82 FR 52757 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt New Equity Trading Rules To trade Securities Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges, Including Orders and Modifiers, Order Ranking and Display, and Order Execution and Routing on Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology Platform
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 218 (November 14, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 218 (November 14, 2017)
| Page Range | 52757-52762 | |
| FR Document | 2017-24577 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 52757-52762] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-24577] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-82028; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-36] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt New Equity Trading Rules To trade Securities Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges, Including Orders and Modifiers, Order Ranking and Display, and Order Execution and Routing on Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology Platform November 7, 2017. I. Introduction On July 28, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or ``Exchange'') 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 to allow the Exchange to trade securities pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP Securities'') \3\ on Pillar, the Exchange's new trading technology platform. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on August 9, 2017.\4\ On September 18, 2017, 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 the proposed rule change [[Page 52758]] should be disapproved.\5\ The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order institutes proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \6\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4. \3\ NYSE Rules define ``UTP Security'' as a security that is listed on a national securities exchange other than the Exchange and that trades on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted trading privileges. See NYSE Rule 1.1(ii). \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81310 (Aug. 3, 2017), 82 FR 37257 (Aug. 9, 2017) (``Notice''). \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81641 (Sept. 18, 2017), 82 FR 44483 (Sept. 22, 2017) (``Extension''). \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt equities trading rules to implement Pillar, a new trading technology platform, in order to introduce trading of UTP Securities on the Exchange. Under the proposal, the Pillar platform rules, as set forth in NYSE Rules 1P-13P, would govern trading in UTP Securities on the Exchange.\7\ The Exchange proposes rule changes relating to clearly erroneous executions; the limit up- limit down plan; short sales; halts; orders and modifiers; order ranking, display, execution, and routing; odd and mixed lots; the tick size pilot plan. The Exchange also proposes to specify the current Exchange rules that would not be operative under Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76803 (Dec. 30, 2015), 81 FR 536 (Jan. 6, 2016) (SR-NYSE-2015-67) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change) (adopting a framework of rule numbering based on NYSE Arca rules in advance of the NYSE adopting Pillar). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pursuant to the proposal, UTP Securities would trade under the Exchange's current parity allocation model.\8\ Designated market makers (``DMMs'') would not be assigned UTP Securities on Pillar.\9\ Supplemental Liquidity Providers \10\ would be eligible to be assigned UTP Securities, and member organizations operating floor broker operations that are physically located on the floor would also be eligible to trade UTP Securities,\11\ but UTP Securities would not be available for floor-based point-of-sale trading. Finally, the Exchange would not conduct auctions in UTP Securities.\12\ The Exchange represents that it will continue to trade NYSE-listed securities on its current trading platform.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ The Pillar platform on NYSE Arca and NYSE American uses a price-time allocation model. See NYSE Arca Rule 7.37-E(a) and NYSE American Rule 7.37E(a). \9\ See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37258. \10\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 107B. \11\ According to the Exchange, member organizations trading UTP Securities would be required to comply with Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1), and with any exceptions that are currently applicable to trading on the Exchange. See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37258 n.12. \12\ See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37258. \13\ The Exchange states that it plans to transition trading in NYSE-listed securities to Pillar at a later date, and will file separate proposed rule changes to implement that transition. See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37258 n.9. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange represents that the proposal to trade UTP Securities on Pillar is based in part on the equity trading rules of NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') and NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American''), with the following substantive differences. First, as noted earlier, the Exchange would use a parity allocation model with a setter priority allocation for the participant that sets the best bid or offer on the Exchange (``BBO'').\14\ Second, the Exchange would not offer a Retail Liquidity Program or the associated order types--Retail Orders and Retail Price Improvement Orders. Third, as noted above, the Exchange would not conduct auctions. Fourth, the Exchange would offer only two trading sessions--an Early Trading Session and a Core Trading Session. Finally, the Exchange's order types and modifiers would differ from the order types and modifiers offered by NYSE Arca and NYSE American. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ See NYSE Rule 1.1(h) (defining ``BBO'' as the best bid or offer on the Exchange). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange represents that it will announce the implementation of trading UTP Securities on Pillar by a Trader Update. The Exchange anticipates that the implementation will occur in the first quarter of 2018. If the Exchange begins trading UTP Securities on Pillar, certain current NYSE trading rules would not be applicable. The Exchange proposes to mark the affected Exchange rules with a preamble to state that the rules are not applicable to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. The Notice contains a detailed description of the proposal. The following section briefly summarizes the proposal. A. NYSE Rule 7P--Equities Trading The Exchange proposes several new rules and changes to existing rules in NYSE Rule 7P. Currently, Section 1 of NYSE Rule 7P sets forth general provisions relating to equities trading on Pillar, such as hours of business and clearance and settlement. The Exchange proposes to add NYSE Rules 7.10 (clearly erroneous executions); 7.11 (limit up- limit down); and 7.16 (short sales) to Section 1 of NYSE Rule 7P and amend NYSE Rule 7.18 (halts). Section 3 of NYSE Rule 7P sets forth the rules for trading on Pillar. The Exchange proposes to add to this section new NYSE Rules 7.31 (orders and modifiers); 7.34 (trading sessions); 7.36 (order ranking and display); 7.37 (order execution and routing); and 7.38 (odd and mixed lots). Finally, the Exchange proposes to add new NYSE Rule 7.46 to Section 5 of NYSE Rule 7P to establish rules to implement the Tick Size Pilot Plan. 1. General Provisions The Exchange proposes to establish rules relating to clearly erroneous executions, the limit up-limit down plan, short sales, and trading halts with respect to UTP Securities. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.10 would set forth the Exchange's rules governing clearly erroneous executions.\15\ The proposed rule would set forth how a member organization could request a review of an order that was submitted erroneously, the timing of Exchange review, thresholds for determining clearly erroneous execution, review procedures, and other rules governing clearly erroneous executions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.10-E and NYSE American Rule 7.10E, except that the proposed rule would omit references to: (1) The Late Trading Session,\16\ since the Exchange would not offer a late trading session; (2) Cross Orders,\17\ since the Exchange would not offer cross orders; and (3) executions in the Trading Halt Auction, since the Exchange would not conduct auctions for UTP Securities.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.34 and see infra the related discussion below. \17\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.31 and see infra the related discussion below. \18\ The Exchange proposes that current NYSE Rule 128 (Clearly Erroneous Executions For NYSE Equities) would not be applicable for trading in UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.11 would establish rules governing how the Exchange would comply with the Regulation NMS Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (``LULD Plan''). The LULD Plan addresses extraordinary market volatility and is intended to prevent trades in NMS securities from occurring outside of specified price bands, and the proposed rule would implement the LULD Plan on the Exchange's Pillar platform. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE American 7.11E with the following differences: (1) There would be no option for member organizations to enter an instruction to cancel Limit Orders that cannot be traded or routed at prices within the price bands; (2) there would be no provisions and references relating to Q Orders, Limit IOC Cross Orders, or orders with specific routing instructions because the Exchange will not offer these order types; \19\ (3) there would be no provision on reopenings since the [[Page 52759]] Exchange will not conduct auctions; and (4) the proposed rules would not include references to Day ISO orders, an order type that NYSE American does not offer. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.31 and the related discussion below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.16 would set forth the Exchange's short sale rule, which would govern short sales and compliance with Regulation SHO. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.16-E and NYSE American Rule 7.16E with two substantive differences. First, because the proposed rule would not apply to the Exchange's listed securities, the Exchange would not evaluate the triggering of the short sale price restrictions pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO for covered securities in which the Exchange is not the listing market.\20\ Second, the Exchange is not proposing a rule that relates to Tracking Orders, Cross Orders, or the Proactive if Locked/ Crossed Modifier because the Exchange would not offer these order types for UTP Securities.\21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ As a result, the Exchange would not include rules based on NYSE Arca Rules 7.16-E(f)(3), 7.16-E(f)(4)(A), or 7.16-E(f)(4)(B) or NYSE American Rules 7.16E(f)(3), 7.16E(f)(4)(A), or 7.16E(f)(4)(B). \21\ Current NYSE Rule 440B (Short Sales) would not be applicable to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current NYSE Rule 7.18 governs trading halts in an UTP Security. The Exchange proposes to add proposed Rule 7.18(b), which would set forth how the Exchange would process new and existing orders in an UTP Security during an UTP Regulatory Halt.\22\ The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.18-E(b) and subparagraphs (1)-(6), as well as NYSE American Rule 7.18E(b) and subparagraphs (1)-(6), except that the Exchange would not refer to ``Primary Only'' order types because the Exchange would not offer this order type. The Exchange also proposes to add NYSE Rule 7.18(d)(1)(A), which would allow the Exchange to continue to trade an UTP Exchange Traded Product for the remainder of the Early Trading Session in certain situations.\23\ The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.18-E(d)(1)(A) and NYSE American Rule 7.18E(d)(1)(A), with no substantive differences.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.18(b). UTP Regulatory Halt is defined in current NYSE Rule 1.1(kk) to mean a trade suspension, halt, or pause called by the UTP Listing Market in an UTP Security that requires all market centers to halt trading in that security. NYSE Rule 1.1(jj) defines the term ``UTP Listing Market'' as the primary listing market for an UTP Security. \23\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.18(d)(1)(A). Specifically, this rule would apply if an UTP Exchange Traded Product begins trading on the Exchange in the Early Trading Session and a temporary interruption occurs in a major market vendor's calculation or wide dissemination of either the Intraday Indicative Value or the value of the underlying index to the UTP Exchange Traded Product, as applicable. \24\ The Exchange proposes two non-substantive changes: (1) Amend NYSE Rule 7.18(a) to update a cross-reference and (2) amend NYSE Rule 7.18(d)(1)(B) to replace the phrase ``Normal Trading Hours'' with the phrase ``Core Trading Session.'' See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.34(a)(2) (defining Core Trading Session). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Trading Rules for Pillar The Exchange proposes trading rules for Pillar, including a description of order types and modifiers, trading sessions, how orders are displayed and ranked, how orders are executed and routed, and how odd lots and mixed lots are ranked and executed. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.31 would set forth the primary order types, as well as time-in-force modifiers, auction-only orders, orders with conditional or undisplayed price and/or size, orders with instructions not to route, pegged orders, and other order instructions and modifiers that would be available on Pillar. The Exchange represents that the proposed orders and modifiers are a subset of those offered on NYSE Arca and NYSE American, with several substantive differences. The proposed NYSE rule differs from the NYSE Arca and NYSE American rules as follows: (1) NYSE would not offer auctions in UTP Securities (Auction-Only Orders would be routed to the primary listing markets); (2) Limit Orders entered before the Core Trading Session would be designated for both the Early and Core Trading Sessions; (3) the Exchange would not offer the option to designate certain orders with a Non-Display Remove Modifier; (4) Intermarket Sweep Orders would not be available to floor brokers; (5) Pegged Orders would be available only to floor brokers; \25\ and (6) the Exchange would not offer certain order types.\26\ The proposed rule also sets forth how Self Trade Prevention Modifiers would function consistent with the Exchange's proposed allocation model.\27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ Currently, NYSE only offers pegged orders for floor brokers. See NYSE Rule 13(f)(1) (stating that pegging interest ``must be an e-Quote or d-Quote''). See NYSE Rule 70 for more information on e-Quote and d-Quote. \26\ The Exchange would not offer Tracking Orders, Cross Orders, Q Orders, orders that include specific routing instructions (which includes Primary Only Orders), Inside Limit Orders, Limit IOC Cross Orders, Market Pegged Orders, Discretionary Pegged Orders, or the Proactive if Locked/Crossed Modifier. However, the Exchange would offer the order type Non-Displayed Primary Pegged Order, which NYSE Arca does not offer. The Exchange would also offer order types and modifiers not offered by NYSE American (Primary Pegged Orders, ALO Orders, Day ISO Orders, IOC ISO Orders, and MPL Orders with an ALO Modifier). \27\ The Exchange proposes additional rules addressing how the self-trade prevention modifiers STP Cancel Newest and STP Cancel Oldest orders would interact with resting orders in a priority category that allocates orders based on parity. The Exchange proposes that current NYSE Rules 13 (Orders and Modifiers) and 70 (Execution of Floor Broker Interest) would not be applicable for trading in UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.34 would specify that the Exchange would operate Early and Core Trading Sessions. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.34-E and NYSE American Rule 7.34E, except for the following substantive differences: (1) The Exchange would offer two trading sessions--an Early Trading Session and a Core Trading Session--instead of three trading sessions; \28\ (2) the Early Trading Session would start at 7:00 a.m. Eastern Time (rather than 4:00 a.m. Eastern Time on NYSE Arca); (3) the Exchange would deem an order entered before or during the Early or Core Trading Session as designated for both trading sessions; \29\ (4) the Exchange would not reference current NYSE Rule 7.44 because the Exchange would not offer a retail liquidity program; (5) in the Early Trading Session, Market Orders would be treated like Auction-Only Orders and would be routed to the primary listing market on arrival, instead of being rejected; and (6) the Exchange would not include provisions involving auctions and would not refer to order types that it does not offer (e.g., Cross Orders). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ NYSE Arca and NYSE American also offer a Late Trading Session. See NYSE Arca Rule 7.34-E(a)(3) and NYSE American Rule 7.34E(a)(3). NYSE would not offer a Late Trading Session. \29\ Proposed NYSE Rule 7.34(b) would also provide that an order would be deemed designated with a day time-in-force modifier if that order did not have a time-in-force designation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36 would set forth how orders are ranked and displayed, and the priority of orders. As noted earlier, the Exchange would use a parity allocation model for the trading of UTP securities. The Exchange represents that proposed subsections NYSE Rule 7.36(a)-(g) are based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.36-E(a)-(g) and NYSE American Rule 7.36(a)-(g) with several substantive differences. The Exchange would add the term ``Participant'' based on the term ``individual participant'' in current NYSE Rule 72(c)(ii), and a new term ``Aggressing Order.'' \30\ Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(b)(2) would not include the [[Page 52760]] reference to NYSE Arca Rule 7.7-E--which prohibits ETP Holders from transmitting through the facilities of the Exchange information regarding a bid, offer, indication of an order, or the ETP Holder's identity unless the originating ETP Holder grants permission or affirmatively elects to disclose its identity--because all non- marketable displayed Limit Orders would be displayed on an anonymous basis. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(c) would not include a reference to price-time priority since the Exchange would operate under its existing parity allocation model, and there would be three priority categories for orders instead of four categories on NYSE Arca and NYSE American.\31\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(a)(6). An Aggressing Order is a buy (sell) order that is or becomes marketable against sell (buy) interest on the Exchange Book. \31\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(e). The proposed priority categories are Priority 1--Market Orders, Priority 2--Display Orders, and Priority 3--Non-Displayed Orders. The category Tracking Orders, which appears as a Priority 4 category in NYSE Arca 7.36-E and NYSE American 7.36E, is not included in the Exchange's proposed rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(h) sets forth the rules for Setter Priority. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based in part on current NYSE Rule 72, with several substantive differences: (1) In addition to establishing the BBO,\32\ an order would have to either establish a new national best bid or offer (``NBBO'') \33\ or join an Away Market NBBO to be eligible for Setter Priority; (2) unlike current NYSE Rule 72(a)(ii), Setter Priority would not be available for a resting order solely because that order is the only interest at a given price when that price becomes the BBO; (3) Setter Priority would not be available for reserve quantities that replenish the display quantity of a Reserve Order; \34\ and (4) orders that are routed and return unexecuted would be eligible for Setter Priority consistent with proposed NYSE Rules 7.16(f)(5)(H), 7.36(f)(1)(A) and (B), and 7.38(b)(2), which govern the working time assigned to the return quantity of an order.\35\ In addition, the Exchange proposes that an order would be evaluated for Setter Priority when the order becomes eligible to trade for the first time upon the transition to a new trading session; \36\ that an order would retain Setter Priority when transitioning from one trading session to another; \37\ and that an order would lose Setter Priority if it is assigned a new display price.\38\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ See NYSE Rule 1.1(h). \33\ See NYSE Rule 1.1(dd) (defining NBBO as the national best bid or offer) and Rule 600(b)(42) of Regulation NMS (``National best bid and national best offer means, with respect to quotations for an NMS security, the best bid and best offer for such security that are calculated and disseminated on a current and continuing basis by a plan processor pursuant to an effective national market system plan; provided, that in the event two or more market centers transmit to the plan processor pursuant to such plan identical bids or offers for an NMS security, the best bid or best offer (as the case may be) shall be determined by ranking all such identical bids or offers (as the case may be) first by size (giving the highest ranking to the bid or offer associated with the largest size), and then by time (giving the highest ranking to the bid or offer received first in time)''). 17 CFR 242.600(b)(42). \34\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(h)(4)(B). The Exchange proposes that resting orders that are the only interest at the price when that price becomes the BBO, and the replenished portion of a Reserve Order, would not be eligible for Setter Priority on Pillar in order to encourage displayed orders that are aggressively priced. \35\ The Exchange proposes that NYSE Rules 72(a), (b), and (c)(xii) would not be applicable to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. \36\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(h)(1)(B). \37\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(h)(2)(E). \38\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(h)(3)(B). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37 would govern how orders would execute and route. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(a) would govern order execution. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b) would govern order allocation, as described further below. And proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(c)-(g) would govern routing, the data feeds the Exchange would use, the prohibition on quotations that lock or cross the protected best bid or offer, and exceptions to the Commission's Order Protection Rule. The Exchange represents that proposed Rule 7.37 is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.37-E(a)-(f) and NYSE American Rule 7.37E(a)-(f), with the following substantive differences. The proposed rule would not include references to Inside Limit Orders and orders with specific routing instructions since the Exchange will not offer these order types. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37 would not include rule text from NYSE Arca Rules 7.37-E(b)(3) or (d)(1) \39\ because, like NYSE American, the Exchange would neither use data feeds from broker-dealers nor route to away markets that do not display protected quotations. Also, in proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(a), the Exchange would use the proposed new term ``Aggressing Order'' instead of ``incoming marketable order'' when referring to orders that would be matched for execution.\40\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ NYSE Arca Rule 7.37-E(b)(3) provides ETP Holders the option to bypass away markets that are not displaying protected quotations. NYSE Arca Rule 7.37-E(d)(1) states that NYSE Arca receives data feeds directly from broker-dealers for the purpose of routing interest to away markets that are not displaying protected quotations. \40\ See supra note 37. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b) would establish how Aggressing Orders are allocated against contra-side orders. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based in part on current NYSE Rule 72(c) with the following substantive differences: (1) The Exchange would maintain separate allocation wheels at each price for displayed and non- displayed orders on each side of the market; \41\ (2) allocations to a Floor Broker Participant would be allocation to orders represented by that Floor Broker on parity; (3) the proposed rule would not reference DMM allocations as there would be no DMMs assigned to UTP Securities; (4) the Exchange would offer Mid-Point Liquidity Orders (``MPL'') with a Minimum Trading Size (``MTS''), and the orders would be allocated based on MTS size and time; \42\ (5) if resting orders on one side of the market are repriced and become marketable against contra-side orders on the Exchange book, the Exchange would rank the re-priced orders as described in proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(c) and trade them as Aggressing Orders consistent with their ranking; and (6) proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b)(9) would provide that if resting orders on both sides of the market are repriced and become marketable against one another, the Exchange would rank the orders based on proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(c) and determine which orders are the Aggressing Orders based on their ranking.\43\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ Current NYSE Rule 72(c)(viii) sets forth a single allocation wheel for each security. According to the Exchange, the proposed NYSE Rule for Pillar would permit a member organization to establish a position at each price point, instead of simply adding the order to a single allocation wheel with multiple price points. \42\ See Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b)(1)(E)). \43\ The Exchange proposes that NYSE Rules 15A, 19, 72(c), 1000, 1001, 1002, and 1004 would not apply to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. As NYSE Rule 72(d) would also not apply to trading UTP Securities on the Pillar trading platform, the Exchange proposes that NYSE Rule 72 in its entirety would not apply to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed NYSE Rule 7.38 sets forth how odd-lot and mixed-lot orders would be ranked and executed. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.38-E and NYSE American 7.38E, except that, if the display price of an odd-lot order to buy (sell) is greater than (less than) its working price, the order would be ranked and allocated based on its display price.\44\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \44\ The Exchange proposes that current NYSE Rule 61 (Recognized Quotations) would not be applicable to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Tick Size Pilot Plan Proposed NYSE Rule 7.46 sets forth the rules for the Tick Size Pilot Plan. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule is based on NYSE American Rule 7.46E, except that: (1) The Exchange would not include text relating to Market Pegged Orders or Limit IOC Cross Orders (as the Exchange would not offer these orders); (2) [[Page 52761]] proposed NYSE Rules 7.46(f)(5)(A) and (B) would govern ranking and allocation for Pilot Securities in Test Group Three instead of Rules 7.36(e) and 7.37(b)(1), respectively; \45\ and (3) proposed NYSE Rules 7.46(f)(5)(F)(i)(a) and (b) are based on NYSE Arca Rules 7.46- E(f)(5)(F)(i)(a) and (b) because NYSE American does not offer Day ISO orders. Proposed NYSE Rules 7.46(f)(5)(F)(ii) and (iii) include ALO orders, which, like Day ISO orders, are not offered by NYSE American.\46\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \45\ The Exchange did not provide a reason for this rule change. \46\ The Exchange proposes that current NYSE Rule 67 (Tick Size Pilot Plan) would not be applicable for trading in UTP Securities on Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Amendments to NYSE Rules 103B and 107B The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 103B(I) (Security Allocation and Reallocation) to state that UTP Securities will not be allocated to a DMM Unit. Also, the Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 107B (Supplemental Liquidity Providers) to change ``NYSE-listed securities'' to ``NYSE-traded securities.'' According to the Exchange, the change reflects that UTP Securities would be eligible for assignment to Supplemental Liquidity Providers. C. Retail Liquidity Program Not Available on Pillar The Exchange does not plan to offer a retail liquidity program for UTP Securities on Pillar. For this reason, the Exchange proposes that NYSE Rule 107C would not apply to trading UTP Securities on Pillar. Also, proposed rules based on NYSE Arca rules that cross reference NYSE Arca Rule 7.44-E would not include that rule reference. D. Current NYSE Rules Not Applicable to Pillar Under the Exchange's proposal, several current NYSE rules would not apply to trading in UTP Securities as they are superseded by the proposed rules. Several additional rules, which do not have counterparts in the proposed Pillar rules, would not apply to trading in UTP Securities as they are related to auctions and floor-based point-of-sale trading. Further information about current NYSE rules that would not apply to UTP trading on the Pillar platform can be found in the Notice.\47\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \47\ See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37270, for a list of NYSE rules that are not applicable to Pillar. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the Proposal The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \48\ to determine whether the Exchange's proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved. The Commission believes it is appropriate to institute proceedings at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposal, as discussed below. Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, as described in greater detail below, the Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide additional comment on the proposed rule change. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act, the Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. In particular, the Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency with Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(8) of the Act.\49\ Section 6(b)(5) 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.'' \50\ In addition, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act prohibits the rules of an exchange from being ``designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.'' \51\ Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, requires that the rules of a national securities exchange ``not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of [the Act].'' \52\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \49\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and (b)(8). \50\ Id. \51\ Id. \52\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As discussed above, NYSE proposes to commence UTP trading of Tape B and C securities and to do so on its new Pillar trading platform. There would be no DMM assigned to UTP Securities; there would be no Floor- based point of sale for UTP Securities; the Exchange would not conduct auctions in UTP Securities; and the Exchange would allocate executions in UTP Securities using a modified version of its parity allocation system, granting one place on the allocation wheel to each Floor Broker Participant and one place on the allocation wheel to orders collectively represented in the Exchange Book. Additionally, Floor Brokers would be able to use certain order types, such as Pegging Orders, that would not be available to other market participants.\53\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \53\ After Market Orders trade based on time and the order with Setter Priority, if eligible, receives an allocation, Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b) allocates orders based on parity by Participant. Proposed NYSE Rule 7.36(a)(5) defines Participant as a Floor broker trading license (a ``Floor Broker Participant'') or orders collectively represented in the Exchange Book that have not been entered by a Floor broker (``Book Participant''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission seeks commenters' views on whether the Exchange's proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) and Section 6(b)(8) of the Act. In particular, the Commission seeks commenters' view on the following questions.Unlike the Exchange's existing trading model for its listed securities, there would be no DMM assigned to UTP Securities, no Floor-based point of sale for UTP Securities, no Crossing Orders, and no auction in UTP Securities. Given these differences from the market structure in which Floor Brokers currently operate, what are commenters' views on the role that Floor Brokers would play in trading UTP Securities on the Exchange? What benefits or costs, if any, would the activities of Floor Brokers create for trading of UTP Securities on the Exchange? What benefits or costs, if any, would accrue to the customers of the Floor Brokers? Would these benefits or costs vary depending on the type of Floor Broker customer or the means the customer used to submit an order through a Floor Broker? What benefits or costs, if any, would accrue to participants on the Exchange that are not customers of a Floor Broker? Would providing Floor Brokers with parity allocation in UTP Securities, or providing them with exclusive use of certain order instructions, unfairly discriminate against market participants who do not submit orders through a Floor Broker? Would providing parity to Floor Brokers, or providing them with exclusive use of certain order instructions, impose a burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate? IV. Solicitation of Comments The Commission requests that interested persons provide written submissions of their views, data and arguments with respect to the concerns identified above, as well as any others they may have with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5), Section 6(b)(8), or any other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulation [[Page 52762]] thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval which would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\54\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \54\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments regarding whether the proposal should be disapproved by December 5, 2017. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by December 19, 2017. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2017-36 on the subject line. Paper Comments Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Numbers SR-NYSE-2017-36. The 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 proposal that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposal 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. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-36 and should be submitted on or before December 5, 2017. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by December 19, 2017. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\55\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \55\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2017-24577 Filed 11-13-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Notices 52757
excess of the limits in section 12(d)(1) companies,’’ as defined in section Commission to exempt any persons or
of the Act. 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act, as the Trust, to transactions from any provision of the
APPLICANTS: Meeder Funds Trust (the acquire shares in series of the Trust (the Act if such exemption is necessary or
‘‘Trust’’), a Massachusetts business trust ‘‘Funds’’) 1 in excess of the limits in appropriate in the public interest and
registered under the Act as an open-end section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act 2 and (b) consistent with the protection of
investment company with multiple the Funds, any principal underwriter for investors and the purposes fairly
series; Meeder Asset Management, Inc., a Fund, and any broker or dealer intended by the policy and provisions of
an Ohio corporation registered as an registered under the Exchange Act (a the Act.
investment adviser under the ‘‘Broker’’) to sell shares of the Funds to For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the the Investing Funds in excess of the Investment Management, pursuant to
‘‘Adviser,’’), and Adviser Dealer limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. delegated authority.
Services, Inc. (the ‘‘Distributor’’), an Applicants also request an order under Eduardo A. Aleman,
Ohio corporation registered as a broker- sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act to Assistant Secretary.
dealer under the Securities Exchange exempt applicants from section 17(a) to [FR Doc. 2017–24628 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am]
Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’). the extent necessary to permit a Fund to
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
FILING DATES: The application was filed sell its shares to, and redeem its shares
on May 16, 2017 and amended on from, an Investing Fund.
September 15, 2017. 2. Applicants agree that any order
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
granting the requested relief will be
HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: COMMISSION
subject to the terms and conditions
An order granting the requested relief
stated in the Application. Such terms [Release No. 34–82028; File No. SR–NYSE–
will be issued unless the Commission 2017–36]
and conditions are designed to, among
orders a hearing. Interested persons may
other things, help prevent any potential
request a hearing by writing to the Self-Regulatory Organizations; New
(i) undue influence over a Fund through
Commission’s Secretary and serving York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
control or in connection with certain
applicants with a copy of the request, Instituting Proceedings To Determine
services, transactions, and
personally or by mail. Hearing requests Whether To Approve or Disapprove a
underwritings; (ii) excessive layering of
should be received by the Commission Proposed Rule Change To Adopt New
fees; and (iii) overly complex fund
by 5:30 p.m. on December 4, 2017 and Equity Trading Rules To trade
structures, which are the concerns
should be accompanied by proof of Securities Pursuant to Unlisted
underlying the limits in sections
service on the applicants, in the form of Trading Privileges, Including Orders
12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate and Modifiers, Order Ranking and
3. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act
of service. Pursuant to Rule 0–5 under Display, and Order Execution and
provides that the Commission may
the Act, hearing requests should state Routing on Pillar, the Exchange’s New
exempt any person, security, or
the nature of the writer’s interest, any Trading Technology Platform
transaction, or any class or classes of
facts bearing upon the desirability of a
persons, securities, or transactions, from November 7, 2017.
hearing on the matter, the reason for the
any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the
request, and the issues contested. I. Introduction
exemption is consistent with the public
Persons who wish to be notified of a
interest and the protection of investors. On July 28, 2017, New York Stock
hearing may request notification by
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)
writing to the Commission’s Secretary.
Commission to grant an order filed with the Securities and Exchange
ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities
permitting a transaction otherwise Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street prohibited by section 17(a) if it finds
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
that (a) the terms of the proposed Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
Applicants: Michael Wible, Thompson transaction are fair and reasonable and
Hine LLP, 41 South High Street, Suite 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
do not involve overreaching on the part change to adopt new equity trading
1700, Columbus, Ohio 43215. of any person concerned; (b) the rules to allow the Exchange to trade
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: proposed transaction is consistent with securities pursuant to unlisted trading
James D. McGinnis, Senior Counsel, at the policies of each registered privileges (‘‘UTP Securities’’) 3 on Pillar,
(202) 551–3025, or Parisa Haghshenas, investment company involved; and (c) the Exchange’s new trading technology
Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6723 the proposed transaction is consistent platform. The proposed rule change was
(Division of Investment Management, with the general purposes of the Act. published for comment in the Federal
Chief Counsel’s Office). Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Register on August 9, 2017.4 On
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The September 18, 2017, the Commission
following is a summary of the 1 Applicants request that the relief apply to: (1)
designated a longer period within which
application. The complete application Each registered, open-end management investment
to approve the proposed rule change,
may be obtained via the Commission’s company or series thereof that currently or
subsequently is part of the same ‘group of disapprove the proposed rule change, or
Web site by searching for the file investment companies,’ within the meaning of institute proceedings to determine
number, or for an applicant using the Section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act, as the Trust and whether the proposed rule change
Company name box, at http:// is advised by the Adviser (included in the term
www.sec.gov/search/search.htm, or by ‘Funds’); (2) each Investing Fund that enters into a
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
Participation Agreement (as defined in the
calling (202) 551–8090.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
Application) with a Fund to purchase shares of the
Fund; and (3) any principal underwriter to a Fund 3 NYSE Rules define ‘‘UTP Security’’ as a security
Summary of the Application or Broker selling shares of a Fund. that is listed on a national securities exchange other
1. Applicants request an order to 2 Certain of the Funds created in the future may than the Exchange and that trades on the Exchange
permit (a) registered open-end be registered under the Act as open-end pursuant to unlisted trading privileges. See NYSE
management investment companies and may have Rule 1.1(ii).
management investment companies (the received exemptive relief to permit their shares to 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81310
‘‘Investing Funds’’) that are not part of be listed and traded on a national securities (Aug. 3, 2017), 82 FR 37257 (Aug. 9, 2017)
the same ‘‘group of investment exchange at negotiated prices. (‘‘Notice’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Nov 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM 14NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52975/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Notices 52761
proposed NYSE Rules 7.46(f)(5)(A) and of the Act 48 to determine whether the Pegging Orders, that would not be
(B) would govern ranking and allocation Exchange’s proposed rule change available to other market participants.53
for Pilot Securities in Test Group Three should be approved or disapproved. The The Commission seeks commenters’
instead of Rules 7.36(e) and 7.37(b)(1), Commission believes it is appropriate to views on whether the Exchange’s
respectively; 45 and (3) proposed NYSE institute proceedings at this time in proposal is consistent with Section
Rules 7.46(f)(5)(F)(i)(a) and (b) are based view of the legal and policy issues 6(b)(5) and Section 6(b)(8) of the Act. In
on NYSE Arca Rules 7.46–E(f)(5)(F)(i)(a) raised by the proposal, as discussed particular, the Commission seeks
and (b) because NYSE American does below. Institution of proceedings does commenters’ view on the following
not offer Day ISO orders. Proposed not indicate that the Commission has questions.
NYSE Rules 7.46(f)(5)(F)(ii) and (iii) reached any conclusions with respect to • Unlike the Exchange’s existing
include ALO orders, which, like Day any of the issues involved. Rather, as trading model for its listed securities,
ISO orders, are not offered by NYSE described in greater detail below, the there would be no DMM assigned to
American.46 Commission seeks and encourages UTP Securities, no Floor-based point of
interested persons to provide additional sale for UTP Securities, no Crossing
B. Amendments to NYSE Rules 103B
comment on the proposed rule change. Orders, and no auction in UTP
and 107B
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Securities. Given these differences from
The Exchange proposes to amend Act, the Commission is providing notice the market structure in which Floor
NYSE Rule 103B(I) (Security Allocation of the grounds for disapproval under Brokers currently operate, what are
and Reallocation) to state that UTP consideration. In particular, the commenters’ views on the role that
Securities will not be allocated to a Commission is instituting proceedings Floor Brokers would play in trading
DMM Unit. Also, the Exchange proposes to allow for additional analysis of the UTP Securities on the Exchange?
to amend NYSE Rule 107B proposed rule change’s consistency with • What benefits or costs, if any,
(Supplemental Liquidity Providers) to Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(8) of the Act.49 would the activities of Floor Brokers
change ‘‘NYSE-listed securities’’ to Section 6(b)(5) requires, among other create for trading of UTP Securities on
‘‘NYSE-traded securities.’’ According to things, that the rules of a national the Exchange? What benefits or costs, if
the Exchange, the change reflects that securities exchange be designed ‘‘to any, would accrue to the customers of
UTP Securities would be eligible for prevent fraudulent and manipulative the Floor Brokers? Would these benefits
assignment to Supplemental Liquidity acts and practices, to promote just and or costs vary depending on the type of
Providers. equitable principles of trade, to remove Floor Broker customer or the means the
C. Retail Liquidity Program Not impediments to and perfect the customer used to submit an order
Available on Pillar mechanism of a free and open market through a Floor Broker? What benefits
and a national market system, and, in or costs, if any, would accrue to
The Exchange does not plan to offer participants on the Exchange that are
a retail liquidity program for UTP general, to protect investors and the
public interest.’’ 50 In addition, Section not customers of a Floor Broker?
Securities on Pillar. For this reason, the • Would providing Floor Brokers
Exchange proposes that NYSE Rule 6(b)(5) of the Act prohibits the rules of
an exchange from being ‘‘designed to with parity allocation in UTP Securities,
107C would not apply to trading UTP or providing them with exclusive use of
Securities on Pillar. Also, proposed permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or certain order instructions, unfairly
rules based on NYSE Arca rules that discriminate against market participants
cross reference NYSE Arca Rule 7.44–E dealers.’’ 51 Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,
requires that the rules of a national who do not submit orders through a
would not include that rule reference. Floor Broker? Would providing parity to
securities exchange ‘‘not impose any
D. Current NYSE Rules Not Applicable burden on competition not necessary or Floor Brokers, or providing them with
to Pillar appropriate in furtherance of the exclusive use of certain order
Under the Exchange’s proposal, purposes of [the Act].’’ 52 instructions, impose a burden on
several current NYSE rules would not competition that is not necessary or
As discussed above, NYSE proposes
apply to trading in UTP Securities as appropriate?
to commence UTP trading of Tape B and
they are superseded by the proposed C securities and to do so on its new IV. Solicitation of Comments
rules. Several additional rules, which do Pillar trading platform. There would be The Commission requests that
not have counterparts in the proposed no DMM assigned to UTP Securities; interested persons provide written
Pillar rules, would not apply to trading there would be no Floor-based point of submissions of their views, data and
in UTP Securities as they are related to sale for UTP Securities; the Exchange arguments with respect to the concerns
auctions and floor-based point-of-sale would not conduct auctions in UTP identified above, as well as any others
trading. Further information about Securities; and the Exchange would they may have with the proposal. In
current NYSE rules that would not allocate executions in UTP Securities particular, the Commission invites the
apply to UTP trading on the Pillar using a modified version of its parity written views of interested persons
platform can be found in the Notice.47 allocation system, granting one place on concerning whether the proposal is
III. Proceedings To Determine Whether the allocation wheel to each Floor inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5),
To Approve or Disapprove the Proposal Broker Participant and one place on the Section 6(b)(8), or any other provision of
allocation wheel to orders collectively the Act, or the rules and regulation
The Commission is instituting represented in the Exchange Book.
proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) Additionally, Floor Brokers would be
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
53 After Market Orders trade based on time and
able to use certain order types, such as the order with Setter Priority, if eligible, receives an
45 The Exchange did not provide a reason for this allocation, Proposed NYSE Rule 7.37(b) allocates
rule change. orders based on parity by Participant. Proposed
48 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
46 The Exchange proposes that current NYSE Rule
49 15
NYSE Rule 7.36(a)(5) defines Participant as a Floor
67 (Tick Size Pilot Plan) would not be applicable U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and (b)(8). broker trading license (a ‘‘Floor Broker Participant’’)
50 Id.
for trading in UTP Securities on Pillar. or orders collectively represented in the Exchange
47 See Notice, supra note 3, 82 FR at 37270, for 51 Id.
Book that have not been entered by a Floor broker
a list of NYSE rules that are not applicable to Pillar. 52 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). (‘‘Book Participant’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Nov 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM 14NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52975/page/5.svg)
![52762 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Notices
thereunder. Although there do not inspection and copying at the principal change, or within such longer period up
appear to be any issues relevant to office of the Exchange. All comments to 90 days as the Commission may
approval or disapproval which would received will be posted without change. designate if it finds such longer period
be facilitated by an oral presentation of Persons submitting comments are to be appropriate and publishes its
views, data, and arguments, the cautioned that we do not redact or edit reasons for so finding, or as to which the
Commission will consider, pursuant to personal identifying information from self-regulatory organization consents,
Rule 19b–4, any request for an comment submissions. You should the Commission shall either approve the
opportunity to make an oral submit only information that you wish proposed rule change, disapprove the
presentation.54 to make available publicly. All proposed rule change, or institute
Interested persons are invited to submissions should refer to File proceedings to determine whether the
submit written data, views and Number SR–NYSE–2017–36 and should proposed rule change should be
arguments regarding whether the be submitted on or before December 5, disapproved. The 45th day after
proposal should be disapproved by 2017. Rebuttal comments should be publication of the notice for this
December 5, 2017. Any person who submitted by December 19, 2017. proposed rule change is November 11,
wishes to file a rebuttal to any other For the Commission, by the Division of 2017. The Commission is extending this
person’s submission must file that Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 45-day time period.
rebuttal by December 19, 2017. authority.55 The Commission finds that it is
Comments may be submitted by any Eduardo A. Aleman, appropriate to designate a longer period
of the following methods: within which to take action on the
Assistant Secretary.
Electronic Comments [FR Doc. 2017–24577 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am] proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider the proposed
• Use the Commission’s Internet BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
rule change, as modified by Amendment
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/
No. 1. Accordingly, the Commission,
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@ SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,6
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– COMMISSION designates December 26, 2017, as the
NYSE–2017–36 on the subject line. date by which the Commission should
[Release No. 34–82026; File No. SR–
either approve or disapprove, or
Paper Comments NYSEArca–2017–110]
institute proceedings to determine
• Send paper comments in triplicate Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE whether to disapprove, the proposed
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a rule change (File No. SR–NYSEArca–
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Longer Period for Commission Action 2017–110), as modified by Amendment
Washington, DC 20549–1090. on a Proposed Rule Change, as No. 1.
All submissions should refer to File Modified by Amendment No. 1, To List For the Commission, by the Division of
Numbers SR–NYSE–2017–36. The file and Trade Shares of the GraniteShares Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
number should be included on the Platinum Trust Under NYSE Arca Rule authority.7
subject line if email is used. To help the 8.201–E Eduardo A. Aleman,
Commission process and review your Assistant Secretary.
November 7, 2017.
comments more efficiently, please use [FR Doc. 2017–24575 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am]
only one method. The Commission will On September 12, 2017, NYSE Arca,
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
post all comments on the Commission’s Inc. (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Securities and Exchange Commission
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
submission, all subsequent 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
COMMISSION
amendments, all written statements of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
with respect to the proposal that are thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
[Release No. 34–82034]
filed with the Commission, and all list and trade shares of the
written communications relating to the GraniteShares Platinum Trust under Order Scheduling Filing of Statements
proposal between the Commission and NYSE Arca Rule 8.201–E. The proposed on Review
any person, other than those that may be rule change was published for comment
withheld from the public in accordance in the Federal Register on September November 8, 2017.
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will 27, 2017.3 On October 24, 2017, the In the Matter of the Chicago Stock
be available for Web site viewing and Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the Exchange, Inc.
printing in the Commission’s Public proposed rule change.4 The Commission For an Order Granting the Approval of
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., has received no comments on the Proposed Rule Change to Adopt the
Washington, DC 20549, on official proposed rule change. CHX Liquidity Enhancing Access
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 5 provides Delay on a Pilot Basis (File No. SR–
business days between the hours of
that, within 45 days of the publication CHX–2017–04)
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
of notice of the filing of a proposed rule
filing also will be available for On February 10, 2017, the Chicago
55 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(57).
Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’ or
54 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. and Exchange Commission
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
94–29 (June 4, 1975), grants the Commission
flexibility to determine what type of proceeding—
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81675 (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
either oral or notice and opportunity for written (Sept. 21, 2017) 82 FR 45080. 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
4 Amendment No. 1, which amended and
comments—is appropriate for consideration of a of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule
particular proposal by a self-regulatory replaced the proposed rule change in its entirety,
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of is available on the Commission’s Web site at:
6 Id.
1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-
Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 110/nysearca2017110-2653767-161379.pdf. 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31).
(1975). 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Nov 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM 14NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52975/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2018-10-25 10:33:58
Document Modified: 2018-10-25 10:33:58
| 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 52757 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR