Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Adding New Paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule 128-Equities, Entitled “Clearly Erroneous Executions for Equities”, 25954-25958 [2014-10287]
Download as PDF
25954
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices
consistent results in handling erroneous
trades across the U.S. markets, thus
furthering fair and orderly markets, the
protection of investors and the public
interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change implicates any
competitive issues. To the contrary, as
noted above, the Exchange believes
FINRA and other national securities
exchanges are also filing similar
proposals, and thus, that the proposal
will help to ensure consistency across
market centers.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange has not solicited, and
does not intend to solicit, comments on
this proposed rule change. The
Exchange has not received any written
comments from members or other
interested parties.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period
up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may
designate if it finds such longer period
to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which
the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission will:
(A) by order approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ISE–2014–25. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–ISE–
2014–25, and should be submitted on or
before May 27, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to
delegated authority.14
notice is hereby given that, on April 21,
2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ‘‘Exchange’’
or ‘‘NYSE MKT’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
[FR Doc. 2014–10285 Filed 5–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
ISE–2014–25 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 May 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to add new
paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule 128—
Equities, entitled ‘‘Clearly Erroneous
Executions For Equities.’’ The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site at www.nyse.com,
at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
self-regulatory organization included
statements concerning the purpose of,
and basis for, the proposed rule change
and discussed any comments it received
on the proposed rule change. The text
of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
1. Purpose
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–72051; File No. SR–
NYSEMKT–2014–37]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed
Rule Change Adding New Paragraphs
(j) and (k) to Rule 128—Equities,
Entitled ‘‘Clearly Erroneous
Executions for Equities’’
April 30, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
14 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
2 15 U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The purpose of this filing is to add
new paragraph (j) to Rule 128—Equities
to provide the Exchange with authority
to nullify transactions that were effected
based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information even if such
transactions occur over a period of
several days, as further described below.
An example of fundamentally incorrect
and grossly misinterpreted issuance
information that led to a severe
valuation error is included below for
illustrative purposes.
The Exchange also proposes to add
new paragraph (k) to Rule 128—Equities
to make clear that in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the
operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices
the Exchange, another market center or
responsible single plan processor in
connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a regulatory trading halt,
suspension or pause (hereafter generally
referred to as a ‘‘trading halt’’ for ease
of reference), the Exchange will nullify
any transaction that occurs after the
primary listing market for a security
declares a trading halt with respect to
such security. In the event a trading halt
is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error, and then re-instituted, proposed
paragraph (k) would also result in
nullification of any transactions that
occur before the official, final end of the
trading halt according to the primary
listing market.
The Exchange also proposes a change
to certain cross-references in Rule 128—
Equities, due to the addition of (j) and
(k). Specifically, the Exchange proposes
to update cross-references in existing
paragraph (i) of Rule 128—Equities in
order to make clear that the provisions
of paragraph (i) do not alter the
application of other provisions of Rule
128—Equities, including new
paragraphs (j) and (k).
Background
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
On September 10, 2010, the
Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to Rule 128—Equities to
provide for uniform treatment: (1) Of
clearly erroneous execution reviews in
multi-stock events involving twenty or
more securities; and (2) in the event
transactions occur that result in the
issuance of an individual stock trading
pause by the primary listing market and
subsequent transactions that occur
before the trading pause is in effect on
the Exchange.4 The Exchange also
adopted additional changes to Rule
128—Equities that reduced the ability of
the Exchange to deviate from the
objective standards set forth in Rule
128—Equities,5 and in 2013, adopted a
provision designed to address the
operation of the Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility
Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS
under the Act (the ‘‘Limit Up-Limit
Down Plan’’ or the ‘‘Plan’’).6 Most
recently, the Exchange removed the
specific provisions related to individual
stock trading pauses and extended the
pilot program to coincide with the pilot
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886
(Sept. 10, 2010), 75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010) (SR–
NYSEAmex–2010–60).
5 Id.
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68801
(Feb. 1, 2013), 78 FR 8630 (Feb. 6, 2013) (SR–
NYSEMKT–2013–11); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498
(June 6, 2012) (the ‘‘Limit Up-Limit Down
Release’’); see also Exchange Rule 128—Equities (i).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 May 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
period for the Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan, including any extensions thereof,
applicable to certain provisions of Rule
128—Equities.7
As proposed, similar to other
provisions added in recent years, as
described above, both paragraph (j) and
paragraph (k) would be subject to the
pilot period, and thus, would coincide
with the pilot period for the Limit UpLimit Down Plan, unless extended or
made permanent.
Executions Based on Incorrect or
Grossly Misinterpreted Issuance
Information
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
new provision, paragraph (j), to Rule
128—Equities, which would provide
that a series of transactions in a
particular security on one or more
trading days may be viewed as one
event if all such transactions were
effected based on the same
fundamentally incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information
(e.g., with respect to a stock split or
corporate dividend) resulting in a severe
valuation error for all such transactions
(the ‘‘Event’’).
As proposed, an Officer, acting on his
or her own motion, would be required
to take action to declare all transactions
that occurred during the Event null and
void not later than the start of trading
on the day following the last transaction
in the Event. If trading in the security
is halted before the valuation error is
corrected, the Officer would be required
to take action to declare all transactions
that occurred during the Event null and
void prior to the resumption of trading.
The Exchange proposes to make clear
that no action can be taken pursuant to
proposed paragraph (j) with respect to
any transactions that have reached
settlement date for the security or that
result from an initial public offering of
a security. The Exchange believes that
declaring a trade null and void after
settlement date would be complex to
administer and unfair to the affected
parties. The Exchange also believes that
excluding IPOs from the proposed rule
will ensure that transactions in a new
security for which there is no
benchmark information are not called
into question, as it is the IPO process
itself, including the extensive public
disclosure associated with IPOs, that is
intended to drive price formation.
7 Paragraphs (c), (e)(2), (f), (g), and (i) of Rule
128—Equities are currently subject to a pilot
program. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70517 (September 26, 2013), 78 FR 60943 (October
2, 2013) (SR–NYSEMKT–2013–78); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 71820 (March 27, 2014),
79 FR 18595 (April 2, 2014) (SR–NYSEMKT–2014–
28).
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25955
Further, the Exchange proposes that
to the extent transactions related to an
Event occur on one or more other
market centers, the Exchange will
promptly coordinate with such other
market center(s) to ensure consistent
treatment of the transactions related to
the Event, if practicable. The Exchange
also proposes to state in the Rule that
any action taken in connection with
paragraph (j) will be taken without
regard to the Numerical Guidelines set
forth in paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 128—
Equities. In particular, the Exchange
believes that there could be scenarios
where there are erroneous transactions
related to an Event that do not meet
applicable Numerical Guidelines but
that are, upon review, clearly erroneous.
One example of a situation that could
occur is a corporate action, such as a
stock split, that results in the
dissemination of fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information and leads to
erroneous transactions at a price that is
close to the price at which the security
was previously trading. Even if such
trading is consistent with prior trading
activity for the security, and thus would
not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines, the Exchange would have
the authority to nullify such
transactions if they were affected based
on the same fundamentally incorrect or
grossly misinterpreted issuance
information and there was a severe
valuation error as a result (i.e., although
the security should be trading at a price
further away from its previous range,
due to fundamentally incorrect or
grossly misinterpreted issuance
information with respect to the
corporate action the security continues
to trade at a price that does not meet
applicable Numerical Guidelines).
The Exchange also proposes to
include a provision, as it does in many
other sub-paragraphs of Rule 128—
Equities, stating that each member or
member organization involved in a
transaction subject to proposed
paragraph (j) shall be notified as soon as
practicable by the Exchange, and that
the party aggrieved by the action may
appeal such action in accordance with
Exchange Rule 128—Equities (e)(2).
In particular, the Exchange believes it
is necessary to have authority to nullify
trades that occur in an event similar to
an event involving an exchange offer
(‘‘Exchange Offer’’) made by U.S.
Bancorp on the New York Stock
Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) in 2010 in which
there were a series of executions based
on incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information. As a result of
such information, the securities traded
at severely dislocated prices. At the
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
25956
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices
time, the NYSE filed an emergency rule
filing in order to respond to that event.8
With the filing the NYSE interpreted the
rule applicable to clearly erroneous
executions as permitting the NYSE to
nullify all trades resulting after the
Exchange Offer at severely dislocated
prices.9 The Exchange believes it is
important to have in place a rule to
break such trades if an event like the
U.S. Bancorp event occurs again in the
future. The U.S. Bancorp event is
described in further detail below and is
intended to be illustrative of the manner
in which the Exchange proposes to
utilize proposed paragraph (j), if
necessary.
In May 2010, U.S. Bancorp
commenced an offer to exchange up to
1,250,000 Depositary Shares, each
representing a 1/100 interest in a share
of Series A Non-Cumulative Perpetual
Preferred Stock, $100,000 liquidation
preference per share (the ‘‘Depositary
Shares’’) for any and all of the 1,250,000
outstanding 6.189% Fixed-to-Floating
Rate Normal ITS issued by U.S. Bancorp
Capital IX, each with a liquidation
amount of $1,000 (the ‘‘Normal ITS’’).
The Depositary Shares were approved
for listing on the NYSE under the
symbol USB PRA. On June 11, 2010, the
NYSE opened the shares on a quote, but
trading did not commence until June 16,
2010 at prices in the range of $79.00 per
share. There were additional executions
on the NYSE in that price range on June
17 and 18, 2010. On June 18, 2010,
NYSE staff learned that the prices at
which trades had executed were not
consistent with the value of the security,
which was closer to an $800 price.
Upon learning of the pricing disparity,
NYSE immediately halted trading in the
Depositary Shares on all markets and
alerted U.S. Bancorp and other
exchanges that traded the Depositary
Shares of the pricing discrepancy.
In order to address the situation, the
NYSE filed a proposal to interpret its
existing clearly erroneous execution
rule such that the trading in Depository
Shares from June 16 to June 18
constituted a single event because that
trading was based on incorrect or
grossly misinterpreted issuance
information that resulted in severe price
dislocation (the ‘‘U.S. Bancorp
Event’’).10 Because the Depository
Shares were halted before the price of
the Depository Shares ceased to be
dislocated, and remain halted, the NYSE
was able to review trading in Depository
8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62609
(July 30, 2010), 75 FR 47327 (August 5, 2010) (SR–
NYSE–2010–55).
9 Id.
10 Id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 May 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
Shares and declare null and void all
trading in the U.S. Bancorp Event before
the security resumed trading.
Rather than filing a proposal in
response to a similar event happening
again, the Exchange proposes to add
paragraph (j) in order to nullify
transactions consistent with the
description of the proposed Rule above.
Executions After a Trading Halt Has
Been Declared
The Exchange proposes to add new
paragraph (k) to Rule 128—Equities to
make clear that in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the
operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of
the Exchange, another market center or
responsible single plan processor in
connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt, the Exchange
will nullify any transaction that occurs
after the primary listing market for a
security declares a trading halt and
before such trading halt with respect to
such security has officially ended
according to the primary listing market.
In addition, proposed paragraph (k) will
make clear that in the event a trading
halt is declared, then prematurely lifted
in error and then re-instituted, the
Exchange will nullify transactions that
occur before the official, final end of the
trading halt according to the primary
listing market.
As with other provisions in Rule
128—Equities, including proposed
paragraph (j) as discussed above, the
authority to nullify transactions
pursuant to paragraph (k) would be
vested in an Officer, acting on his or her
own motion. Any action taken in
connection with paragraph (k) would be
taken in a timely fashion, generally
within thirty (30) minutes of the
detection of the erroneous transaction
and in no circumstances later than the
start of regular trading hours 11 on the
trading day following the date of
execution(s) under review. The
Exchange also proposes to specify that
any action taken in connection with
proposed paragraph (k) will be taken
without regard to the Numerical
Guidelines set forth in paragraph (c)(1)
of Rule 128—Equities. The Exchange
believes it is appropriate to act to nullify
transactions pursuant to proposed
paragraph (k) without regard to
applicable Numerical Guidelines
because in the situations covered by
paragraph (k), such transactions should
not have occurred in the first instance,
and thus, their nullification does not
11 The regular trade hours [sic] on the Exchange
are defined in Rule 51—Equities and is generally
the time between 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. E.T.
PO 00000
Frm 00143
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
put parties in any different position
than they should have been. The
Exchange also believes that the certainty
that the proposed rule provides is
critical in situations involving trading
halts.
As it has proposed for paragraph (j),
as described above, the Exchange also
proposes to an [sic] include a provision
stating that each member or member
organization involved in a transaction
subject to proposed paragraph (k) shall
be notified as soon as practicable by the
Exchange, and that the party aggrieved
by the action may appeal such action in
accordance with Exchange Rule 128—
Equities (e)(2).
The Exchange notes that trading in a
security is typically halted immediately
on the Exchange when the primary
listing market issues a trading halt in
such security. However, in certain
circumstances, due to a technical issue
related to the transmission or receipt of
the electronic message instituting such
trading halt or due to other
extraordinary circumstances, executions
can occur on the Exchange following the
declaration of such a trading halt.
Similarly, although rare, the Exchange
has witnessed scenarios where due to
extraordinary circumstances a trading
halt is declared, then prematurely lifted
in error and then re-instituted. It is these
types of extraordinary circumstances
that the Exchange believes require
certainty, and thus, the Exchange
believes it necessary to make clear that
in such a circumstance any transactions
after a trading halt has been declared
will be nullified. In the event that a
trading halt is declared as of a future
time (i.e., if the primary listing exchange
declares a trading halt as of a specific,
future time in order to ensure
coordination amongst market
participants), the Exchange would only
nullify transactions occurring after the
time the trading halt was supposed to be
in place until the official end of the
trading halt according to the primary
listing market.
The Exchange also notes that it
currently has authority pursuant to
paragraph (f) of Rule 128—Equities to
review and nullify transactions that
arise during a disruption or malfunction
in the operation of any electronic
communications and trading facilities of
the Exchange. Further, paragraph (f) of
Rule 128—Equities gives the Exchange
authority to use a lower numerical
guideline than is set forth in paragraph
(c)(1) of the Rule when necessary to
maintain a fair and orderly market and
to protect investors and the public
interest. Thus, while the Exchange
believes that paragraph (f) does give the
Exchange the authority to nullify
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
transactions occurring when there is an
Exchange technical issue related to the
transmission or receipt of the electronic
message instituting a trading halt or
with respect to a technical issue related
to a prematurely lifted trading halt, the
Exchange believes that proposed
paragraph (k) will provide appropriate
authority for the Exchange to nullify all
such transactions whether or not the
systems problem occurs on the
Exchange with respect to trading halts
and explicit clarity for market
participants that such transactions will
be nullified. The Exchange believes that
such authority is appropriate because
when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have
occurred in the first instance. Finally,
the Exchange believes that such
authority is appropriate because a
trading halt declared by the primary
listing market is indicative of an issue
with respect to the applicable security
or a larger set of securities.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder that are
applicable to a national securities
exchange, and, in particular, with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.12 In particular, the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,13 because it would promote just
and equitable principles of trade,
remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system.
The Exchange believes that it is
appropriate to adopt a provision
granting the Exchange authority to
nullify trades that occur if an Event
similar to the U.S. Bancorp Event occurs
again. The Exchange believes that this
provision will allow the Exchange to act
in the event of such a severe valuation
error, that such action would promote
just and equitable principles of trade
and that the proposal is therefore
consistent with the Act. Similarly, the
Exchange believes that adding a
provision allowing the Exchange to
nullify transactions that occur when a
trading halt is declared, then
prematurely lifted in error and then
reinstituted, and providing that in the
event of any disruption or malfunction
in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of
the Exchange, another market center or
responsible single plan processor in
connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt the Exchange
12 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 May 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
will nullify trades occurring after a
trading halt has been declared by the
primary listing market for the security
will help to avoid confusion amongst
market participants, which is consistent
with the protection of investors and the
public interest and therefore consistent
with the Act. The Exchange further
believes that the proposal is appropriate
and consistent with the Act because
when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have
occurred in the first instance. The
Exchange also believes that the proposal
is appropriate because a trading halt
declared by the primary listing market
is indicative of an issue with respect to
the applicable security or a larger set of
securities.
The Exchange believes that the
proposal to update cross-references in
existing paragraph (i) of Rule 128—
Equities to include new paragraphs (j)
and (k) is consistent with the Act
because, as is the case with respect to
the current rule, this change makes clear
that the provisions of paragraph (i) do
not alter the application of other
provisions of Rule 128—Equities.
The Exchange believes that the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(‘‘FINRA’’) and other national securities
exchanges are also filing similar
proposals to add provisions similar to
the provisions proposed by the
Exchange above. Therefore, the proposal
promotes just and equitable principles
of trade in that it promotes transparency
and uniformity across markets
concerning treatment of transactions as
clearly erroneous. The proposed rule
change would also help to assure
consistent results in handling erroneous
trades across the U.S. markets, thus
furthering fair and orderly markets, the
protection of investors and the public
interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change implicates any
competitive issues. To the contrary, as
noted above, the Exchange believes
FINRA and other national securities
exchanges are also filing similar
proposals, and thus, that the proposal
will help to ensure consistency across
market centers.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited
or received with respect to the proposed
rule change.
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25957
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period (i)
as the Commission may designate up to
90 days of such date if it finds such
longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii) as to which the self-regulatory
organization consents, the Commission
will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–NYSEMKT–2014–37 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSEMKT–2014–37. 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 (https://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
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
25958
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices
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–
NYSEMKT–2014–37 and should be
submitted on or before May 27, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.14
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–10287 Filed 5–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[Release No. 34–72052; File No. SR–NYSE–
2014–22]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New
York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change
Adding New Paragraphs (j) and (k) to
Rule 128, Entitled ‘‘Clearly Erroneous
Executions for NYSE Equities’’
April 30, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that, on April 21,
2014, New York Stock Exchange LLC
(‘‘NYSE’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by the selfregulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to add new
paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule 128,
entitled ‘‘Clearly Erroneous Executions
For NYSE Equities.’’ The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site at www.nyse.com,
at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
2 15 U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 May 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
In its filing with the Commission, the
self-regulatory organization included
statements concerning the purpose of,
and basis for, the proposed rule change
and discussed any comments it received
on the proposed rule change. The text
of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
14 17
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
The purpose of this filing is to add
new paragraph (j) to Rule 128 to provide
the Exchange with authority to nullify
transactions that were effected based on
the same fundamentally incorrect or
grossly misinterpreted issuance
information even if such transactions
occur over a period of several days, as
further described below. An example of
fundamentally incorrect and grossly
misinterpreted issuance information
that led to a severe valuation error is
included below for illustrative
purposes.
The Exchange also proposes to add
new paragraph (k) to Rule 128 to make
clear that in the event of any disruption
or malfunction in the operation of the
electronic communications and trading
facilities of the Exchange, another
market center or responsible single plan
processor in connection with the
transmittal or receipt of a regulatory
trading halt, suspension or pause
(hereafter generally referred to as a
‘‘trading halt’’ for ease of reference), the
Exchange will nullify any transaction
that occurs after the primary listing
market for a security declares a trading
halt with respect to such security. In the
event a trading halt is declared, then
prematurely lifted in error, and then reinstituted, proposed paragraph (k)
would also result in nullification of any
transactions that occur before the
official, final end of the trading halt
according to the primary listing market.
The Exchange also proposes a change
to certain cross-references in Rule 128
due to the addition of (j) and (k).
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
update cross-references in existing
paragraph (i) of Rule 128 in order to
make clear that the provisions of
paragraph (i) do not alter the application
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of other provisions of Rule 128,
including new paragraphs (j) and (k).
Background
On September 10, 2010, the
Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to Rule 128 to provide for
uniform treatment: (1) Of clearly
erroneous execution reviews in multistock events involving twenty or more
securities; and (2) in the event
transactions occur that result in the
issuance of an individual stock trading
pause by the primary listing market and
subsequent transactions that occur
before the trading pause is in effect on
the Exchange.4 The Exchange also
adopted additional changes to Rule 128
that reduced the ability of the Exchange
to deviate from the objective standards
set forth in Rule 128,5 and in 2013,
adopted a provision designed to address
the operation of the Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility
Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS
under the Act (the ‘‘Limit Up-Limit
Down Plan’’ or the ‘‘Plan’’).6 Most
recently, the Exchange removed the
specific provisions related to individual
stock trading pauses and extended the
pilot program to coincide with the pilot
period for the Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan, including any extensions thereof,
applicable to certain provisions of Rule
128.7
As proposed, similar to other
provisions added in recent years, as
described above, both paragraph (j) and
paragraph (k) would be subject to the
pilot period, and thus, would coincide
with the pilot period for the Limit UpLimit Down Plan, unless extended or
made permanent.
Executions Based on Incorrect or
Grossly Misinterpreted Issuance
Information
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
new provision, paragraph (j), to Rule
128, which would provide that a series
of transactions in a particular security
on one or more trading days may be
viewed as one event if all such
transactions were effected based on the
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886
(Sept. 10, 2010), 75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010) (SR–
NYSE–2010–47).
5 Id.
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68804
(Feb. 1, 2013), 78 FR 8677 (Feb. 6, 2013) (SR–
NYSE–2013–11); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6,
2012) (the ‘‘Limit Up-Limit Down Release’’); see
also Exchange Rule 128(i).
7 Paragraphs (c), (e)(2), (f), (g), and (i) of Rule 128
are currently subject to a pilot program. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70519
(September 26, 2013), 78 FR 60969 (October 2,
2013) (SR–NYSE–2013–65); Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 71821 (March 27, 2014), 79 FR
18592 (April 2, 2014) (SR–NYSE–2014–17).
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25954-25958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10287]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-72051; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Adding New Paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule 128--
Equities, Entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions for Equities''
April 30, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on April 21, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
\2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to add new paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule
128--Equities, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions For Equities.''
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of this filing is to add new paragraph (j) to Rule
128--Equities to provide the Exchange with authority to nullify
transactions that were effected based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information even if such
transactions occur over a period of several days, as further described
below. An example of fundamentally incorrect and grossly misinterpreted
issuance information that led to a severe valuation error is included
below for illustrative purposes.
The Exchange also proposes to add new paragraph (k) to Rule 128--
Equities to make clear that in the event of any disruption or
malfunction in the operation of the electronic communications and
trading facilities of
[[Page 25955]]
the Exchange, another market center or responsible single plan
processor in connection with the transmittal or receipt of a regulatory
trading halt, suspension or pause (hereafter generally referred to as a
``trading halt'' for ease of reference), the Exchange will nullify any
transaction that occurs after the primary listing market for a security
declares a trading halt with respect to such security. In the event a
trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error, and then
re-instituted, proposed paragraph (k) would also result in
nullification of any transactions that occur before the official, final
end of the trading halt according to the primary listing market.
The Exchange also proposes a change to certain cross-references in
Rule 128--Equities, due to the addition of (j) and (k). Specifically,
the Exchange proposes to update cross-references in existing paragraph
(i) of Rule 128--Equities in order to make clear that the provisions of
paragraph (i) do not alter the application of other provisions of Rule
128--Equities, including new paragraphs (j) and (k).
Background
On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to Rule 128--Equities to provide for uniform treatment: (1) Of
clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-stock events involving
twenty or more securities; and (2) in the event transactions occur that
result in the issuance of an individual stock trading pause by the
primary listing market and subsequent transactions that occur before
the trading pause is in effect on the Exchange.\4\ The Exchange also
adopted additional changes to Rule 128--Equities that reduced the
ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in Rule 128--Equities,\5\ and in 2013, adopted a provision
designed to address the operation of the Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under the Act
(the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or the ``Plan'').\6\ Most recently,
the Exchange removed the specific provisions related to individual
stock trading pauses and extended the pilot program to coincide with
the pilot period for the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, including any
extensions thereof, applicable to certain provisions of Rule 128--
Equities.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (Sept. 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010) (SR- NYSEAmex-2010-60).
\5\ Id.
\6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68801 (Feb. 1,
2013), 78 FR 8630 (Feb. 6, 2013) (SR- NYSEMKT-2013-11); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6,
2012) (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Release''); see also Exchange Rule
128--Equities (i).
\7\ Paragraphs (c), (e)(2), (f), (g), and (i) of Rule 128--
Equities are currently subject to a pilot program. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 70517 (September 26, 2013), 78 FR 60943
(October 2, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-78); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 71820 (March 27, 2014), 79 FR 18595 (April 2, 2014) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed, similar to other provisions added in recent years, as
described above, both paragraph (j) and paragraph (k) would be subject
to the pilot period, and thus, would coincide with the pilot period for
the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, unless extended or made permanent.
Executions Based on Incorrect or Grossly Misinterpreted Issuance
Information
The Exchange proposes to adopt a new provision, paragraph (j), to
Rule 128--Equities, which would provide that a series of transactions
in a particular security on one or more trading days may be viewed as
one event if all such transactions were effected based on the same
fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information
(e.g., with respect to a stock split or corporate dividend) resulting
in a severe valuation error for all such transactions (the ``Event'').
As proposed, an Officer, acting on his or her own motion, would be
required to take action to declare all transactions that occurred
during the Event null and void not later than the start of trading on
the day following the last transaction in the Event. If trading in the
security is halted before the valuation error is corrected, the Officer
would be required to take action to declare all transactions that
occurred during the Event null and void prior to the resumption of
trading. The Exchange proposes to make clear that no action can be
taken pursuant to proposed paragraph (j) with respect to any
transactions that have reached settlement date for the security or that
result from an initial public offering of a security. The Exchange
believes that declaring a trade null and void after settlement date
would be complex to administer and unfair to the affected parties. The
Exchange also believes that excluding IPOs from the proposed rule will
ensure that transactions in a new security for which there is no
benchmark information are not called into question, as it is the IPO
process itself, including the extensive public disclosure associated
with IPOs, that is intended to drive price formation.
Further, the Exchange proposes that to the extent transactions
related to an Event occur on one or more other market centers, the
Exchange will promptly coordinate with such other market center(s) to
ensure consistent treatment of the transactions related to the Event,
if practicable. The Exchange also proposes to state in the Rule that
any action taken in connection with paragraph (j) will be taken without
regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph (c)(1) of
Rule 128--Equities. In particular, the Exchange believes that there
could be scenarios where there are erroneous transactions related to an
Event that do not meet applicable Numerical Guidelines but that are,
upon review, clearly erroneous. One example of a situation that could
occur is a corporate action, such as a stock split, that results in the
dissemination of fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information and leads to erroneous transactions at a price
that is close to the price at which the security was previously
trading. Even if such trading is consistent with prior trading activity
for the security, and thus would not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines, the Exchange would have the authority to nullify such
transactions if they were affected based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information and there was
a severe valuation error as a result (i.e., although the security
should be trading at a price further away from its previous range, due
to fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance
information with respect to the corporate action the security continues
to trade at a price that does not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines).
The Exchange also proposes to include a provision, as it does in
many other sub-paragraphs of Rule 128--Equities, stating that each
member or member organization involved in a transaction subject to
proposed paragraph (j) shall be notified as soon as practicable by the
Exchange, and that the party aggrieved by the action may appeal such
action in accordance with Exchange Rule 128--Equities (e)(2).
In particular, the Exchange believes it is necessary to have
authority to nullify trades that occur in an event similar to an event
involving an exchange offer (``Exchange Offer'') made by U.S. Bancorp
on the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') in 2010 in which there were a
series of executions based on incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information. As a result of such information, the securities
traded at severely dislocated prices. At the
[[Page 25956]]
time, the NYSE filed an emergency rule filing in order to respond to
that event.\8\ With the filing the NYSE interpreted the rule applicable
to clearly erroneous executions as permitting the NYSE to nullify all
trades resulting after the Exchange Offer at severely dislocated
prices.\9\ The Exchange believes it is important to have in place a
rule to break such trades if an event like the U.S. Bancorp event
occurs again in the future. The U.S. Bancorp event is described in
further detail below and is intended to be illustrative of the manner
in which the Exchange proposes to utilize proposed paragraph (j), if
necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62609 (July 30,
2010), 75 FR 47327 (August 5, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-55).
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In May 2010, U.S. Bancorp commenced an offer to exchange up to
1,250,000 Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/100 interest in a
share of Series A Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, $100,000
liquidation preference per share (the ``Depositary Shares'') for any
and all of the 1,250,000 outstanding 6.189% Fixed-to-Floating Rate
Normal ITS issued by U.S. Bancorp Capital IX, each with a liquidation
amount of $1,000 (the ``Normal ITS''). The Depositary Shares were
approved for listing on the NYSE under the symbol USB PRA. On June 11,
2010, the NYSE opened the shares on a quote, but trading did not
commence until June 16, 2010 at prices in the range of $79.00 per
share. There were additional executions on the NYSE in that price range
on June 17 and 18, 2010. On June 18, 2010, NYSE staff learned that the
prices at which trades had executed were not consistent with the value
of the security, which was closer to an $800 price. Upon learning of
the pricing disparity, NYSE immediately halted trading in the
Depositary Shares on all markets and alerted U.S. Bancorp and other
exchanges that traded the Depositary Shares of the pricing discrepancy.
In order to address the situation, the NYSE filed a proposal to
interpret its existing clearly erroneous execution rule such that the
trading in Depository Shares from June 16 to June 18 constituted a
single event because that trading was based on incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information that resulted in severe price
dislocation (the ``U.S. Bancorp Event'').\10\ Because the Depository
Shares were halted before the price of the Depository Shares ceased to
be dislocated, and remain halted, the NYSE was able to review trading
in Depository Shares and declare null and void all trading in the U.S.
Bancorp Event before the security resumed trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rather than filing a proposal in response to a similar event
happening again, the Exchange proposes to add paragraph (j) in order to
nullify transactions consistent with the description of the proposed
Rule above.
Executions After a Trading Halt Has Been Declared
The Exchange proposes to add new paragraph (k) to Rule 128--
Equities to make clear that in the event of any disruption or
malfunction in the operation of the electronic communications and
trading facilities of the Exchange, another market center or
responsible single plan processor in connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt, the Exchange will nullify any transaction
that occurs after the primary listing market for a security declares a
trading halt and before such trading halt with respect to such security
has officially ended according to the primary listing market. In
addition, proposed paragraph (k) will make clear that in the event a
trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error and then re-
instituted, the Exchange will nullify transactions that occur before
the official, final end of the trading halt according to the primary
listing market.
As with other provisions in Rule 128--Equities, including proposed
paragraph (j) as discussed above, the authority to nullify transactions
pursuant to paragraph (k) would be vested in an Officer, acting on his
or her own motion. Any action taken in connection with paragraph (k)
would be taken in a timely fashion, generally within thirty (30)
minutes of the detection of the erroneous transaction and in no
circumstances later than the start of regular trading hours \11\ on the
trading day following the date of execution(s) under review. The
Exchange also proposes to specify that any action taken in connection
with proposed paragraph (k) will be taken without regard to the
Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 128--
Equities. The Exchange believes it is appropriate to act to nullify
transactions pursuant to proposed paragraph (k) without regard to
applicable Numerical Guidelines because in the situations covered by
paragraph (k), such transactions should not have occurred in the first
instance, and thus, their nullification does not put parties in any
different position than they should have been. The Exchange also
believes that the certainty that the proposed rule provides is critical
in situations involving trading halts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The regular trade hours [sic] on the Exchange are defined
in Rule 51--Equities and is generally the time between 9:30 a.m. to
4:00 p.m. E.T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As it has proposed for paragraph (j), as described above, the
Exchange also proposes to an [sic] include a provision stating that
each member or member organization involved in a transaction subject to
proposed paragraph (k) shall be notified as soon as practicable by the
Exchange, and that the party aggrieved by the action may appeal such
action in accordance with Exchange Rule 128--Equities (e)(2).
The Exchange notes that trading in a security is typically halted
immediately on the Exchange when the primary listing market issues a
trading halt in such security. However, in certain circumstances, due
to a technical issue related to the transmission or receipt of the
electronic message instituting such trading halt or due to other
extraordinary circumstances, executions can occur on the Exchange
following the declaration of such a trading halt. Similarly, although
rare, the Exchange has witnessed scenarios where due to extraordinary
circumstances a trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error and then re-instituted. It is these types of extraordinary
circumstances that the Exchange believes require certainty, and thus,
the Exchange believes it necessary to make clear that in such a
circumstance any transactions after a trading halt has been declared
will be nullified. In the event that a trading halt is declared as of a
future time (i.e., if the primary listing exchange declares a trading
halt as of a specific, future time in order to ensure coordination
amongst market participants), the Exchange would only nullify
transactions occurring after the time the trading halt was supposed to
be in place until the official end of the trading halt according to the
primary listing market.
The Exchange also notes that it currently has authority pursuant to
paragraph (f) of Rule 128--Equities to review and nullify transactions
that arise during a disruption or malfunction in the operation of any
electronic communications and trading facilities of the Exchange.
Further, paragraph (f) of Rule 128--Equities gives the Exchange
authority to use a lower numerical guideline than is set forth in
paragraph (c)(1) of the Rule when necessary to maintain a fair and
orderly market and to protect investors and the public interest. Thus,
while the Exchange believes that paragraph (f) does give the Exchange
the authority to nullify
[[Page 25957]]
transactions occurring when there is an Exchange technical issue
related to the transmission or receipt of the electronic message
instituting a trading halt or with respect to a technical issue related
to a prematurely lifted trading halt, the Exchange believes that
proposed paragraph (k) will provide appropriate authority for the
Exchange to nullify all such transactions whether or not the systems
problem occurs on the Exchange with respect to trading halts and
explicit clarity for market participants that such transactions will be
nullified. The Exchange believes that such authority is appropriate
because when relied upon the Exchange will be cancelling trades that
should not have occurred in the first instance. Finally, the Exchange
believes that such authority is appropriate because a trading halt
declared by the primary listing market is indicative of an issue with
respect to the applicable security or a larger set of securities.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to adopt a provision
granting the Exchange authority to nullify trades that occur if an
Event similar to the U.S. Bancorp Event occurs again. The Exchange
believes that this provision will allow the Exchange to act in the
event of such a severe valuation error, that such action would promote
just and equitable principles of trade and that the proposal is
therefore consistent with the Act. Similarly, the Exchange believes
that adding a provision allowing the Exchange to nullify transactions
that occur when a trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error and then reinstituted, and providing that in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of the Exchange, another market
center or responsible single plan processor in connection with the
transmittal or receipt of a trading halt the Exchange will nullify
trades occurring after a trading halt has been declared by the primary
listing market for the security will help to avoid confusion amongst
market participants, which is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and therefore consistent with the
Act. The Exchange further believes that the proposal is appropriate and
consistent with the Act because when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have occurred in the first instance.
The Exchange also believes that the proposal is appropriate because a
trading halt declared by the primary listing market is indicative of an
issue with respect to the applicable security or a larger set of
securities.
The Exchange believes that the proposal to update cross-references
in existing paragraph (i) of Rule 128--Equities to include new
paragraphs (j) and (k) is consistent with the Act because, as is the
case with respect to the current rule, this change makes clear that the
provisions of paragraph (i) do not alter the application of other
provisions of Rule 128--Equities.
The Exchange believes that the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA'') and other national securities exchanges are also
filing similar proposals to add provisions similar to the provisions
proposed by the Exchange above. Therefore, the proposal promotes just
and equitable principles of trade in that it promotes transparency and
uniformity across markets concerning treatment of transactions as
clearly erroneous. The proposed rule change would also help to assure
consistent results in handling erroneous trades across the U.S.
markets, thus furthering fair and orderly markets, the protection of
investors and the public interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates any competitive issues. To the contrary, as noted above, the
Exchange believes FINRA and other national securities exchanges are
also filing similar proposals, and thus, that the proposal will help to
ensure consistency across market centers.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37. 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 (https://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
[[Page 25958]]
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-NYSEMKT-2014-37 and should
be submitted on or before May 27, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10287 Filed 5-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P