Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 923NY To Refine the Appointment Process Utilized by the Exchange, 18884-18889 [2015-07964]
Download as PDF
18884
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
eligible to invest in securities (as
defined in section 2(a)(36) of the Act) in
reliance on rule 12d1–2 under the Act
(the ‘‘Funds’’), to also invest, to the
extent consistent with its investment
objectives, policies, strategies and
limitations, in financial instruments that
may not be securities within the
meaning of section 2(a)(36) of the Act
(‘‘Other Investments’’).1 Applicants also
request that the order exempt any entity,
including any entity controlled by or
under common control with an Adviser,
that now or in the future acts as
principal underwriter, or broker or
dealer (if registered under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
‘‘Exchange Act’’)), with respect to the
transactions described herein.
3. Consistent with its fiduciary
obligations under the Act, each Fund’s
board of trustees will review the
advisory fees charged by the Fund’s
Adviser to ensure that the fees are based
on services provided that are in addition
to, rather than duplicative of, services
provided pursuant to the advisory
agreement of any investment company
in which the Fund may invest.
Applicants’ Legal Analysis
1. Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act
provides that no registered investment
company (‘‘acquiring company’’) may
acquire securities of another investment
company (‘‘acquired company’’) if such
securities represent more than 3% of the
acquired company’s outstanding voting
stock or more than 5% of the acquiring
company’s total assets, or if such
securities, together with the securities of
other investment companies, represent
more than 10% of the acquiring
company’s total assets. Section
12(d)(1)(B) of the Act provides that no
registered open-end investment
company may sell its securities to
another investment company if the sale
will cause the acquiring company to
own more than 3% of the acquired
company’s voting stock, or cause more
than 10% of the acquired company’s
voting stock to be owned by investment
companies and companies controlled by
them.
2. Section 12(d)(1)(G) of the Act
provides, in part, that section 12(d)(1)
will not apply to securities of an
acquired company purchased by an
acquiring company if: (i) The acquired
company and acquiring company are
part of the same group of investment
companies; (ii) the acquiring company
holds only securities of acquired
1 All entities that currently intend to rely on the
requested order are named as applicants. Any other
entity that relies on the order in the future will
comply with the terms and condition of the
application.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
companies that are part of the same
group of investment companies,
government securities, and short-term
paper; (iii) the aggregate sales loads and
distribution-related fees of the acquiring
company and the acquired company are
not excessive under rules adopted
pursuant to section 22(b) or section
22(c) of the Act by a securities
association registered under section 15A
of the Exchange Act or by the
Commission; and (iv) the acquired
company has a policy that prohibits it
from acquiring securities of registered
open-end investment companies or
registered unit investment trusts in
reliance on section 12(d)(1)(F) or (G) of
the Act.
3. Rule 12d1–2 under the Act permits
a registered open-end investment
company or a registered unit investment
trust that relies on section 12(d)(1)(G) of
the Act to acquire, in addition to
securities issued by another registered
investment company in the same group
of investment companies, government
securities, and short-term paper: (i)
Securities issued by an investment
company that is not in the same group
of investment companies, when the
acquisition is in reliance on section
12(d)(1)(A) or 12(d)(1)(F) of the Act; (ii)
securities (other than securities issued
by an investment company); and (iii)
securities issued by a money market
fund, when the investment is in reliance
on rule 12d1–1 under the Act. For the
purposes of rule 12d1–2, ‘‘securities’’
means any security as defined in section
2(a)(36) of the Act.
4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that
the Commission may exempt any
person, security, or transaction from any
provision of the Act, or from any rule
under the Act, if such exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest and consistent with the
protection of investors and the purposes
fairly intended by the policies and
provisions of the Act. Applicants submit
that their request for relief meets this
standard.
5. Applicants request an order under
section 6(c) of the Act for an exemption
from rule 12d1–2(a) to allow the Funds
to invest in Other Investments while
investing in Underlying Funds.
Applicants state that the Funds will
comply with rule 12d1–2 under the Act,
but for the fact that the Funds may
invest a portion of their assets in Other
Investments. Applicants assert that
permitting the Funds to invest in Other
Investments as described in the
application would not raise any of the
concerns that the requirements of
section 12(d)(1) were designed to
address.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Applicants’ Condition
Applicants agree that any order
granting the requested relief will be
subject to the following condition:
Applicants will comply with all
provisions of rule 12d1–2 under the Act,
except for paragraph (a)(2) to the extent
that it restricts any Fund from investing
in Other Investments as described in the
application.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, under delegated
authority.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–07970 Filed 4–7–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74636; File No. SR–
NYSEMKT–2015–17]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed
Rule Change Amending Rule 923NY To
Refine the Appointment Process
Utilized by the Exchange
April 2, 2015.
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 March
20, 2015, 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 selfregulatory 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 the Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
Rule 923NY (Appointment of Market
Makers) to refine the appointment
process utilized by the Exchange. 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.
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
2 15
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
08APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
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 proposes to amend
Rule 923NY to refine the appointment
process utilized by the Exchange. The
Exchange believes this proposal, which
is consistent with the rules of other
option exchanges,4 would simplify and
enhance the efficiency of the
appointment process for both Market
Makers and the Exchange and add
clarity to Exchange rules.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Current Appointment Process
To register as a Market Maker, an
applicant must file an application with
the Exchange on a form or forms
prescribed by the Exchange.5 Once
registered, a Market Maker may seek an
appointment in one or more option
classes pursuant to Rule 923NY.
Specifically, this Rule provides that
‘‘[o]n a form or forms prescribed by the
Exchange, a Market Maker must apply
4 See, e.g., BATS Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS’’) Rules
22.3(a),(b) (Market Maker Registration); NASDAQ
OMX PHLX (‘‘PHLX) Rule 3212(b) (Registration as
a Market Maker); NASDAQ Options Market
(‘‘NOM’’), Chapter VII (Market Participants),
Section 3(a),(b) (Continuing Market Maker
Registration).
5 See Rule 921NY(Registration of Market Makers).
See also Rule 920NY(a) (Market Maker Defined) (‘‘A
Market Maker is an ATP Holder that is registered
with the Exchange for the purpose of submitting
quotes electronically and making transactions as a
dealer-specialist verbally on the Trading Floor or
through the System from on the Trading Floor or
remotely from off the Trading Floor, in accordance
with the Rules of the Exchange. A Market Maker
submitting quotes remotely is not eligible to
participate in trades affected in open outcry except
to the extent that such Market Maker’s quotation
represents the BBO. Market Makers are designated
as specialists on the Exchange for all purposes
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
Rules and Regulations thereunder. A Market Maker
on the Exchange will be either a Remote Market
Maker, a Floor Market Maker, a Specialist or an eSpecialist. Unless specified, or unless the context
requires otherwise, the term Market Maker refers to
Remote Market Makers, Floor Market Makers,
Specialists and e-Specialists.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
for an appointment in one or more
classes of option contracts.’’ 6
In addition to having the authority to
appoint one Specialist per option class
and to designate e-Specialists to fulfill
certain obligations required of
Specialists,7 ‘‘[t]he Exchange may
appoint an unlimited number of Market
Makers in each class unless the number
of Market Makers appointed to a
particular option class should be
limited’’ based on the Exchange’s
judgment.8 Further, the Rule provides
that ‘‘Market Makers may select from
among any option issues traded on the
Exchange for inclusion in their
appointment, subject to the approval of
the Exchange. In considering the
approval of the appointment of a Market
Maker in each security,’’ the Exchange
will consider the Market Maker’s
preference; the financial resources
available to the Market Maker; the
Market Maker’s experience, expertise
and past performance in making
markets, including the Market Maker’s
performance in other securities; the
Market Maker’s operational capability;
and the maintenance and enhancement
of competition among Market Makers in
each security in which they are
appointed.9 The Rule also states that, in
order to have a trading appointment on
the Exchange, Market Makers must have
the number of Amex Trading Permits
(‘‘ATPs’’) required under the Amex
Options Fee Schedule.10 In addition,
Floor Market Makers 11 must also apply
for appointment to a Trading Zone 12 on
6 See
Rule 923NY(a).
Specialist is ‘‘an individual or entity that has
been deemed qualified by the Exchange for the
purpose of making transactions on the Exchange in
accordance with the provisions of Rule 920NY
[Market Makers], and who meets the qualification
requirements of Rule 927NY(b) [Specialists]. Each
Specialist must be registered with the Exchange as
a Market Maker. Any ATP Holder registered as a
Market Maker with the Exchange is eligible to be
qualified as a Specialist. See Rule 900.2(76). Rule
923NY(b) also provides that ‘‘[t]he Exchange may
designate e-Specialists in an option class in
accordance with Rule 927.4NY[e-Specialists].’’ Id.
The Exchange is not proposing to change Rule
923NY(b) regarding Specialists and e-Specialists.
8 See Rule 923NY(b).
9 See Rule 923NY(c).
10 See Rule 923NY(d)(1). See also NYSE Amex
Options Fee Schedule (Section III.A., Monthly ATP
Fees) (describing ‘‘Number Of Issues Permitted In
A Market Makers Quoting Assignment’’ based on
the number of permits held and the associated
costs), available here, https://www.nyse.com/
publicdocs/nyse/markets/amex-options/NYSE_
Amex_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
11 A Floor Market Maker is ‘‘a registered Market
Maker who makes transactions as a dealer-specialist
while on the Floor of the Exchange and provides
quotations: (A) Manually, by public outcry, and (B)
electronically through an auto-quoting device.’’ See
Rule 900.2NY(29).
12 A Trading Zone refers to the areas on the Floor
designated by the Exchange in which issues are
7A
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18885
the floor, subject to approval by the
Exchange.13
Under the current Rule, ‘‘Market
Makers may change the option issues in
their appointment, subject to the
approval of the Exchange’’ provided
requests for changes are ‘‘made in a
form and manner prescribed by the
Exchange.’’ 14 In addition, ‘‘Market
Makers may withdraw from trading an
option issue that is within their
appointment by providing the Exchange
with three business days’ written notice
of such withdrawal.’’ 15 If Market
Makers fail to provide this notice, they
‘‘may be subject to formal disciplinary
action pursuant to Section 9A of the
Office Rules.’’ 16 Moreover, the
Exchange ‘‘may suspend or terminate
any appointment of a Market Maker in
one or more option issues under this
Rule whenever, in the Exchanges’
judgment, the interests of a fair and
orderly market are best served by such
action’’ 17 A Market Maker may seek
review of any action taken by the
Exchange.18
Finally, under the current Rule, the
Exchange periodically conducts
evaluations of Market Makers to
determine whether they have fulfilled
assigned for the purposes of open outcry trading.
See Rule 900.2NY(29).
13 See Rule 923NY(d)(1) (also providing that
Specialists shall be appointed to the Trading Zone
designated for their issues).
14 See Rule 923NY(e). In considering the change
request, the Exchange will consider the factors set
forth in Rule 923NY(c).
15 See Rule 923NY(f).
16 Id. Section 9A of the Office Rules sets forth the
procedures for Exchange disciplinary proceedings,
including the due process for the formal hearing
process and the requirement that any decision by
the Exchange must include a statement of findings
and conclusions, with the reasons therefore upon
all material issues presented in the record. Further,
where a penalty is imposed, the Exchange’s
decision must include a statement specifying the
acts or practices in which the Respondent has been
found to have engaged, or which the Respondent
has been found to have omitted.
17 See Rule 923NY(g). The Exchange, however,
proposes to correct the possessive form of
‘‘Exchange’’ (from ‘‘Exchanges’ judgment’’ to
‘‘Exchange’s judgment’’) in this paragraph to correct
a typo in the existing rule text, which adds clarity
to Exchange rules. See proposed Rule 923NY(g)
(‘‘The Exchange may suspend or terminate any
appointment of a Market Maker in one or more
option issues under this Rule whenever, in the
Exchange’s judgment, the interests of a fair and
orderly market are best served by such action.’’).
18 See Rule 923NY(h). Per Rule 923NY(i), Market
Makers are also subject to a trading requirement,
such that ‘‘[a]t least 75% of the trading activity of
a Market Maker (measured in terms of contract
volume per quarter) must be in classes within the
Market Maker’s appointment and, in the case of
Floor Market Makers, within their designated
Trading Zone’’ and a failure to comply with the
75% contract volume requirement may result in the
imposition of a fine per Rule 476A or initiation of
formal disciplinary action, pursuant to Section 9A
(Disciplinary Rules). The Exchange is not proposing
any changes to Rule 923NY(i).
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
08APN1
18886
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
performance standards.19 If the
Exchange finds that a Market Maker has
not met the performance standards, the
Exchange may take action, including
suspending, terminating or restricting a
Market Maker’s appointment or
registration, after providing the Market
Maker an opportunity to be heard.20
Proposed Appointment Process
The Exchange proposes to modify
Rule 923NY to refine the current
appointment process. Presently, Market
Makers must apply for an appointment
in an options class, which, as discussed
further below, is done by submitting an
email to the Exchange. The Exchange
proposes to modify Rule 923NY(a) to
provide that, rather than apply for an
appointment, ‘‘a Market Maker may
register for an appointment in one or
more classes of option contracts,’’ in a
form and manner prescribed the
Exchange.21 The Exchange would
continue to have authority to appoint
one Specialist per option class and to
designate e-Specialists in options
classes to fulfill certain obligations
required of Specialists. Similarly, there
would continue to be an unlimited
number of Market Makers appointed to
an options class, unless the Exchange
restricted such appointments following
Commission review and approval. The
Exchange is proposing a change to the
text in Rule 923NY(b) to reflect the
proposed changes in Rule 923NY(a) to
provide that ‘‘[a]n unlimited number of
Market Makers may register in each
class,’’ subject to any limits imposed by
the Exchange.22
In addition, to simplify a Market
Maker’s ability to select and make
changes to its appointment, the
Exchange proposes to modify Rule
923NY(c) to replace the existing rule
19 See
Rule 923NY(j).
Rule 923NY(j)(1). See also Rule 923NY(j)(2)
(‘‘If a Market Maker’s appointment in an option
issue or issues has been terminated pursuant to this
subsection (j), the Market Maker may not be reappointed as a Market Maker in that option issue
or issues for a period not to exceed 6 months.’’).
21 See proposed Rule 923NY(a) (‘‘On a form or
forms prescribed by the Exchange, a Market Maker
may register for an appointment in one or more
classes of option contracts, subject to paragraph (d)
of this Rule.’’). As discussed, paragraph (d) of the
Rule provides that Market Makers must have the
designated number of ATPs set forth in the Amex
Options Fee Schedule in order to have a trading
appointment on the Exchange.
22 See proposed Rule 923NY(b) (‘‘The Exchange
may appoint one Specialist per option class. The
Exchange may designate e-Specialists in an option
class in accordance with Rule 927.4NY. An
unlimited number of Market Makers may register in
each class unless the number of Market Makers
appointed to a particular option class should be
limited whenever, in the Exchange’s judgment,
quotation system capacity in an option class or
classes is not sufficient to support additional
Market Makers in such class or classes.’’).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
20 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
text with text that provides that ‘‘[a]
Market Maker may select or withdraw
option issues included in their
appointment by submitting a request via
an Exchange-approved electronic
interface with the Exchange on a day
when the Exchange is open for
business.’’ 23 The modified rule would
also provide that an appointment would
become effective by no later than the
following business day, whereas a
Market Maker’s request to withdraw
option issues from its appointment
would not become effective until the
following business day. 24 Thus, as
proposed, a Market Maker could be
appointed to an options issue on the
same day it submits a request to the
Exchange, depending on availability of
Exchange resources to process the
request that day, but such addition to its
appointment would be effective no later
than the following business day. A
Market Maker, however, would not be
able to withdraw an options issue from
its appointment on the same day that it
submits the request; instead, the
Exchange will only process such
requests on an overnight basis for
effectiveness on the following business
day. Before any additions to a Market
Maker’s appointment would become
effective, the Exchange would be
required to confirm ‘‘that the Market
Maker’s appointment will not exceed
that permitted under paragraph (d) of
this Rule’’ 25 and confirm receipt of the
Market Maker’s request.26 Confirmation
of receipt is designed to ensure that the
request was successfully transmitted to
the Exchange (i.e., there was no system
failure or human error on either side of
the electronic transaction that prevented
transmission and receipt of the Market
Maker’s request). Presently, Market
Makers can select issues in their
appointment or make changes thereto,
pursuant to proposed Rule 923NY(c), by
submitting an email [sic] the Exchange
which is ‘‘the Exchange-approved
electronic interface’’ at this time.27
Consistent with this proposed change,
the Exchange proposes to delete
paragraphs (e) and (f) of Rule 923NY,
which describe how Market Makers can
change their appointment or withdraw
from issues in their appointment
because these provisions are rendered
23 See
proposed Rule 923NY(c).
24 Id.
25 Id. Proposed changes to Rule 923NY(d) are
discussed below.
26 The Exchange is also required to confirm
receipt of requests to withdraw option issues from
a Market Maker’s appointment. See proposed Rule
923NY(c).
27 The Exchange will announce by Trader Update
the email address that Market Makers should utilize
to make selections in, or changes to, their
appointment pursuant to this Rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
superfluous by the proposed changes to
Rule 923NY(c).28
The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes to how Market
Makers select and modify their appoints
would enable Market Makers to manage
their appointments with more flexibility
and in a timelier manner which, in turn,
would reduce the time and resources
expended by Market Makers and the
Exchange on the appointment process.
The Exchange believes this proposal
would provide Market Makers with
more efficient access to the securities in
which they want to make markets and
disseminate competitive quotations,
which would provide additional
liquidity and enhance competition in
those securities. The Exchange would
retain the ability to suspend or
terminate any appointment of a Market
Maker if necessary to maintain a fair
and orderly market.29 The Exchange
also notes that the proposed changes to
Rule 923NY(a), (b) 30 and (c) 31 are
consistent with the rules of other
exchanges and therefore raise no new or
novel issues.
The Exchange also proposes to amend
Rule 923NY(d)(1) to state that ‘‘Market
Makers must have the number of ATPs
required under the Fee Schedule for its
28 The Exchange proposes to designate
subparagraphs (e) and (f) as Reserved.
29 See Rule 923NY(g). The Exchange, however,
proposes to correct the possessive form of
‘‘Exchange’’ (from ‘‘Exchanges’ judgment’’ to
‘‘Exchange’s judgment’’) in this paragraph to correct
a typo in the existing rule text, which adds clarity
to Exchange rules. See proposed Rule 923NY(g)
(‘‘The Exchange may suspend or terminate any
appointment of a Market Maker in one or more
option issues under this Rule whenever, in the
Exchange’s judgment, the interests of a fair and
orderly market are best served by such action.’’).
30 See e.g., BATS Rules 22.3(a) (‘‘An Options
Member that has qualified as an Options Market
Maker may register to make markets in individual
series of options’’); NOM, Chapter VII, Section 3(a)
(‘‘An Options Participant that has qualified as an
Options Market Maker may register to make markets
in individual options.’’).
31 See e.g., PHLX Rule 3212(b) (‘‘A PSX Market
Maker may become registered in an issue by
entering a registration request via an Exchange
approved electronic interface with PSX’s systems or
by contacting PSX Market Operations. Registration
shall become effective on the day the registration
request is entered’’); PHLX Rule 3220(a) (‘‘A market
maker may voluntarily terminate its registration in
a security by withdrawing its two-sided quotation
from PSX. A PSX Market Maker that voluntarily
terminates its registration in a security may not reregister as a market maker for one (1) business
day.’’). See also BATS Rules 22.3(b) (‘‘An Options
Market Maker may become registered in a series by
entering a registration request via an Exchange
approved electronic interface with the Exchange’s
systems by 9:00 a.m. Eastern time. Registration shall
become effective on the day the registration request
is entered’’); NOM, Chapter VII, Section 3(b) (‘‘An
Options Market Maker may become registered in an
option by entering a registration request via a
Nasdaq approved electronic interface with Nasdaq’s
systems. Registration shall become effective on the
day the registration request is entered.’’).
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
08APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
appointment as a Market Maker in
option issues,’’ which the Exchange
believes adds clarity to the Rule.32 In
addition, the Exchange proposes to
modify Rule 923NY(d)(2) to provide that
‘‘Floor Market Makers shall be
appointed to a Trading Zone on the
Floor,’’ 33 to conform this provision to
other changes proposed herein, which
are designed to streamline the
Exchange’s appointment process.34
The Exchange also proposes to modify
the text in paragraph (h) of the Rule. As
proposed, a Market Maker would
continue to be permitted to ‘‘seek
review of any action taken by the
Exchange, in accordance with Section
9A of the Office Rules, as applicable.’’
However, to clarify the rule text, the
Exchange proposes to delete the
unnecessary clause ‘‘including the
denial of the appointment for, or the
termination or suspension of, a Market
Maker’s appointment in an option issue
or issues.’’ 35 The Exchange’s denial,
termination, or suspension of a Market
Maker’s appointment would continue to
be reviewable under Section 9A of the
Office Rules, as would other applicable
actions taken by the Exchange under
Rule 923NY.36
Rule 923NY(j) states that the
Exchange will conduct periodic
evaluations of Market Makers to
determine whether they have fulfilled
the requisite performance standards.
The Exchange proposes to add ‘‘the
financial resources available to the
Market Maker’’ and ‘‘the Market Maker’s
operational capability’’ as factors the
Exchange will consider in its
evaluations conducted pursuant to Rule
923NY(j).37 The additional
considerations the Exchange proposes to
include in its periodic evaluations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
32 See
proposed Rule 923NY(d)(1).
33 The Exchange also proposes to capitalize
‘‘Floor’’ in the first sentence of Rule 923NY(d)(1) to
add clarity and consistency to Exchange rules.
34 This proposed change also conforms to the
latter portion of Rule 923NY(d)(2) which provides
that ‘‘Specialists shall be appointed to the Trading
Zone designated for their issues.’’
35 See Rule 923NY(h) (‘‘A Market Maker may seek
review of any action taken by the Exchange
pursuant to this Rule in accordance with Section
9A of the Office Rules, as applicable.’’).
36 Id.
37 See proposed Rule 923NY(j) (‘‘The Exchange
will periodically conduct an evaluation of Market
Makers to determine whether they have fulfilled
performance standards relating to, among other
things, quality of markets, competition among
Market Makers, observance of ethical standards,
and administrative factors. The Exchange may
consider any relevant information including, but
not limited to, the results of a Market Maker
evaluation, trading data, a Market Maker’s
regulatory history, the financial resources available
to the Market Maker, the Market Maker’s
operational capability, and such other factors and
data as may be pertinent in the circumstances.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
under Rule 923NY (j) are currently
among the considerations of the
Exchange in approving a Market
Maker’s appointment.38 In connection
with the Exchange’s proposed changes
to the process for Market Makers’
appointments to options classes, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate these
approval provisions. Because financial
resources and operational capability are
important considerations in a Market
Maker’s performance, the Exchange
proposes to retain these factors for
consideration in the Exchange’s
periodic evaluation of Market Maker
performance.39
Finally, the Exchange proposes to
modify Rule 923NY(j)(2) to reflect the
proposed changes to the Market Maker
appointment process. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to change the
reference to a Market Maker being ‘‘reappointed’’ by the Exchange if an option
issue or issues has been terminated
pursuant to this subsection (j), and to
instead provide that ‘‘the Exchange may
restrict a Market Maker’s registration as
a Market Maker in that option issue or
issues for a period not to exceed 6
months.’’ 40 This proposal continues to
give the Exchange discretion to suspend
that Market Maker’s appointment in the
affected option issue(s) for a full six
months, or to allow that Market Maker
to resume that appointment earlier than
the prescribed six-month period, based
on the Exchange’s evaluation of the facts
and circumstances. The Exchange
believes the proposed change is
necessary so that Rule 923NY(j)(2) is
consistent with the proposed changes in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of Rule
923NY to the process for Market Makers
to register and change their
appointments to options classes.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b) 41 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’), in general, and furthers the
38 See
Rule 923NY(c)(2) and (4).
Exchange is not proposing any changes to
Rule 923NY(j)(1), which sets forth the actions that
the Exchange may take, after affording a Market
Maker written notice and an opportunity for
hearing pursuant to Section 9A should the
Exchange find a Market Maker is failing to meet
minimum performance standards. See Rule
923NY(j)(1). The Exchange however proposes to
delete the word ‘‘primary’’ from Rule
923NY(j)(1)(A) so that the clause refers simply to
the ‘‘Market Maker’s appointment,’’ which change
would add clarity and consistency to Exchange
rules. See proposed Rule 923NY(j)(1)(A).
40 See proposed Rule 923NY(j)(2) (‘‘If a Market
Maker’s appointment in an option issue or issues
has been terminated pursuant to this subsection (j),
the Market Maker may not register as a Market
Maker in that option issue or issues for a period not
to exceed 6 months.’’).
41 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
39 The
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18887
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),42 in
particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, and to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change removes
impediments to a free and open market
because it would enable Market Makers
to manage their appointments with
more flexibility and in a timelier
manner. The Exchange believes the
proposed change would reduce the
burden on both Market Makers and
Exchange staff, which would result in a
fair and reasonable use of resources to
the benefit of all market participants. In
particular, the proposal to allow Market
Makers to select their appointments,
and make changes thereto, via an
Exchange-approved electronic interface
is consistent with [sic] Act because it
would provide Market Makers with
more efficient access to the securities in
which they want to make markets and
thus more quickly begin disseminating
competitive quotations in those
securities, which would provide
additional liquidity and enhance
competition in those securities. The
Exchange also believes that preventing
Market Makers from being able to
withdraw an option issue from its
appointment on the same day that it
submits the request (as such requests are
processed on an overnight basis for
effectiveness on the following business
day) would serve to promote just and
equitable principles of trade and benefit
investors and the public interest.
In addition, the Exchange believes
that the proposal to allow Market
Makers to make selections or changes to
their appointment without first
obtaining explicit Exchange approval is
likewise consistent with the Act. First,
because financial resources and
operational capability are important
considerations in a Market Maker’s
performance, the Exchange proposes to
retain these factors for consideration in
the Exchange’s periodic evaluation of
Market Maker performance. The
Exchange believes that adding these
factors to the Exchange’s consideration
would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and would benefit
investors and the public interest. In
addition, as noted above, the Exchange
would continue to have authority to
42 15
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
08APN1
18888
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
suspend or terminate any Market Maker
appointment in the interest of a fair and
orderly market, including if necessary to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices and protect investors,
or if a Market Maker does not satisfy its
obligations with respect to an
appointment.43 The Exchange would
also retain the ability to restrict a Market
Maker’s registration in option issues for
up to six months if a Market Maker’s
appointment in that option issue or
issues had been previously terminated
under the rule, and continues to give the
Exchange discretion to allow the Market
Maker to resume that appointment
earlier than the prescribed six-month
period or to maintain the suspension for
the entire period. Finally, the Exchange
is not proposing changes to the
disciplinary and appeals process for
Market Makers that do not meet the
minimum performance standards.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes this
proposal is consistent with Section 6(d)
of the Exchange Act.44
The proposed rule change would not
result in unfair discrimination, as it
applies to all Market Makers. Further,
the proposed rule change would reduce
the burden on Market Makers to manage
their appointments and thus provide
liquidity to the Exchange. Nevertheless,
Market Makers would still be required
to comply with certain obligations to
maintain their status as a Market Maker,
including that they provide continuous,
two-sided quotations in their appointed
securities.45
Finally, as noted above, the proposed
modifications to the appointment
process would align the rules of the
Exchange with the rules of other options
exchanges, where Market Makers
presently have the ability to select and
make changes to their appointment via
an Exchange-approved electronic
interface.46 The Exchange believes this
consistency across exchanges would
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market by
ensuring that members, regulators and
the public can more easily navigate the
Exchange’s rulebook and better
understand the appointment process.
43 See Rule 923NY(g). See also Rule 921NY
(regarding the Exchange’s ability to suspend or
terminate a Market Maker’s registration based on ‘‘a
determination of any substantial or continued
failure by such Market Maker to engage in dealings
in accordance with Rules 925NY or 923NY’’, which
outline the obligations of Market Makers).
44 15 U.S.C. 78f(d).
45 See Rule 925.1NY.
46 See supra nn. 4, 30, 31.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change would impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act because it
provides the same relief to a group of
similarly situated market participants—
Market Makers. The proposed rule
change would reduce the burden on
Market Makers to manage their
appointments and thus provide
liquidity to the Exchange.
The Exchange does not believe the
proposed rule change would help
Market Makers to the detriment of
market participants on other exchanges,
particularly because the proposed
functionality is similar to functionality
already available on other exchanges.47
Market Makers would still be subject to
the same obligations with respect to its
appointments; the proposed rule change
would make the appointment process
more efficient for Market Makers. The
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change would relieve any burden
on, or otherwise promote, competition,
as it would enable Market Makers to
manage their appointments with more
flexibility and in a timelier manner. The
Exchange believes this would provide
Market Makers with more efficient
access to the securities in which they
want to make markets and thus more
quickly begin disseminating competitive
quotations in those securities, which
would provide additional liquidity and
enhance competition in those securities.
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–2015–17 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–2015–17. 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–
NYSEMKT–2015–17, and should be
submitted on or before April 29, 2015.
47 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
08APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 67 / Wednesday, April 8, 2015 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.48
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–07964 Filed 4–7–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74639; File No. SR–NSCC–
2015–001]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change to Amend Addendum A
(Fee Structure) With Respect to the
Alternative Investment Product
Services
April 2, 2015.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 23,
2015, National Securities Clearing
Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III
below, which Items have been prepared
by NSCC. NSCC filed the proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 3
of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) 4
thereunder. The proposed rule change
was effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the
Terms of Substance of the Proposed
Rule Change
The proposed rule change consists of
an amendment to Addendum A (Fee
Structure) of NSCC’s Rules & Procedures
(‘‘Rules’’) to establish certain fees
applicable to the Alternative Investment
Product services (‘‘AIP’’ or the
‘‘Service’’), as more fully described
below. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on NSCC’s Web site
at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rulefilings.aspx, at the principal office of
NSCC, and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
1 15
17:55 Apr 07, 2015
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
(1) Statement of Purpose
AIP was initially approved by the
Commission on May 12, 2008 5 as a new
processing platform for alternative
investment products such as hedge
funds, funds of hedge funds,
commodities pools, managed futures,
and real estate investment trusts
(collectively, ‘‘Eligible AIP Products’’).
AIP links global market participants,
including broker/dealers, fund
managers, fund administrators and
custodians (collectively, ‘‘AIP
Members’’), to provide one standard
end-to-end process for Eligible AIP
Products.
As set forth in NSCC’s Rules, ‘‘AIP
Data transmitted through the AIP
Service may include data relating to
subscriptions and purchases;
redemptions, withdrawals and tender
offers; exchange transactions; transfers;
. . . and such other data as may be
established by [NSCC] from time to
time.’’ 6
NSCC recently enhanced the AIP
platform to better process transfer
instructions submitted by AIP Members.
In connection with these enhancements,
NSCC proposes to amend Addendum A
to establish the fees applicable to the
processing of transfers, such as for
example, internal transfers. Internal
transfers occur within an AIP Member
that is a broker/dealer when such AIP
Member re-registers a customer account
in the name of a different customer due
to, for example, the death of the
previously registered customer. NSCC
proposes to establish the following fees
for AIP transfers:
• $1.50 per transfer for higher volume
Eligible AIP Products.
5 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57813 (May
12, 2008), 73 FR 28539 (May 16, 2008) (SR–NSCC–
2007–12).
6 See, [sic] NSCC Rule 53 (Alternative Investment
Product Services and Members), Section 6
(Transmission of AIP Data) [emphasis added].
48 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the
Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the
Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission,
NSCC 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 these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. NSCC has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18889
• $5.00 per transfer for lower volume
Eligible AIP Products.
NSCC will implement the new
transfer fees beginning March 26, 2015,
or such later date as NSCC may
announce through Important Notice.
(2) Statutory Basis
NSCC believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act, and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to
NSCC. In particular, the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(D) 7 of the Act because it
establishes NSCC’s fees for the
processing of transfer instructions
submitted by AIP Members, which
helps to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members in
connection with use of the Service.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
NSCC does not believe that the
proposed rule change will have any
impact or impose any burden on
competition.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments relating to the
proposed rule change have not yet been
solicited or received. NSCC will notify
the Commission of any written
comments received by NSCC.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act 8 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 9 thereunder. 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:
7 15
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(D).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f).
8 15
E:\FR\FM\08APN1.SGM
08APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 67 (Wednesday, April 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18884-18889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07964]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-74636; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2015-17]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 923NY To Refine the Appointment
Process Utilized by the Exchange
April 2, 2015.
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 March 20, 2015, 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 923NY (Appointment of Market
Makers) to refine the appointment process utilized by the Exchange. 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.
[[Page 18885]]
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 proposes to amend Rule 923NY to refine the appointment
process utilized by the Exchange. The Exchange believes this proposal,
which is consistent with the rules of other option exchanges,\4\ would
simplify and enhance the efficiency of the appointment process for both
Market Makers and the Exchange and add clarity to Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See, e.g., BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'') Rules 22.3(a),(b)
(Market Maker Registration); NASDAQ OMX PHLX (``PHLX) Rule 3212(b)
(Registration as a Market Maker); NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''),
Chapter VII (Market Participants), Section 3(a),(b) (Continuing
Market Maker Registration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Appointment Process
To register as a Market Maker, an applicant must file an
application with the Exchange on a form or forms prescribed by the
Exchange.\5\ Once registered, a Market Maker may seek an appointment in
one or more option classes pursuant to Rule 923NY. Specifically, this
Rule provides that ``[o]n a form or forms prescribed by the Exchange, a
Market Maker must apply for an appointment in one or more classes of
option contracts.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Rule 921NY(Registration of Market Makers). See also Rule
920NY(a) (Market Maker Defined) (``A Market Maker is an ATP Holder
that is registered with the Exchange for the purpose of submitting
quotes electronically and making transactions as a dealer-specialist
verbally on the Trading Floor or through the System from on the
Trading Floor or remotely from off the Trading Floor, in accordance
with the Rules of the Exchange. A Market Maker submitting quotes
remotely is not eligible to participate in trades affected in open
outcry except to the extent that such Market Maker's quotation
represents the BBO. Market Makers are designated as specialists on
the Exchange for all purposes under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and the Rules and Regulations thereunder. A Market Maker on the
Exchange will be either a Remote Market Maker, a Floor Market Maker,
a Specialist or an e-Specialist. Unless specified, or unless the
context requires otherwise, the term Market Maker refers to Remote
Market Makers, Floor Market Makers, Specialists and e-
Specialists.'').
\6\ See Rule 923NY(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to having the authority to appoint one Specialist per
option class and to designate e-Specialists to fulfill certain
obligations required of Specialists,\7\ ``[t]he Exchange may appoint an
unlimited number of Market Makers in each class unless the number of
Market Makers appointed to a particular option class should be
limited'' based on the Exchange's judgment.\8\ Further, the Rule
provides that ``Market Makers may select from among any option issues
traded on the Exchange for inclusion in their appointment, subject to
the approval of the Exchange. In considering the approval of the
appointment of a Market Maker in each security,'' the Exchange will
consider the Market Maker's preference; the financial resources
available to the Market Maker; the Market Maker's experience, expertise
and past performance in making markets, including the Market Maker's
performance in other securities; the Market Maker's operational
capability; and the maintenance and enhancement of competition among
Market Makers in each security in which they are appointed.\9\ The Rule
also states that, in order to have a trading appointment on the
Exchange, Market Makers must have the number of Amex Trading Permits
(``ATPs'') required under the Amex Options Fee Schedule.\10\ In
addition, Floor Market Makers \11\ must also apply for appointment to a
Trading Zone \12\ on the floor, subject to approval by the
Exchange.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ A Specialist is ``an individual or entity that has been
deemed qualified by the Exchange for the purpose of making
transactions on the Exchange in accordance with the provisions of
Rule 920NY [Market Makers], and who meets the qualification
requirements of Rule 927NY(b) [Specialists]. Each Specialist must be
registered with the Exchange as a Market Maker. Any ATP Holder
registered as a Market Maker with the Exchange is eligible to be
qualified as a Specialist. See Rule 900.2(76). Rule 923NY(b) also
provides that ``[t]he Exchange may designate e-Specialists in an
option class in accordance with Rule 927.4NY[e-Specialists].'' Id.
The Exchange is not proposing to change Rule 923NY(b) regarding
Specialists and e-Specialists.
\8\ See Rule 923NY(b).
\9\ See Rule 923NY(c).
\10\ See Rule 923NY(d)(1). See also NYSE Amex Options Fee
Schedule (Section III.A., Monthly ATP Fees) (describing ``Number Of
Issues Permitted In A Market Makers Quoting Assignment'' based on
the number of permits held and the associated costs), available
here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/amex-options/NYSE_Amex_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
\11\ A Floor Market Maker is ``a registered Market Maker who
makes transactions as a dealer-specialist while on the Floor of the
Exchange and provides quotations: (A) Manually, by public outcry,
and (B) electronically through an auto-quoting device.'' See Rule
900.2NY(29).
\12\ A Trading Zone refers to the areas on the Floor designated
by the Exchange in which issues are assigned for the purposes of
open outcry trading. See Rule 900.2NY(29).
\13\ See Rule 923NY(d)(1) (also providing that Specialists shall
be appointed to the Trading Zone designated for their issues).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the current Rule, ``Market Makers may change the option
issues in their appointment, subject to the approval of the Exchange''
provided requests for changes are ``made in a form and manner
prescribed by the Exchange.'' \14\ In addition, ``Market Makers may
withdraw from trading an option issue that is within their appointment
by providing the Exchange with three business days' written notice of
such withdrawal.'' \15\ If Market Makers fail to provide this notice,
they ``may be subject to formal disciplinary action pursuant to Section
9A of the Office Rules.'' \16\ Moreover, the Exchange ``may suspend or
terminate any appointment of a Market Maker in one or more option
issues under this Rule whenever, in the Exchanges' judgment, the
interests of a fair and orderly market are best served by such action''
\17\ A Market Maker may seek review of any action taken by the
Exchange.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Rule 923NY(e). In considering the change request, the
Exchange will consider the factors set forth in Rule 923NY(c).
\15\ See Rule 923NY(f).
\16\ Id. Section 9A of the Office Rules sets forth the
procedures for Exchange disciplinary proceedings, including the due
process for the formal hearing process and the requirement that any
decision by the Exchange must include a statement of findings and
conclusions, with the reasons therefore upon all material issues
presented in the record. Further, where a penalty is imposed, the
Exchange's decision must include a statement specifying the acts or
practices in which the Respondent has been found to have engaged, or
which the Respondent has been found to have omitted.
\17\ See Rule 923NY(g). The Exchange, however, proposes to
correct the possessive form of ``Exchange'' (from ``Exchanges'
judgment'' to ``Exchange's judgment'') in this paragraph to correct
a typo in the existing rule text, which adds clarity to Exchange
rules. See proposed Rule 923NY(g) (``The Exchange may suspend or
terminate any appointment of a Market Maker in one or more option
issues under this Rule whenever, in the Exchange's judgment, the
interests of a fair and orderly market are best served by such
action.'').
\18\ See Rule 923NY(h). Per Rule 923NY(i), Market Makers are
also subject to a trading requirement, such that ``[a]t least 75% of
the trading activity of a Market Maker (measured in terms of
contract volume per quarter) must be in classes within the Market
Maker's appointment and, in the case of Floor Market Makers, within
their designated Trading Zone'' and a failure to comply with the 75%
contract volume requirement may result in the imposition of a fine
per Rule 476A or initiation of formal disciplinary action, pursuant
to Section 9A (Disciplinary Rules). The Exchange is not proposing
any changes to Rule 923NY(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, under the current Rule, the Exchange periodically conducts
evaluations of Market Makers to determine whether they have fulfilled
[[Page 18886]]
performance standards.\19\ If the Exchange finds that a Market Maker
has not met the performance standards, the Exchange may take action,
including suspending, terminating or restricting a Market Maker's
appointment or registration, after providing the Market Maker an
opportunity to be heard.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Rule 923NY(j).
\20\ See Rule 923NY(j)(1). See also Rule 923NY(j)(2) (``If a
Market Maker's appointment in an option issue or issues has been
terminated pursuant to this subsection (j), the Market Maker may not
be re-appointed as a Market Maker in that option issue or issues for
a period not to exceed 6 months.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Appointment Process
The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 923NY to refine the current
appointment process. Presently, Market Makers must apply for an
appointment in an options class, which, as discussed further below, is
done by submitting an email to the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to
modify Rule 923NY(a) to provide that, rather than apply for an
appointment, ``a Market Maker may register for an appointment in one or
more classes of option contracts,'' in a form and manner prescribed the
Exchange.\21\ The Exchange would continue to have authority to appoint
one Specialist per option class and to designate e-Specialists in
options classes to fulfill certain obligations required of Specialists.
Similarly, there would continue to be an unlimited number of Market
Makers appointed to an options class, unless the Exchange restricted
such appointments following Commission review and approval. The
Exchange is proposing a change to the text in Rule 923NY(b) to reflect
the proposed changes in Rule 923NY(a) to provide that ``[a]n unlimited
number of Market Makers may register in each class,'' subject to any
limits imposed by the Exchange.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See proposed Rule 923NY(a) (``On a form or forms prescribed
by the Exchange, a Market Maker may register for an appointment in
one or more classes of option contracts, subject to paragraph (d) of
this Rule.''). As discussed, paragraph (d) of the Rule provides that
Market Makers must have the designated number of ATPs set forth in
the Amex Options Fee Schedule in order to have a trading appointment
on the Exchange.
\22\ See proposed Rule 923NY(b) (``The Exchange may appoint one
Specialist per option class. The Exchange may designate e-
Specialists in an option class in accordance with Rule 927.4NY. An
unlimited number of Market Makers may register in each class unless
the number of Market Makers appointed to a particular option class
should be limited whenever, in the Exchange's judgment, quotation
system capacity in an option class or classes is not sufficient to
support additional Market Makers in such class or classes.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, to simplify a Market Maker's ability to select and
make changes to its appointment, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule
923NY(c) to replace the existing rule text with text that provides that
``[a] Market Maker may select or withdraw option issues included in
their appointment by submitting a request via an Exchange-approved
electronic interface with the Exchange on a day when the Exchange is
open for business.'' \23\ The modified rule would also provide that an
appointment would become effective by no later than the following
business day, whereas a Market Maker's request to withdraw option
issues from its appointment would not become effective until the
following business day. \24\ Thus, as proposed, a Market Maker could be
appointed to an options issue on the same day it submits a request to
the Exchange, depending on availability of Exchange resources to
process the request that day, but such addition to its appointment
would be effective no later than the following business day. A Market
Maker, however, would not be able to withdraw an options issue from its
appointment on the same day that it submits the request; instead, the
Exchange will only process such requests on an overnight basis for
effectiveness on the following business day. Before any additions to a
Market Maker's appointment would become effective, the Exchange would
be required to confirm ``that the Market Maker's appointment will not
exceed that permitted under paragraph (d) of this Rule'' \25\ and
confirm receipt of the Market Maker's request.\26\ Confirmation of
receipt is designed to ensure that the request was successfully
transmitted to the Exchange (i.e., there was no system failure or human
error on either side of the electronic transaction that prevented
transmission and receipt of the Market Maker's request). Presently,
Market Makers can select issues in their appointment or make changes
thereto, pursuant to proposed Rule 923NY(c), by submitting an email
[sic] the Exchange which is ``the Exchange-approved electronic
interface'' at this time.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See proposed Rule 923NY(c).
\24\ Id.
\25\ Id. Proposed changes to Rule 923NY(d) are discussed below.
\26\ The Exchange is also required to confirm receipt of
requests to withdraw option issues from a Market Maker's
appointment. See proposed Rule 923NY(c).
\27\ The Exchange will announce by Trader Update the email
address that Market Makers should utilize to make selections in, or
changes to, their appointment pursuant to this Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with this proposed change, the Exchange proposes to
delete paragraphs (e) and (f) of Rule 923NY, which describe how Market
Makers can change their appointment or withdraw from issues in their
appointment because these provisions are rendered superfluous by the
proposed changes to Rule 923NY(c).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The Exchange proposes to designate subparagraphs (e) and
(f) as Reserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to how Market
Makers select and modify their appoints would enable Market Makers to
manage their appointments with more flexibility and in a timelier
manner which, in turn, would reduce the time and resources expended by
Market Makers and the Exchange on the appointment process. The Exchange
believes this proposal would provide Market Makers with more efficient
access to the securities in which they want to make markets and
disseminate competitive quotations, which would provide additional
liquidity and enhance competition in those securities. The Exchange
would retain the ability to suspend or terminate any appointment of a
Market Maker if necessary to maintain a fair and orderly market.\29\
The Exchange also notes that the proposed changes to Rule 923NY(a), (b)
\30\ and (c) \31\ are consistent with the rules of other exchanges and
therefore raise no new or novel issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Rule 923NY(g). The Exchange, however, proposes to
correct the possessive form of ``Exchange'' (from ``Exchanges'
judgment'' to ``Exchange's judgment'') in this paragraph to correct
a typo in the existing rule text, which adds clarity to Exchange
rules. See proposed Rule 923NY(g) (``The Exchange may suspend or
terminate any appointment of a Market Maker in one or more option
issues under this Rule whenever, in the Exchange's judgment, the
interests of a fair and orderly market are best served by such
action.'').
\30\ See e.g., BATS Rules 22.3(a) (``An Options Member that has
qualified as an Options Market Maker may register to make markets in
individual series of options''); NOM, Chapter VII, Section 3(a)
(``An Options Participant that has qualified as an Options Market
Maker may register to make markets in individual options.'').
\31\ See e.g., PHLX Rule 3212(b) (``A PSX Market Maker may
become registered in an issue by entering a registration request via
an Exchange approved electronic interface with PSX's systems or by
contacting PSX Market Operations. Registration shall become
effective on the day the registration request is entered''); PHLX
Rule 3220(a) (``A market maker may voluntarily terminate its
registration in a security by withdrawing its two-sided quotation
from PSX. A PSX Market Maker that voluntarily terminates its
registration in a security may not re-register as a market maker for
one (1) business day.''). See also BATS Rules 22.3(b) (``An Options
Market Maker may become registered in a series by entering a
registration request via an Exchange approved electronic interface
with the Exchange's systems by 9:00 a.m. Eastern time. Registration
shall become effective on the day the registration request is
entered''); NOM, Chapter VII, Section 3(b) (``An Options Market
Maker may become registered in an option by entering a registration
request via a Nasdaq approved electronic interface with Nasdaq's
systems. Registration shall become effective on the day the
registration request is entered.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 923NY(d)(1) to state that
``Market Makers must have the number of ATPs required under the Fee
Schedule for its
[[Page 18887]]
appointment as a Market Maker in option issues,'' which the Exchange
believes adds clarity to the Rule.\32\ In addition, the Exchange
proposes to modify Rule 923NY(d)(2) to provide that ``Floor Market
Makers shall be appointed to a Trading Zone on the Floor,'' \33\ to
conform this provision to other changes proposed herein, which are
designed to streamline the Exchange's appointment process.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See proposed Rule 923NY(d)(1).
\33\ The Exchange also proposes to capitalize ``Floor'' in the
first sentence of Rule 923NY(d)(1) to add clarity and consistency to
Exchange rules.
\34\ This proposed change also conforms to the latter portion of
Rule 923NY(d)(2) which provides that ``Specialists shall be
appointed to the Trading Zone designated for their issues.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to modify the text in paragraph (h) of
the Rule. As proposed, a Market Maker would continue to be permitted to
``seek review of any action taken by the Exchange, in accordance with
Section 9A of the Office Rules, as applicable.'' However, to clarify
the rule text, the Exchange proposes to delete the unnecessary clause
``including the denial of the appointment for, or the termination or
suspension of, a Market Maker's appointment in an option issue or
issues.'' \35\ The Exchange's denial, termination, or suspension of a
Market Maker's appointment would continue to be reviewable under
Section 9A of the Office Rules, as would other applicable actions taken
by the Exchange under Rule 923NY.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See Rule 923NY(h) (``A Market Maker may seek review of any
action taken by the Exchange pursuant to this Rule in accordance
with Section 9A of the Office Rules, as applicable.'').
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 923NY(j) states that the Exchange will conduct periodic
evaluations of Market Makers to determine whether they have fulfilled
the requisite performance standards. The Exchange proposes to add ``the
financial resources available to the Market Maker'' and ``the Market
Maker's operational capability'' as factors the Exchange will consider
in its evaluations conducted pursuant to Rule 923NY(j).\37\ The
additional considerations the Exchange proposes to include in its
periodic evaluations under Rule 923NY (j) are currently among the
considerations of the Exchange in approving a Market Maker's
appointment.\38\ In connection with the Exchange's proposed changes to
the process for Market Makers' appointments to options classes, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate these approval provisions. Because
financial resources and operational capability are important
considerations in a Market Maker's performance, the Exchange proposes
to retain these factors for consideration in the Exchange's periodic
evaluation of Market Maker performance.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See proposed Rule 923NY(j) (``The Exchange will
periodically conduct an evaluation of Market Makers to determine
whether they have fulfilled performance standards relating to, among
other things, quality of markets, competition among Market Makers,
observance of ethical standards, and administrative factors. The
Exchange may consider any relevant information including, but not
limited to, the results of a Market Maker evaluation, trading data,
a Market Maker's regulatory history, the financial resources
available to the Market Maker, the Market Maker's operational
capability, and such other factors and data as may be pertinent in
the circumstances.'').
\38\ See Rule 923NY(c)(2) and (4).
\39\ The Exchange is not proposing any changes to Rule
923NY(j)(1), which sets forth the actions that the Exchange may
take, after affording a Market Maker written notice and an
opportunity for hearing pursuant to Section 9A should the Exchange
find a Market Maker is failing to meet minimum performance
standards. See Rule 923NY(j)(1). The Exchange however proposes to
delete the word ``primary'' from Rule 923NY(j)(1)(A) so that the
clause refers simply to the ``Market Maker's appointment,'' which
change would add clarity and consistency to Exchange rules. See
proposed Rule 923NY(j)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule 923NY(j)(2) to
reflect the proposed changes to the Market Maker appointment process.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to change the reference to a Market
Maker being ``re-appointed'' by the Exchange if an option issue or
issues has been terminated pursuant to this subsection (j), and to
instead provide that ``the Exchange may restrict a Market Maker's
registration as a Market Maker in that option issue or issues for a
period not to exceed 6 months.'' \40\ This proposal continues to give
the Exchange discretion to suspend that Market Maker's appointment in
the affected option issue(s) for a full six months, or to allow that
Market Maker to resume that appointment earlier than the prescribed
six-month period, based on the Exchange's evaluation of the facts and
circumstances. The Exchange believes the proposed change is necessary
so that Rule 923NY(j)(2) is consistent with the proposed changes in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of Rule 923NY to the process for Market
Makers to register and change their appointments to options classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See proposed Rule 923NY(j)(2) (``If a Market Maker's
appointment in an option issue or issues has been terminated
pursuant to this subsection (j), the Market Maker may not register
as a Market Maker in that option issue or issues for a period not to
exceed 6 months.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \41\ of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\42\ in particular, in that
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\42\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change removes
impediments to a free and open market because it would enable Market
Makers to manage their appointments with more flexibility and in a
timelier manner. The Exchange believes the proposed change would reduce
the burden on both Market Makers and Exchange staff, which would result
in a fair and reasonable use of resources to the benefit of all market
participants. In particular, the proposal to allow Market Makers to
select their appointments, and make changes thereto, via an Exchange-
approved electronic interface is consistent with [sic] Act because it
would provide Market Makers with more efficient access to the
securities in which they want to make markets and thus more quickly
begin disseminating competitive quotations in those securities, which
would provide additional liquidity and enhance competition in those
securities. The Exchange also believes that preventing Market Makers
from being able to withdraw an option issue from its appointment on the
same day that it submits the request (as such requests are processed on
an overnight basis for effectiveness on the following business day)
would serve to promote just and equitable principles of trade and
benefit investors and the public interest.
In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal to allow
Market Makers to make selections or changes to their appointment
without first obtaining explicit Exchange approval is likewise
consistent with the Act. First, because financial resources and
operational capability are important considerations in a Market Maker's
performance, the Exchange proposes to retain these factors for
consideration in the Exchange's periodic evaluation of Market Maker
performance. The Exchange believes that adding these factors to the
Exchange's consideration would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and would benefit investors and the
public interest. In addition, as noted above, the Exchange would
continue to have authority to
[[Page 18888]]
suspend or terminate any Market Maker appointment in the interest of a
fair and orderly market, including if necessary to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices and protect investors, or if a
Market Maker does not satisfy its obligations with respect to an
appointment.\43\ The Exchange would also retain the ability to restrict
a Market Maker's registration in option issues for up to six months if
a Market Maker's appointment in that option issue or issues had been
previously terminated under the rule, and continues to give the
Exchange discretion to allow the Market Maker to resume that
appointment earlier than the prescribed six-month period or to maintain
the suspension for the entire period. Finally, the Exchange is not
proposing changes to the disciplinary and appeals process for Market
Makers that do not meet the minimum performance standards. Accordingly,
the Exchange believes this proposal is consistent with Section 6(d) of
the Exchange Act.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Rule 923NY(g). See also Rule 921NY (regarding the
Exchange's ability to suspend or terminate a Market Maker's
registration based on ``a determination of any substantial or
continued failure by such Market Maker to engage in dealings in
accordance with Rules 925NY or 923NY'', which outline the
obligations of Market Makers).
\44\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change would not result in unfair discrimination,
as it applies to all Market Makers. Further, the proposed rule change
would reduce the burden on Market Makers to manage their appointments
and thus provide liquidity to the Exchange. Nevertheless, Market Makers
would still be required to comply with certain obligations to maintain
their status as a Market Maker, including that they provide continuous,
two-sided quotations in their appointed securities.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See Rule 925.1NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, as noted above, the proposed modifications to the
appointment process would align the rules of the Exchange with the
rules of other options exchanges, where Market Makers presently have
the ability to select and make changes to their appointment via an
Exchange-approved electronic interface.\46\ The Exchange believes this
consistency across exchanges would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market by ensuring that members,
regulators and the public can more easily navigate the Exchange's
rulebook and better understand the appointment process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See supra nn. 4, 30, 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it provides the same
relief to a group of similarly situated market participants--Market
Makers. The proposed rule change would reduce the burden on Market
Makers to manage their appointments and thus provide liquidity to the
Exchange.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change would help
Market Makers to the detriment of market participants on other
exchanges, particularly because the proposed functionality is similar
to functionality already available on other exchanges.\47\ Market
Makers would still be subject to the same obligations with respect to
its appointments; the proposed rule change would make the appointment
process more efficient for Market Makers. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change would relieve any burden on, or otherwise
promote, competition, as it would enable Market Makers to manage their
appointments with more flexibility and in a timelier manner. The
Exchange believes this would provide Market Makers with more efficient
access to the securities in which they want to make markets and thus
more quickly begin disseminating competitive quotations in those
securities, which would provide additional liquidity and enhance
competition in those securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-2015-17 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-2015-17. 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-NYSEMKT-2015-17, and should
be submitted on or before April 29, 2015.
[[Page 18889]]
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07964 Filed 4-7-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P