[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 101 (Tuesday, May 26, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31560-31564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11135]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-88904; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-43]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Rules
To Add New Rule 7.19-E
May 19, 2020.
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 May 8, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'') 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 the Exchange. 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\ 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 its rules to add new Rule 7.19-E
(Pre-Trade Risk Controls). The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
In order to assist ETP Holders' efforts to manage their risk, the
Exchange proposes to amend its rules to add new Rule 7.19-E (Pre-Trade
Risk Controls) to establish a set of pre-trade risk controls by which
Entering Firms and their designated Clearing Firms (as defined below)
may set credit limits and other pre-trade risk controls for an Entering
Firm's trading on the Exchange and authorize the Exchange to take
action if those credit limits or other pre-trade risk controls are
exceeded.
For purposes of this proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to
define the term ``Entering Firm'' to mean an ETP Holder that either has
a correspondent relationship with a Clearing Firm whereby it executes
trades and the clearing function is the responsibility of the Clearing
Firm or clears for its own account \3\ and to define the term
``Clearing Firm'' to mean an ETP Holder that acts as principal for
clearing and settling a trade, whether for its own account or for an
Entering Firm.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See proposed Rule 7.19-E(a)(1).
\4\ See proposed Rule 7.19-E(a)(2). As required by Rule 7.14-E,
an ETP Holder is required to give up the name of the clearing firm
through which each transaction on the Exchange will be cleared.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Overview
In order to help firms manage their risk, the Exchange proposes to
offer optional pre-trade risk controls that would authorize the
Exchange to take automated actions if a designated credit limit or
other pre-trade risk control for a firm is breached. Because Clearing
Firms bear the risk on behalf of their correspondent Entering Firms,
the Exchange proposes to make the proposed pre-trade risk controls
available not only to Entering Firms, but also to their Clearing Firms,
if so authorized by the Entering Firm. These pre-trade risk controls
would provide Entering Firms and their Clearing Firms with enhanced
abilities to manage their risk with respect to orders on the Exchange.
As proposed, these optional controls would allow Entering Firms and
their Clearing Firms (if designated by the Entering Firm) to each
define different pre-set risk thresholds and to choose the automated
action the Exchange would take if those thresholds are breached, which
would range from notifying the Entering Firm and Clearing Firm that a
limit has been breached, blocking new orders, or canceling orders until
the Entering Firm has been reinstated to trade on the Exchange.
Although use of the proposed Exchange-provided pre-trade risk
controls are optional, all orders on the Exchange will pass through
risk checks. As such, an Entering Firm that does not choose to set
limits or permit its Clearing Firm to set limits on its behalf will not
achieve any latency advantage with respect to its trading activity on
the Exchange. In addition, the Exchange expects that any latency added
by the pre-trade risk controls will be de minimis.
The proposed pre-trade risk controls described are meant to
supplement, and not replace, the ETP Holders' own internal systems,
monitoring and procedures related to risk management. The Exchange does
not guarantee that these controls will be sufficiently comprehensive to
meet all of an ETP Holder's needs, the controls are not designed to be
the sole means of risk management, and using these controls will not
necessarily meet an ETP Holder's obligations required by Exchange or
federal rules (including, without limitation, the Rule 15c3-5
[[Page 31561]]
under the Act \5\ (``Rule 15c3-5'')). Use of the Exchange's pre-trade
risk controls will not automatically constitute compliance with
Exchange or federal rules and responsibility for compliance with all
Exchange and Commission rules remains with the ETP Holder.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 17 CFR 240.15c3-5.
\6\ The Exchange proposes Commentary .01 to Rule 7.19-E to
provide that ``[t]he pre-trade risk controls described in this Rule
are meant to supplement, and not replace, the ETP Holder's own
internal systems, monitoring and procedures related to risk
management and are not designed for compliance with Rule 15c3-5
under the Exchange Act. Responsibility for compliance with all
Exchange and SEC rules remains with the ETP Holder.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Proposed Rule Change
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(a) would set forth the definitions that would
be used for purposes of the Rule. In addition to the defined terms of
``Entering Firm'' and ``Clearing Firm,'' as described above, the
Exchange proposes the following definitions:
The term ``Single Order Maximum Notional Value Risk
Limit'' would mean a pre-established maximum dollar amount for a single
order before it can be traded.
The term ``Single Order Maximum Quantity Risk Limit''
would mean a pre-established maximum number of shares that may be
included in a single order before it can be traded.
The term ``Gross Credit Risk Limit'' would mean a pre-
established maximum daily dollar amount for purchases and sales across
all symbols, where both buy and sell orders are counted as positive
values. For purposes of calculating the Gross Credit Risk Limit,
unexecuted orders in the NYSE Arca Book,\7\ orders routed on arrival
pursuant to Rule 7.37-E(a)(1), and executed orders are included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The term ``NYSE Arca Book'' is defined in Rule 1.1-E(jj) to
refer to the Exchange's electronic file of orders, which contains
all orders entered on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b) would set forth the Pre-Trade Risk Controls
that would be available to Entering Firms and Clearing Firms. Under
proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(1), an Entering Firm may select one or more of
the following optional pre-trade risk controls with respect to its
trading activity on the Exchange: (i) Gross Credit Risk Limits; (ii)
Single Order Maximum Notional Value Risk Limits; and (iii) Single Order
Maximum Quantity Risk Limits, which would collectively be referred to
as the ``Pre-Trade Risk Controls.''
In addition, under proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(2)(A), an Entering Firm
that does not self-clear may designate its Clearing Firm to (i) view
any Pre-Trade Risk Controls set by the Entering Firm, or (ii) set one
or more Pre-Trade Risk Controls on the Entering Firm's behalf, or both.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(2)(B) provides that an Entering Firm would be
able to view any Pre-Trade Risk Controls that its Clearing Firm sets
with respect to the Entering Firm's trading activity on the Exchange.
Because both an Entering Firm and Clearing Firm (if so designated by
the Entering Firm) would be able to access information about Pre-Trade
Risk Controls, this mechanism would foster transparency between an
Entering Firm and its Clearing Firm regarding which Pre-Trade Risk
Control limits may have been set. For example, if an Entering Firm
designates its Clearing Firm to view the Pre-Trade Risk Controls set by
that Entering Firm, its Clearing Firm may determine that it does not
need to separately set Pre-Trade Risk Controls on behalf of such
Entering Firm.
Because the Entering Firm is the ETP Holder that is entering orders
on the Exchange, the Exchange will not take action based on a Clearing
Firm's instructions about the Entering Firm's trading activities on the
Exchange without first receiving consent from the Entering Firm.
Accordingly, proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(2)(C) would provide that if an
Entering Firm designates a Clearing Firm to set Pre-Trade Risk Controls
for the Entering Firm, the Entering Firm would be consenting to the
Exchange taking certain prescribed actions (discussed further below)
with respect to the Entering Firm's trading activity as provided for in
proposed Rules 7.19-E(c) and (d), described below. The Exchange would
consider an Entering Firm to provide such consent by authorizing a
Clearing Firm to enter Pre-Trade Risk Controls via the risk management
tool that will be provided to Entering Firms in connection with this
proposed rule change. Once such authorization is provided by the
Entering Firm, the Clearing Firm would have access to the Pre-Trade
Risk Controls that the Entering Firm designates. The proposed Rule
makes clear that by designating a Clearing Firm to set limits on its
trading activities, the Entering Firm will have authorized the Exchange
to act pursuant to the Clearing Firm's instructions if the limits set
by the Clearing Firm are breached.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(3) would set forth how the Pre-Trade Risk
Controls could be set or adjusted. Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(3)(A) would
provide that Pre-Trade Risk Controls may be set before the beginning of
a trading day and may be adjusted during the trading day. Proposed Rule
7.19-E(b)(3)(B) would provide that Entering Firms or Clearing Firms may
set Pre-Trade Risk Controls at the MPID level or at one or more sub-IDs
associated with that MPID.\8\ The Exchange believes that supporting
Pre-Trade Risk Controls at both an MPID and sub-ID level would provide
both Entering Firms, and if designated, their Clearing Firms, more
granular control over how such risk controls are determined and
monitored.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Entering Firms may request that the Exchange create sub-IDs
associated with their MPIDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(4) would provide that with respect to Gross
Credit Risk Limits, an Entering Firm and, if so designated, its
Clearing Firm, will receive notifications when the Entering Firm is
approaching or has breached a limit set by itself or by the Clearing
Firm. The Exchange believes that by providing such notifications, the
Entering Firm, and if designated, its Clearing Firm, would have advance
notice that the Entering Firm is approaching a designated limit and
could take steps to mitigate the potential that an automated breach
action would be triggered.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(c) would set forth the actions the Exchange
would be authorized to take when a Pre-Trade Risk Control set by an
Entering Firm or a Clearing Firm is breached, which would be referred
to as ``Automated Breach Actions.'' These proposed actions would be
automated; if a Pre-Trade Risk Control is breached, the Exchange would
automatically take the designated action and would not need further
direction from either the Entering Firm or Clearing Firm to take such
action.
At the outset, proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(1) would provide that if
both an Entering Firm and its Clearing Firm set the same type of Pre-
Trade Risk Control for the Entering Firm but have set different limits,
the Exchange would enforce the more restrictive limit. For example, if
an Entering Firm sets a Single Order Maximum Notional Value Risk Limit
of $20 million and its Clearing Firm sets the same risk limit at $15
million, the Exchange will take action when the more restrictive limit
is breached--i.e., $15 million.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(2) would set forth the Automated Breach
Action the Exchange would take if an order would breach the designated
limit of either a Single Order Maximum Notional Value Risk Limit or
Single Order Maximum Quantity Risk Limit. As proposed, the Exchange
would reject the incoming order that would have breached the applicable
limit.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(3)(A) would set forth the Automated Breach
Actions the Exchange would take if a designated
[[Page 31562]]
Gross Credit Risk Limit is breached. The Exchange proposes to provide
options of which Automated Breach Action the Exchange would be
authorized to take if a Gross Credit Risk Limit is breached. Such
Automated Breach Actions would be taken at the MPID or sub-ID level
that is associated with the designated Gross Credit Risk Limit. As
proposed, when setting Gross Credit Risk Limits, the Entering Firm or
Clearing Firm setting the limit would be required to indicate one of
the following actions that the Exchange would take if such limit is
breached:
``Notification Only.'' As set forth in proposed Rule 7.19-
E(c)(3)(A)(i), if this option is selected, the Exchange would continue
to accept new orders and order instructions and would not cancel any
unexecuted orders in the NYSE Arca Book. Proposed Rule 7.19-E(b)(4),
described above, sets forth the notifications that would be provided to
an Entering Firm, and if designated, a Clearing Firm regarding the Pre-
Trade Risk Controls that have been set. With the ``Notification Only''
action, the Exchange would provide such notifications, but would not
take any other automated actions with respect to new or unexecuted
orders.
``Block Only.'' As set forth in proposed Rule 7.19-
E(c)(3)(A)(ii), if this option is selected, the Exchange would reject
new orders and order instructions but would not cancel any unexecuted
orders in the NYSE Arca Book. The Exchange would continue to accept
instructions from the Entering Firm to cancel one or more orders in
full (including Auction-Only Orders) or any instructions specified in
proposed Rule 7.19-E(e) (described below), but would not take any
automated action to cancel orders.
``Cancel and Block.'' As set forth in proposed Rule 7.19-
E(c)(3)(A)(iii), if this option is selected, in addition to the Block
actions described above, the Exchange would also cancel all unexecuted
orders in the NYSE Arca Book other than Auction-Only Orders.
If an Entering Firm and its Clearing Firm each set different limits
for a Gross Credit Risk Limit for the Entering Firm's activities on the
Exchange, proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(3)(B) would provide that the Exchange
would enforce the action that was chosen by the party that set the
limit that was breached. For example, if a Clearing Firm sets a lower
limit and designates the ``Cancel and Block'' Automated Breach Action,
if that limit is breached, the Exchange will implement that ``Cancel
and Block'' action even if the Entering Firm designated a different
Automated Breach Action.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(3)(C) would provide that if both the
Entering Firm and Clearing Firm set the same Gross Credit Risk Limit
and that limit is breached, the Exchange would enforce the most
restrictive Automated Breach Action. As further proposed, for purposes
of this Rule, the ``Cancel and Block'' action would be more restrictive
than ``Block Only,'' which would be more restrictive than
``Notification Only.'' For example, if the Entering Firm selects the
``Block Only'' action for a Gross Credit Risk Limit and its Clearing
Firm selects the ``Cancel and Block'' action for the same Gross Credit
Risk Limit, if the limit is breached, the Exchange would take the
``Cancel and Block'' action for the Entering Firm's orders.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(c)(4) would provide that if a Pre-Trade Risk
Control set at the MPID level is breached, the Automated Breach Action
specified at the MPID level would be applied to all sub-IDs associated
with that MPID. For instance, if a Clearing Firm sets a Gross Credit
Risk Limit for an MPID at $500 million and the Entering Firm sets Gross
Credit Risk Limits for each of three sub-IDs associated with that MPID
at $500 million each, if two of the sub-IDs reach a $250 million limit,
which combined is the Gross Credit Risk Limit at the MPID level, the
Automated Breach Action associated with the limit at the MPID level
would be triggered and would apply also to the associated sub-IDs, even
though none of the sub-IDs have breached their separate $500 million
limits. This functionality ensures that an Entering Firm cannot
effectively override a Pre-Trade Risk Control set at the MPID level by
setting risk limits for each of the MPID's associated sub-IDs that
cumulatively equal more than the MPID's total Gross Credit Risk Limit.
Proposed Rule 7.19-E(d) concerns how an Entering Firm's ability to
enter orders and order instructions would be reinstated after a ``Block
Only'' or ``Cancel and Block'' Automated Breach Action has been
triggered. In such case, proposed Rule 7.19-E(d) provides that the
Exchange would not reinstate the Entering Firm's ability to enter
orders and order instructions on the Exchange (other than instructions
to cancel one or more orders (including Auction-Only Orders) in full)
without the consent of (1) the Entering Firm, and (2) the Clearing
Firm, if the Entering Firm has designated that the Clearing Firm's
consent is required. The Exchange proposes to include this
functionality because the Clearing Firm bears the risk of any exposure
of its correspondent Entering Firms.
Finally, proposed Rule 7.19-E(e) would set forth ``kill switch''
functionality, which would allow an Entering Firm or its designated
Clearing Firm to direct the Exchange to take certain bulk Kill Switch
Actions with respect to orders. In contrast to the Automated Breach
Actions described above, which the Exchange would take automatically
after the breach of a credit limit, the Exchange would not take any of
the Kill Switch Actions without express direction from the Entering
Firm or its designated Clearing Firm.
Specifically, Proposed Rule 7.19-E(e) would specify that an
Entering Firm, or if authorized pursuant to proposed Rule 7.19-
E(b)(2)(A), its Clearing Firm, could direct the Exchange to take one or
more of the following actions with respect to orders at either an MPID,
or if designated, sub-ID Level: (1) Cancel all Auction-Only Orders; (2)
Cancel all unexecuted orders in the NYSE Arca Book other than Auction-
Only Orders; or (3) Block the entry of any new orders and order
instructions, provided that the Exchange would continue to accept
instructions from Entering Firms to cancel one or more orders
(including Auction-Only Orders) in full, and later, reverse that block.
The Exchange proposes that the Kill Switch functionality proposed
in Rule 7.19-E(e) would supersede and replace the Exchange's previously
filed proposed rule change,\9\ which provided certain post-trade risk
management tools to ETP Holders, but not to their Clearing Firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71166 (December 20,
2013), 78 FR 79046 (December 27, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-142)
(Notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule
change) (the ``2013 Risk Control Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to provide these post-trade Kill Switch
Actions in addition to the pre-trade Automated Breach Actions described
above in order to give Entering Firms and their Clearing Firms more
flexibility in setting risk controls. An Entering Firm that wants more
control over when and which actions are taken with respect to its
orders may choose to use these Kill Switch Actions instead of the
``Block'' or ``Cancel and Block'' Automated Breach Actions described
above. For example, for an Entering Firm that selects the
``Notification Only'' Automated Breach Action, if it receives
notification of a credit breach, it could choose to direct the Exchange
to take a Kill Switch Action described in proposed Rule 7.19-E(e).
3. Proposed Rule Commentary
The Exchange proposes Commentary .01 to Rule 7.19-E to specify that
the
[[Page 31563]]
Pre-Trade Risk Controls described in this Rule are meant to supplement,
and not replace, the ETP Holder's own internal systems, monitoring and
procedures related to risk management and are not designed for
compliance with Rule 15c3-5 under the Act.\10\ This proposed Commentary
specifies that use of the Exchange's pre-trade risk controls would not
automatically constitute compliance with Exchange or federal rules and
responsibility for compliance with all Exchange and SEC rules remains
with the ETP Holder. The Exchange does not guarantee that these
controls will be sufficiently comprehensive to meet all of an ETP
Holder's needs, the controls are not designed to be the sole means of
risk management, and using these controls will not necessarily meet an
ETP Holder's obligations required by Exchange or federal rules
(including, without limitation, the Rule 15c3-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 17 CFR 240.15c3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, because 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 regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
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 because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule will
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system because the proposed optional Pre-
Trade Risk Controls would provide both Entering Firms, and if
designated, Clearing Firms, with the ability to manage risk, while also
providing an alert system that would help to ensure that such firms are
aware of developing issues. In addition, the Pre-Trade Risk Controls
would provide Clearing Firms, who have assumed certain risks of the
Entering Firms, greater control and flexibility over setting risk
tolerance and exposure on behalf of their correspondent Entering Firms.
As such, the Exchange believes that the Pre-Trade Risk Controls would
provide a means to address potentially market-impacting events, helping
to ensure the proper functioning of the market.
In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
designed to protect investors and the public interest because the Pre-
Trade Risk Controls are a form of impact mitigation that will aid
Entering Firms and Clearing Firms in minimizing their risk exposure and
reduce the potential for disruptive, market-wide events. The Exchange
understands that ETP Holders implement a number of different risk-based
controls, including those required by Rule 15c3-5. The proposed
controls will serve as an additional tool for Entering Firms and
Clearing Firms to assist them in identifying any risk exposure. The
Exchange believes the Pre-Trade Risk Controls will assist Entering
Firms and Clearing Firms in managing their financial exposure which, in
turn, could enhance the integrity of trading on the securities markets
and help to assure the stability of the financial system.
Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule will foster
cooperation and coordination with persons facilitating transactions in
securities because the Exchange will provide alerts to Entering Firms
and their Clearing Firms when the Entering Firm's trading reaches
certain thresholds. As such, the Exchange will help Clearing Firms
monitor the risk levels of their correspondent Entering Firms and
provide tools for Clearing Firms, if designated, to take action.
The Exchange believes that proposed Commentary .01 to Rule 7.19 is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and
promote just and equitable principles of trade because it provides
clarity in Exchange rules that the proposed Pre-Trade Risk Controls are
intended to supplement, and not replace, an ETP Holder's own internal
systems, monitoring, and procedures related to compliance with Rule
15c3-5.
Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change does
not unfairly discriminate among the Exchange's ETP Holders because use
of the Pre-Trade Risk Controls is optional and is not a prerequisite
for participation on the Exchange. In addition, because all orders on
the Exchange would pass through the risk checks, there would be no
difference in the latency experienced by ETP Holders who have opted to
use the Pre-Trade Risk Controls versus those who have not opted to use
them.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In fact, the Exchange
believes that the proposal will have a positive effect on competition
because, by providing Entering Firms and their Clearing Firms
additional means to monitor and control risk, the proposed rule will
increase confidence in the proper functioning of the markets. The
Exchange believes the proposed Pre-Trade Risk Controls will assist
Entering Firms and Clearing Firms in managing their financial exposure
which, in turn, could enhance the integrity of trading on the
securities markets and help to assure the stability of the financial
system. As a result, the level of competition should increase as public
confidence in the markets is solidified.
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
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings
[[Page 31564]]
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) \15\ of the Act to determine whether the
proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-43 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-NYSEArca-2020-43. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-43, and should be
submitted on or before June 16, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11135 Filed 5-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P