
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65274-65277]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27069]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76198; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2015-58]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving 
Proposed Rule Change, and Notice of Filing and Order Granting 
Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Adopting New Equity 
Trading Rules Relating to Trading Halts, Short Sales, Limit Up-Limit 
Down, and Odd Lots and Mixed Lots To Reflect the Implementation of 
Pillar, the Exchange's New Trading Technology Platform

October 20, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On July 1, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Arca'') 
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), 
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to 
adopt new equity trading rules relating to Trading Halts, Short Sales, 
Limit Up-Limit Down, and Odd Lots and Mixed Lots to reflect the 
implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's new trading technology 
platform. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
Federal Register on July 16, 2015.\3\ The Commission received no 
comment letters on the proposed rule change. On September 1, 2015, 
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\3\ the Commission designated a 
longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change, 
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to 
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.\4\ 
On October 15, 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the 
proposal.\5\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit 
comment on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and is approving 
the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an 
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75467 (July 22, 
2015), 80 FR 43515 (``Notice'').
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75800, 80 FR 53911 
(September 8, 2015).
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (i) Removes an erroneous 
reference to subparagraph (6) from proposed Rule 7.11P(b); (ii) 
amends proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(A) to add the phrase ``or lower 
than'' to clarify that short sale orders with a working price and/or 
display price below the NBB would also be re-priced to a Permitted 
Price; (iii) amend proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(C) to clarify that the 
Exchange would treat all odd lot orders ranked Priority 2--Display 
Orders in the same manner as Market Orders and other non-displayed 
orders; (iv) amend proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(D) to provide that all 
Pegged Orders and MPL Orders, including orders marked buy, sell 
long, and sell short exempt, would use the NBBO instead of the PBBO 
as the reference price; (v) amend proposed Rule 7.18P(b)(6) to 
specify that the Exchange would reject all ``incoming order 
instructions'' during a UTP Regulatory Halt other than those 
specified in proposed Rules 7.18P(b)(1)-(5); (vi) amend footnote 44 
of the Notice to add a reference to Limit IOC Orders designated with 
an MTS, change the rule reference for MPL-IOC Orders from Rule 
7.31P(c)(3)(E) to Rule 7.31P(d)(3)(E), and add a reference to Day 
ISO ALO Orders; and (vii) amend Rule 7.38P(b)(1) to add that if the 
limit price of an odd lot order to buy (sell) is above (below) the 
PBO (PBB), and the PBBO is crossed, it would have a working price 
equal to the PBB (PBO) to ensure that an odd lot order to buy (sell) 
would not have a working price below (above) the PBB (PBO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to adopt new equity trading rules relating to 
the implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's new trading technology 
platform. The Exchange proposes to adopt the following new Pillar 
rules: (1) Definition of ``Official Closing Price'' (NYSE Arca Equities 
Rule 1.1 (``Rule 1.1'')); (2) Clearly Erroneous Executions (NYSE Arca 
Equities Rule 7.10P (``Rule 7.10P'')); (3) Limit Up--Limit Down Plan 
and Trading Pauses in Individual Securities Due to Extraordinary Market 
Volatility (NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.11P (``Rule 7.11P'')); \6\ (4) 
Short Sales (NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.16P (``Rule 7.16P'')); (5) 
Trading Halts (NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.18P (``Rule 7.18P'')); and (6) 
Odd and Mixed Lots (NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.38P (``Rule 7.38P'')). In 
addition, the proposed new rules to support Pillar in this filing would 
use the terms and definitions that were proposed in the Pillar I Filing 
and Pillar II Filing.\7\ The Exchange also proposes to amend existing 
definitions in Rule 1.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Rule 7.11 and proposed Rule 7.11P implement the Plan to 
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility pursuant to Rule 608 of 
Regulation NMS (``LULD Plan''). See Securities Exchange Act Release 
No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-
631) (Order approving the LULD Plan).
    \7\ See infra notes 9 and 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Background

    The Exchange represents that Pillar is an integrated trading 
technology platform designed to use a single specification for 
connecting to the equities and options markets operated by Arca and its 
affiliates, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') and NYSE MKT LLC 
(``NYSE MKT'').\8\ On April 30, 2015, the Exchange filed its first rule 
filing relating to the implementation of Pillar, which proposed to 
adopt new rules relating to Trading Sessions, Order Ranking and 
Display, and Order Execution.\9\ On June 26, 2015, the Exchange filed 
the second rule filing relating to the implementation of Pillar to 
adopt new rules relating to Orders and Modifiers and the Retail 
Liquidity Program.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice at 43516.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74951 (May 13, 
2015), 80 FR 28721 (May 19, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-38) (``Pillar I 
Filing''). The Commission approved the Pillar I Filing on July 20, 
2015. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75494 (July 20, 2015), 
80 FR 44170 (July 24, 2015)
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75497 (July 21, 
2015), 80 FR 45022 (July 28, 2015) (notice of SR-NYSEArca-2015-56) 
(``Pillar II Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This filing is the third set of proposed rule changes to support 
Pillar implementation. As proposed, the new rules governing trading on 
Pillar would have the same numbering as current rules, but with the 
modifier ``P'' appended to the rule number. The Exchange proposes that 
rules with a ``P'' modifier would operate for symbols that are trading 
on the Pillar trading platform. If a symbol is trading on the Pillar 
trading platform, a rule with the same number as a rule with a ``P'' 
modifier would no longer operate for

[[Page 65275]]

that symbol and the Exchange would announce by Trader Update when 
symbols are trading on the Pillar trading platform. Definitions that do 
not have a companion version with a ``P'' modifier would continue to 
operate for all symbols.

B. Proposed Modifications

    As described in detail in the Notice, Rules 7.10P, 7.11P, 7.16P, 
7.18P, and 7.38P incorporate much of the substance of current NYSE Arca 
Rules 7.10, 7.11, 7.16, 7.18, and 7.38, respectively. However, with 
Pillar, the Exchange would introduce new terminology, reorganize and 
redraft certain provisions to improve clarity, and provide additional 
detail to other current provisions being redesignated. The Exchange 
also proposes to make several changes that are more substantive in 
nature, as follows:
     Adopt a new definition in Pillar to define the term 
``Official Closing Price,'' which would mean the reference price to 
determine the closing price in a security for purposes of Rule 7 
Equities Trading; \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed Rule 1.1(ggP); see also Notice at 43517. 
Proposed Rule 1.1(ggP)(1) would describe how the Official Closing 
Price would be determined for securities listed on the Exchange. As 
proposed, the Official Closing Price would be the price established 
in a Closing Auction of one round lot or more on a trading day. 
Because there may be circumstances when there is insufficient 
trading interest to have a closing auction trade of one round lot or 
more, the Exchange proposes to specify what price the Exchange would 
use as its Official Closing Price when there is no auction or a 
closing trade of less than a round lot. As proposed, if there is no 
Closing Auction or if a Closing Auction trade is less than a round 
lot on a trading day, the Official Closing Price would be the most 
recent consolidated last sale eligible trade during Core Trading 
Hours on that trading day. The rule would further provide that if 
there were no consolidated last sale eligible trades during Core 
Trading Hours on that trading day, the Official Price would be the 
prior trading day's Official Closing Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     during Core Trading Hours, the Exchange would halt trading 
during a UTP Regulatory Halt until it receives the first Price Band in 
a UTP Security; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See proposed Rule 7.18P(a); see also Notice at 43518.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     the Exchange would not conduct any Trading Halt Auctions 
in UTP Securities; \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See proposed rule 7.18P(b)(1); see also Notice at 43518.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Pegged Orders would not be cancelled during a UTP 
Regulatory Halt; \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     During a UTP Regulatory Halt, the Exchange would process a 
request to cancel and replace as a cancellation without replacing the 
order; \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See proposed rule 7.18P(b)(4); see also Notice at 43519.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     During a UTP Regulatory Halt, the Exchange would accept 
and route new Market Orders, Auction-Only Orders, Primary Only Market-
on-Open (``MOO'')/Limit on Open (``LOO'') Orders, Primary Only Day 
Orders, and Primary Only Market-on-Close (``MOC'')/Limit-on-Close 
(``LOC'') Orders to the primary listing market; \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed rule 7.18P(b)(5); see also Notice at 43519.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     As described more fully in the Notice, because Exchange-
listed securities would be eligible to participate in a Trading Halt 
Auction, the Exchange proposes to process orders in Exchange-listed 
securities differently than how it would process orders in UTP 
Securities; \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed rule 7.18P(c); see also Notice at 43519.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     As described more fully in the Notice, because of proposed 
substantive differences to how certain orders and modifiers would 
operate, the Exchange proposes different handling of certain orders in 
Pillar to comply with the requirements of Rule 201 of Regulation SHO 
(``Rule 201''); \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 242.201. See proposed rule 7.16P; see also Notice at 
43520-43523.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Exchange would use the Official closing Price for 
purposes of determining the Trigger Price for the Short Sale Price Test 
in exchange-listed securities; \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See proposed rule 7.16P(f)(2); see also Notice at 43520.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     An Exchange Trading Permit (``ETP'') Holder's instruction 
to reject back individual short sale orders subject to the short sale 
price test would apply to resting orders; \20\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See proposed rule 7.16P(f)(5)(B); see also Notice at 43521.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     As described more fully in the Notice, the Exchange would 
expand the number of order types that would be eligible for optional 
re-pricing instructions pursuant to the LULD Plan; \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See proposed rule 7.11P; see also Notice at 43523-43525. In 
addition, rather than specifying which order types would be eligible 
for re-pricing instructions, the Exchange would enumerate which 
order types would not be eligible for repricing instructions. See 
proposed rule 7.11P(a)(6)(A); see also Notice at 43523-43524.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act \22\ and the 
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities 
exchange.\23\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed 
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\24\ which 
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities 
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and 
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster 
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating 
transactions in securities, 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 and that the 
rules are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between 
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \23\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has 
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, 
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the Exchange believes that the proposed 
rules would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free 
and open market because the proposed rule set would promote 
transparency by using consistent terminology governing equities 
trading, and by clearly denoting the rules that govern once a symbol 
has been migrated to the Pillar platform.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice at 43526.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the proposed changes to Rule 1.1, the Commission 
notes that the Exchange believes that the proposed amendments would 
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly 
market because they would not make any substantive changes to Exchange 
rules, but rather are designed to reduce confusion by eliminating 
obsolete references and terms and therefore streamline the Exchange's 
rules. The Commission also notes that the Exchange further believes 
that the proposed new definition for the term ``Official Closing 
Price'' would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair 
and orderly market because the proposed definition would promote 
transparency regarding the reference price the Exchange would use in 
Pillar for purposes of calculating Trading Collars, pursuant to 
proposed Rule 7.31P(a)(1)(B), and for purposes of determining a Trigger 
Price pursuant to proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(2).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For determining the Official Closing Price, the Exchange states 
that it believes that in the absence of a Closing Auction of a round 
lot or more, the most recent consolidated last sale eligible trade 
during Core Trading Hours best approximates the market's determination 
of the appropriate price of such securities.\27\ In addition, the

[[Page 65276]]

Exchange states that it believes that using only those trades that 
occur during Core Trading Hours that are last sale eligible would 
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly 
market because the lower liquidity during the Early and Late Trading 
Sessions may mean that trades occurring during those sessions may not 
be as representative of the price of the security and odd-lot trades 
may indicate an anomalous trade.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See id.
    \28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to proposed Rule 7.10P, regarding clearly erroneous 
executions, the Commission notes that the Exchange represents that the 
proposal would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a 
fair and orderly market because it would use Pillar terminology, 
without any substantive differences from current Rule 7.10.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Notice at 43527.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to proposed Rule 7.11P, the Commission notes that the 
Exchange believes that the proposed substantive difference to expand 
the number of Limit Orders eligible for re-pricing instructions would 
be consistent with the LULD Plan, and therefore would remove 
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market, 
because the proposed re-pricing of such orders would assure that such 
orders would not trade at or be displayed at prices outside of the 
Price Bands.\30\ The Exchange further states that it believes that 
expanding the number of orders eligible for re-pricing instructions 
would provide ETP Holders with more options regarding how orders would 
be processed in compliance with the LULD Plan.\31\ With respect to Mid-
Point Liquidity (``MPL'') Orders, the Exchange states that it believes 
that proposed Rule 7.11P(a)(6)(C) would remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market because the proposal 
would provide ETP Holders with the choice for such orders not to be 
cancelled, and instead remain on the NYSE Arca Book until such time 
that the working price would be at a price eligible to trade consistent 
with the LULD Plan.\32\ The Exchange further believes that using Pillar 
terminology to describe how orders would be re-priced would promote 
consistency in Exchange rules, making them easier to navigate.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id.
    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Short Sales, the Commission notes that the Exchange 
represents that proposed Rule 7.16P would remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market because it would use 
Pillar terminology to describe how the Exchange would process sell 
short orders during a Short Sale Period, consistent with Rule 201 of 
Regulation SHO.\34\ More specifically, the Exchange states that it 
believes that using the new term ``Official Closing Price'' for 
determining the Trigger Price of a security in Rule 7.16P(f)(2) is 
consistent with Rule 201(b)(1)(i) of Regulation SHO, which requires 
that the listing market determine the closing price of a covered 
security, but does not require that the Exchange use the closing 
auction on the Exchange to determine that closing price.\35\ Moreover, 
the Commission notes that the Exchange represents that how it would 
process sell short orders during a Short Sale Period, set forth in 
proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5), would remove impediments to and perfect the 
mechanism of a fair and orderly market because the proposed processing 
would assure that sell short orders would neither trade at the National 
Best Bid (``NBB'') or be displayed at the NBB, unless an order is 
eligible for an exemption pursuant to proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(6) or 
(f)(7).\36\ The Exchange further represents that the proposed 
processing in Pillar of odd-lot orders that are ranked Priority 2, 
Pegged Orders, Cross Orders, and Tracking Orders would remove 
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market 
and is consistent with Rule 201 of Regulation SHO because the proposed 
processing would assure that such orders would not trade at the NBB or 
be displayed at the NBB as the NBB moves both up and down.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice at 43527.
    \35\ Id.
    \36\ Id.
    \37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to proposed Rule 7.18P, the Commission notes that the 
Exchange believes that it would remove impediments to and perfect the 
mechanism of a fair and orderly market because it would set forth in a 
single rule the requirements for trading halts on the Exchange in both 
UTP Securities and Exchange-listed securities, which are currently set 
forth in Rules 7.11(b)(6), 7.18, and 7.34(a)(4) and (a)(5).\38\ The 
Exchange also represents that it believes that the proposed substantive 
differences for Rule 7.18P as compared to the current rules would 
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly 
market.\39\ Specifically, the Exchange represents that it believes that 
waiting until receipt of a Price Band in a UTP Security before resuming 
trading following a UTP Regulatory Halt would assure that the Exchange 
would not begin trading in a UTP Security before the protections of the 
LULD Plan would be available.\40\ In addition, not holding a Trading 
Halt Auction on the Exchange in a UTP Security, together with rejecting 
new orders and routing Primary Only Orders received during a UTP 
Regulatory Halt to the primary listing market, would protect investors 
and the public by promoting price discovery and liquidity on the 
primary listing market for its re-opening auction. In addition, the 
Exchange represents that it believes that processing new and existing 
orders for UTP Securities differently from new and existing orders in 
Exchange-listed securities during a halt, suspension, or trading pause 
would complement the proposal not to conduct a Trading Halt Auction in 
a UTP Security. For Exchange-listed securities, because the Exchange 
would be conducting a Trading Halt Auction, the Exchange states that it 
would accept new orders that would be eligible to participate in such 
auction. In addition, to facilitate such auction, the Exchange would 
not cancel resting Pegged Orders and would adjust the working price of 
resting Limit Orders (including Pegged Orders) to their limit price so 
that such orders could participate in a Trading Halt Auction at their 
limit prices. The Exchange represents that it believes such proposed 
processing of new and existing orders would promote liquidity and price 
discovery for Trading Halt Auctions in Exchange-listed securities.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Notice at 43526.
    \39\ See Notice at 43527.
    \40\ Id.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to proposed Rule 7.38P, the Commission notes that the 
Exchange believes that the proposed rule would promote consistency in 
the Exchange's rule book by using Pillar terminology to describe how 
the Exchange would price odd lot orders so that they would not trade 
through the protected best bid or offer (``PBBO'').\42\ The Exchange 
represents that proposed Rule 7.38P(b)(2) would remove impediments to 
and perfect the mechanism of a fair and orderly market because it would 
promote transparency in Exchange rules regarding the working time that 
would be assigned to an order that has been partially routed and 
whether, when it returns, it would be displayed as a new best bid or 
offer (``BBO'').\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Id. See also Amendment No. 1.
    \43\ See Notice at 43527.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the Exchange's representations, the Commission

[[Page 65277]]

believes that the proposed rule change does not raise any novel 
regulatory considerations and should provide greater specificity with 
respect to the functionality available on the Exchange as symbols are 
migrated to the Pillar platform. For these reasons, the Commission 
believes that the proposal should help to prevent fraudulent and 
manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles 
of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and 
open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect 
investors and the public interest.

IV. Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 1

    In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (i) Removes an erroneous 
reference to subparagraph (6) from proposed Rule 7.11P(b); (ii) amends 
proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(A) to add the phrase ``or lower than'' to 
clarify that short sale orders with a working price and/or display 
price below the NBB would also be re-priced to a Permitted Price; (iii) 
amends proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(C) to clarify that the Exchange would 
treat all odd lot orders ranked Priority 2--Display Orders in the same 
manner as Market Orders and other non-displayed orders; (iv) amends 
proposed Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(D) to provide that all Pegged Orders and MPL 
Orders, including orders marked buy, sell long, and sell short exempt, 
would use the national best bid or offer (``NBBO'') instead of the PBBO 
as the reference price; (v) amend proposed Rule 7.18P(b)(6) to specify 
that the Exchange would reject all ``incoming order instructions'' 
during a UTP Regulatory Halt other than those specified in proposed 
Rules 7.18P(b)(1)-(5); (vi) amend footnote 44 of the Notice to add a 
reference to Limit Immediate-or-Cancel (``IOC'') Orders designated with 
a minimum trade size (``MTS''), change the rule reference for MPL-IOC 
Orders from Rule 7.31P(c)(3)(E) to Rule 7.31P(d)(3)(E), and add a 
reference to Day ISO ALO Orders; and (vii) amends Rule 7.38P(b)(1) to 
add that if the limit price of an odd lot order to buy (sell) is above 
(below) the protected best offer (``PBO'') (protected best bid 
(``PBB''), and the PBBO is crossed, it would have a working price equal 
to the PBB (PBO) to ensure that an odd lot order to buy (sell) would 
not have a working price below (above) the PBB (PBO).
    The Commission believes that the changes proposed in Amendment No. 
1 are non-substantive and further clarify the operation of the proposed 
rules governing Pillar. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, 
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\44\ to approve the proposed 
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 1 
is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the 
following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-58 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-2015-58. 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 (http://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-NYSEArca-2015-58, and should 
be submitted on or before November 16, 2015.

VI. Conclusion

    IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the 
Act,\45\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2015-58), as 
modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and hereby is, approved on an 
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-27069 Filed 10-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


