Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 6.37B Regarding Market Maker Quotations, 11964-11967 [2017-03727]
Download as PDF
11964
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 37 / Monday, February 27, 2017 / Notices
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
filings will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE
Clear Europe’s Web site at https://
www.theice.com/clear-europe/
regulation#rule-filings.
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–ICEEU–2017–001 and
should be submitted on or before March
20, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.9
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–03731 Filed 2–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
[Release No. 34–80072; File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2017–17]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend Rule 6.37B
Regarding Market Maker Quotations
February 21, 2017.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
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 February
10, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘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
Rule 6.37B regarding Market Maker
Quotations, including to adopt a Market
Maker Light Only Quotation. The
proposed rule change is available on the
9 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
20:23 Feb 24, 2017
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Exchange’s Web site at www.nyse.com,
at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
Jkt 241001
The purpose of this filing is to modify
Rule 6.37B regarding Market Maker
Quotations. Rule 6.37B(a) provides that
a Market Maker may enter quotes in the
option issues included in its
appointment. The Exchange proposes to
amend Rule 6.37B(a) to define Market
Maker quotes, add a new quote type,
and specify how such quotes would be
processed when a series is open for
trading.
Defining Market Maker Quotes and
Adopting Market Maker Light Only
Quotes
First, the Exchange proposes to define
Market Maker quotes to provide that
‘‘[t]he term ‘quote’ or ‘quotation’ means
a bid or offer entered by a Market Maker
that updates the Market Maker’s
previous bid or offer, if any.’’ 4 This
proposed definition, which would add
clarity, transparency, and internal
consistency to Exchange rules, is
identical or substantially identical to the
way quotes are defined on at least two
other options exchanges.5 Consistent
with this change, the Exchange also
proposes to modify the current
definition of ‘‘Quote with Size’’ to
include a cross reference to the
proposed definition of quotation, which
4 See
proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(1).
e.g., International Securities Exchange Rule
100(42). See also BOX Options Exchange LLC Rule
100(a)(55) (providing that ‘‘[t]he term ‘quote’ or
‘quotation’ means a bid or offer entered by a Market
Maker as a firm order that updates the Market
Maker’s previous bid or offer, if any’’).
5 See,
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
would add clarity and transparency to
Exchange rules.6
Second, the Exchange proposes to add
a Market Maker Light Only Quotation
(‘‘MMLO’’) to provide Market Makers
the option to designate incoming quotes
to trade solely with displayed interest
on the Consolidated Book.7 This
proposed change would allow Market
Makers to designate quotes as MMLO to
prevent such quotes from trading with
undisplayed liquidity upon arrival.
Once an MMLO is added to the
Consolidated Book, the MMLO
designation no longer applies and any
unexecuted portion could trade with
displayed and undisplayed interest. The
Exchange believes that this functionality
would give Market Makers greater
control over the circumstances in which
their quotes interact with contra-side
trading interest on the Exchange. This
increase in control is desirable from the
perspective of Market Makers because it
is difficult for them to account for
undisplayed liquidity in their quoting
models.8 Because the options market is
quote driven, Market Makers are vital to
the price discovery process, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
MMLO would provide Market Makers
with a greater level of determinism, in
terms of managing their exposure, and
thus may encourage more aggressive
liquidity provision, resulting in more
trading opportunities and tighter
spreads. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the proposal would
improve overall market quality and
enhance competition on the Exchange to
the benefit to all market participants.
The Exchange notes that all market
participants, including Market Makers,
already have the ability to avoid trading
with undisplayed liquidity by entering
Post No Preference Light Order (‘‘PNPLight Orders’’), which have existed on
the Exchange since 2009.9 With the
adoption of the MMLO, the Exchange is
proposing a similar functionality for use
6 See proposed Rule 6.1(b)(33) (providing that
‘‘the term ‘Quote with Size’ means a quotation (as
defined in Rule 6.37B(a)(1)) to buy or sell a specific
number of option contracts at a specific price that
a Market Maker has submitted to the NYSE Arca OX
trading system through an electronic interface’’).
7 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(2).
8 The Exchange understands that, while a Market
Maker’s quoting algorithm can take into account
displayed liquidity in the marketplace, the
algorithm may not be able to accurately account for
the risk of interacting with undisplayed liquidity.
9 See Securities Exchange Act Release 59603
(March 19, 2009), 74 FR 13279 (March 26, 2009)
(SR–NYSEArca–2009–21) (immediately effective
filing to adopt PNP-Light Order type). See also Rule
6.62(v) (defining PNP-Light Orders as non-routable
orders that are only eligible to execute against
displayed liquidity).
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 37 / Monday, February 27, 2017 / Notices
by Market Makers when quoting.10 The
Exchange also notes that other options
exchanges have recently adopted quote
types designed to strengthen market
making.11
*
*
*
*
*
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Specifying the Treatment of Market
Maker Quotes, Including MMLOs
The Exchange also proposes to modify
and add detail regarding how Market
Maker quotes, including MMLOs, would
be processed when a series is open for
trading. As discussed below, the
Exchange’s proposal to modify the
processing of Market Maker quotations
aligns with the NMS plan for Options
Order Protection And Locked/Crossed
Market Plan (‘‘Plan’’), to which the
Exchange is a party.12
The Exchange proposes to change the
treatment of incoming quotations,
including the conditions under which
quotes would be cancelled or rejected.
Specifically, as proposed, an incoming
quotation would only trade against
contra-side interest in the Consolidated
Book at prices that would not trade
through interest on another Market
10 The Exchange previously offered (and later
eliminated) a Post No Preference Light Only
Quotation (‘‘PNPLO’’), which, like the MMLO,
allowed Market Makers to designate certain
quotations to only interact with displayed liquidity.
The Commission approved the PNPLO, in part, on
grounds that market participants, including Market
Makers, could achieve functionality similar to the
PNPLO through use of the PNP-Light Order and that
the PNPLO offer similar functionality for use by
Market Makers when quoting. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 67252 (June 25, 2012),
77 FR 38879 (June 29, 2012) (SR–NYSEArca–2012–
05) (order approving adoption of PNPLO, applicable
to Penny Pilot issues only); 68339 (December 3,
2012), 77 FR 73109 (December 7, 2012) (SR–
NYSEArca–2012–130) (immediately effective filing
extending the PNPLO to non-Penny Pilot issues).
The PNPLO was eliminated approximately one year
after it was adopted because the functionality was
not implemented in the time period contemplated.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34–69641
(May 28, 2013), 78 FR 33134 (June 3, 2013) (SR–
NYSEArca–2013–51) (immediately effective filing
deleting reference to the PNPLO from Rule
6.62(cc)).
11 The Exchange notes that BOX recently added
functionality to only accept quotes that add
liquidity. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
79311 (October 3 [sic], 2016), 81 FR 83322
(November 15 [sic], 2016) (SR–BOX–2016–45)
(order approving change to only accept liquidityadding quotes); 78946 (September 27, 2016), 81 FR
68069 (October 3, 2016) (notice). See also BOX IM–
8050–3 (providing that ‘‘[i]f an incoming quote is
marketable against the BOX Book and will execute
against a resting order or quote, it will be rejected’’).
12 See Plan, dated April 14, 2009, available here,
https://www.optionsclearing.com/components/docs/
clearing/services/options_order_protection_
plan.pdf. See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 60405 (July 30, 2009), 74 FR 39362 (August 6,
2009) (File No. 4–546) (order approving the Plan).
Consistent with the Plan, the rules of the Exchange
include prohibitions against trade-throughs and a
pattern or practice of displaying certain quotations
that lock or cross away markets. See, e.g., Rules
6.94, 6.95. See also infra note 20.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:23 Feb 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
Center.13 Any untraded size of an
incoming quote would be added to the
Consolidated Book, unless it locks or
crosses interest on another Market
Center or if the quote is an MMLO and
locks or crosses undisplayed interest.14
The proposed rule would state that
when such quantity of an incoming
quote is cancelled (as opposed to being
rejected outright), the Exchange would
also cancel the Market Maker’s current
quote on the opposite side of the
market. In other words, both sides of the
Market Maker’s quote residing on the
Consolidated Book would be cancelled,
which allows a Market Maker to refresh
both its bid and offer simultaneously.
In addition, as proposed, an incoming
quotation would be rejected if it locks
or crosses interest on another Market
Center and if it cannot trade with
interest in the Consolidated Book at
prices that do not trade through another
Market Center.15 An incoming quotation
designated as MMLO would be rejected
if it locks or crosses undisplayed
interest and cannot trade with displayed
interest in the Consolidated Book at
prices that do not trade through another
Market Center.16 The proposed rule
would specify that when an incoming
quote is rejected outright (as opposed to
being cancelled after a partial fill), the
Exchange would also cancel the Market
Maker’s current quote on the same side
of the market.17 Such treatment
recognizes that the Market Maker
attempted (unsuccessfully) to update its
bid or offer price and allows the Market
Maker to refresh that side of its quote.
In addition, when a series is open for
trading, a quote will trade only against
interest in the Consolidated Book and
will not route. The Exchange does not
route Market Maker quotations because
such quotes are designed to meet the
Market Maker’s obligation to have
displayed quotations on the Exchange.
The Exchange proposes to specify this
functionality in Exchange rules.18
The Exchange believes that processing
Market Maker quotations, as described
in the proposed rules, aligns with the
Plan.19 The Plan obligates the
participating exchanges to provide order
protection, including addressing locked
and crossed markets and the potential
13 See proposed 6.37B(a)(3)(A). See Rule 6.1A(6)
(defining Market Center as ‘‘a national securities
exchange that has qualified for participation in the
Options Clearing Corporation pursuant to the
provisions of the rules of the Options Clearing
Corporation’’).
14 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(B)(i).
15 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C)(i).
16 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C)(ii).
17 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C).
18 See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3), (D).
19 See Plan, supra note 12.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11965
for trade-throughs in certain options
classes.20 The Plan establishes various
obligations for participating exchanges,
including that Market Makers should
‘‘reasonably avoid displaying, and shall
not engage in a pattern or practice of
displaying, any quotations that lock or
cross’’ the best bid or offer on another
Market Center.21 The Plan further
obligates participating exchanges to
conduct surveillance of their respective
markets on a regular basis to ascertain
the effectiveness of the policies and
procedures to prevent trade-throughs
and to take prompt action to remedy
deficiencies in such policies and
procedures.22 Because Market Maker
quotations do not route, and incoming
quotes, or portions thereof, would reject
or cancel if such quotes locked or
crossed away markets, the Exchange
believes the proposal is consistent with
the requirements of the Plan. In
addition, the proposed processing of
quotes is consistent with the Plan
because it avoids trading-through better
prices on other exchange and locking or
crossing markets. In addition, the
Exchange believes this proposal would
assist Market Makers in maintaining a
fair and orderly market, as it would
encourage Market Makers to provide
greater liquidity.
The Exchange notes that this proposal
does not relieve a Market Maker of its
continuous quoting, or firm quote,
obligations pursuant to Rules 6.37B and
6.86, respectively. Further, the
Exchange notes that Market Makers
would still be able to send orders in
(and out of) classes to which they are
appointed, as orders are not affected by
this proposal.
Implementation
The Exchange will announce the
implementation of the proposed rule
change by Trader Update, which
implementation will be no later than 30
days after the approval of this rule
change.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ‘‘Act’’),23 in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,24 in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
20 See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No.
60527 (August 18, 2009), 74 FR 43178 (August 26,
2009) (SR–NYSEArca–2009–45) (adopting and
updating Exchange rules to implement the Plan).
21 See Plan at Section 6(c), supra note 12.
22 See Plan at Section 5(a), supra note 12.
23 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
24 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
11966
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 37 / Monday, February 27, 2017 / Notices
equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
The proposal to add the definition of
Market Maker quotes would provide
clarity and transparency to Exchange
rules to the benefit of investors as the
additional clarity would promote just
and equitable principles of trade and
remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system. The
proposed rule amendments would also
provide internal consistency within
Exchange rules and operate to protect
investors and the investing public by
making the Exchange rules easier to
navigate and comprehend. Because the
proposed definition of quotes is
identical or substantially identical to
definitions provided on other options
exchanges, the proposal presents no
new or novel issues.25
The proposal to offer to Market
Makers the ability to designate quotes as
MMLO would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system because it would provide Market
Makers with increased control over
interactions with contra-side liquidity.
Specifically, the proposal would
improve market making on the
Exchange because it would prevent
incoming Market Maker quotes from
trading with resting undisplayed
interest, which interest is difficult to
take into account in quoting models.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that
the proposed MMLO designation would
provide Market Makers with a greater
level of determinism, in terms of
managing their exposure, and would
encourage more aggressive liquidity
provision, resulting in more trading
opportunities for market participants
and tighter spreads. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that the proposal
would improve overall market quality
and improve competition on the
Exchange, to the benefit of all market
participants. Moreover, the Exchange
notes that all market participants,
including Market Makers, already have
the ability to avoid trading with
undisplayed liquidity interest by
entering PNP-Light Orders.26 The
proposal to adopt MMLO simply
extends existing functionality to Market
Maker quotes.27
Because market participants that enter
undisplayed interest (e.g., PNP-Blind
25 See
supra note 5.
supra note 9.
27 See supra note 11.
26 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:23 Feb 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
Orders or orders with reserve size) 28 are
opting not to have their interest
displayed, the Exchange believes it is
consistent with the Act for Market
Makers to choose to designate their
quotes not to trade with such
undisplayed interest.29 For the forgoing
reasons, the Exchange believes that the
proposal to offer to Market Makers the
option to designate their quotes as
MMLO is not unfairly discriminatory.
The Exchange also believes that such
offering would protect investors and the
public interest because it may
contribute to more aggressive quoting by
Market Makers, which should increase
the quality of the Exchange’s market and
benefit investors.
The proposal to add detail and amend
the treatment of Market Maker quotes is
consistent with, and facilitates the
Exchange meeting its obligations under
the Plan and, thus, would remove
impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system. The
Exchange believes the proposed
processing of quotes is consistent with
the Plan because it avoids trading
through better prices on other exchanges
and is designed to avoid locking and
crossing markets. By preventing Market
Makers from locking or crossing trading
interest on away Market Centers, the
proposal would prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices and
would promote just and equitable
principles of trade to the benefit of all
market participants. The Exchange also
believes the proposal regarding how the
Exchange processes quotes in the event
that an incoming quote is rejected, or a
portion thereof is cancelled, would
promote just and equitable principles of
trade. Specifically, the proposed rules
would enable Market Makers to
simultaneously update both sides of
their resting quote when one side of the
quote received a partial fill but was
subsequently cancelled and, where one
side of a quote is rejected and not
booked, to leave undisturbed that
opposite-side interest because it remains
valid. The Exchange believes this
proposed handling of quotes would
assist Market Makers in maintaining a
28 See Rule 6.62(u) (providing that a PNP Blind
Order is a Limit Order to buy or sell that is to be
executed in whole or in part on the Exchange, and
the portion not so executed is to be ranked in the
Consolidated Book, without routing any portion of
the order to another Market Center) and (d)(3)
(providing that a Reserve Order is ‘‘a limit order
with a portion of the size displayed and with a
reserve portion of the size (‘reserve size’) that is not
displayed on NYSE Arca’’).
29 In this regard, the Exchange notes that
undisplayed liquidity is not afforded trade-through
protection under Section 5 of the Plan. See Plan,
supra note 12.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
fair and orderly market as it would
encourage Market Makers to provide
greater volumes of liquidity, which
would add value to market making on
the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that the entire
proposal is just, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory, as it would
apply to all Market Makers on the
Exchange. Further, the proposal would
protect investors and the public interest
by providing a more robust market,
including because the proposal may
contribute to more aggressive quoting by
Market Makers. The Exchange believes
that the proposal would lead to
enhanced liquidity on the Exchange,
which in turn will benefit and protect
investors and the public interest
through the potential for greater volume
of orders and executions on the
Exchange.
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. The
Exchange believes the proposal adds
value to market making on the
Exchange. The Exchange does not
believe the proposal would impose a
burden on competition among the
options exchanges because of vigorous
competition for order flow among the
options exchanges. In this highly
competitive market, market participants
can easily and readily direct order flow
to competing venues. The proposal does
not impose an undue burden on
intramarket competition because the
proposed change would apply to all
Market Makers on the Exchange. The
proposal is structured to offer the same
enhancement to all Market Makers,
regardless of size, and would not
impose a competitive burden on any
participant.
The proposed MMLO, which provides
Market Makers with enhanced
determinism over their quotes, may
contribute to more aggressive quoting by
Market Makers, resulting in more
trading opportunities and tighter
spreads. To the extent this purpose is
achieved, the MMLO would enhance
the market making function on the
Exchange, which would improve overall
market quality and improve competition
on the Exchange to the benefit of all
market participants.
The Exchange believes the proposal is
pro-competitive because when an
exchange offers enhanced functionality
that distinguishes it from other
exchanges and participants find it
useful, it has been the Exchange’s
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 37 / Monday, February 27, 2017 / Notices
experience that competing exchanges
will move to adopt similar functionality.
Thus, the Exchange believes that this
type of competition amongst exchanges
is beneficial to the market place as a
whole as it can result in enhanced
processes, functionality, and
technologies.
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 such longer period up to 90
days (i) as the Commission may
designate if it finds such longer period
to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which
the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
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:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
NYSEArca–2017–17 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSEArca–2017–17. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:23 Feb 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–
NYSEArca–2017–17 and should be
submitted on or before March 20, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.30
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–03727 Filed 2–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–80074; File No. SR–Phlx–
2016–105]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing of
Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Amend Rules
501, 507, 508, 510, and 511 of the
Exchange
February 21, 2017.
I. Introduction
On December 21, 2016, NASDAQ
PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to amend Rule 501 (Specialist
Appointment), Rule 507 (Application
for Approval as an SQT, RSQT, or
RSQTO and Assignment in Options),
Rule 508 (Transfer Application), Rule
30 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11967
510 (SQT and RSQT Performance
Evaluation), and Rule 511 (Specialist
Allocation and Performance
Evaluation).3 The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the
Federal Register on January 9, 2017.4
On February 15, 2017, the Exchange
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed
rule change, which superseded the
original filing in its entirety.5 The
Commission received no comments on
the proposed rule change. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comment on Amendment No. 1
to the proposed rule change from
interested persons, and is approving the
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated
basis.
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1
The Exchange proposes to amend
certain of its Series 500 Rules
concerning the treatment of Specialists,6
SQTs,7 and RSQTs.8
3 See infra notes 6–8 for definitions of Specialist,
SQT, RSQT, and RSQTO.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79724
(January 3, 2017), 82 FR 2418 (‘‘Notice’’).
5 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1)
Specified that members of the panel that may be
appointed by the Board of Directors to consider
certain appeals may not have been involved at all
in the decision appealed from (rather than not being
materially involved) and must otherwise have no
conflict of interest; and (2) clarified that when
selecting members for such panel, the Board of
Directors shall choose individuals whose
background, experience, and training qualify them
to consider and make determinations regarding the
subject matter to be presented to the panel (rather
than considering these factors to the extent
practicable). To promote transparency of its
proposed amendment, when Phlx filed Amendment
No. 1 with the Commission, it also submitted
Amendment No. 1 as a comment letter to the file,
which the Commission posted on its Web site and
placed in the public comment file for SR–Phlx–
2016–105 (available at https://www.sec.gov/
comments/sr-phlx-2016-105/phlx2016105-1589879132169.pdf). The Exchange also posted a copy of its
Amendment No. 1 on its Web site (https://
nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQPHLX/pdf/
phlx-filings/2016/SR-Phlx-2016-105_Amendment_
1.pdf) when it filed Amendment No. 1 with the
Commission.
6 A ‘‘Specialist’’ is an Exchange member who is
registered as an options specialist pursuant to Rule
1020(a). A ‘‘Remote Specialist’’ is an options
specialist that does not have a physical presence on
an Exchange floor. See Rule 1020(a)(i) and (ii).
7 An ‘‘ROT’’ is a regular member of the Exchange
located on the trading floor who has received
permission from the Exchange to trade in options
for his own account. See Rule 1014(b)(i). A
‘‘Streaming Quote Trader’’ or ‘‘SQT’’ is an ROT who
has received permission from the Exchange to
generate and submit option quotations
electronically in options to which such SQT is
assigned. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A).
8 A ‘‘Remote Streaming Quote Trader’’ or ‘‘RSQT’’
is an ROT that is a member affiliated with a
‘‘Remote Streaming Quote Trader Organization’’ or
‘‘RSQTO’’ with no physical trading floor presence
Continued
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 37 (Monday, February 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11964-11967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03727]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-80072; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-17]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 6.37B Regarding Market Maker
Quotations
February 21, 2017.
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 February 10, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``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 Rule 6.37B regarding Market Maker
Quotations, including to adopt a Market Maker Light Only Quotation. 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of this filing is to modify Rule 6.37B regarding Market
Maker Quotations. Rule 6.37B(a) provides that a Market Maker may enter
quotes in the option issues included in its appointment. The Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 6.37B(a) to define Market Maker quotes, add a
new quote type, and specify how such quotes would be processed when a
series is open for trading.
Defining Market Maker Quotes and Adopting Market Maker Light Only
Quotes
First, the Exchange proposes to define Market Maker quotes to
provide that ``[t]he term `quote' or `quotation' means a bid or offer
entered by a Market Maker that updates the Market Maker's previous bid
or offer, if any.'' \4\ This proposed definition, which would add
clarity, transparency, and internal consistency to Exchange rules, is
identical or substantially identical to the way quotes are defined on
at least two other options exchanges.\5\ Consistent with this change,
the Exchange also proposes to modify the current definition of ``Quote
with Size'' to include a cross reference to the proposed definition of
quotation, which would add clarity and transparency to Exchange
rules.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(1).
\5\ See, e.g., International Securities Exchange Rule 100(42).
See also BOX Options Exchange LLC Rule 100(a)(55) (providing that
``[t]he term `quote' or `quotation' means a bid or offer entered by
a Market Maker as a firm order that updates the Market Maker's
previous bid or offer, if any'').
\6\ See proposed Rule 6.1(b)(33) (providing that ``the term
`Quote with Size' means a quotation (as defined in Rule 6.37B(a)(1))
to buy or sell a specific number of option contracts at a specific
price that a Market Maker has submitted to the NYSE Arca OX trading
system through an electronic interface'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the Exchange proposes to add a Market Maker Light Only
Quotation (``MMLO'') to provide Market Makers the option to designate
incoming quotes to trade solely with displayed interest on the
Consolidated Book.\7\ This proposed change would allow Market Makers to
designate quotes as MMLO to prevent such quotes from trading with
undisplayed liquidity upon arrival. Once an MMLO is added to the
Consolidated Book, the MMLO designation no longer applies and any
unexecuted portion could trade with displayed and undisplayed interest.
The Exchange believes that this functionality would give Market Makers
greater control over the circumstances in which their quotes interact
with contra-side trading interest on the Exchange. This increase in
control is desirable from the perspective of Market Makers because it
is difficult for them to account for undisplayed liquidity in their
quoting models.\8\ Because the options market is quote driven, Market
Makers are vital to the price discovery process, the Exchange believes
that the proposed MMLO would provide Market Makers with a greater level
of determinism, in terms of managing their exposure, and thus may
encourage more aggressive liquidity provision, resulting in more
trading opportunities and tighter spreads. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the proposal would improve overall market quality and
enhance competition on the Exchange to the benefit to all market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(2).
\8\ The Exchange understands that, while a Market Maker's
quoting algorithm can take into account displayed liquidity in the
marketplace, the algorithm may not be able to accurately account for
the risk of interacting with undisplayed liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange notes that all market participants, including Market
Makers, already have the ability to avoid trading with undisplayed
liquidity by entering Post No Preference Light Order (``PNP-Light
Orders''), which have existed on the Exchange since 2009.\9\ With the
adoption of the MMLO, the Exchange is proposing a similar functionality
for use
[[Page 11965]]
by Market Makers when quoting.\10\ The Exchange also notes that other
options exchanges have recently adopted quote types designed to
strengthen market making.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 59603 (March 19, 2009),
74 FR 13279 (March 26, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-21) (immediately
effective filing to adopt PNP-Light Order type). See also Rule
6.62(v) (defining PNP-Light Orders as non-routable orders that are
only eligible to execute against displayed liquidity).
\10\ The Exchange previously offered (and later eliminated) a
Post No Preference Light Only Quotation (``PNPLO''), which, like the
MMLO, allowed Market Makers to designate certain quotations to only
interact with displayed liquidity. The Commission approved the
PNPLO, in part, on grounds that market participants, including
Market Makers, could achieve functionality similar to the PNPLO
through use of the PNP-Light Order and that the PNPLO offer similar
functionality for use by Market Makers when quoting. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 67252 (June 25, 2012), 77 FR 38879 (June
29, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-05) (order approving adoption of PNPLO,
applicable to Penny Pilot issues only); 68339 (December 3, 2012), 77
FR 73109 (December 7, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-130) (immediately
effective filing extending the PNPLO to non-Penny Pilot issues). The
PNPLO was eliminated approximately one year after it was adopted
because the functionality was not implemented in the time period
contemplated. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-69641 (May
28, 2013), 78 FR 33134 (June 3, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-51)
(immediately effective filing deleting reference to the PNPLO from
Rule 6.62(cc)).
\11\ The Exchange notes that BOX recently added functionality to
only accept quotes that add liquidity. See Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 79311 (October 3 [sic], 2016), 81 FR 83322 (November 15
[sic], 2016) (SR-BOX-2016-45) (order approving change to only accept
liquidity-adding quotes); 78946 (September 27, 2016), 81 FR 68069
(October 3, 2016) (notice). See also BOX IM-8050-3 (providing that
``[i]f an incoming quote is marketable against the BOX Book and will
execute against a resting order or quote, it will be rejected'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Specifying the Treatment of Market Maker Quotes, Including MMLOs
The Exchange also proposes to modify and add detail regarding how
Market Maker quotes, including MMLOs, would be processed when a series
is open for trading. As discussed below, the Exchange's proposal to
modify the processing of Market Maker quotations aligns with the NMS
plan for Options Order Protection And Locked/Crossed Market Plan
(``Plan''), to which the Exchange is a party.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Plan, dated April 14, 2009, available here, https://www.optionsclearing.com/components/docs/clearing/services/options_order_protection_plan.pdf. See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 60405 (July 30, 2009), 74 FR 39362 (August 6, 2009)
(File No. 4-546) (order approving the Plan). Consistent with the
Plan, the rules of the Exchange include prohibitions against trade-
throughs and a pattern or practice of displaying certain quotations
that lock or cross away markets. See, e.g., Rules 6.94, 6.95. See
also infra note 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to change the treatment of incoming
quotations, including the conditions under which quotes would be
cancelled or rejected. Specifically, as proposed, an incoming quotation
would only trade against contra-side interest in the Consolidated Book
at prices that would not trade through interest on another Market
Center.\13\ Any untraded size of an incoming quote would be added to
the Consolidated Book, unless it locks or crosses interest on another
Market Center or if the quote is an MMLO and locks or crosses
undisplayed interest.\14\ The proposed rule would state that when such
quantity of an incoming quote is cancelled (as opposed to being
rejected outright), the Exchange would also cancel the Market Maker's
current quote on the opposite side of the market. In other words, both
sides of the Market Maker's quote residing on the Consolidated Book
would be cancelled, which allows a Market Maker to refresh both its bid
and offer simultaneously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See proposed 6.37B(a)(3)(A). See Rule 6.1A(6) (defining
Market Center as ``a national securities exchange that has qualified
for participation in the Options Clearing Corporation pursuant to
the provisions of the rules of the Options Clearing Corporation'').
\14\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, as proposed, an incoming quotation would be rejected
if it locks or crosses interest on another Market Center and if it
cannot trade with interest in the Consolidated Book at prices that do
not trade through another Market Center.\15\ An incoming quotation
designated as MMLO would be rejected if it locks or crosses undisplayed
interest and cannot trade with displayed interest in the Consolidated
Book at prices that do not trade through another Market Center.\16\ The
proposed rule would specify that when an incoming quote is rejected
outright (as opposed to being cancelled after a partial fill), the
Exchange would also cancel the Market Maker's current quote on the same
side of the market.\17\ Such treatment recognizes that the Market Maker
attempted (unsuccessfully) to update its bid or offer price and allows
the Market Maker to refresh that side of its quote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C)(i).
\16\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C)(ii).
\17\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, when a series is open for trading, a quote will trade
only against interest in the Consolidated Book and will not route. The
Exchange does not route Market Maker quotations because such quotes are
designed to meet the Market Maker's obligation to have displayed
quotations on the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to specify this
functionality in Exchange rules.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See proposed Rule 6.37B(a)(3), (D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that processing Market Maker quotations, as
described in the proposed rules, aligns with the Plan.\19\ The Plan
obligates the participating exchanges to provide order protection,
including addressing locked and crossed markets and the potential for
trade-throughs in certain options classes.\20\ The Plan establishes
various obligations for participating exchanges, including that Market
Makers should ``reasonably avoid displaying, and shall not engage in a
pattern or practice of displaying, any quotations that lock or cross''
the best bid or offer on another Market Center.\21\ The Plan further
obligates participating exchanges to conduct surveillance of their
respective markets on a regular basis to ascertain the effectiveness of
the policies and procedures to prevent trade-throughs and to take
prompt action to remedy deficiencies in such policies and
procedures.\22\ Because Market Maker quotations do not route, and
incoming quotes, or portions thereof, would reject or cancel if such
quotes locked or crossed away markets, the Exchange believes the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Plan. In addition,
the proposed processing of quotes is consistent with the Plan because
it avoids trading-through better prices on other exchange and locking
or crossing markets. In addition, the Exchange believes this proposal
would assist Market Makers in maintaining a fair and orderly market, as
it would encourage Market Makers to provide greater liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Plan, supra note 12.
\20\ See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60527 (August
18, 2009), 74 FR 43178 (August 26, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-45)
(adopting and updating Exchange rules to implement the Plan).
\21\ See Plan at Section 6(c), supra note 12.
\22\ See Plan at Section 5(a), supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange notes that this proposal does not relieve a Market
Maker of its continuous quoting, or firm quote, obligations pursuant to
Rules 6.37B and 6.86, respectively. Further, the Exchange notes that
Market Makers would still be able to send orders in (and out of)
classes to which they are appointed, as orders are not affected by this
proposal.
Implementation
The Exchange will announce the implementation of the proposed rule
change by Trader Update, which implementation will be no later than 30
days after the approval of this rule change.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\23\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\24\
in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
[[Page 11966]]
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal to add the definition of Market Maker quotes would
provide clarity and transparency to Exchange rules to the benefit of
investors as the additional clarity would promote just and equitable
principles of trade and remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system. The
proposed rule amendments would also provide internal consistency within
Exchange rules and operate to protect investors and the investing
public by making the Exchange rules easier to navigate and comprehend.
Because the proposed definition of quotes is identical or substantially
identical to definitions provided on other options exchanges, the
proposal presents no new or novel issues.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal to offer to Market Makers the ability to designate
quotes as MMLO would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system because it would
provide Market Makers with increased control over interactions with
contra-side liquidity. Specifically, the proposal would improve market
making on the Exchange because it would prevent incoming Market Maker
quotes from trading with resting undisplayed interest, which interest
is difficult to take into account in quoting models. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that the proposed MMLO designation would provide
Market Makers with a greater level of determinism, in terms of managing
their exposure, and would encourage more aggressive liquidity
provision, resulting in more trading opportunities for market
participants and tighter spreads. Accordingly, the Exchange believes
that the proposal would improve overall market quality and improve
competition on the Exchange, to the benefit of all market participants.
Moreover, the Exchange notes that all market participants, including
Market Makers, already have the ability to avoid trading with
undisplayed liquidity interest by entering PNP-Light Orders.\26\ The
proposal to adopt MMLO simply extends existing functionality to Market
Maker quotes.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See supra note 9.
\27\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because market participants that enter undisplayed interest (e.g.,
PNP-Blind Orders or orders with reserve size) \28\ are opting not to
have their interest displayed, the Exchange believes it is consistent
with the Act for Market Makers to choose to designate their quotes not
to trade with such undisplayed interest.\29\ For the forgoing reasons,
the Exchange believes that the proposal to offer to Market Makers the
option to designate their quotes as MMLO is not unfairly
discriminatory. The Exchange also believes that such offering would
protect investors and the public interest because it may contribute to
more aggressive quoting by Market Makers, which should increase the
quality of the Exchange's market and benefit investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Rule 6.62(u) (providing that a PNP Blind Order is a
Limit Order to buy or sell that is to be executed in whole or in
part on the Exchange, and the portion not so executed is to be
ranked in the Consolidated Book, without routing any portion of the
order to another Market Center) and (d)(3) (providing that a Reserve
Order is ``a limit order with a portion of the size displayed and
with a reserve portion of the size (`reserve size') that is not
displayed on NYSE Arca'').
\29\ In this regard, the Exchange notes that undisplayed
liquidity is not afforded trade-through protection under Section 5
of the Plan. See Plan, supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal to add detail and amend the treatment of Market Maker
quotes is consistent with, and facilitates the Exchange meeting its
obligations under the Plan and, thus, would remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market
system. The Exchange believes the proposed processing of quotes is
consistent with the Plan because it avoids trading through better
prices on other exchanges and is designed to avoid locking and crossing
markets. By preventing Market Makers from locking or crossing trading
interest on away Market Centers, the proposal would prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices and would promote just and
equitable principles of trade to the benefit of all market
participants. The Exchange also believes the proposal regarding how the
Exchange processes quotes in the event that an incoming quote is
rejected, or a portion thereof is cancelled, would promote just and
equitable principles of trade. Specifically, the proposed rules would
enable Market Makers to simultaneously update both sides of their
resting quote when one side of the quote received a partial fill but
was subsequently cancelled and, where one side of a quote is rejected
and not booked, to leave undisturbed that opposite-side interest
because it remains valid. The Exchange believes this proposed handling
of quotes would assist Market Makers in maintaining a fair and orderly
market as it would encourage Market Makers to provide greater volumes
of liquidity, which would add value to market making on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that the entire proposal is just, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory, as it would apply to all Market Makers
on the Exchange. Further, the proposal would protect investors and the
public interest by providing a more robust market, including because
the proposal may contribute to more aggressive quoting by Market
Makers. The Exchange believes that the proposal would lead to enhanced
liquidity on the Exchange, which in turn will benefit and protect
investors and the public interest through the potential for greater
volume of orders and executions on the Exchange.
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. The Exchange believes the
proposal adds value to market making on the Exchange. The Exchange does
not believe the proposal would impose a burden on competition among the
options exchanges because of vigorous competition for order flow among
the options exchanges. In this highly competitive market, market
participants can easily and readily direct order flow to competing
venues. The proposal does not impose an undue burden on intramarket
competition because the proposed change would apply to all Market
Makers on the Exchange. The proposal is structured to offer the same
enhancement to all Market Makers, regardless of size, and would not
impose a competitive burden on any participant.
The proposed MMLO, which provides Market Makers with enhanced
determinism over their quotes, may contribute to more aggressive
quoting by Market Makers, resulting in more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads. To the extent this purpose is achieved, the MMLO would
enhance the market making function on the Exchange, which would improve
overall market quality and improve competition on the Exchange to the
benefit of all market participants.
The Exchange believes the proposal is pro-competitive because when
an exchange offers enhanced functionality that distinguishes it from
other exchanges and participants find it useful, it has been the
Exchange's
[[Page 11967]]
experience that competing exchanges will move to adopt similar
functionality. Thus, the Exchange believes that this type of
competition amongst exchanges is beneficial to the market place as a
whole as it can result in enhanced processes, functionality, and
technologies.
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 such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
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-NYSEArca-2017-17 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-17. 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 the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-17 and should
be submitted on or before March 20, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03727 Filed 2-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P