[Federal Register: May 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 95)]
[Notices]
[Page 27895-27896]
[DOCID:fr17my07-134]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55743; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change to Waive Certain Listing Fees

May 10, 2007

I. Introduction

    On February 28, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange''), through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities,
Inc., filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposal to waive certain listing fees. The proposal
was published for comment in the Federal Register on March 16, 2007.\3\
The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55430 (March 8,
2007), 72 FR 12651 (the ``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to amend its listing fee schedule to provide
that there shall be no initial listing fee applicable to (i) any
company listing following emergence from bankruptcy, or (ii) any
company listing its primary class of common stock that is not listed on
a national securities exchange but is registered under the Act.
    The Exchange believes that the initial listing fee waiver for
companies listing upon emergence from bankruptcy is justified the
unique circumstances of those issuers, which, according to the NYSE,
among other things, tend to be more sensitive to the initial and
continued costs associated with listing because of the desire in
bankruptcy proceedings to ensure creditors are paid as much as
possible. According to the Exchange, because bankrupt companies face
unique challenges in the listing process, and because the number of
companies that will benefit from the fee waiver will be very limited,
the Exchange does not believe that the treatment this proposal would
afford to bankrupt companies constitutes an inequitable or unfairly
discriminatory allocation of fees.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that waiving initial listing
fees for a company listing its primary class of common stock which is
registered under that Act but not listed on a national securities
exchange is appropriate and does not constitute an inequitable or
unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees. The Exchange anticipates
that most companies taking advantage of this waiver will be formerly-
listed companies that were delisted as a result of a failure to timely
file annual reports with the Commission. These companies usually seek
to re-list on the Exchange as soon as their filings are up to date.\4\
According to the Exchange, because such companies had previously paid
initial listing fees to the Exchange or to another national securities
exchange, the Exchange believes that to make them pay these fees again
would further penalize them unnecessarily.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In its filing, the Exchange stated that typically, such
companies are otherwise in good standing with a national securities
exchange, but fell behind on their reporting obligations under the
Act because their auditors or the Commission required restatements
of their financial statements. The Commission notes that the timely
filing of accurate financial reports under the Act is critical to
investors and our national market and assures that investors receive
up to date financial information about listed companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange stated that other companies trading in the over-the-
counter market that have not previously been listed on a national
securities exchange may seek to qualify for the waiver of initial
listing fees. However, the Exchange believes that not many of these
companies will be able to meet its quantitative initial listing
standards, and thus does not believe that waiving initial listing fees
for such companies will have a meaningful effect on the Exchange's
revenue or constitute an inequitable or unfairly discriminatory
allocation of fees.
    The Exchange has represented that the proposed rule change will not
affect the Exchange's commitment of resources to its regulatory
oversight of the listing process or its regulatory programs. Companies
that benefit from one of the proposed waivers will be reviewed for
compliance with Exchange listing standards in the same manner as any
other company that applies to be listed on the Exchange. The Exchange
will conduct a full and independent review of each issuer's compliance
with the Exchange's listing standards.
    The Exchange also has represented that it does not expect the
financial impact of this proposed rule change to be material, either in
terms of increased levels of annual fees from transferring issuers or
in terms of diminished initial listing fee revenues. A limited number
of companies are qualified and seek to list on the Exchange that are
either emerging from bankruptcy or have a registered class of common
stock but are not currently listed on another market. Accordingly, the
proposed rule change will not impact the Exchange's resource commitment
to its regulatory oversight of the listing process or its regulatory
programs.
    Following their approval, the Exchange would apply the amendments
contained in the proposal retroactively to February 28, 2007, the date
of filing of the proposed rule change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\6\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ which
requires that an exchange have rules that provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and other persons using its facilities. The Commission also
finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\8\ which requires, inter alia, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
and not designed to permit unfair discrimination between issuers. The
Commission has not received any comments on the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that companies who re-list upon emerging from
bankruptcy or who re-list upon a return to good standing following
delisting have usually paid listing fees to either the Exchange or to
another national securities exchange at the time of their initial
listing. For this reason, the Exchange argues, the waiver of listing
fees constitutes an equitable allocation of reasonable fees.
    The Commission recognizes that, as drafted, the initial fee waiver
would extend to companies that have never

listed on a national securities exchange, which thus have never paid
listing fees. In this regard, the Exchange acknowledges that some
companies other than those returning to good standing after recent
delisting--e.g., a company trading on the over-the-counter market--may
seek to take advantage of the waiver of listing fees for companies not
listed on a national securities exchange but registered under the Act.
However, the Exchange expects the number of such companies eligible for
the waiver to be very small, since not many of these companies would
meet the Exchange's quantitative listing requirements.
    The Commission also notes that the Exchange has represented that
the waiver of listing fees should not have a material financial impact
on the exchange, or impact the Exchange's resource commitment to its
regulatory oversight of the listing process or its regulatory programs.
    Further, the proposal does not have any impact on whether a company
is actually eligible to list on the Exchange. The Commission expects,
and the Exchange has represented, that a full and independent review of
compliance with listing standards will be conducted for any company
seeking to take advantage of either of the fee waivers, just as for any
company that applies for listing on the Exchange.
    In light of these arguments, the Commission agrees that the
proposed waivers, which are retroactively effective to February 28,
2007, the date of the filing of the proposed rule change,\9\ do not
constitute an inequitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges, do not permit unfair discrimination between issuers, and
are generally consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\10\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-24)
be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9439 Filed 5-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

			Issued by the Department of Transportation on March 7 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2000-8299

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant: Air Japan Co., Ltd.						Date Filed:  February 14, 2005

Relief requested:  Renew exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to (1) engage
in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail
between any point or points in Japan and any point or points in the
United States; (2) provide U.S. carrier code-share services on flights
operated by Air Japan between points in Japan and points beyond Japan,
in connection with U.S. carrier services between the United States and
points beyond Japan, via Japan; and (3) conduct charters in accordance
with Part 212 of our rules.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  February 18, 2004, in
this docket

Applicant representative:  Charles J. Simpson, Jr. & Shannon M. Moyer
202-298-8660

DOT analyst:  Shelita Smith<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved									Action date:  March 7, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  March 7, 2005 – March 7, 2006

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  1998 Memorandum
of Understanding between the United States and Japan (1998 MOU).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

   X    Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:

Under the authority granted above, Air Japan must (1) comply with the
prior approval requirements for charters set forth in the Notice of
Action Taken dated February 27, 2001, in this docket, and (2) perform
all services consistent with existing agreements between the United
States and Japan.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

We found that the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that  (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

05/2004


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70812-70813]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Notice of Application for Special Permits

AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

ACTION: List of applications for special permits

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR part 107,
subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the application described herein. Each
mode of transportation for which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in the ``Nature of Application''
portion of the table below as follows: 1--Motor vehicle, 2--Rail
freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft only, 5--Passenger-carrying
aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2011.

Address Comments To: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington,
DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the applications are
available for inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30,
1200 New Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington DC or at http://regulations.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 3, 2011.
Donald Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits.

                                               New Special Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Regulation(s)       Nature of special permit
    Application No.       Docket No.          Applicant               affected                  thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15476-N...............  ..............  Swanson Group          49 CFR 172.101 Column  To authorize the
                                         Aviation, LLC Grants   (9B), 172.204          transportation in
                                         Pass, OR.              (c)(3), 173.27         commerce of certain
                                                                (b)(2), 175.30         hazardous materials by
                                                                (a)(1), and 172.200.   external load on cargo
                                                                                aircraft in remote areas
                                                                                of the U.S. without being
                                                                                subject to hazard
                                                                                communication
                                                                                requirements and quantity
                                                                                limitations where no
                                                                                other means of
                                                                                transportation is
                                                                                available. (mode 4)
15479-N...............  ..............  Korean Air Lines Co.   49 CFR 172.101 Column  To authorize the one-time
                                         Ltd. (KAL).            (9B).                  transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                explosives that are
                                                                                forbidden for
                                                                                transportation by cargo
                                                                                only aircraft. (mode 4)

15483-N...............  ..............  United Space Alliance  49 CFR 173.302a......  To authorize the
                                         Houston, TX.                                  transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                Division 2.2 compressed
                                                                                gases in non-DOT
                                                                                specification cylinders
                                                                                to support the
                                                                                International Space
                                                                                Station Human Research
                                                                                Facility Gas Delivery
                                                                                System. (modes 1, 2, 3,
                                                                                4, 5)
15491-N...............  ..............  Metalcraft/Sea-Fire    49 CFR 173.301(f)....  To authorize the
                                         Marine Inc.                                   transportation in
                                         Baltimore, MD.                                commerce of non-DOT
                                                                                specification cylinders
                                                                                containing a Division 2.2
                                                                                compressed gas for export
                                                                                only. (modes 1, 2, 3, 4)
15493-N...............  ..............  Carleton Technologies  49 CFR 173.302a......  To authorize the
                                         dba Cobham Mission                            manufacture, marking,
                                         Systems Orchard                               sale and use of a
                                         Park, NY.                                     nonrefillable non-DOT
                                                                                specification cylinder
                                                                                similar to a DOT
                                                                                specification 39 cylinder
                                                                                for use in transporting
                                                                                Division 2.2 non-
                                                                                flammable compressed gas.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 4, 5)
15494-N...............  ..............  Johnson Controls       49 CFR 173.159.......  To authorize the
                                         Battery Group, Inc.                           transportation in
                                         Milwaukee, WI.                                commerce of certain
                                                                                actively leaking lead
                                                                                acid batteries in a
                                                                                special overpack by motor
                                                                                vehicle. (mode 1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-28984 Filed 11-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4909-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52749-52756]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24576]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82027; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2017-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend NYSE
American Rule 980NY To Clarify the Priority of Electronic Complex
Orders and To Modify Aspects of the Complex Order Auction Process

November 7, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On September 8, 2017, NYSE American LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
American'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ a
proposed rule change to amend NYSE American Rule 980NY to clarify and
provide greater specificity to its rules governing the trading of
Electronic Complex Orders (``ECOs''), and to correct inaccuracies in
those rules.\4\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on September 27, 2017.\5\ The Commission received
no comment letters regarding the proposal. On October 26, 2017, NYSE
American filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal, which supersedes the
original filing in its entirety.\6\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comment on Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change from interested persons and is approving the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ For purposes of NYSE American Rule 980NY, an Electronic
Complex Order is any Complex Order, as defined in NYSE American Rule
900.3NY(e) that is entered into the Exchange System. See NYSE
American Rule 980NY. The Exchange System (``System'') is the
Exchange's electronic order delivery, execution and reporting system
for designated option issues through which orders and quotes of
Users are consolidated for execution and/or display. Market Makers
must submit quotes to the System in their appointed classes
electronically. See NYSE American Rule 900.2NY(48). A Complex Order
is any order involving the simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two
or more different option series in the same underlying security, for
the same account, in a ratio that is equal to or greater than one-
to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one (3.00) and
for the purpose of executing a particular investment strategy. See
NYSE American Rule 900.3NY(e).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81676 (September 21,
2017), 82 FR 45085 (``Notice'').
    \6\ Amendment No. 1 modifies the original filing to (1) add
specificity to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) by indicating that
both Customer and non-Customer leg market interest will have first
priority to trade with an incoming ECO when the leg markets can
execute against an incoming ECO in full (or in a permissible ratio),
and each leg includes Customer interest; (2) clarify the provision
in NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2) indicating that a Complex Order
Auction (``COA'')-eligible order may trade immediately in full (or
in a permissible ratio) with a resting ECO priced equal to the
contra-side Complex BBO, unless each leg of the contra-side Complex
BBO includes Customer interest; (3) add a provision to NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(7)(A) indicating that ECOs on behalf of Customers will
have priority over same-priced ECOs for non-Customers when
allocating orders at the conclusion of a COA; (4) clarify the
requirement NYSE American Rule 980NY, Commentary .02 to provide
price improvement on at least one leg of the ECO when each leg of
the contra-side Complex BBO for the components of the ECO includes
Customer interest; (5) remove a superfluous reference in Commentary
.02 to Commentary .01; and (6) delete language in the description
section indicating that the proposal removes references to Customer
ECO priority. To promote transparency of its proposed amendment,
when NYSE American filed Amendment No. 1 with the Commission, it
also submitted Amendment No. 1 as a comment letter to the file,
which the Commission posted on its Web site and placed in the public
comment file for SR-NYSEAMER-2017-15 (available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyseamer-2017-15/nyseamer201715-2656362-161384.pdf). The Exchange also posted a copy of its Amendment No. 1
on its Web site (available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-american/rule-filings/filings/2017/NYSEAmer-2017-15,%20Am.%201.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    NYSE American Rule 980NY governs the trading of ECOs in the
Exchange's Complex Matching Engine (``CME''). As described more fully
in the Notice, NYSE American proposes to amend NYSE American Rule 980NY
to provide additional specificity, transparency, and clarity to its
processing of ECOs. The proposal also corrects inaccuracies in NYSE
American Rule 980NY.

Execution of ECOs During Core Trading Hours

    The proposal amends NYSE American Rule 980NY(c), ``Execution of
Complex Orders,'' to indicate that ECOs may be executed not only
without consideration of prices of the same complex order that might be
available on other exchanges, as the rule currently provides, but also
without consideration of the prices of single-legged orders that might
be available on other exchanges. In addition, the proposal revises and
reorganizes current NYSE American Rule 980NY(c) by replacing current
text and adding new paragraphs (ii), ``Execution of Electronic Complex
Orders During Core Trading,'' and (iii), ``Electronic Complex Orders in
the Consolidated Book.'' \7\ The changes to NYSE American Rules
980NY(c)(ii) and (iii) are designed to describe the processing of ECOs
during Core Trading in a more concise and logical manner, with NYSE
American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) governing the execution of ECOs that are
marketable on arrival and NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(iii) governing
how ECOs would be ranked in the Consolidated Book and executed as
resting interest on the Consolidated Book.\8\ New NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(ii) indicates that the CME would accept an incoming marketable
ECO and automatically execute it against the best-priced contra-side
interest resting in the Consolidated Book.\9\ If, at a price, the leg
markets can trade against an incoming ECO in full (or in a permissible
ratio), and each leg includes Customer interest, the leg markets--
including both Customer and non-Customer interest--would have first
priority at that price to trade with the incoming ECO pursuant to NYSE
American Rule 964NY(b), followed by resting ECOs in price/time
priority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The title of NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) remains
unchanged, except for the addition of the word ``Electronic'' prior
to ``Complex Orders.'' NYSE American Rule 900.2NY(15) defines Core
Trading Hours as ``the regular trading hours for business set forth
in the rules of the primary markets underlying those option classes
listed on the Exchange; provided, however, that transactions may be
effected on the Exchange until the regular time set for the normal
close of trading in the primary markets with respect to equity
option classes and ETF option classes, and 15 minutes after the
regular time set for the normal close of trading in the primary
markets with respect to index option classes, or such other hours as
may be determined by the Exchange from time to time.''
    \8\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45086.
    \9\ See id. NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) states that ``The
CME will accept an incoming marketable Electronic Complex Order and
automatically execute it against the best-priced contra-side
interest resting in the Consolidated Book. If, at a price, the leg
markets can execute against an incoming Electronic Complex Order in
full (or in a permissible ratio), and each leg includes Customer
interest, the leg markets (Customer and non-Customer interest) will
have first priority at that price and will trade with the incoming
Electronic Complex Order pursuant to Rule 964NY(b) before Electronic
Complex Orders resting in the Consolidated Book can trade at that
price.'' See Amendment No. 1.
    \10\ See Amendment No. 1. See also Notice, 82 FR at 45087. The
proposal amends NYSE American Rule 980NY(a) to add a defined term,
``leg markets,'' to refer to individual quotes and orders in the
Consolidated Book. In addition, the proposal revises NYSE American
Rule 980NY(c) to add the word ``strategy'' following the term
``complex order,'' and to add references to ``Electronic'' Complex
Orders to the titles of NYSE American Rules 980NY(c)(i) and (ii).
See id., 82 FR at 45086, n. 7.

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

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(iii), which incorporates existing
paragraphs (c)(ii)(B) and (C) and renumbers them as (iii)(A) and (B),
addresses incoming ECOs that are not marketable. New NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(iii)(A) makes clear that an ECO, or portion thereof, that is
not executed on arrival will be ranked in the Consolidated Book and
that any incoming orders and quotes that can trade with a resting ECO
would execute according to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii).\11\ New
NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(iii)(B) clarifies that orders that trade
against ECOs in the Consolidated Book will be allocated pursuant to
NYSE American Rule 964NY(b), rather than pursuant to NYSE American Rule
964NY.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45087.
    \12\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Electronic Complex Order Auction Rules

    Because of the number of modifications to current NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e), ``Electronic Complex Order Auction (``COA'') Process,''
the proposal deletes the existing rule in its entirety and replaces it
with new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e), which is designed to describe the
COA process more clearly, accurately, and logically.\13\ New NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e) indicates that, upon entry into the System, an
ECO may be executed immediately in full, or in a permissible ratio, as
provided in NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2), or may be subject to a
COA.\14\ New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(1) defines a ``COA-eligible
order'' to mean an ECO that is entered in a class designated by the
Exchange and is (i) designated by the ATP Holder as COA-eligible; and
(ii) received during Core Trading Hours.\15\ New NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(1) preserves existing provisions in current NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(1) and (2) that allow the Exchange to determine COA
eligibility on a class-by-class basis and require an ATP Holder to
provide direction that an auction be initiated.\16\ The proposal
eliminates from the new definition of COA-eligible order several
features of ECOs that are included in the current definition of COA-
eligible order, but that, according to the Exchange, are not
determinative of COA eligibility on NYSE American, including the
``size, number of series, and complex order origin types (i.e.,
Customers, broker-dealers that are not Market-Makers or specialists on
an options exchange, and/or Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange).'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See id. NYSE American notes that it is not proposing to
modify the functionality of the COA. See id.
    \14\ See id. Current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e) states that
``Upon entry into the System, eligible Electronic Complex Orders may
be subject to an automated request for responses (`RFR') auction.''
    \15\ Core Trading Hours are ``the regular trading hours for
business set forth in the rules of the primary markets underlying
those option classes listed on the Exchange; provided, however, that
transactions may be effected on the Exchange until the regular time
set for the normal close of trading in the primary markets with
respect to equity option classes and ETF option classes, and 15
minutes after the regular time set for the normal close of trading
in the primary markets with respect to index option classes, or such
other hours as may be determined by the Exchange from time to
time.'' See NYSE American Rule 900.2NY(15).
    \16\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45087. Current NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(1) defines COA-eligible order as ``an Electronic Complex
Order that, as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis,
is eligible for a COA considering the order's marketability (defined
as a number of ticks away from the current market), size, number of
series, and complex order origin types (i.e., Customers, broker-
dealers that are not Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange, and/or Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange).'' NYSE American currently allows COA-eligible orders to
be entered in every class. See Notice, 82 FR at 45087, n. 24.
    \17\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2) provides that, upon entry into
the System, a COA-eligible order will trade immediately, in full or in
a permissible ratio, with any ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book
that are priced better than the contra-side Complex BBO.\18\ A COA-
eligible order may trade with any ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book
priced equal to the contra-side Complex BBO, unless each leg of the
contra-side Complex BBO includes Customer interest.\19\ Any portion of
a COA-eligible order that does not trade immediately upon entry into
the System may start a COA.\20\ A COA-eligible order that does not
trade immediately upon entry into the System will start a COA, provided
that the limit price of the COA-eligible order to buy (sell) is: (i)
Higher (lower) than the best-priced, same side interest in both the leg
markets and any ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book; and (ii) within
a given number of ticks away from the current, contra-side market, as
determined by the Exchange.\21\ NYSE American notes that, because a
COA-eligible order may be a certain number of ticks away from the
current contra-side market, it is possible that a COA could be
initiated even if the limit price of the COA-eligible order is not at
or within the NYSE American best bid/offer for each leg of the
order.\22\ NYSE American notes, however, that a COA-eligible order must
execute at a price that is at or within the NYSE American best bid/
offer for each leg of the order, consistent with NYSE American Rule
980NY(c).\23\ A COA-eligible order will reside on the Consolidated Book
until it meets the requirements of NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3)(i)
and (ii) and can initiate a COA.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Complex BBO is ``the BBO for a given complex order
strategy as derived from the best bid on OX and the best offer on OX
for each individual component series of a Complex Order.'' See NYSE
American Rule 900.2NY(7)(b).
    \19\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2) and Amendment No. 1.
    \20\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2).
    \21\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3).
    \22\ See Notice, 82 FR 45088.
    \23\ See id.
    \24\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3) provides that NYSE American will
initiate a COA by sending a request for response (``RFR'') message to
all ATP Holders that subscribe to RFR messages. RFR messages will
identify the component series, the size and side of the market of the
order and any contingencies.\25\ These provisions are consistent with
current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2). New NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(3) further provides that only one COA may be conducted at a
time for any given complex order strategy.\26\ Finally, new NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(3) states that, at the time the COA is
initiated, NYSE American will record the Complex BBO (the ``initial
Complex BBO'') for purposes of determining whether the COA should end
early pursuant to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6). As discussed more
fully below, NYSE American believes that the use of the initial Complex
BBO ensures that the COA respects the leg markets and the principles of
price-time priority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See id.
    \26\ The Exchange believes that this provision can be inferred
from current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(8), which describes the
impact of COA-eligible orders that arrive during a COA. See Notice,
82 FR at 45088, n. 29. The Commission notes that current NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(8)(D) states that incoming COA-eligible
orders received during the Response Time Interval that are one same
side of the market and priced better than the initiating order will
cause the auction to end.
    \27\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(4) defines the ``Response Time
Interval'' (``RTI'') as the period of time during which RFR Responses
may be entered. The rule further provides that NYSE American will
determine the length of the RTI, provided, however, that the duration
will not be less than 500 milliseconds and will not exceed one second.
These provisions are consistent with current NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(3). Finally, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(4) indicates

that, at the end of the RTI, the COA-eligible order will be allocated
pursuant to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7).
    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5), which describes the
characteristics of RFR Responses, retains some provisions of current
NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(4) and (e)(7) and modifies other aspects
of those rules. Specifically, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)
retains the following provisions in current NYSE American Rules
980NY(e)(4) and (7): Any ATP Holder may submit RFR Responses during the
RTI; \28\ RFR Responses are ECOs with a time-in-force contingency for
the duration of the COA and will expire at the end of the COA; \29\ RFR
Responses may be submitted in $0.01 increments and may be modified
during the RTI; \30\ RFR Responses must be on the opposite side of the
COA-eligible order, while RFR Responses on the same side as the COA-
eligible order will be rejected; \31\ and RFR Responses will not be
ranked or displayed in the Consolidated Book.\32\ New NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(5)(A) adds new detail by indicating that an RFR Response
must specify the price, size, and side of the market. Current NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(7) states that RFR Response may not be withdrawn
prior to the end of the RTI. New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)(C),
however, indicates that RFR Responses may be cancelled during the RTI,
which NYSE American states is consistent with its current
functionality.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5). ATP Holders also
may submit RFR Responses on behalf of Customers. See Notice, 82 FR
at 45088, n. 31.
    \29\ See new NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(5)(A) and (C).
    \30\ See id.
    \31\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)(B).
    \32\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)(C).
    \33\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45089. NYSE American notes that all
orders may be cancelled. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Impact of Incoming Trading Interest on the COA Process

    New NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(A) and (B) replace existing
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(8), and new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(C) replaces existing NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(9). As
noted above, the new rules introduce and incorporate the concept of the
initial Complex BBO--the BBO for a given complex order strategy derived
from the best bid (``BB'') and best offer (``BO'') for each individual
component series of a complex order as recorded at the start of the
RTI--as a benchmark against which incoming interest is measured to
determine whether a COA should end early.\34\ New NYSE American Rules
980NY(e)(6)(A) and (B) address the impact on the COA of incoming ECOs
and COA-eligible orders. New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)
addresses the impact of leg market updates on the COA. New NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B) provides that when a COA ends early, or at
the end of the RTI, the initiating COA-eligible order will execute
pursuant to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7) ahead of any interest
that arrived during the COA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45089 and new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(3). See also note 28, supra, and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(i) provides that incoming
opposite-side ECOs or COA-eligible orders that lock or cross the
initial Complex BBO will cause the COA to end early. If the incoming
ECO or COA-eligible order is also executable against the limit price of
the initiating COA-eligible order, it will be ranked with RFR Responses
to execute with the COA-eligible order pursuant to new NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(7).\35\ NYSE American believes that ending the COA early
under these circumstances would allow an initiating COA-eligible order
to execute (ahead of the incoming order) against any RFR Responses or
ECOs received during the RTI until that point, while preserving the
priority of the incoming order to trade with the resting leg
markets.\36\ NYSE American also states that early conclusion of the COA
would avoid disturbing priority in the Consolidated Book and allow the
Exchange to appropriately handle the incoming orders.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(i).
    \36\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45090.
    \37\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(A)(ii) provides that incoming
opposite-side ECOs or COA-eligible orders that are executable against
the limit price of the COA-eligible order, but do not lock or cross the
initial Complex BBO, will not cause the COA to end early and will be
ranked with RFR Responses to execute with the COA-eligible order
pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7). NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(A)(iii) provides that incoming opposite-side ECOs or COA-
eligible orders that are either not executable on arrival against the
limit price of the initiating COA-eligible order or do not lock or
cross the initial Complex BBO will not cause the COA to end early.
    New NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(A)(iv) and (v) describe the
treatment of incoming opposite-side ECOs and COA-eligible orders that
do not execute with the initiating COA-eligible order or were not
executable on arrival. An incoming opposite-side ECO that did not
execute against the initiating COA-eligible order or was not executable
on arrival will trade pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or
(iii).\38\ An incoming opposite-side COA-eligible order(s) that did not
execute against the initiating COA-eligible order or was not executable
on arrival will initiate subsequent COA(s) in price-time priority.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(iv). NYSE
American notes that this provision is consistent with current NYSE
American 980NY(e)(8)(A), but provides additional detail regarding
the ability for any balance of the incoming opposite-side ECO to
trade with the best-priced resting contra-side interest before, or
instead of, being ranked in the Consolidated Book. See Notice, 82 FR
at 45089-90.
    \39\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(i) indicates that an incoming
ECO or COA-eligible order on the same side of the market as the
initiating COA-eligible order that is priced higher (lower) than the
initiating COA-eligible order to buy (sell) will cause the COA to end
early.\40\ In addition, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(ii)
states that an incoming same-side ECO or COA-eligible order that is
priced equal to or lower (higher) than the initiating COA-eligible
order to buy (sell), and that also locks or crosses the contra-side
initial Complex BBO, will cause the COA to end early. NYSE American
believes that ending the COA early under the circumstances would ensure
that the COA interacts seamlessly with the Consolidated Book, and would
allow the COA-eligible order to execute (ahead of the incoming order)
against any RFR Responses or ECOs received during the RTI until that
point, while preserving the priority of the incoming order to trade
with the resting leg markets.\41\ New NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(B)(ii) also helps to correct an inaccuracy in current NYSE
American Rules 980NY(e)(8)(B) and (C), which indicate that incoming
same-side COA-eligible orders received during the RTI that are priced
equal to or worse than the initiating COA-eligible order will join the
COA. Instead, an incoming

same-side equal-priced or worse-priced COA-eligible order that locks or
crosses the contra-side initial Complex BBO would not execute during
the COA in progress, as the current rules suggest, but could trade with
RFR Responses or ECOs that do not execute in the COA and, if any
balance remains, would initiate a new COA.\42\ An incoming same-side
equal-priced or worse-priced ECO that locks or crosses the contra-side
initial Complex BBO could trade with RFR Responses or ECOs that do not
execute in the COA and, if any balance remains, would trade pursuant to
NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or (iii).\43\ New NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(B)(iii) states that an incoming same-side ECO or COA-
eligible order that is priced equal to, or lower (higher) than the
initiating COA-eligible order to buy (sell), but does not lock or cross
the contra-side initial Complex BBO, will not cause the COA to end
early.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(8)(D) also provides
that an incoming same-side, better-priced COA-eligible order will
cause the COA to end.
    \41\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45091.
    \42\ See new NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iv) and (vi).
See also Notice, 82 FR at 45091, n. 48 and accompanying text. New
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iv) provides that an incoming ECO
or COA-eligible order that caused a COA to end early, if executable,
will trade against any RFR Responses and/or ECOs received during the
RTI that did not trade with the initiating COA-eligible order. New
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(vi) provides that the remaining
balance of any incoming COA-eligible order(s) that does not trade
against any remaining RFR Responses or ECOs will initiate new COA(s)
in price-time priority.
    \43\ See new NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iv) and (v).
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(v) provides that any incoming
same-side ECO, or the remaining balance of such an ECO, that did not
trade against any remaining RFR Responses or ECOs will trade
pursuant to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or (iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(i) provides that updates to
the leg markets that cause the same-side Complex BBO to lock or cross
any RFR Response(s) and/or ECOs received during the RTI, or ECOs
resting in the Consolidated Book, will cause the COA to end early.\44\
The Exchange believes that providing for a COA to terminate early under
these circumstances would allow a COA-eligible order to trade against
any RFR Responses or ECOs received during the RTI up until that point,
while preserving the priority of the updated leg markets to trade with
any eligible contra-side interest, including any ECOs resting in the
Consolidated Book.\45\ Updates to the leg markets that cause the same-
side Complex BBO to be priced higher (lower) than the COA-eligible
order to buy (sell), but do not lock or cross any RFR Response(s) and/
or Electronic Complex Order(s) received during the RTI, or ECOs resting
in the Consolidated Book, will not cause the COA to end early.\46\
Updates to the leg markets that cause the contra-side Complex BBO to
lock or cross the same-side initial Complex BBO will cause the COA to
end early.\47\ Updates to the leg markets that cause the contra-side
Complex BB (BO) to improve (i.e., become higher (lower)), but do not
lock or cross the same-side initial Complex BBO, will not cause the COA
to end early.\48\ NYSE American believes that new NYSE American Rules
980NY(e)(6)(C)(i)-(iv) respect the COA process while maintaining the
priority of orders and quotes on the Consolidated Book as they
update.\49\ NYSE American notes that new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(C) is based in part on current NYSE American Rules
980NY(e)(9)(A) and (B).\50\ NYSE American states that the new rule
provides additional clarity and transparency by indicating on which
side the leg markets have updated.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(9)(A) similarly
provides that leg market interest that causes the derived Complex
Best Bid/Offer to be better than the COA-eligible order and to cross
the best-priced RFR Response will cause the auction to end.
    \45\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45091.
    \46\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(ii).
    \47\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(iii).
    \48\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(iv).
    \49\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45091.
    \50\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45091-45092.
    \51\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45092.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7), which describes the allocation
of COA-eligible orders at the conclusion of a COA, will replace current
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6) in its entirety.\52\ New NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(7)(A) provides that RFR Responses and ECOs to buy (sell)
that are priced higher (lower) than the initial Complex BBO will be
eligible to trade first with the COA-eligible order, beginning with the
highest (lowest) at each price point, on a Size Pro Rata basis, as
defined in NYSE American Rule 964(b)(3), provided that ECOs on behalf
of Customers will have priority over same-priced ECOs for non-
Customers.\53\ After COA allocations pursuant to NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(7)(A), the COA-eligible order will trade with best-priced
contra-side interest pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or
(iii).\54\ Thus, after the COA-eligible order trades with price-
improving interest received during the RTI, any remainder of the COA-
eligible order will follow NYSE American's regular allocation rules for
an incoming marketable ECO.\55\ NYSE American believes that this
provision makes clear that a COA-eligible order would trade against the
leg markets only after any auction allocations have been made.\56\ Any
unexecuted portion of the COA-eligible order will be ranked in the
Consolidated Book.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45092 and Amendment No. 1.
    \53\ See Amendment No. 1.
    \54\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7)(B).
    \55\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45092.
    \56\ See id.
    \57\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE American also proposes to modify Commentary .02 to NYSE
American Rule 980NY to make clear that the price improvement
requirement provided in Commentary .02 applies if each leg of the
contra-side Complex BBO for the components of the ECO includes Customer
interest.\58\ NYSE American believes that these changes add clarity and
internal consistency to its rules.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See Amendment No. 1.
    \59\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45093.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as
amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\60\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\61\ which requires, among other things, that the
rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Commission notes that the proposed rules are substantially similar to
rules recently adopted by NYSE Arca, Inc., except that NYSE American's
rules reflect its Customer priority allocation model.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \61\ 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(5).
    \62\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80138 (March 1,
2017), 82 FR 12869 (March 7, 2017) (order approving File No. SR-
NYSEArca-2016-149).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Execution of Complex Orders During Core Trading Hours

    NYSE American Rule 980NY(c) currently provides that ECOs submitted

to NYSE American may be executed without consideration of prices of the
same complex order that might be available on other exchanges. The
proposal revises NYSE American Rule 980NY(c) to state that ECOs
submitted to the Exchange may be executed without consideration not
only of the prices of the same complex order strategy that might be
available on other exchanges, but also of the prices of other single-
legged orders that might be available on other exchanges. The
Commission believes that expanding NYSE American Rule 980NY(c) to
include single-legged orders on other exchanges is consistent with the
rules of other options exchanges.\63\ In addition, the Commission notes
that this change is consistent with the Options Order Protection and
Locked/Crossed Markets Plan, which excepts transactions effected as
part of a ``complex trade'' from the requirement that exchanges
establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to prevent trade-throughs.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See, e.g., NYSE Arca Rule 6.91-O(a)(2) (substantively
identical to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)); ISE Rule 722(b)(3)
(stating that complex orders may be executed without consideration
of the prices that might be available on other options exchanges
trading the same contracts); and Phlx Rules 1098(e)(i)(B) and
(f)(iii) (providing that COLA-eligible orders and complex orders in
the CBOOK will be executed without consideration of any prices that
might be available on other exchanges trading the same contracts).
    \64\ See Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Markets
Plan, Section V(b)(viii) (available at http://www.optionsclearing.com/components/docs/clearing/services/options_order_protection_plan.pdf). The proposal also revises NYSE
American Rule 980NY(a) to add the defined term ``leg markets'' to
refer to individual quotes and orders in the Consolidated Book. The
Commission believes that adding this defined term could help to
enhance the clarity and readability of NYSE American Rule 980NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposal to add new NYSE American
Rules 980NY(c)(ii) and (iii), and the accompanying changes to delete
certain existing rule text, will benefit market participants by more
clearly describing, respectively, the treatment of incoming marketable
ECOs (which are executed immediately) and incoming non-marketable ECOs
(which are routed to the Consolidated Book) during Core Trading Hours.
In particular, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) specifies that an
incoming marketable ECO would trade against the best-priced contra-side
interest resting in the Consolidated Book. New NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(ii) further provides that if, at a price, the leg markets can
execute against an incoming ECO in full (or in a permissible ratio),
and each leg includes Customer interest, the leg markets (Customer and
non-Customer interest) will have first priority at that price and will
trade with the incoming ECO pursuant to NYSE American Rule 964NY(b)
before ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book can trade at that
price.\65\ The Commission believes that new NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(ii) is consistent with current NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(ii)(A).\66\ The Commission believes that new NYSE American
Rule 980NY(c)(iii) adds clarifying detail to NYSE American's rules by
indicating that an ECO or portion of an ECO that is not executed on
arrival will be ranked in the Consolidated Book and by providing that
resting ECOs will be executed against new interest entered into the
Consolidated Book according to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii), thereby
providing market participants with more precise information concerning
NYSE American's handling of these orders.\67\ In addition, new NYSE
American Rule 980NY(c)(iii)(B) provides additional specificity by
indicating that complex trades are allocated among ATP Holders pursuant
to NYSE American Rule 964NY(b), rather than pursuant to NYSE American
Rule 964NY, as provided in current NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See Amendment No. 1.
    \66\ Current NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii)(A) states that
``The CME will accept an incoming marketable Electronic Complex
Order and will automatically execute it against Electronic Complex
Orders in the Consolidated Book, or, if not marketable against
another Electronic Complex Order, against individual orders or
quotes residing in the Consolidated Book, provided the Electronic
Complex Order can be executed in full (or in a permissible ratio) by
the individual orders or quotes in the Consolidated Book.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if individual Customer orders
residing in the Consolidated Book can execute the incoming
Electronic Complex Order in full (or in a permissible ratio) at the
same total or net debit or credit as an Electronic Complex Order in
the Consolidated Book, the individual Customer orders will have
priority. The allocation of orders or quotes residing in the
Consolidated Book that execute against an Electronic Complex Order
shall be done pursuant to Rule 964NY.'' NYSE American notes that,
under its current rule, the leg markets have first priority to trade
against an incoming ECO if (i) there are no better priced ECOs in
the Consolidated Book, (ii) the leg markets can trade in full or
permissible ratio against an ECO, and (iii) each leg contains
Customer interest. See Notice, 82 FR at 45086.
    \67\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(iii)(A). Current NYSE
American Rule 980NY(c)(ii)(B) provides that ``An Electronic Complex
Order that is not marketable will rest in the Consolidated Book. If
an Electronic Complex Order is being held in the Consolidated Book,
the CME will monitor the bids and offers in the leg markets, and if
a new order(s) or quote(s) entered into the Consolidated Book can
execute the Electronic Complex Order in full (or in a permissible
ratio), the Electronic Complex Order will be executed against such
new order(s) or quote(s).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Related to the COA Process

    The Commission believes that the introductory language in new NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e) is similar to the text of current NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e), but provides additional clarity by indicating that an
incoming ECO could execute immediately against interest resting in the
Consolidated Book pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii), or be
subject to a COA.\68\ The Commission believes that the definition of
COA-eligible order in new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(1) will make
clear that an ECO will be COA-eligible only if it is submitted during
Core Trading Hours.\69\ The definition of COA-eligible order retains
the requirement that the ATP Holder designate the order as COA-
eligible.\70\ The Commission believes that eliminating the provision in
current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(1) that allows NYSE American to
restrict COA eligibility based on an order's size, number of series, or
order origin type could benefit investors by helping to make more
orders eligible for a COA and, therefore, able to receive potential
price improvement during a COA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See note14, supra, and accompanying text.
    \69\ See note 15, supra, for the current definition of COA-
eligible order.
    \70\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(1)(i). Current NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(2) provides, in part, that NYSE American will
initiate an auction for a COA-eligible order upon direction from the
entering ATP Holder that an auction be initiated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2) provides that, upon entry into
the System, a COA-eligible order will trade immediately, in full or in
a permissible ratio, with any ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book
that are priced better than the contra-side Complex BBO. NYSE American
believes that the immediate price improvement opportunity for an
incoming COA-eligible order from ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book
obviates the need to start a COA.\71\ The Commission believes that,
under these circumstances, executing a COA-eligible order against
resting interest that is priced better than the contra-side Complex BBO
will provide the COA-eligible order with an immediate execution at an
improved price, and could benefit both the sender of the COA-eligible
order and the sender of the resting better-priced ECO. NYSE American
Rule 908NY(e)(2) further provides that a COA-eligible order may trade
with any ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book that are priced equal to
the contra-side Complex BBO, unless each leg of the contra-side Complex

BBO includes Customer interest.\72\ The Commission believes that this
provision is consistent with new NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii),
which, as described above, gives contra-side leg market interest first
priority to trade with an incoming ECO only if, at a price, the contra-
side leg market interest includes Customer interest for each component
leg of the ECO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45088.
    \72\ See Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3)(i)
could enhance competition by encouraging market participants to submit
aggressively priced COA-eligible orders because only COA-eligible
orders priced better than the same-side leg market and ECO interest
would be able to initiate a COA. The Commission believes that new NYSE
American Rule 980NY(e)(3)(ii) will provide NYSE American with
flexibility to determine when the price of a COA-eligible order, based
on the number of ticks away from the current contra-side market,
warrants the initiation of a COA. The Commission believes that
permitting only one COA at a time for any complex order strategy will
help to provide for the orderly processing of trading interest on NYSE
American.\73\ The Commission notes that although a COA could be
initiated even if the limit price of the COA-eligible order is not at
or within the NYSE American best bid/offer for each leg of the order,
the COA-eligible order must execute at a price that is at or within the
NYSE American best bid/offer for each leg of the order, consistent with
NYSE American Rule 980NY(c).\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ See NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3).
    \74\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above,\75\ the definition of RTI in new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(4) is based on current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(3), with
the addition of new rule text providing that, at the end of an RTI, a
COA-eligible order would be allocated pursuant to new NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(7). The Commission believes that the new rule text will
benefit market investors by clarifying how these two provisions
interact with one another.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ See note 29, supra, and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed more fully above, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5),
which describes the characteristics of RFR Responses, retains features
of the current provisions addressing RFR Responses,\76\ but adds new
detail by indicating that an RFR Response must specify the price, size,
and side of the market.\77\ The Commission believes that this change
will make clear to market participants the information that they must
include in an RFR Response. In addition, new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(5)(C) indicates that RFR Responses may be cancelled during the
RTI, replacing language in current NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7) that
states that RFR Responses may not be withdrawn prior to the end of the
RTI. The Commission believes that new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)(C)
will correct an inaccuracy in NYSE American's current rules and make
clear to ATP Holders that they may cancel their RFR Responses during
the RTI. The Commission notes that two other options exchanges also
permit the withdrawal or cancellation of RFR Responses during the
RTI.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ See notes 30-36, supra, and accompanying text.
    \77\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(5)(A).
    \78\ See NYSE Arca Rule 6.91-O(c)(5)(C) (stating that RFR
Responses may be modified or cancelled during the RTI); and CBOE
Rule 6.53C(d)(vii) (stating that RFR Responses represent non-firm
interest that can be modified or withdrawn at any time prior to the
end of the RTI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Impact of Incoming Trading Interest on the COA Process

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(i) provides that incoming
opposite-side ECOs or COA-eligible orders that lock or cross the
initial Complex BBO will cause the COA to end early.\79\ NYSE American
believes that ending the COA early under these circumstances will allow
an initiating COA-eligible order to execute, ahead of the incoming
order, against RFR Responses or ECOs received during the RTI until that
point, while preserving the priority of the incoming order to trade
with the resting leg markets.\80\ NYSE American also believes that the
early conclusion of the COA would avoid disturbing the priority in the
Consolidated Book.\81\ The Commission believes that ending the COA
early when an incoming contra-side ECO or COA-eligible order locks or
crosses the initial Complex BBO will allow NYSE American to maximize
order executions and provide for the orderly processing of trading
interest on NYSE American. The early termination of the COA will allow
the COA-eligible order to execute against trading interest received
during the RTI, including the order that caused the COA to end early,
while preserving the ability of the resting leg market orders that
comprise the initial Complex BBO to trade with the incoming interest
that locked or crossed the initial Complex BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ If the incoming opposite-side ECO or COA-eligible order is
also executable against the limit price of the initiating COA-
eligible order, it will be ranked with RFR Responses to execute with
the COA-eligible order. See new NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(6)(A)(i).
    \80\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45090. If no RFRs are received during
the RTI, the COA-eligible order will execute against the best-priced
contra-side interest, including the order that caused the COA to
terminate early. See id.
    \81\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980(e)(6)(A)(ii) provides that incoming
opposite-side ECO or COA-eligible orders that are executable against
the limit price of the COA-eligible order, but do not lock or cross the
initial Complex BBO, will not cause the COA to end early and will be
ranked with RFR Responses to execute with the COA-eligible order
pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7). The Commission believes
that allowing the COA to continue under these circumstances could
provide the potential for the COA-eligible order to receive price
improvement as the auction continues. The Commission notes that, in
this case, the incoming contra-side interest does not raise leg market
priority concerns that would require an early termination of the COA
because the incoming contra-side interest does not lock or cross the
initial Complex BBO.
    NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(A)(iii) provides that incoming
opposite-side ECOs or COA-eligible orders that are either not
executable on arrival against the limit price of the initiating COA-
eligible order or do not lock or cross the initial Complex BBO will not
cause the COA to end early. The Commission believes that because the
incoming contra-side interest does not lock or cross the initial
Complex BBO, it is not necessary to end the COA early to protect the
priority of interest in the leg market under these circumstances.
    New NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(A)(iv) and (v) describe the
treatment of incoming opposite-side ECOs and COA-eligible orders that
did not execute with the initiating COA-eligible order or were not
executable on arrival. Such an incoming opposite-side ECO would trade
pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or (iii), and an incoming
opposite-side COA-eligible order would initiate a subsequent COA. The
Commission believes that allowing these incoming ECOs and COA-eligible
orders to trade with interest resting in the Consolidated Book, or to
initiate a new COA, as applicable, will allow NYSE American to provide
additional execution opportunities for these orders. In addition, the
Commission believes that new NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(A)(iv) and
(v) will enhance the transparency of NYSE American's rules by providing
additional detail regarding the treatment of incoming opposite-side
ECOs and COA-eligible

orders that did not trade with the initiating COA-eligible order or
were not executable on arrival.
    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B) states that when a COA ends
early, or at the end of the RTI, the initiating COA-eligible order will
execute pursuant to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7) ahead of any
interest that arrived during the COA. The Commission believes that this
provision establishes the priority of the initiating COA-eligible order
to trade before trading interest that arrives during the auction. The
Commission notes that the rules of two other options exchanges
similarly establish the priority of the auctioned order to trade prior
to interest that arrives during the auction.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ See NYSE Arca Rule 6.91-O(c)(6)(B) (substantively identical
to new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)); and Phlx Rule
1098(e)(viii)(B) (stating, in part, with respect to the Phlx's
Complex Order Live Auction (``COLA''): ``Incoming Complex Orders
that were received during the COLA Timer for the same Complex Order
Strategy as the COLA-eligible order that are on the same side of the
market will join the COLA. The original COLA-eligible order has
priority at all price points (i.e., multiple COLA Sweep Prices) over
the incoming Complex Order(s), regardless of the price of the
incoming Complex Order. The incoming Complex Order shall not be
eligible for execution against interest on the opposite side of the
market from the COLA-eligible order until the COLA-eligible order is
executed to the fullest extent possible'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(i) indicates that an incoming
ECO or COA-eligible order on the same side of the market as the
initiating COA-eligible order that is priced higher (lower) than the
initiating COA-eligible order to buy (sell) will cause the COA to end
early.\83\ The Commission believes that ending the COA early under
these circumstances provides a means to maximize execution
opportunities by allowing the COA-eligible order to execute against
interest received during the auction and allowing the incoming better-
priced ECO or COA-eligible order to trade with interest resting in the
Consolidated Book (in the case of an ECO), or to initiate a new auction
(in the case of a COA-eligible order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ The Commission notes that current NYSE American Rule
980NY(e)(8)(D) also provides that an incoming same-side, better-
priced COA-eligible order will cause the COA to end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(ii) provides that an incoming
same-side ECO or COA-eligible order that is priced equal to or lower
(higher) than the initiating COA-eligible order to buy (sell), and that
also locks or crosses the contra-side initial Complex BBO, will cause
the COA to end early. NYSE American states that ending the COA early
under these circumstances will allow the COA-eligible order to execute,
ahead of the incoming order, against RFR Responses or ECOs received
during the RTI until the point, while preserving the priority of the
incoming order to trade with the resting leg markets.\84\ The
Commission believes that ending the COA early under these circumstances
is designed to maximize execution opportunities and provide for the
orderly processing of trading interest on NYSE American by allowing the
COA-eligible order to execute against trading interest received during
the RTI, while preserving the ability of the resting leg market orders
that comprise the initial Complex BBO to trade with the incoming
interest that locked or crossed the initial Complex BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \84\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rules 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iv), (v), and (vi) further
describe the treatment of incoming same-side COA-eligible orders or
ECOs received during the RTI. An incoming same-side ECO or COA-eligible
order that caused a COA to end early, if executable, will trade against
any RFR Responses and/or ECOs received during the RTI that did not
trade with the initiating COA-eligible order.\85\ Any incoming same-
side ECO, or the remaining balance of such an ECO, that did not trade
against any remaining RFR Responses or ECOs will trade pursuant to new
NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or (iii).\86\ The balance of any
incoming COA-eligible order(s) that did not trade against any remaining
RFR Responses or ECOs will initiate new COA(s) in price-time
priority.\87\ The Commission believes that these provisions could
benefit investors by potentially maximizing the execution opportunities
for incoming same-side ECOs and COA-eligible orders, which may execute
against remaining RFR Responses or ECOs, execute against interest
resting in the Consolidated Book (in the case of an ECO), or initiate a
new COA (in the case of a COA-eligible order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iv).
    \86\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(v).
    \87\ See new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(B)(iii) states that an incoming
same-side ECO or COA-eligible order that is priced equal to, or lower
(higher) than the initiating COA-eligible order to buy (sell), but does
not lock or cross the contra-side initial Complex BBO, will not cause
the COA to end early. The Commission believes that, under these
circumstances, the incoming same-side interest does not raise leg
market priority concerns that would require an early termination of the
COA because the incoming interest does not lock or cross the contra-
side initial Complex BBO.
    The Commission believes that new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)
will provide greater clarity and specificity regarding the impact of
leg market updates on the COA. The Commission believes that providing
for an early end to the COA when the leg market updates cause the same-
side Complex BBO to lock or cross RFR Responses or ECOs received during
the RTI, or ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book,\88\ or cause the
contra-side Complex BBO to lock or cross the same-side initial Complex
BBO,\89\ will allow the COA-eligible order to execute against interest
received during the auction and permit the updated leg markets to
execute against available trading interest, thereby maximizing
execution opportunities for trading interest in the COA and in the leg
markets, and providing for the orderly processing of trading interest
on NYSE American. The Commission believes that allowing the COA to
continue when leg market updates do not result in an execution
opportunity--i.e., when leg market updates cause the same-side Complex
BBO to be priced higher (lower) than the COA-eligible order to buy
(sell), but do not lock or cross any RFR Responses or ECOs received
during the RTI, or ECOs resting in the Consolidated Book,\90\ or when
leg market updates cause the contra-side Complex BB (BO) to improve,
but do not lock or cross the same-side initial Complex BBO \91\--will
allow for the submission of additional trading interest that might
result in an execution or price improvement for the COA-eligible order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ See NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(i).
    \89\ See NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(iii).
    \90\ See NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(ii).
    \91\ See NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6)(C)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7), which describes the allocation
of COA-eligible orders at the conclusion of a COA, will replace current
NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(6) in its entirety.\92\ The Commission
believes that new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7)(A) protects leg market
interest resting in the Consolidated Book at the beginning of the COA
by providing that the COA-eligible order will be eligible to trade
first with RFR Responses and ECOs priced better than the initial
Complex BBO. In addition, new NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7)(A)
clarifies the

allocation priority of Customer orders by indicating that ECOs on
behalf of Customers will have priority over same-priced ECOs for non-
Customers.\93\ New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7)(B) provides that,
after allocations pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(7)(A), a COA-
eligible order will trade with best-priced contra-side interest
pursuant to NYSE American Rule 980NY(c)(ii) or (iii). NYSE American
Rule 980NY(e)(7) states that any unexecuted portion of a COA-eligible
order will be ranked in the Consolidated Book. The Commission believes
that these provisions establish additional execution opportunities for
a COA-eligible order, or portion of a COA-eligible order, that does not
execute during the COA, and provide clarity regarding the handling of
these orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ See Notice, 82 FR at 45092.
    \93\ See Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed changes to Commentary .02
to NYSE American Rule 980NY clarify the circumstances under which an
ECO that executes against another ECO must trade at a price that is
better than leg market interest. Specifically, Commentary .02 indicates
that the ECOs must trade at an improved price when each leg of the
contra-side Complex BBO for the components of the ECO includes Customer
interest.\94\ The Commission notes that Commentary .02 is consistent
with the Customer priority provisions of new NYSE American Rules
980NY(c)(ii) and (e)(2).\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ See id.
    \95\ As described more fully above, new NYSE American Rule
980NY(c)(ii) provides the leg markets first priority to trade
against an incoming marketable ECO only when the contra-side leg
market interest for each component leg of the ECO includes Customer
interest. New NYSE American Rule 980NY(e)(2) provides that a COA-
eligible order may execute against ECOs resting in the Consolidated
Book that are priced equal to the contra-side Complex BBO, unless
each leg of the contra-side Complex BBO includes Customer interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2017-15 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-NYSEAMER-2017-15. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. 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-NYSEAMER-2017-15, and should
be submitted on or before December 5, 2017.

V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of the notice of Amendment No. 1 in the
Federal Register. In Amendment No. 1, NYSE American revises its
original proposal to make the changes discussed in detail above.\96\
Notably, in Amendment No. 1, NYSE American revises its proposal to
provide additional clarity to the Customer priority provisions of the
proposed rules. In this regard, Amendment No. 1 makes clear that when
allocating orders at the conclusion of a COA, ECOs on behalf of
Customers have priority over same-priced ECOs for non-Customers. In
addition, Amendment No. 1 indicates that a COA-eligible order may trade
immediately in full (or in a permissible ratio) with a resting ECO
priced equal to the contra-side Complex BBO, unless each leg of the
contra-side Complex BBO includes Customer interest. Amendment No. 1
also clarifies the circumstances under which ECOs that execute against
each other must trade at a price that is better than the corresponding
leg market interest. The Commission believes that Amendment No. 1 does
not raise any novel regulatory issues and instead provides additional
clarity in the rule text. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause
for approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1,
on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ See footnote 6, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\97\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2017-15),
as modified by Amendment No. 1, is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-24576 Filed 11-13-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Summary of Responses to Comments Regarding Detailed Edits of the Proposed Fuel Regulations in the Tier 3 NPRM
The following table contains our responses to detailed comments on the proposed amendments to the fuel regulations in 40 CFR Parts 79 and 80 that were contained in the Tier 3 NPRM.

Comment
EPA Response/Action
§ 79.5: Improper use of the phrase "of this section"
Regulatory text amended to address comment
40 CFR 80: Discontinue toxics calculation and reporting for blendstocks for butane and TGP.  Reduce sampling and testing for blendstocks (T50, T90, E200, and E300)
We are not making the requested changes as discussed in Section VI.A. of the preamble.  We may consider whether additional changes in the context of a broader regulatory streamlining rulemaking in the future.
§ 80.2: Broaden definition of NGL used as an ethanol denaturant and as a blendstock for E51-83
Regulatory text amended to address comment with respect to NGL used as an ethanol denaturant.
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83 including the use of NGL as an E51-83 blendstock
§ 80.2(cccc): Amend E51-83 definition
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.65(f)(3)(iii)(A): Amend text regarding reporting requirements
Regulatory text amended to address comment
§ 80.75: Amend text regarding reporting requirements
Regulatory text amended to address comments
§ 80.75: Extended deadline for attest engagements
We do not believe that it is necessary to extend the deadline as suggested in the comments, as discussed in Section VI.A.1.b. of the preamble to the final rule.
§ 80.82: Amend requirements regarding butane quality records
Deferring making suggested change to allow additional consideration
§ 80.1347:  Change the words "at the refinery" to "by the refiner" regarding benzene sampling
Deferring making suggested change to allow additional consideration
§ 80.1601(a)(4):  Provide clarity regarding the applicability of requirements to E16-50
Deferring finalizing standards for E16-50
§ 80.1601(b)(2): Provide clarity regarding applicability of Subpart O requirements to E16-50 and E50-E83 sold in California
Deferring finalizing standards for E16-50 and E51-83
§ 80.1603(d)(3)(i): Clarify requirements regarding the reporting of conventional gasoline and CBOB volumes
We believe that regulations as amended are clear.
§ 80.1608: Provide clarity regarding the effective date for E51-83  requirements
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1608(b)(2): Amend benzene specifications for E51-83
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1608(b)(4): Correct error regarding the RVP requirements for E51-83
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1608(c)(3): Amend benzene requirements for E51-83
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1610: Amend requirements regarding the demonstration of compliance with the requirements for denatured fuel ethanol
These comments are addressed in the context of responding to comments in chapter 5.3 of the Summary and Analysis of Comments document
§ 80.1611: Provide clarity regarding the effective date for E51-83 requirements
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1611(a)(b): Amend requirements regarding the limitation on blendstocks  used in E51-83
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1612(b): Amend prohibition on use of E51-83 made with NGL for use on making E16-50
Deferring finalizing standards for E16-50 and E51-83
§ 80.1615(a): Allow butane blenders and transmix processors to generate credits
We do not believe that is necessary or appropriate for butane blenders and transmix processors to generate credits
§ 80.1616(a): Change date until early credits are valid until March 31, 2020
Regulatory text amended to address comment
§ 80.1622:  Extend application for small refiner/refinery status until June 31, 2014
The application was extended until January 1, 2015
§ 80.1632: Amend benzene requirements for E51-83
Deferring finalizing standards for E51-83
§ 80.1650(b)(1): Change registration date to June 30, 2014,
The registration date for refiners and importers has been set at December 1, 2016.
§ 80.1651: Amend Product transfer document requirements
These comments are addressed in the context of responding to comments in chapter 5.3 of the Summary and Analysis of Comments document that accompanies the Tier 3 final rule
§ 80.1652: Amend Product transfer document requirements
These comments are addressed in the context of responding to comments in chapter 5.3 of the Summary and Analysis of Comments document
§ 80.1652(a)(7(iv): Clarify how identification of test method should be reported
EPA will provide guidance on how reporting forms should be filled out
§ 80.1653" Amend Product transfer document requirements
These comments are addressed in the context of responding to comments in chapter 5.3 of the Summary and Analysis of Comments document
§ 80.1662(a)(5):  Amend branded refiner/importer liability regarding E16-50 and E51-83 violations
Deferring finalizing standards for E16-50 and E51-83
§ 80.1615(c): Amend Calculation of credits
Regulatory text amended to address comment
§ 80.1656: Provide exemption for aviation and racing gasoline
The exemption for aviation and racing gasoline is address in 80.1601
§ 80.1667:  Amend regulations re attest engagements
Regulatory text amended to address comment
Comments on regulatory sections regarding performance based testing
These comments are addressed in chapter 6.1.2. of the Summary and Analysis of Comments document that accompanies the Tier 3 final rule