[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20030-20040]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07838]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77491; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No.
2, Amending Its Rules Relating to Pre-Opening Indications and Opening
Procedures To Promote Greater Efficiency and Transparency at the Open
of Trading on the Exchange

March 31, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on March 31, 2016, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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 its rules relating to pre-opening
indications and opening procedures to promote greater efficiency and
transparency at the open of trading on the Exchange. This Amendment No.
2 supersedes the original filing in its entirety. 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 Exchange proposes to amend its rules relating to pre-opening
indications and opening procedures to promote greater efficiency and
transparency at the open of trading on the Exchange. In particular, the
Exchange proposes to:
     Make changes to the rules related to the pre-opening
indication process by:
    [cir] Amending Rules 15 and 123D to consolidate the requirements
for publication of pre-open indications in a single rule (Rule 15);
    [cir] changing the conditions in which a Designated Market Maker
(``DMM'') is required to publish a pre-opening indication in a security
to an anticipated 5% move from a security's reference price and, during
extreme market-wide volatility, an anticipated 10% from a security's
reference price; and
    [cir] providing for the CEO of the Exchange to temporarily suspend
the requirement to publish pre-opening indications.
     Make changes to Rule 123D related to the opening process
by:
    [cir] Incorporating all procedures relating to openings, other than
pre-opening indications, in Rule 123D; and
    [cir] Specifying that DMMs may effect an opening of a security
electronically within specified percentage and volume parameters, which
would be doubled during extreme market-wide volatility; and
    [cir] providing for the CEO of the Exchange to temporarily suspend
price and volume limitations for a DMM

automated open or the requirement for prior Floor Approval before
opening or reopening a security.
     Delete Rule 48
     Make conforming changes to Rules 80C, 124 and 9217.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes will enhance
transparency regarding the Exchange's opening process by specifying new
parameters for how the opening at the Exchange would be effectuated on
trading days experiencing extreme market-wide volatility, which would
include both additional information before the open through the use of
new parameters for pre-opening indications and expanded ability for
DMMs to effectuate an opening electronically. The proposed rule changes
are designed to preserve the Exchange's existing model, which values
human touch when opening securities with significant price or volume
disparity, while at the same time promoting automated measures to have
as many securities open as close to 9:30 a.m. as feasible, even during
extreme market-wide volatility.
Background
    The Exchange's current pre-opening procedures are outlined in Rules
15 (Pre-Opening Indications), 48 (Exemptive Relief--Extreme Market
Volatility Condition), and 123D (Openings and Halts in Trading).
    Rule 15(a) provides that if the opening transaction in a security
will be at a price that represents a change of more than the
``applicable price change'' specified in the Rule,\4\ the DMM arranging
the opening transaction or the Exchange shall issue a pre-opening
indication (``Rule 15 Indication''), which represents a price range in
which a security is anticipated to open.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In current Rule 15, other than for certain American
Depositary Receipts (``ADRs''), the ``applicable price change'' is
measured from a security's last reported sale price on the Exchange,
the security's offering price in the case of an initial public
offering (``IPO''), or the security's last reported sale price on
the market from which it is being transferred. For an ADR where the
trading day of the underlying security in the primary foreign market
for the ADR concludes after the previous day's trading in the US has
ended, the ``applicable price change'' is measured from closing
price of the primary foreign market. For an ADR where the primary
foreign market on which the underlying security is open for trading
at the time of the opening of the Exchange, the ``applicable price
change'' is measured from parity with the last sale price of the
underlying security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A Rule 15 Indication is published on the Exchange's proprietary
data feeds only and includes the security and the price range within
which the DMM anticipates the opening transaction will occur, and would
include any orally-represented Floor broker interest for the open. The
applicable price ranges for determining whether to publish a Rule 15
Indication are based on five different price buckets and are expressed
in dollar and percentage parameters:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Applicable
                 Exchange closing price                    price change
                                                            (more than)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under $20.00............................................           $0.50
$20-$49.99..............................................           $1.00
$50.00-$99.99...........................................           $2.00
$100-$500...............................................           $5.00
Above $500..............................................            1.5%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 123D also mandates that pre-opening indications be published
if the opening price would result in a significant price change from
the previous close or if the opening is delayed past 10:00 a.m. Eastern
Time (``Rule 123D Mandatory Indication''). The DMM is responsible for
publishing the Rule 123D Mandatory Indication and, when determining the
price range for the indication, takes into consideration Floor broker
interest that has been orally entered and what, at a given time, the
DMM anticipates the dealer participation in the opening transaction
would be. Rule 123D Mandatory Indications are published to the
Consolidated Tape and proprietary data feeds. The applicable price
ranges for determining whether an opening price would be a
``significant'' price change requiring a Rule 123D Mandatory Indication
are based on three price buckets and are expressed in a mixture of
dollar (1 point = one dollar) and percentage parameters:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Price change  (equal to or
       Previous NYSE  closing price                greater than)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under $10.00.............................  1 point.
$10--$99.99..............................  the lesser of 10% or 3
                                            points.
$100 and Over............................  5 points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 48 provides that a ``qualified Exchange officer'' \5\ can
invoke an extreme market volatility condition at the open (or reopen of
trading following a market-wide halt of securities) during which time
the Exchange can suspend the requirements of Rules 15 and 123D, and in
particular, the requirement to publish pre-opening indications. Rule 48
is intended to be invoked only in those situations where the potential
for extreme market volatility would likely impair Floor-wide operations
at the Exchange by impeding the fair and orderly opening or reopening
securities.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A ``qualified Exchange officer'' means the Chief Executive
Officer of ICE, or his or her designee, or the Chief Regulatory
Officer of the Exchange, or his or her designee.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56920 (December 6,
2007), 72 FR 70915 (December 13, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-111) (``Rule 48
Notice of Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, Rule 123D, which in addition to setting forth requirements
for certain pre-opening indications, also specifies procedures relating
to openings, including that it is the responsibility of each DMM to
ensure that securities open as close to the opening bell as possible
and that securities can be opened on a trade or a quote. The rule
further provides that openings may be effectuated manually or
electronically.
Proposed Rule Change
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 15, 48, and 123D to introduce
greater efficiency and transparency into its opening process by, among
other things, consolidating its rules regarding pre-opening indications
into a single rule (Rule 15), introducing a new, single percentage
parameter for the publication of pre-opening indications that would
double on volatile trading days, and consolidating opening procedures
into Rule 123D, including specifying parameters of when a DMM may
effect an opening electronically, and consolidating the procedures of
Rule 48 into Rules 15 and 123D, as applicable. The Exchange also
proposes conforming changes to Rules 80C, 124 and 9217.
Pre-Opening Indications
    The Exchange proposes to make changes to the pre-opening indication
process. The Exchange would consolidate the requirements relating to
pre-opening indications into Rule 15(a)-(f). Because the Exchange
proposes all new rule text in Rule 15(a)-(f), the Exchange proposes to
delete paragraphs (a) and (b) of current Rule 15, re-number Rule 15(c)
as Rule 15(g), delete rule text in Rule 123D(b) relating to mandatory
indications, and amend the title of Rule 15 to add the phrase ``and
Opening Order Imbalance Information'' so that the rule would be titled
``Pre-Opening Indications and Opening Order Imbalance Information.'' In
amending Rule 15, the Exchange would establish new conditions for when
DMMs are required to publish pre-opening indications.
    Proposed Rule 15(a), entitled ``Pre-Opening Indications,'' would
provide that a pre-opening indication would include the security and
the price range within which the opening price is anticipated to occur.
This proposed rule text is based on the last clause of the first
sentence of current Rule 15(a), which provides that a pre-opening

indication includes the security and the price range within which the
opening transaction is anticipated to occur. Proposed Rule 15(a) would
further provide that a pre-opening indication would be published via
the securities information processor (``SIP'') and proprietary data
feeds. This proposed rule text is based on the way in which Rule 123D
Mandatory Indications are currently published to both the SIP and
proprietary data feeds. The Exchange proposes to use the term
``securities information processor'' instead of ``Consolidated Tape''
to use the term more commonly used in the industry.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(b), entitled ``Conditions for Publishing a Pre-
Open Indication,'' would set forth the conditions in which a DMM is
required to publish a pre-opening indication.
     Proposed Rule 15(b)(1) would provide that a DMM will
publish a pre-opening indication before a security opens if the opening
transaction on the Exchange is anticipated to be at a price that
represents a change of more than the ``Applicable Price Range,'' as
defined in proposed Rule 15(d), from a specified ``Reference Price,''
as defined in proposed Rule 15(c), before the security opens. The
procedures for publishing a pre-opening indication would be described
in Rule 15(e). This proposed rule text is based on current Rule 15(a),
which uses the term ``applicable price range'' and describes the
reference prices used for purposes of current Rule 15(a). The Exchange
proposes to define the ``Reference Price'' and ``Applicable Price
Range'' in proposed Rules 15(c) and (d), described below. The
requirement for DMMs to publish pre-opening indications is based on
current Rule 15(a), which provides that the DMM shall issue a pre-
opening indication if the conditions set forth in the rule are met.
     Proposed Rule 15(b)(2) would specify that when making a
determination of what the opening transaction price would be, the DMM
will take into consideration all interest eligible to participate in
the opening transaction, including electronically-entered orders, the
DMM's own interest, and any interest represented orally in the crowd.
This proposed rule text would be new and is designed to promote
transparency in Exchange rules that all interest eligible to
participate in the opening transaction is considered when publishing a
pre-opening indication.
     Proposed Rule 15(b)(3) would provide that if a DMM is
unable to publish a pre-opening indication for one or more securities
due to a systems or technical issue, the Exchange may publish the pre-
opening indication. This proposed rule text is based in part on current
Rule 15(a), which provides that either the DMM or the Exchange shall
publish a pre-opening indication. The Exchange proposes a substantive
difference to provide that the Exchange ``may'' rather than ``shall''
publish a pre-opening indication. As set forth in current Rule
123D(a)(5), which was added after the applicable rule text in Rule
15(a),\8\ if a DMM is unavailable to open a security and the Exchange
opens trading, the Exchange will not publish a pre-opening indication.
Because the Exchange is not obligated to publish pre-opening
indications in such scenario, the Exchange proposes to make Rule
15(b)(3) consistent with that rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76290 (Oct. 28,
2015), 80 FR 67822 (Nov. 3, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-49).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(c), entitled ``Reference Price,'' would provide in
paragraph (1) that the Reference Price for a security (other than an
American Depository Receipt (``ADR'')) for purposes of the proposed
rule would be:
     The security's last reported sale price on the Exchange
(proposed Rule 15(c)(1)(A));
     in the case of an IPO, the security's offering price
(proposed Rule 15(c)(1)(B)); or
     the security's last reported sale price on the securities
market from which the security is being transferred to the Exchange, on
the security's first day of trading on the Exchange (proposed Rule
15(c)(1)(C)).
    This proposed rule text is based on current Rule 15(a).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(c)(2) would provide that the Reference Price for
ADRs for purposes of the proposed rule would be:
     The closing price of the security underlying the ADR in
the primary foreign market in such security when the trading day of the
primary foreign market concludes (proposed Rule 15(c)(2)(A)); or
     based on parity with the last sale price of the security
underlying the ADR in the primary foreign market for such security when
the trading day of the primary foreign market is open for trading at
the time of the opening on the Exchange (proposed Rule 15(c)(2)(B)).
    This proposed rule text is based on current Rule 15(b), with non-
substantive differences for clarity and to use the defined term
``Reference Price'' in the proposed rule text.\10\ Proposed Rule
15(c)(3) would further provide that the Reference Price for reopening a
security following a halt would be the security's last reported sale
price on the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to specify the Reference
Price for reopening following a halt because the Reference Price would
be the same for all securities, including ADRs, which would be trading
on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The seventh paragraph of Rule 123D(b), which the Exchange
proposes to delete, similarly describes the reference price to be
used for a foreign-listed security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(d) would set forth the Applicable Price Ranges for
determining whether a DMM is required to disseminate a pre-opening
indication. The Exchange proposes to eliminate the current price
buckets in Rules 15 and 123D and instead use a single percentage
parameter as the Applicable Price Range for all securities, regardless
of price of the security. As proposed, except during extreme market-
wide volatility as set forth in proposed Rule 15(d)(2), a DMM would be
required to publish a pre-opening indication if a security is expected
to open at a price more than 5% away from the Reference Price. The
Exchange believes that the proposed 5% parameter applicable to all
securities would simplify and streamline the Exchange's rules regarding
required pre-opening indications by having a single percentage
parameter that would be applied across all securities, rather than
having different price buckets and percentage parameter ranges to
track. The Exchange further believes that the proposed single
percentage parameter would result in a similar number of pre-opening
indications as are currently published pursuant to Rule 123D, while at
the same time simplifying the process for DMMs.
    For example, using trade data for the month of October 2015, which
was a month of relative trading stability and volumes, current Rule
123D Mandatory Indication parameters required indications for 15
securities on an average daily basis, which represents approximately
0.46% of the securities traded on the Exchange. Applying the proposed
new percentage parameter of 5% to the same October 2015 trade data,
DMMs would have been required, on average, to publish 33 pre-opening
indications, which represents 1.01% of securities that trade on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the incremental increase in number
of pre-opening indications that would have been published pursuant to
the proposed new single percentage parameter would promote transparency

in the opening of securities at the Exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For purposes of this analysis, the Exchange compared the
proposed new percentage parameters against only the current Rule
123D Mandatory Indications because these indications are more widely
distributed via the SIP to market participants, and therefore more
likely to be relied upon for purposes of assessing the opening price
of a security on the Exchange. In addition, unlike Rule 15
Indications, a DMM is required to update Rule 123D Mandatory
Indications, and thus this form of pre-opening indication is more
likely to track to the actual opening price of a security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under current rules, the Exchange may suspend the requirement to
publish pre-opening indications if a market-wide extreme market
volatility condition is declared under Rule 48. This rule was adopted,
in part, because of the manual nature of publishing pre-opening
indications, and if DMMs were required to publish Rule 123D Mandatory
Indications for multiple securities, it could delay the opening process
and result in a large number of securities opening past 9:30 a.m.
Eastern Time.\12\ Historically, the Exchange has declared such a
condition if, before the opening of trading, the E-mini S&P 500 Futures
are plus or minus 2% from the prior day's closing price of the E-mini
S&P 500 Futures. However, based on the events of the week of August 24,
2015, when the Exchange declared extreme market volatility conditions
on August 24, 25, and 26, the Exchange appreciates that the absence of
any pre-opening indications may leave a void in the information
available for market participants to assess the price at which a
security may open. Yet, because market-wide volatility would cause the
price of most or all securities to move significantly away from the
last sale price on the Exchange, the Exchange believes that the 5%
price move appropriate for ``normal'' trading days would result in a
DMM being required to disseminate more pre-opening indications than is
feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 48 Notice of Filing, supra note 6 at 70916.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend its rules to provide
that on trading days with extreme market-wide volatility, the
Applicable Price Range would be 10%, or double the Applicable Price
Range on regular trading days. Specifically, proposed Rule 15(d)(2)
would provide that, if as of 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time (``ET''), the E-
mini S&P 500 Futures are plus or minus 2% from the prior day's closing
price of the E-mini S&P 500 Futures, when reopening trading following a
market-wide trading halt under Rule 80B, or if the Exchange determines
that it is necessary or appropriate for the maintenance of a fair and
order market, a DMM would be required to publish a pre-opening
indication in a security if the price of that security is expected to
open at a price more than 10% away from the Reference Price. By
proposing to specify the conditions in which the Applicable Price Range
would be 10%, the Exchange would promote transparency in Exchange rules
so that market participants will know when the double-wide percentage
parameter would be applied. Because the standard for extreme market-
wide volatility would be specified in the rule, the Exchange would not
need to provide separate notification on a trading day when the double-
wide percentages would be applicable.
    By proposing to specify in its rules that the Applicable Price
Range would be 10%, rather than 5%, when the market is more volatile,
the Exchange would require DMMs to disseminate pre-opening indications
in those securities experiencing the greatest price movement. Under
current rules, the Exchange's only option when the overall market is
volatile is to lift the requirement for pre-opening indications under
Rule 48. The Exchange also proposes to use the 10% percentage parameter
when reopening securities following a market-wide trading halt under
Rule 80B. The Exchange believes that widening the parameters for pre-
opening indications following a market-wide trading halt would be
appropriate because the reason for the trading halt was market-wide
volatility, and thus the reopening of securities would face similar
pricing pressure as circumstances when there is pre-opening extreme
market-wide volatility. The Exchange also proposes that it would have
the authority to use the 10% Applicable Price Range when it is
necessary or appropriate for the maintenance of a fair and orderly
market. For example, if the E-mini S&P 500 Futures were not plus or
minus 2% as of 9:00 a.m., but moved to that level between 9:00 and
9:30, it may be appropriate, for the maintenance of a fair and orderly
market, to use widened percentage parameters.
    To determine the percentage parameter that would be appropriate for
trading days with extreme market-wide volatility, the Exchange reviewed
trading data from August 24, 25, and 26, 2015 and assessed how many
Rule 123D Mandatory Indications would have been required under current
rules, and how many pre-opening indications would have been required if
a 5% and 10% percentage parameter were used on those days. Taking for
example August 24, 2015, as set forth on Table 1 below, the data show
that, had the Exchange not invoked Rule 48 lifting the requirement to
publish Rule 123D Mandatory Indications, there would have been 638
securities (19% of securities) for which DMMs would have been required
to publish Rule 123D Mandatory Indications. As set forth in Table 2
below, a 5% percentage parameter would have required 1,460 pre-opening
indications (44% of securities) on August 24, 2015, more than twice as
many as under the current parameters. As noted above, the Exchange
believes that this would be too many pre-opening indications for DMMs
to process on a trading day without impacting their ability to timely
open their assigned securities.
    By contrast, as set forth in Table 2 below, a 10% percentage
parameter would have required pre-opening indications in 278 securities
(8.4% of securities) on August 24, 2015. While this number is still
higher than the number of pre-opening indications that would have been
published on an average trading day in October using the 5% percentage
parameter (see above), the Exchange believes that it strikes the
appropriate balance between providing additional pre-opening
information to investors and enabling the DMM's to timely open their
assigned securities. As set forth in more detail in Tables 1 and 2
below, August 24 represents an outlier, even for days when there has
been extreme market-wide volatility. For other days in 2015 when the
Exchange declared an extreme market-wide volatility under Rule 48, as
set forth in Tables 1 and 2 below, applying a 10% parameter would not
materially change the number of pre-opening indications being
published.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN06AP16.010

    Proposed Rule 15(e), entitled ``Procedures for publishing a pre-
opening indication,'' would set forth proposed procedures a DMM would
use when publishing a pre-opening indication. As discussed below, these
procedures are based on existing procedures currently set forth in Rule
123D, with specified differences.
    Proposed Rule 15(e)(1) would provide that publication of pre-
opening indications requires the supervision and approval of a Floor
Governor.\13\ This proposed rule change is based on the sixth paragraph
of Rule 123D(b). The Exchange proposes a substantive change in that the
proposed rule would require the supervision and approval of a Floor
Governor, rather than supervision and approval of a Floor Official, as
set forth in the current rule. The Exchange would also eliminate the
requirement in Rule 123D that if a situation involves a bank or
brokerage stock, the approval of an Executive Floor Governor is
required, and if an Executive Floor Governor is unavailable, a Floor
Governor or Senior Floor Governor's approval is required. The Exchange
believes that requiring Floor Governor approval for all securities
would involve the appropriate review by an experienced Floor official,
while at the same time simplifying the approval process to require a
single category of Floor Official to approve a pre-opening indication
regardless of the type of security.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Rule 46 describes the different categories of Floor
Officials, which are Floor Officials, Senior Floor Officials,
Executive Floor Officials, Floor Governors, and Executive Floor
Governors. Floor Governors are generally more senior members of the
Trading Floor or qualified Exchange employees and are also empowered
to perform any duty of a Floor Official.
    \14\ The Exchange would also be deleting the 14th through 16th
paragraphs of Rule 123D(b) regarding Floor Official approval for
``tape indications,'' which are Rule 123D Mandatory Indications. The
Exchange believes that proposed Rule 15(e)(1) simplifies the
approval process and obviates the need for this Rule 123D rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(e)(2) would provide that a pre-opening indication
must be updated if the opening transaction would be at a price outside
of a published pre-opening indication. Proposed Rule 15(e)(3) would
further require that if a pre-opening indication is a spread wider than
$1.00, the DMM should undertake best efforts to publish an updated pre-
opening indication of $1.00 or less before opening the security, as may
be appropriate for the specific security. Proposed Rules 15(e)(2) and
(e)(3) are based, in part, on the second and third bullet points
following the ninth paragraph of Rule 123D(b),\15\ but with new rule
text to simplify the requirements regarding updating pre-opening
indications. With respect to proposed Rule 15(e)(3), for higher-priced
securities, a pre-opening indication wider than $1.00 may be
appropriate and it may not be necessary to narrow such indication any
further, particularly since Opening Imbalance Information pursuant to
Rule 15(c) (proposed Rule 15(g)) would also be disseminated regarding
the security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The second bullet following the ninth paragraph of Rule
123D(b) requires that the number of indications should increase in
proportion to the anticipated disparity in the opening or reopening
price, with increasingly definitive, ``telescoped'' indications when
an initial narrow indication spread is impractical. The third bullet
provides for similar requirements following a non-regulatory halt,
and specifically that a final indication with a one point (one
dollar) spread would be appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(e)(4) would provide that, after publication of a
pre-opening indication, the DMM must wait for the following minimum
specified periods before opening a security:
     Proposed Rule 15(e)(4)(A) would provide that, when using
the 5% Applicable Price Range specified in proposed Rule 15(d)(1), a
minimum of three minutes must elapse between publication of the first
indication and a security's opening. The rule would further provide
that, if more than one indication has been published, a security may be
opened one minute after the last published indication provided that at
least three minutes have elapsed from the dissemination of the first
indication. These first two sentences of proposed Rule 15(e)(4)(A) are
based on rule text set forth in the twelfth and thirteenth paragraphs
of current Rule 123D(b). Proposed Rule 15(e)(4)(A) would further
provide that the DMM may open a security less than the required wait
times after the publication of a pre-opening indication if the
imbalance is paired off at a price within the Applicable Price Range.
This proposed exception to the three-minute waiting requirement is new
and is because the Exchange believes that, if equilibrium in price has
been reached at a price within the Applicable Price Range, i.e., at a
price that would not have required a pre-opening indication in the
first instance, there is no reason to require the DMM to further delay
the opening of the security in an effort to attract offsetting
interest.
     Proposed Rule 15(e)(4)(B) would provide that, when using
the 10% Applicable Price Range specified in Proposed Rule 15(d)(2), a
minimum of one minute must elapse between publication of the first
indication and a security's opening and that if more than one
indication has been published, a security may be opened without waiting
any additional time. As discussed above, proposed Rule 15(d)(2) would
provide for new percentage parameters for trading days with extreme
market-wide volatility. Based on the analysis of trade data for August
24, 2015, even with the new percentage parameters, there is the
potential for 278 pre-opening indications to be required on an
extremely volatile trading day. Because these pre-opening indications
would be manually published by the DMM, the Exchange believes that
eliminating additional wait times would enable the

DMMs to facilitate a speedy opening for a security that has been
subject to a pre-opening indication on days with extreme market-wide
volatility.
    Proposed Rule 15(e)(5) would provide that, if trading is halted for
a non-regulatory order imbalance, a pre-opening indication must be
published as soon as practicable after the security is halted. This
proposed rule text is based on the first sentence of the third bulleted
paragraph following the ninth paragraph in Rule 123D(b), with a
proposed substantive difference that a pre-opening indication should be
published ``as soon as practicable,'' rather than ``immediately,''
after a security is halted. The Exchange believes that the proposed
approach provides for more flexibility for the DMM to assess the order
imbalance and publish a pre-opening indication that takes into
consideration all applicable factors.
    Proposed Rule 15(e)(6) would set forth the requirements for pre-
opening indications when reopening a security following a trading pause
under Rule 80C.\16\ Proposed Rule 15(e)(6)(A) would provide that a pre-
opening indication may be published without prior Floor Governor
approval. Proposed Rule 15(e)(6)(B) would provide that a pre-opening
indication would not need to be updated before reopening the security,
and the security may be reopened outside of any prior indication.
Lastly, proposed Rule15(e)(6)(C) would provide that the reopening is
not subject to the minimum waiting time requirements in Proposed Rule
15(e)(4). Proposed Rules 15(e)(6)(A)-(C) are based on Rule
80C(b)(2)(A), with non-substantive differences to use different rule
text cross-references.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Rule 80C sets forth the Exchange's rules to comply with the
requirements of the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility
submitted to the Commission pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS
under the Act known as the Limit Up/Limit Down (``LULD'') Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(f), entitled ``Temporary Suspension of Pre-Opening
Indications,'' would provide in proposed Rule 15(f)(1) that if the CEO
of the Exchange determines that a Floor-wide event is likely to impact
the ability of DMMs to arrange for a fair and orderly opening or
reopening and that absent such relief, operation of the Exchange is
likely to be impaired, the CEO of the Exchange may temporarily suspend
the requirement to publish pre-opening indications under Rule 15 prior
to opening or reopening a security following a market-wide trading
halt.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Pursuant to Rule 1, the CEO of the Exchange may formally
designate one or more qualified employees of Intercontinental
Exchange, Inc. (``ICE'') to act in place of any person named in a
rule as having authority to act under such rule in the event the
named person in the rule is unavailable to administer that rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(f) is based in part on Rule 48, which provides
that a qualified Exchange officer may declare an extreme market
volatility condition and temporarily suspend the requirements for pre-
opening indications.\18\ Because the Exchange would be specifying new
percentage parameters for pre-opening indications on trading days with
market-wide volatility, the Exchange does not believe that it needs
Rule 48 in its current form. While the Exchange expects that its other
proposed changes to DMMs' requirements related to pre-opening
indications will make it unlikely that a complete suspension of pre-
opening indications would be required, the Exchange believes it would
be prudent for the CEO of the Exchange to retain the authority to
temporarily suspend the requirements to make pre-opening indications
for events that it cannot currently predict. Accordingly, rather than
refer to extreme market-wide volatility as in current Rule 48, proposed
Rule 15(f)(1) would refer to a Floor-wide event that could impact the
fair and orderly opening or reopening of securities more generally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Rule 48(d) defines a ``qualified Exchange officer'' for
purposes of Rule 48 as the CEO of ICE, or his or her designee, or
the Chief Regulatory Officer (``CRO'') of the Exchange, or his or
her designee. The Exchange proposes to streamline its rules to
specify that only the CEO of the Exchange would have the authority
to temporarily suspend the requirement for pre-opening indications.
However, pursuant to Rule 1, the CEO could delegate this authority
to other qualified ICE employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 15(f)(2), which is based on Rule 48(c)(1)(A), would
specify the range of factors that the CEO of the Exchange would be
required to consider in making any determination to temporarily suspend
the requirement for pre-opening indications.\19\ In addition, similar
to Rule 48(c)(1)(B) and 48(c)(1)(C), proposed Rules 15(f)(2)(B) and (C)
would require the CEO to consult with the CRO of the Exchange in making
a determination under proposed Rule 15(f)(1) and inform Commission
staff as promptly as practicable that pre-opening indications under
Rule 15 have been temporarily suspended. Proposed Rule 15(f)(3), which
is based on Rule 48(c)(4), would provide that a temporary suspension
under Rule 15(f) would be in effect only for the trading day on which
it was declared.\20\ Finally, proposed Rule 15(f)(4) would provide that
notwithstanding a temporary suspension of the requirement to publish
pre-opening indications in a security under Rule 15, a DMM or the
Exchange may publish a pre-opening indication for one or more
securities. This proposed rule text, which is based in part on Rule
48(c)(5), would allow a DMM or the Exchange to publish a pre-opening
indication, even if the rule were suspended.\21\ Unlike Rule 48(c)(5),
which specifies conditions when the DMM should still publish a pre-
opening indication, proposed Rule 15(f)(3) would not require pre-
opening indications, but rather, would allow them to be published even
if the rule were temporarily suspended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ As provided for in Rule 48(c)(1)(A), these factors include
volatility in the previous day's trading session, trading in foreign
markets before the open, substantial activity in the futures market
before the open, the volume of pre-opening indications of interest,
evidence of pre-opening significant order imbalances across the
market, government announcements, news and corporate events, and
such other market conditions that could impact Floor-wide trading
conditions.
    \20\ Rule 48(c)(4) provides that that a declaration of an
extreme market volatility condition under Rule 48 shall be in effect
only for the particular opening or reopen for the trading session on
the particular day that the extreme market volatility condition if
determined to exist.
    \21\ Rule 48(c)(5) provides that a declaration of an extreme
market volatility condition shall not relieve DMMs from the
obligation to make pre-opening indications in situations where the
opening of a security is delayed for reasons unrelated to the
extreme market volatility condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the Exchange has added new subsections to Rule 15, the
Exchange proposes to renumber Rule 15(c) as Rule 15(g) and to add a
header to this subsection of rule entitled ``Opening Order Imbalance
Information.'' In addition to re-designating the rule from Rule 15(c)
to Rule 15(g), the Exchange proposes non-substantive differences to re-
number the subsections of proposed Rule 15(g) to use the same numbering
convention as proposed for proposed Rule 15(a)-(f), delete the phrase
``the provisions of'' in proposed Rule 15(g)(2)(B), and remove the
reference to subparagraph (b) by deleting the phrase ``or (b).''
    The Exchange also proposes a substantive difference to change Rule
15(c)(3)(iii) (re-numbered as proposed Rule 15(g)(3)(C)) to increase
the frequency with which the Exchange disseminates Order Imbalance
Information \22\ beginning at 9:20 a.m.

ET. Currently, under Rule 15(c)(3)(iii), Order Imbalance Information is
disseminated approximately every 15 seconds between 9:20 a.m. ET and
the opening of trading in that security. The Exchange proposes to
disseminate Order Imbalance Information approximately every 5 seconds
between 9:20 a.m. ET and the opening of trading in that security. The
Exchange believes that increasing the frequency with which Order
Imbalance Information is disseminated would provide market participants
with additional updated pre-opening information, thus promoting
transparency for the opening transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Order Imbalance Information reflects real-time order
imbalances that accumulate prior to the opening transaction on the
Exchange and the price at which interest eligible to participate in
the opening transaction may be executed in full. Order Imbalance
Information disseminated pursuant to Rule 15(c) includes all
interest eligible for execution in the opening transaction of the
security in Exchange systems, i.e., electronic interest, including
Floor broker electronic interest, entered into Exchange systems
prior to the opening. Order Imbalance Information is disseminated on
the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. See Rule 15(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to add new Supplementary Material
.10 to Rule 15 providing that, unless otherwise specified in the
proposed Rule,\23\ references to an opening transaction include a
reopening transaction following a trading halt or pause in a security.
Currently, Rule 123D Mandatory Indications are required for both
openings and reopenings. Because proposed Rule 15 indications would
similarly be required for openings and reopenings following a halt or
pause, the Exchange proposes to add Supplementary Material .10 to Rule
15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See, e.g., proposed Rules 15(d)(2) (referring only to
reopenings following a market-wide trading halt under Rule 80B) and
15(e)(6) (specifying different procedures when reopening trading
following a trading pause).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DMM Automated Openings
    As noted above, the process for publishing either Rule 15
Indications or Rule 123D Mandatory Indications is manual, and is
generally followed by the DMM effecting the opening of a security
manually rather than electronically. Consistent with this approach, the
Exchange currently systemically blocks DMMs from opening a security
electronically if the opening price would be outside of price
parameters that are based on the price buckets and applicable price
ranges specified in Rule 15(a). The Exchange similarly blocks DMMs from
electronically opening a security if size of the opening transaction
would be a significant volume, which similarly would indicate the
potential need for manual oversight of the opening process.
    Because the DMM is not obligated to open a security electronically,
the Exchange has not historically specified in its rules the parameters
for when the DMM may effect an opening electronically.\24\ However,
following the events of the week of August 24, 2015, the Exchange
believes that specifying in Exchange rules the conditions in which a
DMM is permitted to open a security electronically would provide
greater transparency in Exchange rules. The Exchange therefore proposes
to amend Rule 123D(a) to specify when a DMM may effect an opening
electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Rule 123D does not require DMMs to open a security
electronically; a DMM may determine that in the particular
circumstances for a security, manually opening the security may be
warranted, even if the price would be within the Applicable Price
Range. For example, if a Floor broker has represented an order in
the Crowd, the DMM will open a security manually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In specifying parameters for when a DMM may effectuate an opening
electronically, the Exchange proposes to adopt parameters and
requirements that would be structured similarly to the proposed
parameters for new Rule 15 pre-opening indications, as discussed above.
To effect this change, the Exchange proposes new subsection numbering
to Rule 123D(a)(1) to break out the third and fourth sentences of
current Rule 123D(a)(1) to be proposed Rules 123D(a)(1)(A) and (B).\25\
The Exchange proposes to add to proposed Rule 123D(a)(1)(B) that
Exchange systems would not permit a DMM to open a security
electronically if a DMM has manually entered Floor interest. This is
how Exchange systems currently function and is similar to Rule 123C.10
regarding when a DMM may close a security electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The Exchange also proposes a non-substantive amendment to
change the term ``stock'' to ``security.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to set forth the parameters for when a DMM
may effect an opening electronically in new proposed Rules
123D(a)(1)(B)(i) and (ii):
     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(1)(B)(i) would provide that except
under the conditions set forth in Rule 123D(a)(1)(B)(ii), a DMM may not
effect an opening electronically if the opening transaction would be at
a price more than 4% away from the Official Closing Price, as defined
in Rule 123C(1)(e), or the matched volume for the opening transaction
would be more than (a) 150,000 shares for securities with an average
opening volume of 100,000 shares or fewer in the previous calendar
quarter; or (b) 500,000 shares for securities with an average opening
volume of over 100,000 shares in the previous calendar quarter. For
purposes of this Rule, the calendar quarters will be based on a January
1 to December 31 calendar year.
     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(1)(B)(ii) would provide that if as
of 9:00 a.m. ET, the E-mini S&P 500 Futures are plus or minus 2% from
the prior day's closing price of the E-mini S&P 500 Futures, or if the
Exchange determines that it is necessary or appropriate for the
maintenance of a fair and order market, a DMM could effect an opening
electronically if the opening transaction would be at a price of up to
8% away from the Official Closing Price, as defined in Proposed Rule
123C(1)(e), without any volume limitations.
    Similar to the new Applicable Price Ranges for pre-opening
indications proposed in Rule 15(d) above, the Exchange proposes to use
a single percentage parameter for all securities, regardless of price.
The Exchange also proposes to double those percentage parameters on
days with extreme market-wide volatility, and would use the same
standard for determining whether there is market-wide volatility as is
proposed in Rule 15(d)(2), described above. Because the Exchange
continues to believe that, if a pre-opening indication has been
published, a security is better served if a DMM effects a manual
opening, the Exchange proposes to apply percentage parameters to DMM
automated openings that are tighter than the requirements for
publishing a pre-opening indication. In other words, if a pre-opening
indication would be required under proposed Rule 15, the DMM would not
be permitted to effect an opening electronically. To achieve this goal,
the Exchange proposes that the percentage parameter on a regular
trading day for DMM automated opens should be one percent lower than
the percentage parameter for pre-opening indications on a regular
trading day. And as with pre-opening indications, on a day with extreme
market-wide volatility, the applicable percentage would be doubled.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed conditions for when a DMM
may effect an opening electronically would reduce the number of manual
openings and enable more securities to open closer to 9:30 a.m. ET,
both on regular trading days and on extremely volatile trading days
such as August 24, 2015.
    Tables 3 through 5 below illustrate how many securities would not
be eligible for a DMM to effect an opening electronically when applying
the current and proposed percentage and volume parameters to trade data
from October 2015 and trade data from August 24, 2015.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN06AP16.011

    For example, as set forth in Table 3, using current price
parameters and a 100,000 share volume parameter, in October 2015, 94
securities (13.4% of securities) on average each day were not eligible
to be opened by the DMM electronically. As demonstrated in Table 4,
using the proposed 4% price and tiered volume parameters, a comparable
47 securities (1.7% of securities) on average in October would not have
been eligible to be opened by the DMM electronically.
    With respect to the proposed volume parameters, the Exchange
believes that having a parameter tied to higher-than-average opening
volume in a security would better reflect whether opening
electronically would be appropriate. For example, as the data show in
Table 4, there were 74 securities averaging daily opening volume over
100,000 shares in the previous quarter (3Q15) and three of those
securities had opening volume of over 500,000 shares on an average
daily basis in October. The Exchange believes that if a security has a
higher-than-average opening volume on a quarterly basis without any
corresponding price dislocation, then the volume of shares trading on
the opening for such securities is not representative of any volatility
for that security, but rather, is a regular state of affairs that does
not require a high-touch opening managed by a DMM on the trading Floor.
Rather, such securities would benefit from being available for the DMM
to open electronically in order to promote a fair and orderly opening
at or near the open of trading.
    As with pre-opening indications, the Exchange proposes to double
the percentage parameter on trading days with extreme market-wide
volatility and eliminate the volume parameter. As illustrated in Table
5, doubling the percentage parameter and eliminating the volume
parameters would allow DMMs to open most securities electronically even
during extreme market-wide volatility. As trade data from August 24,
2015 set forth in Table 3 illustrates, the current percentage
parameters restricted DMMs from opening 1,753 securities
electronically, which represents 58.4% of securities.\26\ As set forth
in Table 5, applying the proposed 8% percentage parameter would have
allowed DMMs to open all but 573 securities electronically, which
represents 19.1% of the securities traded on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ On August 24, 2015, DMMs also chose not to open securities
electronically, even if they would have been priced within the
current price parameters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add a new paragraph (c) to Rule 123D
entitled ``Temporary Suspension of DMM Automated Opening Limitations or
Floor Official Approval.'' Similar to proposed Rule 15(f), if the CEO
of the Exchange determines that a Floor-wide event it likely to have an
impact on the ability of DMMs to arrange for a fair and orderly opening
or reopening following a market-wide trading halt at the Exchange and
that, absent relief, the operation of the Exchange is likely to be
impaired, the CEO of the Exchange may temporarily suspend the
prohibition on a DMM opening a security electronically if the opening
transaction would be more than the price or volume parameters specified
in proposed Rule 123D(a)(1)(B). This would be a new suspension
authority that relates to the proposed new price and volume parameters
for when a DMM may open a security electronically. The Exchange
believes that having this temporary suspension authority would be
appropriate for situations if the DMM is unable to open a security
manually, either due to unavailability of 11 Wall Street facilities or
because of systems or technical issues with Floor-based tools for
manually opening a security.
    Proposed Rule 123D(c) would also provide that if the CEO of the
Exchange

determines that a Floor-wide event is likely to have an impact on the
ability of DMMs to arrange for a fair and orderly opening or reopening
following a market-wide trading halt at the Exchange, and that absent
relief, the operation of the Exchange is likely to be impaired, the CEO
of the Exchange may temporarily suspend (i) the prohibition on a DMM
opening a security electronically if the opening transaction will be
more than the price or volume parameters specified in proposed Rule
123D(a)(1)(B); or (ii) the need under Rule 123D(b) for prior Floor
Official approval to open or reopen a security following a market-wide
trading halt. This proposed rule change is similar to authority in
current Rule 48, which permits a qualified Exchange officer to
temporarily suspend the need for prior Floor Official or prior NYSE
Floor operations approval to open or reopen a security following a
market-wide trading halt. While the Exchange expects that its other
proposed changes to Rule 123D would make it unlikely that a complete
suspension of prior Floor Official approval would be required, the
Exchange believes it would be prudent for the CEO of the Exchange to
retain the authority temporarily suspend such requirements for events
that it cannot currently predict. The Exchange also proposes a new
temporary suspension that correlates to the proposed new price and
volume parameters for when a DMM may open a security electronically.
The Exchange expects that this relief would be required if 11 Wall
Street facilities were unavailable and DMMs would be required to open
all securities remotely, and thus electronically.
    Proposed Rule 123D(c)(2)-(3) are nearly identical to proposed Rule
15(f)(1)-(3), as described in greater detail above, with changes only
to address that this proposed rule relates to the temporary suspension
of the requirements for specified paragraphs of Rule 123D. Proposed
Rule 123D(c)(2)-(3) is based on the same provisions of Rule 48 that
proposed Rule 15(f)(2)-(4) is based on, which is discussed in greater
detail above.
    The miscellaneous and technical amendments proposed to Rule 123D
are as follows:
     The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 123D(a)(5) (Pre-
Opening Information) to change the citation to Rule 15(c) to 15(g)
based on the proposed changes to Rule 15, described above, and delete
the word ``either'' and the references to Rule 123D.
     The Exchange proposes to delete the phrase ``Halts in
Trading'' from the heading of Rule 123D(b).
     Also in Rule 123D(b), the Exchange proposes to delete the
text relating to the dissemination of mandatory indications beginning
with the sentence ``If an unusual situation exists, such as a large
order imbalance, tape indications should be disseminated, including
multiple indications if appropriate with the supervision of a Floor
Official'' through and including the sentence ``An Executive Floor
Governor or Floor Governor should be consulted in any case where there
is not complete agreement among the Floor Officials participating in
the discussion.'' This rule text all pertains to Rule 123D Mandatory
indications, which, as discussed above, would be governed by proposed
Rule 15.
     The Exchange proposes to add a new heading (c) entitled
``Halts in Trading'' before the sentence ``Once trading has commenced,
trading may only be halted with the approval of a Floor Governor or two
Floor Officials'' in current Rule 123D(b) and change current headings
(c) (Equipment Changeover) and (d) of Rule 123D to (d) and (e),
respectively.
     Finally, in current Rule 123D(c) (Proposed Rule 123D(e)),
to reflect that all information relating to pre-opening indications,
including the Applicable Price Ranges and Reference Prices, are now
described in Rule 15, the Exchange proposes to delete the phrase ``a
significant order imbalance (one which would result in a price change
from the last sale of one point or more for stocks under $10, the
lesser of 10% or three points for $10--$99.99 and five points if $100
or more--unless a Floor Governor deems circumstances warrant a lower
parameter) develops'' and add the phrase ``a pre-opening indication
would be required to be published'' in its place.
Rule 48
    The Exchange proposes to delete Rule 48 in its entirety. As
discussed above, the Exchange is proposing changes to Rules 15 and 123D
that it believes will allow DMMs to publish pre-opening indications in
a manageable number of securities, even on days of high volatility,
which would promote transparency regarding opening prices at the
Exchange. In addition, and as described above, the Exchange is
incorporating into Rules 15 and 123D authority for the CEO of the
Exchange to temporarily suspend the requirement to publish pre-opening
indications, the pricing and volume limitations for a DMM to open a
security electronically, and for a DMM to obtain Floor Official
approval under Rule 123D(b) when opening or reopening a security, if
the CEO of the Exchange determines that such relief is necessary to the
ability of DMMs to open the securities and to the operation of the
Exchange. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the Rule 48 is no
longer necessary.
Conforming and Technical Amendments--Rules 80C, 124 and 9217
Rule 80C
    The Exchange proposes conforming amendments Rule 80C(b)(2), which
governs a Trading Pause under the LULD Plan.
    First, Rule 80C(b)(2) requires that the Exchange re-open the
security in a manner similar to the procedures set forth in Rule 123D
following a Trading Pause (as defined therein). The Exchange proposes
to add a reference to Rule 15 to Rule 80C(b)(2), so that the
requirement to re-open would be in a manner similar to Rules 15 and
123D.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to delete subdivision (A) of Rule
80C(b)(2) in its entirety and mark the deleted text as ``Reserved.'' As
noted above, the requirements for reopening a security following a
trading pause set forth in Rule 80C would be codified in proposed Rule
15(d)(6).
Rule 124
    The Exchange proposes to amend subsection (c)(1) of Rule 124
(Midday Auction), describing the reopening process for the Midday
Auction in the same manner as in Rule 123D for reopenings, by adding
``pre-opening'' before the word ``indication'' in four places and
deleting the reference ``to the Consolidated Tape'' in the first
sentence.
Rule 9217
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 9217, which sets forth the
list of rules under which a member organization or covered person may
be subject to a fine under a minor rule violation plan as set forth in
Rule 9216(b). Rule 9217 permits a summary fine for violations of Rule
123D requirements for DMMs relating to openings, reopenings, delayed
openings, trading halts, and tape indications. The Exchange proposes to
delete the clause ``tape indications'' to reflect elimination of
mandatory indications from Rule 123D. The Exchange believes this
proposed change would add transparency and clarity to the Exchange's
rules.
* * * * *
    Because of the technology changes associated with the proposed rule

change, the Exchange will announce by Trader Update the implementation
date of the changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\27\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\28\ in particular, because it
is designed 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 protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that streamlining and consolidating pre-
opening indications into a single rule (Rule 15) from two (Rules 15 and
123D) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market because it would set forth in a single rule the
requirements for pre-opening indications, thereby promoting
transparency by using consistent terminology for rules governing
equities trading and ensuring that members, regulators, and the public
can more easily navigate the Exchange's rulebook.
    The Exchange believes that adopting new single-wide (5% change) and
double-wide (10% change if S&P 500 futures move 2%) percentage
parameters for the publication of pre-opening indications would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by
requiring issuance of more pre-opening indications than currently
during times of market stress, thereby increasing the amount of
information available in the pre-market and improving the quality of
price discovery at the opening. The proposed rule therefore promotes
just and equitable principles of trade because it would expand the
amount of pre-opening information available to the marketplace, thereby
promoting transparency. For the same reasons, the proposal is also
designed to protect investors as well as the public interest.
    The Exchange believes that amending Rule 123D to specify when a DMM
may effect an opening electronically would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by promoting
transparency in Exchange rules regarding under what circumstances a DMM
may effect an opening electronically. The Exchange believes that the
proposed parameters for when a DMM may open a security electronically,
which would be 4% on regular trading days and doubled to 8% in times of
market stress, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market by reducing the number of manual openings and
enabling more securities to open closer to 9:30 a.m. ET on extremely
volatile trading days, thereby providing customers and the investing
public with greater certainty of a timely open in circumstances of
extreme market stress. The Exchange further believes that the proposal
would advance the efficiency and transparency of the opening process,
thereby fostering accurate price discovery at the open of trading. For
the same reasons, the proposal is also designed to protect investors as
well as the public interest.
    The Exchange believes that deleting Rule 48 and moving the
applicable provisions to Rules 15 and 123D would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by reducing
reliance on Rule 48 during extremely volatile trading days. Rather, as
proposed, the need for the CEO of the Exchange to temporarily suspend
either pre-opening indications or the need for prior Floor Official
approval before opening or reopening a security would be under more
narrow circumstances of when a Floor-wide event would impair the
Exchange's ability to conduct a fair and orderly open or reopening. As
discussed above, the proposed amendments to Rule 15 and 123D to provide
for parameters on days with extreme market-wide volatility would
obviate the need for the current Rule 48 ability to lift the
requirements for pre-opening indications or prior Floor Official
approval during extreme market-wide volatility. The Exchange further
believes that the proposal would advance the efficiency and
transparency of the opening process, thereby fostering accurate price
discovery at the open of trading. For the same reasons, the proposal is
also designed to protect investors as well as the public interest.
    The Exchange believes that making corresponding conforming changes
to Rules 80C, 124 and 9217 would remove impediments to and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market by reducing potential confusion and
adding transparency and clarity to the Exchange's rules, thereby
ensuring that members, regulators and the public can more easily
navigate and understand the Exchange's rulebook.

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. The proposed rule change is
not intended to address competitive issues but rather promote greater
efficiency and transparency at the open of trading on the Exchange.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove 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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2016-24 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-NYSE-2016-24. 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 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-NYSE-2016-24 and should be
submitted on or before April 27, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-07838 Filed 4-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment: Dear Mr. Zeller:

        I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.  	         The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited due to my attention being focused on term finals and studying for the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT). I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.                   I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they improved my quality of life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

        I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

Kind regards, Shant N.


[Federal Register: February 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 31)]
[Notices]
[Page 7151]
[DOCID:fr17fe10-7]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: [75 FR 6431,
February 9, 2010]

Status: Closed meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Date and Time of Previously Announced Meeting: Thursday, February 11,
2010 at 2 p.m.

Change in the Meeting: Cancellation of meeting.
    The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 2
p.m. has been cancelled.
    For further information please contact the Office of the Secretary
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 10, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3073 Filed 2-12-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P