Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 13 to Make the Add Liquidity Only Modifier Available for Additional Limit Orders and Make the Day Time-In-Force Condition Available for Intermarket Sweep Orders, 40183-40188 [2014-16191]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
Pilot Programs, the proposed rule
change will allow for further analysis of
the PIPP and COPIP Pilot Programs and
a determination of how the PIP and
COPIP Pilot Programs shall be
structured in the future. In doing so, the
proposed rule change will also serve to
promote regulatory clarity and
consistency, thereby reducing burdens
on the marketplace and facilitating
investor protection.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received from
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange has neither solicited
nor received comments on the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Because the foregoing proposed rule
change does not: (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant
burden on competition; and (iii) become
operative for 30 days from the date on
which it was filed, or such shorter time
as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 10 and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b–4
thereunder.11
A proposed rule change filed under
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 12 normally does not
become operative for 30 days after the
date of filing. However, pursuant to
Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 13 the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such
action is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. The
Exchange requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay. The Exchange noted that such
waiver will permit the PIP and COPIP
Pilot Programs to continue without
interruption.
The Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, as it
will allow the pilot program to continue
uninterrupted, thereby avoiding any
potential investor confusion that could
result from a temporary interruption in
the pilot program. Further, the
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b–
4(f)(6) requires the Exchange to give the
Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent
to file the proposed rule change along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time
as designated by the Commission. The Exchange
has met this requirement.
12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
13 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
Commission notes that, because the
filing was submitted for immediate
effectiveness on July 1, 2014, the fact
that the current rule provision does not
expire until July 18, 2014 will afford
interested parties the opportunity to
comment on the proposal before the
Exchange requires it to become
operative. For this reason, the
Commission designates the proposed
rule change to be operative on July 18,
2014.14
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.
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–
BOX–2014–19 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–BOX–2014–19. 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
14 For purposes only of waiving the operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed
rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40183
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–BOX–
2014–19 and should be submitted on or
before August 1, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.15
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–16188 Filed 7–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–72548; File No. SR–NYSE–
2014–32]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New
York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Rule 13 to Make the Add
Liquidity Only Modifier Available for
Additional Limit Orders and Make the
Day Time-In-Force Condition Available
for Intermarket Sweep Orders
July 7, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that on June 27,
2014, New York Stock Exchange LLC
(‘‘NYSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared
by the self-regulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
NYSE Rule 13 to make the Add
Liquidity Only (‘‘ALO’’) modifier
15 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
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
40184
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
available for additional limit orders and
make the day time-in-force condition
available for Intermarket Sweep Orders
(‘‘ISO’’). 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 Exchange is proposing to amend
NYSE Rule 13 to make the ALO
modifier available for additional limit
orders and make the day time-in-force
condition available for ISOs.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ALO Modifier
The Exchange currently offers an ALO
modifier for MPL Orders, which are
undisplayed limit orders that execute at
the mid-point of the protected best bid
or offer (‘‘PBBO’’).4 Pursuant to
paragraph (e) governing MPL Orders in
Rule 13, an MPL–ALO Order will not
execute upon arrival, even if
marketable. The Exchange proposes to
amend Rule 13 to make the ALO
modifier available for day limit orders.
The Exchange notes that all other equity
exchanges already make available addliquidity-only functionality for limit
orders.5
4 See Rule 13 (Mid-Point Passive Liquidity (MPL)
Order).
5 See BATS Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS’’) Rule
11.9(c)(6) (‘‘BATS Post Only Order’’); BATS YExchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS–Y’’) Rule 11.9(c)(6) (‘‘BATS
Post Only Order’’); Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘CHX’’) Article 20, Rule 4(b)(18) (‘‘Post Only’’);
EDGA Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGA’’) Rule 11.5(c)(5)
(‘‘Post Only Order’’); EDGX Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘EDGX’’) Rule 11.5(c)(5) (‘‘Post Only Order’’);
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’) Rule
4751(f)(10) (‘‘Post-Only Orders’’); NASDAQ OMX
BX LLC (‘‘Nasdaq OMX BX’’) Rule 4751(f)(10)
(‘‘Post-Only Orders’’); NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC
(‘‘Nasdaq OMX PSX’’) Rule 3301(f)(11) (‘‘Post-Only
Orders’’); and NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (‘‘NYSE
Arca Equities’’) Rule 7.31(nn).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
To effect this change, the Exchange
proposes to adopt a definition of ALO
Modifier in Rule 13. Proposed
paragraph (a) of this new definition
would describe how an ALO Modifier
impacts an order to which it is
appended, which is the same
functionality as the ALO modifier
currently available for MPL Orders.
Specifically, an order designated ALO
does not route and will not remove
liquidity from the Exchange’s book.
Proposed paragraph (a) of the new
definition would also state that ALO
modifiers are available for MPL Orders,
as they are today, and for day limit
orders.6 Because the behavior of MPL–
ALO Orders is currently described in
paragraph (e) for MPL Orders in Rule
13, the Exchange further proposes to
cross-reference that rule text in the new
definition for ALO Modifiers.
Accordingly, the remainder of the
proposed definition for ALO Modifier
would describe the behavior of limit
orders designated ALO.
The Exchange further proposes in
new paragraph (a) of the new definition
that limit orders designated ALO would
be eligible to participate in the open or
close, which would include Limit on
Open or Limit on Close Orders, but that
the ALO designation would be ignored.
The Exchange’s opening and closing
transactions are single-priced auction
transactions and the Exchange does not
consider either side of the transaction to
be either a ‘‘provider’’ or a ‘‘taker.’’
Accordingly, an ALO modifier is moot
for the open or close. In order to enable
as much interest as possible to
participate in the open or close, the
Exchange proposes to include any limit
orders designated ALO in these
auctions, but to ignore the ALO
designation.
To promote the display of liquidity,
the Exchange further proposes that a
limit order designated ALO must be
entered with a minimum of one
displayable round lot. Accordingly, the
ALO Modifier would be available for
Minimum Display Reserve Orders (Rule
13) and Minimum Display Reserve eQuotes (Rule 70(f)(1)). The Exchange
would reject incoming limit orders
designated ALO that do not meet the
minimum display requirement,
including odd-lot sized orders
designated ALO.
6 Pursuant to Rule 13, a ‘‘Limit, Limited Order, or
Limited Price Order’’ means an order to buy or sell
a stated amount of a security at a specified price,
or at a better price, if obtainable and a ‘‘Day Order’’
means an order to buy or sell which, if not
executed, expires at the end of the 9:30 a.m. to 4:00
p.m. trading session on the day on which it was
entered.
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Exchange proposes to specify in
paragraph (c) to the new rule text that
the following interest may not be
designated ALO: (1) DMM interest
entered via the Capital Commitment
Schedule pursuant to Rule 1000; (2) dQuotes, as defined in Rule 70.25; (3)
Sell ‘‘Plus’’–Buy ‘‘Minus’’ Orders as
defined in Rule 13; (4) Non-Display
Reserve Orders, as defined in Rule 13,
or Non-Display Reserve e-Quotes, as
defined in Rule 70(f)(ii); (5) Retail
Orders or Retail Price Improvement
Orders, as defined in Rule 107C; or (6)
High-priced securities, as defined in
Rule 1000(a)(vi).
To assure that a limit order designated
ALO meets its goal to be available on
the Exchange’s book to add liquidity to
arriving orders, the Exchange proposes
to re-price a limit order designated ALO
that upon arrival would be marketable
against Exchange interest or would lock
or cross a protected quotation in
violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation
NMS.7 Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to specify in paragraph (b) to
the rule text for ALO Modifiers that if,
at the time of entry, a limit order
designated ALO is marketable against
Exchange interest or would lock or cross
a protected quotation in violation of
Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS, the
order would be re-priced and displayed
one minimum price variation, as
defined in supplementary material .10
to Rule 62, below the best-priced sell
interest (for bids) or above the bestpriced buy interest (for offers). The
Exchange notes that re-pricing a limit
order designated ALO so that it would
not execute against resting Exchange
interest or lock or cross a protected
quotation is consistent with how other
equities markets currently operate.8
The Exchange proposes to use the
term ‘‘Exchange interest’’ in the
proposed rule text in order to include
both displayed interest and nondisplayed interest (i.e., Non-Displayed
Reserve Orders or odd-lot sized orders),
which may be priced better than the
displayed quote. In addition, the
Exchange proposes to add new
Supplementary Material .10 to Rule 13
to define new terms to capture the best
price among Exchange displayed and
non-displayed interest and the best
away protected quote. As proposed, the
term ‘‘best-priced sell interest’’ would
refer to the lowest-priced sell interest
against which incoming buy interest
7 17
CFR 242.610(d).
BATS Rules 11.9(c)(6) and 11.9(g)(2)(D);
BATS–Y Rules 11.9(c)(6) and 11.9(g)(2)(D); CHX
Article 20, Rule 4(b)(25 (‘‘CHX Only’’); EDGA Rule
11.5(c)(5); EDGX Rule 11.5(c)(5); Nasdaq Rule
4751(f)(10); and NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(mm)
(PNP Blind order combined with an ALO order).
8 See
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
would be required to execute with and/
or route to, including Exchange
displayed offers, Non-Display Reserve
Orders, Non-Display Reserve e-Quotes,
odd-lot sized sell interest, and protected
offers on away markets, but would not
include non-displayed interest that is
priced based on the PBBO, such as MPL
Orders or Retail Price Improvement
Orders (‘‘RPI’’). The term ‘‘best-priced
buy interest’’ would refer to the highestpriced buy interest against which
incoming sell interest would be required
to execute with and/or route to,
including Exchange displayed bids,
Non-Display Reserve Orders, NonDisplay Reserve e-Quotes, odd-lot sized
buy interest, and protected bids on away
markets, but would not include nondisplayed interest that is priced based
on the PBBO, such as MPL Orders or
RPIs. The Exchange believes it is
appropriate to exclude MPL Orders from
the definition of best-priced sell/buy
interest because the price at which an
MPL Order is eligible to execute
changes as the PBBO moves.
As further proposed, if the best-priced
sell interest is re-priced higher, an order
to buy designated ALO would be repriced and re-displayed higher, up to its
limit price. If the best-priced buy
interest is re-priced lower, an order to
sell designated ALO would be re-priced
and re-displayed lower, down to its
limit price. The Exchange believes that
re-pricing and re-displaying limit orders
designated ALO each time the bestpriced sell interest is priced higher (for
bids) or the best-priced buy interest is
priced lower (for offers) would ensure
that the order is displayed at its most
aggressive price without requiring the
order to either take liquidity or lock or
cross a protected quotation.
In addition, as proposed, a limit order
designated ALO would not be re-priced
if it is displayed at its limit price or if
the best-priced sell interest moves down
in price (for limit orders to buy
designated ALO) or if the best-priced
buy interest moves up in price (for limit
orders to sell designated ALO). Once an
order reaches its limit price, the
Exchange would no longer need to reprice it. The Exchange also would not
need to re-price a limit order designated
ALO if the best-priced sell interest
moves down (for bids) or the best-priced
buy interest moves up (for offers)
because in such scenario, the limit order
designated ALO would have been
displayed first at that price and the
opposite-side bid or offer would be
required to execute with or route to the
resting limit order designated ALO.
For example, assume the Exchange
best bid and offer (‘‘BBO’’) in XYZ is
10.05 × 10.11, the PBBO is 10.05 ×
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
10.09, and the Exchange has a nondisplayed odd-lot sell order priced at
10.07. In this scenario, the best-priced
sell interest, as defined in new
supplementary material .10 to Rule 13,
would be 10.07. Accordingly, if the
Exchange were to receive a limit order
to buy designated ALO at 10.12 (‘‘Order
A’’), the Exchange would re-price and
display Order A at $10.06, which is one
MPV below the 10.07 best-priced sell
interest.
Assume now that the resting odd-lot
order to sell on the Exchange is either
executed or cancelled, but the Exchange
best offer and PBO does not change.
Because the new best-priced sell interest
is the away-market PBO of 10.09, Order
A would re-price and re-display to
10.08, which is one MPV below the
updated best-priced sell interest.
Assume further that the market
updates so that both the Exchange’s
BBO and the PBBO update to 10.08–
10.14 and there is no undisplayed
interest to sell at the Exchange. Order A
would be re-priced and re-displayed at
its limit price of 10.12. At this point,
because it has been displayed at its limit
price, Order A would not be subject to
any further re-pricing. If the Exchange
were to receive incoming sell interest
marketable against Order A, Order A
would be available liquidity to execute
against that incoming sell interest.
As further proposed, a limit order
designated ALO would receive a new
time stamp each time it is re-priced and
re-displayed. The Exchange believes
that providing a new time stamp each
time a limit order designated ALO is repriced and re-displayed is consistent
with current Exchange rules that
provide that an order that is modified to
change the price of the order shall
receive a new time stamp.9
As noted above, limit orders
designated ALO would not be priced
based on resting opposite-side MPL
Orders, which are triggered to trade at
the midpoint of the PBBO by arriving
interest. To assure that limit orders
designated ALO would not trigger an
opposite-side MPL Order to trade, the
Exchange proposes to add new
paragraph (d) governing ALO Modifiers
in Rule 13 to specify that a limit order
designated ALO would not trigger a
contra-side MPL Order to trade. The
Exchange proposes to make a
conforming change to paragraph (a)
governing MPL Orders in Rule 13 to
specify that an incoming limit order
designated ALO would not interact with
an MPL Order.
For example, assume the Exchange
BBO and PBBO in XYZ is 10.05–10.09
PO 00000
9 See
Rule 72(xii).
Frm 00128
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40185
and there is a sell MPL Order eligible to
execute at the midpoint of the PBBO,
which would be 10.07. Assume further
that the Exchange also has a NonDisplay Reserve Order to sell priced at
10.08. In this scenario, an incoming buy
order designated ALO priced at 10.11
(‘‘Order B’’) would re-price and display
one MPV below the best-priced sell
interest, which is 10.08. Accordingly,
Order B would display at 10.07.
Although the new 10.07 bid is at the
same price that the resting MPL Order
could have executed when the PBBO
was 10.05 x 10.09, because the new bid
updates the PBBO to 10.07 x 10.09, the
MPL Order is now eligible to execute at
10.08 and no longer at 10.07.
Because pegging interest may be
designated ALO, the Exchange proposes
to amend the rules governing pegging
interest in Rule 13 to take into
consideration how an ALO Modifier
would function with pegging interest.
As proposed in paragraph (c) governing
pegging interest in Rule 13, pegging
interest to buy (sell) that is designated
ALO would not peg to a price that
would result in its executing before
displaying and shall instead peg one
minimum price variation below (above)
the undisplayed Exchange sell (buy)
interest against which it would have
otherwise executed. For example,
assume the Exchange BBO is 10.05 x
10.10 and the PBBO is 10.08 x 10.10 and
the Exchange has sell odd-lot interest
priced at 10.08. Assume further
incoming pegging interest to buy
designated ALO with a limit of 10.10
arrives (‘‘Order C’’). If Order C were not
designated ALO, it would peg to the
PBB of 10.08 and execute against the
resting odd-lot interest, and any
remainder would be displayed at 10.08.
As proposed, with the ALO designation,
to assure that Order C would not
execute on arrival, it would peg to a
price one MPV below the 10.08 odd-lot
sell interest and display at 10.07.
Day Time-in-Force Designation for ISOs
An ISO is currently defined in Rule
13 as a limit order designated for
automatic execution that meets the
following requirements: (i) It is
identified as an ISO in the manner
prescribed by the Exchange; and (ii)
simultaneously with the routing of an
ISO to the Exchange, one or more
additional limit orders, as necessary, are
routed to execute against the full
displayed size of any protected bid, in
the case of a limit order to sell, or the
full displayed size of any protected
offer, in the case of a limit order to buy
and these additional orders are
identified as ISOs. This definition is
based on the definition of an ISO set
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
40186
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
forth in Regulation NMS Rule
600(b)(30),10 and is consistent with
similar provisions on other exchanges.11
Currently, the Exchange immediately
and automatically executes an ISO upon
arrival and the portion not so executed
will be immediately and automatically
cancelled.12 Accordingly, the Exchange
treats all ISOs with an immediate-orcancel time-in-force condition.
Other equities exchanges do not limit
their ISOs to an immediate-or-cancel
time-in-force condition.13 Accordingly,
the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
13 governing ISOs to make available an
ISO Order with a day time-in-force
condition. As proposed, an ISO
designated day (‘‘Day ISO’’), if
marketable upon arrival, would be
immediately and automatically
executed against the displayed bid
(offer) up to its full size in accordance
with and to the extent provided by
Exchange Rules 1000–1004 and would
then sweep the Display Book,® as
provided in Rule 1000(d)(iii). This
proposed rule text is consistent with
current paragraph (b) governing ISOs in
Rule 13.
The Exchange further proposes to
provide that the remaining unexecuted
portion of a Day ISO would be posted
to the Exchange’s book at its limit price
and may lock or cross a protected
quotation that was displayed at the time
of arrival of the Day ISO. The Exchange
believes this proposed rule text is
consistent with Regulation NMS and the
rules of other exchanges because the
member organization that sent the Day
ISO to the Exchange has an existing
obligation (pursuant to paragraph (a)(ii)
governing ISOs in Rule 13) to
simultaneously route ISOs to trade with
the full size of protected quotations on
10 17
CFR 242.600(b)(30).
BATS Rule 11.9(d); BATS–Y Rule 11.9(d);
CHX Article 20, Rule 4(b)(1) and (15); EDGA Rule
11.5(d); EDGX Rule 11.5(d); Nasdaq Rule 4751(f)(6);
Nasdaq OMX BX Rule 4751(f)(6); Nasdaq OMX PSX
Rule 3301(f)(6); and NYSE Arca Equities Rule
7.31(jj).
12 See paragraph (b) governing ISOs in Rule 13.
13 The rules of Nasdaq, BATS, BATS–Y, EDGA,
and EDGX do not expressly provide that their
versions of ISOs can be day, however, nor do their
rules prohibit this functionality. In practice,
Nasdaq, BATS, BATS–Y EDGA, and EDGX all
accept ISOs with a day time-in-force condition. In
addition, NYSE Arca Equities expressly permits an
ISO with a day time-in-force condition, which is
entered as a Post No Preference (‘‘PNP’’) Order. See,
e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(w) (PNP Order
designated ISO does not route and may lock and
cross and trade through protected quotations). See
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34–54549
(Sept. 29, 2006), 71 FR 59179 (Oct. 6, 2006) (SR–
NYSEArca–2006–59) (Order approving NYSE Arca
Equities’ proposal to adopt ISO PNP Orders, which
post to NYSE’s Arca book and may lock or cross
protected quotations). See also CHX Article 20,
Rules 4(b)(1) and (23).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
11 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
other markets.14 Accordingly, the
Exchange would consider any protected
quotes that existed at the time of arrival
of the Day ISO as cleared when it posts
any remainder of a Day ISO to the
Exchange’s book.15
The Exchange further proposes that a
Day ISO must be entered with a
minimum of one displayable round lot.
Accordingly, similar to the proposed
ALO Modifier for limit orders, Day ISOs
would be available for Minimum
Display Reserve Orders and Minimum
Display Reserve e-Quotes. The Exchange
also proposes that a Day ISO may also
be designated ALO.
Because Day ISOs would not route,
which is similar to the proposed ALO
Modifier functionality, the Exchange
proposes to re-price and re-display
resting Day ISOs in a manner consistent
with the proposed re-pricing and redisplaying functionality described
above for limit orders designated ALO.
As proposed, if, after posting, a Day ISO
would lock or cross a protected
quotation, the Exchange would re-price
and re-display the order consistent with
proposed paragraph (b) for ALO
Modifiers in Rule 13. Accordingly, any
such re-pricing would be based on the
best-priced sell interest (for bids) or
best-priced buy interest (for offers), as
proposed in new Supplementary
Material .10 to Rule 13.
The Exchange further proposes that a
Day ISO designated ALO that is
marketable upon arrival would follow a
combination of both the Day ISO and
ALO rules. Specifically, the Day ISO
element of this order would be
permitted to trade through away market
protected quotations on arrival and lock
or cross a protected quotation. In
addition, the ALO element would
require that this order not result in
taking liquidity. Accordingly, the
Exchange proposes that if a Day ISO
designated ALO is marketable against
Exchange interest on arrival, it would be
re-priced and displayed one minimum
price variation, as defined in
supplementary material .10 to Rule 62,
below the Exchange’s best-priced
displayed or non-displayed non-MPL
Order sell interest (for bids) or above the
best-priced Exchange displayed or nondisplayed non-MPL Order buy interest
(for offers). Any re-pricing and display
on arrival would ignore away-market
protected quotations. As further
proposed, once a Day ISO designated
ALO has been posted to the Exchange’s
book, to assure that any subsequent repricing and re-displaying of a Day ISO
designated ALO does not lock or cross
PO 00000
14 See
15 See
supra n. 11.
supra n. 13.
Frm 00129
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a protected quotation, the Exchange
proposes to follow the re-pricing rule set
forth in proposed paragraph (b) for ALO
Modifiers in this Rule. Therefore, any
subsequent re-pricing would be based
on the best-priced sell interest (for bids)
or best-priced buy interest (for offers), as
proposed in new Supplementary
Material .10 to Rule 13.
For example, assume the BBO in XYZ
is 10.05 x 10.11, the PBBO is 10.05 x
10.09, and the Exchange has a resting
odd-lot order to sell priced at 10.07. In
this scenario, the best-priced sell
interest, as defined in new
supplementary material .10 to Rule 13,
would be 10.07. If the Exchange were to
receive a Day ISO to buy at 10.12
(‘‘Order D’’), the Exchange would
execute Order D against the resting oddlot order to sell at 10.07, ignore the best
protected offer of 10.09, and execute
against the Exchange’s best offer of
10.11. If there were any remaining
quantity of Order D, it would post at
10.12. Although this 10.12 bid would
cross the 10.09 PBO, the Exchange
would consider that 10.09 PBO cleared
pursuant to the existing obligation for
the entering firm to have sent an ISO to
trade with the full size of that PBO
simultaneous with entering Order D at
the Exchange.
Assume instead that the Day ISO to
buy at 10.12 is also designated ALO
(‘‘Order E’’). In this scenario, upon
arrival, Order E would be re-priced and
displayed at 10.06, which is one MPV
below the Exchange’s best priced nondisplayed interest. Assume instead that
the Exchange receives a Day ISO
designated ALO to buy at 10.12 (‘‘Order
F’’), but that when Order F arrives, the
BBO is 10.05 x 10.11, the PBBO is 10.05
× 10.09, and the Exchange has no nondisplayed sell interest. In this scenario,
the Exchange would ignore the 10.09
PBO and Order F would be re-priced
and displayed at 10.10, which is one
MPV below the Exchange’s best-priced
displayed offer of 10.11. Assume the
market updates and the BBO becomes
10.10 x 10.14 and the PBBO is 10.10 x
10.12. Order F would re-price and redisplay one MPV below the best-priced
sell interest, which here would be the
10.12 PBO. Accordingly, Order F would
re-price and re-display at 10.11.
The Exchange also proposes to add
new paragraph (e) governing ISOs in
Rule 13 to specify that IOC ISOs and
Day ISOs are not available for Sell
‘‘Plus’’—Buy ‘‘Minus’’ Orders or NonDisplay Reserve Orders or Non-Display
Reserve e-Quotes, and that IOC ISOs are
not available for high-priced securities,
as defined in Rule 1000(a)(vi).
Finally, the Exchange proposes nonsubstantive changes to paragraph (a)
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
defining ISOs to provide more detail
regarding the current operation of ISOs,
consistent with existing NYSE Arca
Rule 7.31(jj). As proposed, the Exchange
would define an ISO as a limit order
designated for automatic execution in a
particular security that is never routed
to an away market, may trade through
a protected bid or offer, and will not be
rejected or cancelled if it would lock,
cross, or be marketable against an away
market provided that it meets the
requirements described in the rule. The
Exchange also proposes to make nonsubstantive, technical amendments to
define the term ‘‘Intermarket Sweep
Order’’ as ‘‘ISO’’ and change references
from ‘‘Intermarket Sweep Order’’ to
‘‘ISO.’’ The Exchange further proposes a
non-substantive, technical change to
define the existing form of an ISO as an
‘‘ISO designated IOC (‘IOC ISO’).’’
Because of the technology changes
associated with this proposed rule
change, the Exchange proposes to
announce the implementation date of
ALO Modifiers for day limit orders and
Day ISOs by Trader Update.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b) 16 of the
Act, in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),17 in
particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade, remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
The Exchange believes that the
proposal is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system because
the expansion of the availability of ALO
Modifiers for day limit orders will
increase competition, not only among
market participants, but also among
exchanges offering similar functionality.
Specifically, all other equity exchanges
currently enable member firms to enter
limit orders that would only post on the
designated exchange and not route.18
The Exchange proposes to expand its
existing ALO functionality, consistent
with other markets, to also make it
available for limit orders. The Exchange
believes that requiring limit orders
designated ALO to be entered with a
minimum display quantity will help
perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market by encouraging additional
displayed liquidity on a public
16 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
18 See supra n. 5.
17 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
registered exchange, and therefore
promote price discovery. The Exchange
further believes that the proposed repricing and re-displaying of a limit
order designated ALO removes
impediments to and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market
because it assures that such an order
would meet its intended goal to be
available on the Exchange’s book as
displayed liquidity without locking or
crossing a protected quotation in
violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation
NMS.19 The Exchange further notes that
the proposed re-pricing and redisplaying of limit orders designated
ALO is consistent with how other
exchanges currently operate.20
The Exchange also believes that
adding a day time-in-force condition for
ISOs, an existing order type on the
Exchange, is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and national market system because the
proposed expansion is consistent with
the definition of an ISO under
Regulation NMS 21 and with the
operation of how ISOs may be entered
on other exchanges, including that it
may trade through protected quotations
on arrival and display on the Exchange
at a price that may lock or cross a
protected quotation.22 The Exchange
further believes that any subsequent repricing and re-displaying of a Day ISO
after it has posted on the Book will meet
the entering firm’s expectations that a
Day ISO order not route, while at the
same time ensure that it would not lock
or cross a protected quotation in
violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation
NMS.23
(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change is pro-competitive because
it expands the functionality associated
CFR 242.610(d).
supra n. 8.
21 17 CFR 242.600(b)(3) and supra n. 11.
22 See supra n. 13, 71 FR at 59181 (‘‘If an ISO is
not marked as ‘immediate or cancel,’ any remaining
balance in the order would be displayed by the
Exchange without regard to whether that display
would lock or cross another market center, only if
the participant routing the order has already sent
an order to satisfy the quotations of other markets
so that the display of the order would not lock or
cross those markets.’’) and at 59182 (approving,
among other things, NYSE Arca’s proposed ISO
order type and finding that it is consistent with the
Act).
23 17 CFR 242.610(d).
PO 00000
19 17
20 See
Frm 00130
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40187
with existing NYSE order types to
conform to how these order types
already operate on other exchanges,
thereby harmonizing the forms of order
types available for market participants
that trade on equity exchanges.24
(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
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
such 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–
NYSE–2014–32 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–NYSE–2014–32. 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
24 See
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
supra, nn. 5, 11, and 13.
11JYN1
40188
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Notices
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 NYSE’s
principal office and on its Internet Web
site at www.nyse.com. 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–NYSE–
2014–32 and should be submitted on or
before August 1, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.25
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–16191 Filed 7–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN
COMMISSION
Public Hearing; Susquehanna River
Basin Commission
Susquehanna River Basin
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Susquehanna River Basin
Commission will hold a public hearing
on August 7, 2014, in Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania. At this public hearing,
the Commission will hear testimony on
the projects listed in the Supplementary
Information section of this notice. Such
projects are intended to be scheduled
for Commission action at its next
business meeting, tentatively scheduled
for September 4, 2014, which will be
noticed separately. The public should
take note that this public hearing will be
the only opportunity to offer oral
comment to the Commission for the
listed projects. The deadline for the
submission of written comments is
August 18, 2014.
DATES: The public hearing will convene
on August 7, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. The
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
25 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:23 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
public hearing will end at 5:00 p.m. or
at the conclusion of public testimony,
whichever is sooner. The deadline for
the submission of written comments is
August 18, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be
conducted at the Pennsylvania State
Capitol, Room 8E–B, East Wing,
Commonwealth Avenue, Harrisburg, Pa.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jason Oyler, Regulatory Counsel,
telephone: (717) 238–0423, ext. 1312;
fax: (717) 238–2436. Information
concerning the applications for these
projects is available at the SRBC Water
Resource Portal at www.srbc.net/wrp.
Materials and supporting documents are
available to inspect and copy in
accordance with the Commission’s
Access to Records Policy at
www.srbc.net/pubinfo/docs/200902%20Access%20to%20Records
%20Policy%209-10-09.PDF.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
public hearing will cover the following
projects:
Public Hearing—Projects Scheduled for
Action
1. Project Sponsor and Facility: City
of Aberdeen, Harford County, Md.
Modification to extend the approval
term of the surface water withdrawal
approval (Docket No. 20021210) to be
coterminous with the revised Maryland
Department of the Environment State
Water Appropriation and Use Permit for
the Aberdeen Proving Ground-Aberdeen
Area.
2. Project Sponsor and Facility: City
of Aberdeen, Harford County, Md.
Modification to extend the approval
term of the consumptive water use
approval (Docket No. 20021210) to be
coterminous with the revised Maryland
Department of the Environment State
Water Appropriation and Use Permit for
the Aberdeen Proving Ground-Aberdeen
Area.
3. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC (Lycoming
Creek), McIntyre Township, Lycoming
County, Pa. Application for surface
water withdrawal of up to 0.499 mgd
(peak day).
4. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC (Pine
Creek), McHenry Township, Lycoming
County, Pa. Application for renewal of
surface water withdrawal of up to 0.499
mgd (peak day) (Docket No. 20100902).
5. Project Sponsor and Facility: Cabot
Oil & Gas Corporation (Tunkhannock
Creek), Nicholson Township, Wyoming
County, Pa. Application for surface
water withdrawal of up to 2.000 mgd
(peak day).
6. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Carrizo (Marcellus), LLC (East Branch
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Wyalusing Creek), Jessup Township,
Susquehanna County, Pa. Application
for renewal of surface water withdrawal
of up to 0.720 mgd (peak day) (Docket
No. 20100601).
7. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Heidelberg Township Municipal
Authority, Heidelberg Township,
Lebanon County, Pa. Application for
renewal of groundwater withdrawal of
up to 0.115 mgd (30-day average) from
Well 5 (Docket No. 19820602).
8. Project Sponsor and Facility: IBM
Corporation, Village of Owego, Tioga
County, N.Y. Application for
groundwater withdrawal of up to 0.002
mgd (30-day average) from Well 415.
9. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Inflection Energy (PA) LLC (Loyalsock
Creek), Upper Fairfield Township,
Lycoming County, Pa. Application for
surface water withdrawal of up to 1.700
mgd (peak day).
10. Project Sponsor and Facility: Jay
Township Water Authority, Jay
Township, Elk County, Pa. Application
for groundwater withdrawal of up to
0.265 mgd (30-day average) from
Byrnedale Well #1.
11. Project Sponsor: Lancaster County
Solid Waste Management Authority.
Project Facility: Susquehanna Resource
Management Complex, City of
Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pa.
Application for consumptive water use
of up to 0.700 mgd (peak day).
12. Project Sponsor: Leola Sewer
Authority. Project Facility: Upper
Leacock Township, Lancaster County,
Pa. Application for groundwater
withdrawal of up to 0.075 mgd (30-day
average) from Well 13.
13. Project Sponsor and Facility: LHP
Management, LLC (Muncy Creek),
Muncy Creek Township, Lycoming
County, Pa. Application for renewal of
surface water withdrawal of up to 0.999
mgd (peak day) (Docket No. 20120607).
14. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Millersville University of Pennsylvania,
Millersville Borough, Lancaster County,
Pa. Application for renewal of
consumptive water use of up to 0.253
mgd (peak day) (Docket No. 19820105).
15. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Millersville University of Pennsylvania,
Millersville Borough, Lancaster County,
Pa. Application for renewal and
modification to increase groundwater
withdrawal by an additional 0.055 mgd
(30-day average) from Well 1, for a total
of up to 0.320 mgd (30-day average)
from Well 1 (Docket No. 19820105).
16. Project Sponsor and Facility:
Newport Borough Water Authority,
Oliver and Howe Townships and
Newport Borough, Perry County, Pa.
Application for groundwater
E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM
11JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40183-40188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16191]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-72548; File No. SR-NYSE-2014-32]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 13 to Make the
Add Liquidity Only Modifier Available for Additional Limit Orders and
Make the Day Time-In-Force Condition Available for Intermarket Sweep
Orders
July 7, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on June 27, 2014, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the 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 amend NYSE Rule 13 to make the Add
Liquidity Only (``ALO'') modifier
[[Page 40184]]
available for additional limit orders and make the day time-in-force
condition available for Intermarket Sweep Orders (``ISO''). 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 Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Rule 13 to make the ALO
modifier available for additional limit orders and make the day time-
in-force condition available for ISOs.
ALO Modifier
The Exchange currently offers an ALO modifier for MPL Orders, which
are undisplayed limit orders that execute at the mid-point of the
protected best bid or offer (``PBBO'').\4\ Pursuant to paragraph (e)
governing MPL Orders in Rule 13, an MPL-ALO Order will not execute upon
arrival, even if marketable. The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 13 to
make the ALO modifier available for day limit orders. The Exchange
notes that all other equity exchanges already make available add-
liquidity-only functionality for limit orders.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Rule 13 (Mid-Point Passive Liquidity (MPL) Order).
\5\ See BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'') Rule 11.9(c)(6) (``BATS
Post Only Order''); BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (``BATS-Y'') Rule
11.9(c)(6) (``BATS Post Only Order''); Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``CHX'') Article 20, Rule 4(b)(18) (``Post Only''); EDGA Exchange,
Inc. (``EDGA'') Rule 11.5(c)(5) (``Post Only Order''); EDGX
Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'') Rule 11.5(c)(5) (``Post Only Order'');
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') Rule 4751(f)(10) (``Post-Only
Orders''); NASDAQ OMX BX LLC (``Nasdaq OMX BX'') Rule 4751(f)(10)
(``Post-Only Orders''); NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Nasdaq OMX PSX'')
Rule 3301(f)(11) (``Post-Only Orders''); and NYSE Arca Equities,
Inc. (``NYSE Arca Equities'') Rule 7.31(nn).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to adopt a definition
of ALO Modifier in Rule 13. Proposed paragraph (a) of this new
definition would describe how an ALO Modifier impacts an order to which
it is appended, which is the same functionality as the ALO modifier
currently available for MPL Orders. Specifically, an order designated
ALO does not route and will not remove liquidity from the Exchange's
book. Proposed paragraph (a) of the new definition would also state
that ALO modifiers are available for MPL Orders, as they are today, and
for day limit orders.\6\ Because the behavior of MPL-ALO Orders is
currently described in paragraph (e) for MPL Orders in Rule 13, the
Exchange further proposes to cross-reference that rule text in the new
definition for ALO Modifiers. Accordingly, the remainder of the
proposed definition for ALO Modifier would describe the behavior of
limit orders designated ALO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Pursuant to Rule 13, a ``Limit, Limited Order, or Limited
Price Order'' means an order to buy or sell a stated amount of a
security at a specified price, or at a better price, if obtainable
and a ``Day Order'' means an order to buy or sell which, if not
executed, expires at the end of the 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. trading
session on the day on which it was entered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further proposes in new paragraph (a) of the new
definition that limit orders designated ALO would be eligible to
participate in the open or close, which would include Limit on Open or
Limit on Close Orders, but that the ALO designation would be ignored.
The Exchange's opening and closing transactions are single-priced
auction transactions and the Exchange does not consider either side of
the transaction to be either a ``provider'' or a ``taker.''
Accordingly, an ALO modifier is moot for the open or close. In order to
enable as much interest as possible to participate in the open or
close, the Exchange proposes to include any limit orders designated ALO
in these auctions, but to ignore the ALO designation.
To promote the display of liquidity, the Exchange further proposes
that a limit order designated ALO must be entered with a minimum of one
displayable round lot. Accordingly, the ALO Modifier would be available
for Minimum Display Reserve Orders (Rule 13) and Minimum Display
Reserve e-Quotes (Rule 70(f)(1)). The Exchange would reject incoming
limit orders designated ALO that do not meet the minimum display
requirement, including odd-lot sized orders designated ALO.
The Exchange proposes to specify in paragraph (c) to the new rule
text that the following interest may not be designated ALO: (1) DMM
interest entered via the Capital Commitment Schedule pursuant to Rule
1000; (2) d-Quotes, as defined in Rule 70.25; (3) Sell ``Plus''-Buy
``Minus'' Orders as defined in Rule 13; (4) Non-Display Reserve Orders,
as defined in Rule 13, or Non-Display Reserve e-Quotes, as defined in
Rule 70(f)(ii); (5) Retail Orders or Retail Price Improvement Orders,
as defined in Rule 107C; or (6) High-priced securities, as defined in
Rule 1000(a)(vi).
To assure that a limit order designated ALO meets its goal to be
available on the Exchange's book to add liquidity to arriving orders,
the Exchange proposes to re-price a limit order designated ALO that
upon arrival would be marketable against Exchange interest or would
lock or cross a protected quotation in violation of Rule 610(d) of
Regulation NMS.\7\ Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to specify in
paragraph (b) to the rule text for ALO Modifiers that if, at the time
of entry, a limit order designated ALO is marketable against Exchange
interest or would lock or cross a protected quotation in violation of
Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS, the order would be re-priced and
displayed one minimum price variation, as defined in supplementary
material .10 to Rule 62, below the best-priced sell interest (for bids)
or above the best-priced buy interest (for offers). The Exchange notes
that re-pricing a limit order designated ALO so that it would not
execute against resting Exchange interest or lock or cross a protected
quotation is consistent with how other equities markets currently
operate.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
\8\ See BATS Rules 11.9(c)(6) and 11.9(g)(2)(D); BATS-Y Rules
11.9(c)(6) and 11.9(g)(2)(D); CHX Article 20, Rule 4(b)(25 (``CHX
Only''); EDGA Rule 11.5(c)(5); EDGX Rule 11.5(c)(5); Nasdaq Rule
4751(f)(10); and NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(mm) (PNP Blind order
combined with an ALO order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to use the term ``Exchange interest'' in the
proposed rule text in order to include both displayed interest and non-
displayed interest (i.e., Non-Displayed Reserve Orders or odd-lot sized
orders), which may be priced better than the displayed quote. In
addition, the Exchange proposes to add new Supplementary Material .10
to Rule 13 to define new terms to capture the best price among Exchange
displayed and non-displayed interest and the best away protected quote.
As proposed, the term ``best-priced sell interest'' would refer to the
lowest-priced sell interest against which incoming buy interest
[[Page 40185]]
would be required to execute with and/or route to, including Exchange
displayed offers, Non-Display Reserve Orders, Non-Display Reserve e-
Quotes, odd-lot sized sell interest, and protected offers on away
markets, but would not include non-displayed interest that is priced
based on the PBBO, such as MPL Orders or Retail Price Improvement
Orders (``RPI''). The term ``best-priced buy interest'' would refer to
the highest-priced buy interest against which incoming sell interest
would be required to execute with and/or route to, including Exchange
displayed bids, Non-Display Reserve Orders, Non-Display Reserve e-
Quotes, odd-lot sized buy interest, and protected bids on away markets,
but would not include non-displayed interest that is priced based on
the PBBO, such as MPL Orders or RPIs. The Exchange believes it is
appropriate to exclude MPL Orders from the definition of best-priced
sell/buy interest because the price at which an MPL Order is eligible
to execute changes as the PBBO moves.
As further proposed, if the best-priced sell interest is re-priced
higher, an order to buy designated ALO would be re-priced and re-
displayed higher, up to its limit price. If the best-priced buy
interest is re-priced lower, an order to sell designated ALO would be
re-priced and re-displayed lower, down to its limit price. The Exchange
believes that re-pricing and re-displaying limit orders designated ALO
each time the best-priced sell interest is priced higher (for bids) or
the best-priced buy interest is priced lower (for offers) would ensure
that the order is displayed at its most aggressive price without
requiring the order to either take liquidity or lock or cross a
protected quotation.
In addition, as proposed, a limit order designated ALO would not be
re-priced if it is displayed at its limit price or if the best-priced
sell interest moves down in price (for limit orders to buy designated
ALO) or if the best-priced buy interest moves up in price (for limit
orders to sell designated ALO). Once an order reaches its limit price,
the Exchange would no longer need to re-price it. The Exchange also
would not need to re-price a limit order designated ALO if the best-
priced sell interest moves down (for bids) or the best-priced buy
interest moves up (for offers) because in such scenario, the limit
order designated ALO would have been displayed first at that price and
the opposite-side bid or offer would be required to execute with or
route to the resting limit order designated ALO.
For example, assume the Exchange best bid and offer (``BBO'') in
XYZ is 10.05 x 10.11, the PBBO is 10.05 x 10.09, and the Exchange has a
non-displayed odd-lot sell order priced at 10.07. In this scenario, the
best-priced sell interest, as defined in new supplementary material .10
to Rule 13, would be 10.07. Accordingly, if the Exchange were to
receive a limit order to buy designated ALO at 10.12 (``Order A''), the
Exchange would re-price and display Order A at $10.06, which is one MPV
below the 10.07 best-priced sell interest.
Assume now that the resting odd-lot order to sell on the Exchange
is either executed or cancelled, but the Exchange best offer and PBO
does not change. Because the new best-priced sell interest is the away-
market PBO of 10.09, Order A would re-price and re-display to 10.08,
which is one MPV below the updated best-priced sell interest.
Assume further that the market updates so that both the Exchange's
BBO and the PBBO update to 10.08-10.14 and there is no undisplayed
interest to sell at the Exchange. Order A would be re-priced and re-
displayed at its limit price of 10.12. At this point, because it has
been displayed at its limit price, Order A would not be subject to any
further re-pricing. If the Exchange were to receive incoming sell
interest marketable against Order A, Order A would be available
liquidity to execute against that incoming sell interest.
As further proposed, a limit order designated ALO would receive a
new time stamp each time it is re-priced and re-displayed. The Exchange
believes that providing a new time stamp each time a limit order
designated ALO is re-priced and re-displayed is consistent with current
Exchange rules that provide that an order that is modified to change
the price of the order shall receive a new time stamp.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Rule 72(xii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, limit orders designated ALO would not be priced
based on resting opposite-side MPL Orders, which are triggered to trade
at the midpoint of the PBBO by arriving interest. To assure that limit
orders designated ALO would not trigger an opposite-side MPL Order to
trade, the Exchange proposes to add new paragraph (d) governing ALO
Modifiers in Rule 13 to specify that a limit order designated ALO would
not trigger a contra-side MPL Order to trade. The Exchange proposes to
make a conforming change to paragraph (a) governing MPL Orders in Rule
13 to specify that an incoming limit order designated ALO would not
interact with an MPL Order.
For example, assume the Exchange BBO and PBBO in XYZ is 10.05-10.09
and there is a sell MPL Order eligible to execute at the midpoint of
the PBBO, which would be 10.07. Assume further that the Exchange also
has a Non-Display Reserve Order to sell priced at 10.08. In this
scenario, an incoming buy order designated ALO priced at 10.11 (``Order
B'') would re-price and display one MPV below the best-priced sell
interest, which is 10.08. Accordingly, Order B would display at 10.07.
Although the new 10.07 bid is at the same price that the resting MPL
Order could have executed when the PBBO was 10.05 x 10.09, because the
new bid updates the PBBO to 10.07 x 10.09, the MPL Order is now
eligible to execute at 10.08 and no longer at 10.07.
Because pegging interest may be designated ALO, the Exchange
proposes to amend the rules governing pegging interest in Rule 13 to
take into consideration how an ALO Modifier would function with pegging
interest. As proposed in paragraph (c) governing pegging interest in
Rule 13, pegging interest to buy (sell) that is designated ALO would
not peg to a price that would result in its executing before displaying
and shall instead peg one minimum price variation below (above) the
undisplayed Exchange sell (buy) interest against which it would have
otherwise executed. For example, assume the Exchange BBO is 10.05 x
10.10 and the PBBO is 10.08 x 10.10 and the Exchange has sell odd-lot
interest priced at 10.08. Assume further incoming pegging interest to
buy designated ALO with a limit of 10.10 arrives (``Order C''). If
Order C were not designated ALO, it would peg to the PBB of 10.08 and
execute against the resting odd-lot interest, and any remainder would
be displayed at 10.08. As proposed, with the ALO designation, to assure
that Order C would not execute on arrival, it would peg to a price one
MPV below the 10.08 odd-lot sell interest and display at 10.07.
Day Time-in-Force Designation for ISOs
An ISO is currently defined in Rule 13 as a limit order designated
for automatic execution that meets the following requirements: (i) It
is identified as an ISO in the manner prescribed by the Exchange; and
(ii) simultaneously with the routing of an ISO to the Exchange, one or
more additional limit orders, as necessary, are routed to execute
against the full displayed size of any protected bid, in the case of a
limit order to sell, or the full displayed size of any protected offer,
in the case of a limit order to buy and these additional orders are
identified as ISOs. This definition is based on the definition of an
ISO set
[[Page 40186]]
forth in Regulation NMS Rule 600(b)(30),\10\ and is consistent with
similar provisions on other exchanges.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 242.600(b)(30).
\11\ See BATS Rule 11.9(d); BATS-Y Rule 11.9(d); CHX Article 20,
Rule 4(b)(1) and (15); EDGA Rule 11.5(d); EDGX Rule 11.5(d); Nasdaq
Rule 4751(f)(6); Nasdaq OMX BX Rule 4751(f)(6); Nasdaq OMX PSX Rule
3301(f)(6); and NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(jj).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the Exchange immediately and automatically executes an
ISO upon arrival and the portion not so executed will be immediately
and automatically cancelled.\12\ Accordingly, the Exchange treats all
ISOs with an immediate-or-cancel time-in-force condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See paragraph (b) governing ISOs in Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other equities exchanges do not limit their ISOs to an immediate-
or-cancel time-in-force condition.\13\ Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 13 governing ISOs to make available an ISO Order
with a day time-in-force condition. As proposed, an ISO designated day
(``Day ISO''), if marketable upon arrival, would be immediately and
automatically executed against the displayed bid (offer) up to its full
size in accordance with and to the extent provided by Exchange Rules
1000-1004 and would then sweep the Display Book,[supreg] as provided in
Rule 1000(d)(iii). This proposed rule text is consistent with current
paragraph (b) governing ISOs in Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The rules of Nasdaq, BATS, BATS-Y, EDGA, and EDGX do not
expressly provide that their versions of ISOs can be day, however,
nor do their rules prohibit this functionality. In practice, Nasdaq,
BATS, BATS-Y EDGA, and EDGX all accept ISOs with a day time-in-force
condition. In addition, NYSE Arca Equities expressly permits an ISO
with a day time-in-force condition, which is entered as a Post No
Preference (``PNP'') Order. See, e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule
7.31(w) (PNP Order designated ISO does not route and may lock and
cross and trade through protected quotations). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 34-54549 (Sept. 29, 2006), 71 FR 59179
(Oct. 6, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-59) (Order approving NYSE Arca
Equities' proposal to adopt ISO PNP Orders, which post to NYSE's
Arca book and may lock or cross protected quotations). See also CHX
Article 20, Rules 4(b)(1) and (23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further proposes to provide that the remaining
unexecuted portion of a Day ISO would be posted to the Exchange's book
at its limit price and may lock or cross a protected quotation that was
displayed at the time of arrival of the Day ISO. The Exchange believes
this proposed rule text is consistent with Regulation NMS and the rules
of other exchanges because the member organization that sent the Day
ISO to the Exchange has an existing obligation (pursuant to paragraph
(a)(ii) governing ISOs in Rule 13) to simultaneously route ISOs to
trade with the full size of protected quotations on other markets.\14\
Accordingly, the Exchange would consider any protected quotes that
existed at the time of arrival of the Day ISO as cleared when it posts
any remainder of a Day ISO to the Exchange's book.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See supra n. 11.
\15\ See supra n. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further proposes that a Day ISO must be entered with a
minimum of one displayable round lot. Accordingly, similar to the
proposed ALO Modifier for limit orders, Day ISOs would be available for
Minimum Display Reserve Orders and Minimum Display Reserve e-Quotes.
The Exchange also proposes that a Day ISO may also be designated ALO.
Because Day ISOs would not route, which is similar to the proposed
ALO Modifier functionality, the Exchange proposes to re-price and re-
display resting Day ISOs in a manner consistent with the proposed re-
pricing and re-displaying functionality described above for limit
orders designated ALO. As proposed, if, after posting, a Day ISO would
lock or cross a protected quotation, the Exchange would re-price and
re-display the order consistent with proposed paragraph (b) for ALO
Modifiers in Rule 13. Accordingly, any such re-pricing would be based
on the best-priced sell interest (for bids) or best-priced buy interest
(for offers), as proposed in new Supplementary Material .10 to Rule 13.
The Exchange further proposes that a Day ISO designated ALO that is
marketable upon arrival would follow a combination of both the Day ISO
and ALO rules. Specifically, the Day ISO element of this order would be
permitted to trade through away market protected quotations on arrival
and lock or cross a protected quotation. In addition, the ALO element
would require that this order not result in taking liquidity.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes that if a Day ISO designated ALO is
marketable against Exchange interest on arrival, it would be re-priced
and displayed one minimum price variation, as defined in supplementary
material .10 to Rule 62, below the Exchange's best-priced displayed or
non-displayed non-MPL Order sell interest (for bids) or above the best-
priced Exchange displayed or non-displayed non-MPL Order buy interest
(for offers). Any re-pricing and display on arrival would ignore away-
market protected quotations. As further proposed, once a Day ISO
designated ALO has been posted to the Exchange's book, to assure that
any subsequent re-pricing and re-displaying of a Day ISO designated ALO
does not lock or cross a protected quotation, the Exchange proposes to
follow the re-pricing rule set forth in proposed paragraph (b) for ALO
Modifiers in this Rule. Therefore, any subsequent re-pricing would be
based on the best-priced sell interest (for bids) or best-priced buy
interest (for offers), as proposed in new Supplementary Material .10 to
Rule 13.
For example, assume the BBO in XYZ is 10.05 x 10.11, the PBBO is
10.05 x 10.09, and the Exchange has a resting odd-lot order to sell
priced at 10.07. In this scenario, the best-priced sell interest, as
defined in new supplementary material .10 to Rule 13, would be 10.07.
If the Exchange were to receive a Day ISO to buy at 10.12 (``Order
D''), the Exchange would execute Order D against the resting odd-lot
order to sell at 10.07, ignore the best protected offer of 10.09, and
execute against the Exchange's best offer of 10.11. If there were any
remaining quantity of Order D, it would post at 10.12. Although this
10.12 bid would cross the 10.09 PBO, the Exchange would consider that
10.09 PBO cleared pursuant to the existing obligation for the entering
firm to have sent an ISO to trade with the full size of that PBO
simultaneous with entering Order D at the Exchange.
Assume instead that the Day ISO to buy at 10.12 is also designated
ALO (``Order E''). In this scenario, upon arrival, Order E would be re-
priced and displayed at 10.06, which is one MPV below the Exchange's
best priced non-displayed interest. Assume instead that the Exchange
receives a Day ISO designated ALO to buy at 10.12 (``Order F''), but
that when Order F arrives, the BBO is 10.05 x 10.11, the PBBO is 10.05
x 10.09, and the Exchange has no non-displayed sell interest. In this
scenario, the Exchange would ignore the 10.09 PBO and Order F would be
re-priced and displayed at 10.10, which is one MPV below the Exchange's
best-priced displayed offer of 10.11. Assume the market updates and the
BBO becomes 10.10 x 10.14 and the PBBO is 10.10 x 10.12. Order F would
re-price and re-display one MPV below the best-priced sell interest,
which here would be the 10.12 PBO. Accordingly, Order F would re-price
and re-display at 10.11.
The Exchange also proposes to add new paragraph (e) governing ISOs
in Rule 13 to specify that IOC ISOs and Day ISOs are not available for
Sell ``Plus''--Buy ``Minus'' Orders or Non-Display Reserve Orders or
Non-Display Reserve e-Quotes, and that IOC ISOs are not available for
high-priced securities, as defined in Rule 1000(a)(vi).
Finally, the Exchange proposes non-substantive changes to paragraph
(a)
[[Page 40187]]
defining ISOs to provide more detail regarding the current operation of
ISOs, consistent with existing NYSE Arca Rule 7.31(jj). As proposed,
the Exchange would define an ISO as a limit order designated for
automatic execution in a particular security that is never routed to an
away market, may trade through a protected bid or offer, and will not
be rejected or cancelled if it would lock, cross, or be marketable
against an away market provided that it meets the requirements
described in the rule. The Exchange also proposes to make non-
substantive, technical amendments to define the term ``Intermarket
Sweep Order'' as ``ISO'' and change references from ``Intermarket Sweep
Order'' to ``ISO.'' The Exchange further proposes a non-substantive,
technical change to define the existing form of an ISO as an ``ISO
designated IOC (`IOC ISO').''
Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange proposes to announce the implementation date
of ALO Modifiers for day limit orders and Day ISOs by Trader Update.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \16\ of
the Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\17\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposal is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the expansion of the availability of
ALO Modifiers for day limit orders will increase competition, not only
among market participants, but also among exchanges offering similar
functionality. Specifically, all other equity exchanges currently
enable member firms to enter limit orders that would only post on the
designated exchange and not route.\18\ The Exchange proposes to expand
its existing ALO functionality, consistent with other markets, to also
make it available for limit orders. The Exchange believes that
requiring limit orders designated ALO to be entered with a minimum
display quantity will help perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market by encouraging additional displayed liquidity on a public
registered exchange, and therefore promote price discovery. The
Exchange further believes that the proposed re-pricing and re-
displaying of a limit order designated ALO removes impediments to and
perfects the mechanism of a free and open market because it assures
that such an order would meet its intended goal to be available on the
Exchange's book as displayed liquidity without locking or crossing a
protected quotation in violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS.\19\
The Exchange further notes that the proposed re-pricing and re-
displaying of limit orders designated ALO is consistent with how other
exchanges currently operate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See supra n. 5.
\19\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
\20\ See supra n. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that adding a day time-in-force
condition for ISOs, an existing order type on the Exchange, is designed
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and national market system because the proposed expansion is
consistent with the definition of an ISO under Regulation NMS \21\ and
with the operation of how ISOs may be entered on other exchanges,
including that it may trade through protected quotations on arrival and
display on the Exchange at a price that may lock or cross a protected
quotation.\22\ The Exchange further believes that any subsequent re-
pricing and re-displaying of a Day ISO after it has posted on the Book
will meet the entering firm's expectations that a Day ISO order not
route, while at the same time ensure that it would not lock or cross a
protected quotation in violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 17 CFR 242.600(b)(3) and supra n. 11.
\22\ See supra n. 13, 71 FR at 59181 (``If an ISO is not marked
as `immediate or cancel,' any remaining balance in the order would
be displayed by the Exchange without regard to whether that display
would lock or cross another market center, only if the participant
routing the order has already sent an order to satisfy the
quotations of other markets so that the display of the order would
not lock or cross those markets.'') and at 59182 (approving, among
other things, NYSE Arca's proposed ISO order type and finding that
it is consistent with the Act).
\23\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change is pro-competitive because it
expands the functionality associated with existing NYSE order types to
conform to how these order types already operate on other exchanges,
thereby harmonizing the forms of order types available for market
participants that trade on equity exchanges.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See supra, nn. 5, 11, and 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(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 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 such 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-NYSE-2014-32 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-NYSE-2014-32. 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
[[Page 40188]]
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 NYSE's principal office and on its Internet Web site
at www.nyse.com. 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-
NYSE-2014-32 and should be submitted on or before August 1, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16191 Filed 7-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
