commission believes that the proposed amendments to Rule 5.5(m) would provide transparency regarding the process that the Exchange will follow if a listed product fails to meet its continued listing requirements. Also, as noted above, the proposed delisting procedures already exist and are not novel. Finally, the Commission believes that the conforming and technical proposed changes do not raise novel issues, are designed to further the goals of the listing standards, and provide clarity and consistency in the Exchange's rules. For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the Act. IV. Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 2 As noted above, in Amendment No. 2, the Exchange: (i) Further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to reflect that certain listing requirements (including certain statements or representations in rule filings for the listing and trading of specific products) apply on an initial and ongoing basis; (ii) further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to consistently state that the Exchange will maintain surveillance procedures for listed products and will initiate delisting proceedings if continued listing requirements are not maintained; (iii) further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series to provide that, in [[Page 13893]] a rule filing to list and trade a product, all statements or representations regarding the applicability of Exchange listing rules (including, for example, statements and representations related to the dissemination of the intraday indicative value and index value, as applicable) specified in such rule filing constitute continued listing requirements; (iv) specified an implementation date for the proposed changes; and (v) made other technical, clarifying, and conforming changes throughout the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. The Commission believes that Amendment No. 2 furthers the goals of the proposed rule change as discussed above, enhances consistency between the Exchange's proposal and recently approved proposals from other exchanges,\38\ and provides clarity and consistency within the Exchange's rules. 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 No. 2, on an accelerated basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79784 (January 12, 2017), 82 FR 6664 (January 19, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-135) and 80169 (March 7, 2017) (SR-BatsBZX-2016-80). \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 2 Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 2 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic CommentsUse 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-2017-01 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-2017-01. 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 the 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-2017-01 and should be submitted on or before April 5, 2017. VI. Conclusion It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\40\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2017-01), as modified by Amendment No. 2, 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\ Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [FR Doc. 2017-05090 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 15, 2017 / Notices 13889
burden intramarket competition because change that are filed with the change was published for comment in
the proposed rates would apply Commission, and all written the Federal Register on January 25,
uniformly to all Members. communications relating to the 2017.3 On February 10, 2017, the
proposed rule change between the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Commission and any person, other than proposed rule change, which amended
Statement on Comments on the those that may be withheld from the
Proposed Rule Change Received From and replaced the original proposal. On
public in accordance with the March 6, 2017, the Exchange filed
Members, Participants, or Others provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule
The Exchange has not solicited, and available for Web site viewing and change, which amended and replaced
does not intend to solicit, comments on printing in the Commission’s Public the original proposal, as modified by
this proposed rule change. The Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Amendment No. 1.4 The Commission
Exchange has not received any written Washington, DC 20549, on official
comments from members or other business days between the hours of received nine comment letters on the
interested parties. 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the proposed rule change.5 The Commission
filing also will be available for is publishing this notice to solicit
III. Date of Effectiveness of the comments on Amendment No. 2 from
inspection and copying at the principal
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for interested persons, and is approving the
office of the Exchange. All comments
Commission Action proposed rule change, as modified by
received will be posted without change;
The foregoing rule change has become the Commission does not edit personal Amendment No. 2, on an accelerated
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) identifying information from basis.
of the Act 11 and paragraph (f) of Rule submissions. You should submit only
19b–4 thereunder.12 At any time within information that you wish to make 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79834
60 days of the filing of the proposed rule available publicly. All submissions (January 18, 2017), 82 FR 8444.
change, the Commission summarily may should refer to File No. SR–BatsEDGA– 4 In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange: (i) Further
temporarily suspend such rule change if amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series
2017–04, and should be submitted on or
to reflect that certain listing requirements
it appears to the Commission that such before April 5, 2017. (including certain statements or representations in
action is necessary or appropriate in the For the Commission, by the Division of rule filings for the listing and trading of specific
public interest, for the protection of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated products) apply on an initial and ongoing basis; (ii)
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of authority.13 further amended rules within the Rule 5 and Rule
the purposes of the Act. 8 Series to consistently state that the Exchange will
Eduardo A. Aleman, maintain surveillance procedures for listed
IV. Solicitation of Comments Assistant Secretary. products and will initiate delisting proceedings if
[FR Doc. 2017–05088 Filed 3–14–17; 8:45 am] continued listing requirements are not maintained;
Interested persons are invited to (iii) further amended rules within the Rule 5 and
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
submit written data, views, and Rule 8 Series to provide that, in a rule filing to list
arguments concerning the foregoing, and trade a product, all statements or
representations regarding the applicability of
including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Exchange listing rules (including, for example,
change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION statements and representations related to the
Comments may be submitted by any of dissemination of the intraday indicative value and
the following methods: [Release No. 34–80189; File No. SR– index value, as applicable) specified in such rule
NYSEArca–2017–01] filing constitute continued listing requirements; (iv)
Electronic Comments specified an implementation date for the proposed
• Use the Commission’s Internet Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE changes; and (v) made other technical, clarifying,
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of and conforming changes throughout the Rule 5 and
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Rule 8 Series. Amendment No. 2 is available at
rules/sro.shtml); or Amendment No. 2 and Order Granting https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-
• Send an email to rule-comments@ Accelerated Approval of a Proposed 01/nysearca201701-1618319-137048.pdf.
sec.gov. Please include File No. SR- Rule Change, as Modified by 5 See Letters to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
BatsEDGA–2017–04 on the subject line. Amendment No. 2, Amending the Commission, from David W. Blass, General
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5 and Rule 8 Counsel, Investment Company Institute, dated
Paper Comments January 12, 2017 (‘‘ICI Letter’’); Anna Paglia, Head
Series of Legal, Invesco PowerShares Capital Management
• Send paper comments in triplicate LLC, dated February 10, 2017 (‘‘PowerShares
March 9, 2017.
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Letter’’); Steven Price, SVP, Director of Distribution
Commission, 100 F Street NE., I. Introduction Services and Chief Compliance Officer, ALPS
Distributors, Inc., ALPS Portfolio Solutions
Washington, DC 20549–1090. On January 6, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. Distributor, Inc., dated February 10, 2017 (‘‘ALPS
All submissions should refer to File No. (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Arca’’) filed with the Letter’’); James E. Ross, Executive Vice President
SR–BatsEDGA–2017–04. This file Securities and Exchange Commission and Chairman, Global SPDR Business, State Street
number should be included on the Global Advisors, dated February 13, 2017 (‘‘SSGA
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section Letter’’); Samara Cohen, Managing Director, U.S.
subject line if email is used. To help the 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act Head of iShares Capital Markets, Joanne Medero,
Commission process and review your of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 Managing Director, Government Relations & Public
comments more efficiently, please use thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to Policy, and Deepa Damre, Managing Director, Legal
only one method. The Commission will amend the NYSE Arca Equities Rule & Compliance, BlackRock, Inc., dated February 14,
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES2
2017 (‘‘BlackRock Letter’’); Peter K. Ewing, Senior
post all comments on the Commission’s (‘‘Rule’’) 5 and Rule 8 Series to add Vice President, Northern Trust Investments, Inc.,
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ specific continued listing standards for dated February 14, 2017 (‘‘NTI Letter’’); Ryan
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the exchange-traded products (‘‘ETPs’’) and Louvar, General Counsel, WisdomTree Asset
submission, all subsequent to specify the delisting procedures for Management, Inc., dated February 15, 2017
amendments, all written statements (‘‘WisdomTree Letter’’); Kevin McCarthy, Senior
these products. The proposed rule
Managing Director, Nuveen Fund Advisors, LLC,
with respect to the proposed rule dated February 15, 2017 (‘‘Nuveen Letter’’); and
13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Matthew B. Farber, Assistant General Counsel, First
11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Trust Advisors L.P., dated February 23, 2017 (‘‘First
12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Trust Letter’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 Mar 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_13938/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 15, 2017 / Notices 13891
to ensure that it continues to meet the standards that are higher on an initial intended to reduce the potential for
exchange’s standards for market depth basis and lower on a continuing basis.24 manipulation by assuring that the ETP
and liquidity so that fair and orderly Similarly, ETPs and other types of is sufficiently broad-based, and that the
markets can be maintained. equity securities each have certain components of an index or portfolio
With respect to commenters’ concerns listing standards that are the same on an underlying an ETP are adequately
regarding the inability of certain ETFs to initial and continuing basis.25 In fact, capitalized, sufficiently liquid, and that
assure compliance with the proposal, the listing standards that address the no one stock dominates the index.28
the Commission believes that a variety index composition with respect to
of means are available to ETP (including certain index-based ETPs already apply in unregistered securities’’ and that ‘‘the
ETF) issuers to monitor for a product’s equally on an initial and ongoing requirement that each component security
underlying an ETF be listed on an exchange and
compliance with the continued listing basis.26 subject to last-sale reporting should contribute to
standards. For example, information Finally, with respect to commenters’ the transparency of the market for ETFs’’ and that
regarding the composition of a third questions regarding the purpose of the ‘‘by requiring pricing information for both the
party index may be publicly available, proposal and its impact on the potential relevant underlying index and the ETF to be readily
available and disseminated, the proposal is
or may be obtained from the index for manipulation and investor designed to ensure a fair and orderly market for
provider pursuant to provisions in the protection, the Commission notes that, ETFs’’); 53142 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4186
index licensing agreement, so that the in approving a wide variety of ETP (January 25, 2006) (SR–NASD–2006–001)
ETP issuer can monitor its compliance listing standards, including standards (approving generic listing standards for Index-
Linked Securities and stating that ‘‘[t]he
on an ongoing basis. If an index that apply to underlying indexes or Commission believes that by requiring pricing
approaches the thresholds set forth in portfolios, the Commission has information for both the relevant underlying index
the continued listing standards, the consistently explained that these or indexes and the Index Security to be readily
issuer may decide to engage in standards, among other things,27 are available and disseminated, the proposed listing
standards should help ensure a fair and orderly
discussions with the index provider market for Index Securities’’); 34758 (September 30,
regarding potential modifications to the 24 See, e.g., Rule 8.202, Commentary .04(a)
1994), 59 FR 50943, 50945–46 (October 6, 1994)
index so that the ETP can continue to (requiring a minimum of 100,000 shares of a series (SR–NASD–94–49) (approving listing standards for
of Currency Trust Shares to be outstanding at Selected Equity-Linked Debt Securities (‘‘SEEDS’’)
be listed on the Exchange. If an index commencement of trading); and Rule 8.202(e)(2)(ii) and stating that ‘‘the listing standards and issuance
provider is unwilling to modify the (requiring 50,000 Currency Trust Shares issued and restrictions should help to reduce the likelihood of
index in order to comply with the outstanding for continued listing). any adverse market impact on the securities
Exchange’s listing requirements, the 25 See, e.g., Rule 5.2(c) (requiring at least 400
underlying SEEDS,’’ and where the NASD stated
Exchange may submit a rule proposal to public beneficial holders for the initial listing of that ‘‘the proposed numerical, quantitative listing
common stock on the Exchange under the Alternate standards should ensure that only substantial
continue to list the product based on the Listing Requirements); and Rule 5.5(b) (requiring at companies capable of meeting their contingent
index.22 Moreover, as noted below, the least 400 public beneficial holders as one option for obligations created by SEEDS are able to list such
listing standards that address the index the continued listing of common stock on the products on Nasdaq’’).
composition with respect to certain Exchange). 28 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
26 See Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(IV) (setting forth the initial
index-based ETPs already apply equally 54739 (November 9, 2006), 71 FR 66993, 66996–97
and continued listing requirements for Fixed (November 17, 2006) (SR–AMEX–2006–78)
on an initial and ongoing basis,23 so Income Index-Linked Securities and stating that (approving generic listing standards for Portfolio
some ETP issuers should have ‘‘[t]he Corporation will commence delisting or Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares based
experience complying with these removal proceedings if any of the initial listing on international or global indexes, and stating that
criteria described above are not continuously standards related to the composition of an index or
requirements. With respect to maintained’’). The Commission also notes that ETPs portfolio underlying an ETF ‘‘are designed, among
commenters’ questions regarding the are structurally different from other types of equity other things, to require that components of an index
Exchange’s enforcement of the proposed securities. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. or portfolio underlying an ETF are adequately
continued listing requirements, the 53142 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4182 and capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one
4187 (January 25, 2006) (SR–NASD–2006–001) stock dominates the index’’ and that ‘‘[t]aken
Commission notes that the Exchange is (approving generic listing standards for Index- together, the Commission finds that these standards
proposing to apply its existing delisting Linked Securities, stating that ‘‘[a]n Index Security, are reasonably designed to ensure that stocks with
procedures to products listed under the just like an ETF, derives its value by reference to substantial market capitalization and trading
Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series, rather than the underlying index. For this reason, the volume account for a substantial portion of any
Commission has required that markets that list underlying index or portfolio, and that when
adopting new delisting procedures for index based securities monitor the qualifications of applied in conjunction with the other applicable
these products. not just the actual security (e.g., the ETF, index listing requirements, will permit the listing only of
With respect to commenters’ concerns option, or Index Securities), but also of the ETFs that are sufficiently broad-based in scope to
that the proposed listing standards underlying indexes (and of the index providers),’’ minimize potential manipulation’’); 53142 (January
and where the NASD stated that ‘‘[i]n contrast to 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180, 4186 (January 25, 2006) (SR–
would treat ETPs fundamentally a typical corporate security (e.g., a share of common NASD–2006–001) (approving generic listing
differently than other types of listed stock of a corporation), whose value is determined standards for Index-Linked Securities and stating
equity securities, the Commission notes by the interplay of supply and demand in the that the listing standards for Index-Linked
that ETPs and other types of equity marketplace, the fair value of an index-based Securities, including minimum market
security can be determined only by reference to the capitalization, monthly trading volume, and relative
securities each have certain listing underlying index itself, which is a proprietary weight requirements ‘‘are designed to ensure that
creation of the particular index provider. For this the trading markets for index components
22 The Commission also notes that the Exchange
reason, the Commission has always required that underlying Index Securities are adequately
may preemptively submit a rule proposal to provide markets that list or trade index-based securities capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one
for the continued listing of a specific product where continuously monitor the qualifications of not just stock dominates the index. The Commission
the underlying index is approaching thresholds in the actual securities being traded (e.g., exchange- believes that these requirements should
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES2
the continued listing requirements, but has not yet traded funds (‘ETF’), index options, or Index significantly minimize the potential for []
fallen below those thresholds (i.e., submit a rule Securities), but also of the underlying indexes and manipulation.’’); 78397 (July 22, 2016), 81 FR
proposal before the delisting procedures are of the index providers.’’). 49320, 49324–25 (July 27, 2016) (SR–NYSEArca–
triggered). 27 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 2015–110) (approving generic listing standards for
For an example of an exchange rule proposal to 54739 (November 9, 2006), 71 FR 66993, 66997 Managed Fund Shares, noting the Exchange’s
continue the listing of a product that no longer (November 17, 2006) (SR–AMEX–2006–78) statement that the proposed requirements for
meets generic listing standards, see Securities (approving generic listing standards for Portfolio Managed Fund Shares are based in large part on the
Exchange Act Release No. 57320 (February 13, Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares based generic listing criteria currently applicable to
2008), 73 FR 9395 (February 20, 2008) (SR– on international or global indexes, and stating that Investment Company Units and stating that ‘‘the
NYSEArca–2008–15). ‘‘the proposed listing standards are designed to Commission believes that this is an appropriate
23 See infra note 26 and accompanying text. preclude ETFs from becoming surrogates for trading Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 Mar 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_13938/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 15, 2017 / Notices 13893
a rule filing to list and trade a product, change that are filed with the II, below, which Items have been
all statements or representations Commission, and all written prepared by the Exchange. The
regarding the applicability of Exchange communications relating to the Commission is publishing this notice to
listing rules (including, for example, proposed rule change between the solicit comments on the proposed rule
statements and representations related Commission and any person, other than change from interested persons.
to the dissemination of the intraday those that may be withheld from the
indicative value and index value, as public in accordance with the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
applicable) specified in such rule filing provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Statement of the Terms of Substance of
constitute continued listing available for Web site viewing and the Proposed Rule Change
requirements; (iv) specified an printing in the Commission’s Public The Exchange proposes to amend the
implementation date for the proposed Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Schedule of Fees to (1) eliminate fees
changes; and (v) made other technical, Washington, DC 20549, on official and rebates for trades in Calpine
clarifying, and conforming changes business days between the hours of Corporation executed on February 27–
throughout the Rule 5 and Rule 8 Series. 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 28, 2017, and (2) modify the Exchange’s
The Commission believes that filing also will be available for average daily volume calculation for
Amendment No. 2 furthers the goals of inspection and copying at the principal March 2017.
the proposed rule change as discussed office of the Exchange. All comments The text of the proposed rule change
above, enhances consistency between received will be posted without change; is available on the Exchange’s Web site
the Exchange’s proposal and recently the Commission does not edit personal at www.ise.com, at the principal office
approved proposals from other identifying information from of the Exchange, and at the
exchanges,38 and provides clarity and submissions. You should submit only Commission’s Public Reference Room.
consistency within the Exchange’s rules. information that you wish to make
Accordingly, the Commission finds II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
available publicly. All submissions
good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) Statement of the Purpose of, and
should refer to File Number SR–
of the Act,39 to approve the proposed Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
NYSEArca–2017–01 and should be
rule change, as modified by Amendment Change
submitted on or before April 5, 2017.
No. 2, on an accelerated basis. In its filing with the Commission, the
VI. Conclusion
V. Solicitation of Comments on Exchange included statements
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to concerning the purpose of and basis for
Amendment No. 2 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,40 that the the proposed rule change and discussed
Interested persons are invited to proposed rule change (SR–NYSEArca– any comments it received on the
submit written data, views, and 2017–01), as modified by Amendment proposed rule change. The text of these
arguments concerning the foregoing, No. 2, be, and hereby is, approved on an statements may be examined at the
including whether Amendment No. 2 is accelerated basis. places specified in Item IV below. The
consistent with the Act. Comments may Exchange has prepared summaries, set
For the Commission, by the Division of
be submitted by any of the following Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
methods: authority.41 the most significant aspects of such
Electronic Comments Eduardo A. Aleman, statements.
Assistant Secretary.
• Use the Commission’s Internet A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ [FR Doc. 2017–05090 Filed 3–14–17; 8:45 am] Statement of the Purpose of, and
rules/sro.shtml); or BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
• Send an email to rule-comments@ Change
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
NYSEArca–2017–01 on the subject line. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 1. Purpose
COMMISSION The purpose of the proposed rule
Paper Comments
[Release No. 34–80184; File No. SR– change is to amend the Schedule of Fees
• Send paper comments in triplicate ISEGemini–2017–09] to (1) eliminate fees and rebates for
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities trades in Calpine Corporation (‘‘CPN’’)
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE executed on February 27–28, 2017, and
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and (2) modify the Exchange’s average daily
All submissions should refer to File Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed volume (‘‘ADV’’) calculation for March
Number SR–NYSEArca–2017–01. This Rule Change To Amend the Schedule 2017. These changes are both being
file number should be included on the of Fees made in connection with the migration
subject line if email is used. To help the of the Exchange’s trading system to the
March 9, 2017.
Commission process and review your Nasdaq INET technology, which is
comments more efficiently, please use Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 scheduled to begin on February 27,
only one method. The Commission will 2017.
post all comments on the Commission’s (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on February The Exchange will launch its re-
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ platformed INET trading system
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 27, 2017, ISE Gemini, LLC (‘‘ISE
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES2
Gemini’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the beginning with a single symbol—CPN—
submission, all subsequent on February 27, 2017. The Exchange
amendments, all written statements Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed proposes to eliminate fees and rebates
with respect to the proposed rule for trades in options overlying Symbol
rule change as described in Items I and
CPN executed on the INET trading
38 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
40 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). system during the last two trading days
79784 (January 12, 2017), 82 FR 6664 (January 19,
2017) (SR–NASDAQ–2016–135) and 80169 (March 41 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). of the month, i.e., February 27–28, 2017.
7, 2017) (SR–BatsBZX–2016–80). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Because the Exchange is eliminating
39 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. fees and rebates for trades in this
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 Mar 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_13938/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2017-03-15 06:04:08
Document Modified: 2017-03-15 06:04:08
| 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 | 82 FR 13889 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR