[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 451-453]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28467]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0703; Product Identifier 2019-NM-106-AD; Amendment
39-21014; AD 2019-25-15]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100 airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of smoke in the flight deck, in conjunction with
the loss of electrical power. This AD requires replacement of affected
generator power transfer contactors (GPTCs), essential bus transfer
contactors (EBTCs), and auxiliary power transfer contactors (APTCs), as
specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which
is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 10, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 10,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For the material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
https://www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA
website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in

the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0703.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0703; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0120, dated May 29, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0120'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100 airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Fokker Services
B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on October 1, 2019 (84 FR 52044). The NPRM was prompted by
reports of smoke in the flight deck, in conjunction with the loss of
electrical power. The NPRM proposed to require replacement of affected
GPTCs, EBTCs, and APTCs, as the most likely cause of the smoke was
arcing inside one of these affected parts.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address smoke in the flight deck
combined with the loss of electrical power, which could lead to
excessive flightcrew workload and injury to the flightcrew. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0120 describes procedures for replacing affected parts
(GPTCs, EBTCs, and APTCs having part number DHR18-1) with serviceable
parts. This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 4 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170...........................          $5,400           $5,570          $22,280
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2019-25-15 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-21014; Docket No. FAA-
2019-0703; Product Identifier 2019-NM-106-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 10, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24, Electrical
power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of smoke in the flight deck, in
conjunction with the loss of electrical power. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address smoke in the flight deck combined with the loss
of electrical power, which could lead to excessive flightcrew
workload and injury to the flightcrew.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2019-0120, dated May 29, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0120'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0120

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0120 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0120 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Fokker
Services B.V.'s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved
by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0120,
dated May 29, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2019-0120, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This
material may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0703.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on December 12, 2019.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-28467 Filed 1-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58761-58762]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23193]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2473-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.501: 2013 CICO Report
Filing.
    Filed Date: 8/29/14.
    Accession Number: 20140829-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2474-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.501: 2013 CICO Report
Filing.
    Filed Date: 8/29/14.
    Accession Number: 20140829-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1258-000.
    Applicants: Southeast Supply Header, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Negotiated Rate and
Non-conforming Agreement--Compliance CP14-87-000 to be effective 10/1/
2014.
    Filed Date: 9/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140911-5156.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/23/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1259-000.
    Applicants: Southeast Supply Header, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: SESH Incremental Fuel--
Compliance CP14-87-000 to be effective 10/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 9/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140911-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/23/14.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1173-001.
    Applicants: Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Off Peak Firm
Transportation--OPT 90 Compliance Filing to be effective 9/7/2014.
    Filed Date: 9/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140910-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1898-001.
    Applicants: Centra Pipelines Minnesota Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Revised Statement of
Rates to be effective 11/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 9/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140911-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/23/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1101-001.
    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Compliance Filing--Non-
conforming Negotiated Rate Service Agreement--Devon to be effective 7/
18/2014.
    Filed Date: 9/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140911-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/23/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1198-001.
    Applicants: Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Revisions to Previously
Filed Records in RP14-1198-000 to be effective 10/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 9/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140911-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/14.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 12, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-23193 Filed 9-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71691-71695]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24885]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90334; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-97]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Equities Fees and Charges To Adopt an Alternative Method To
Qualify for the Tier 2 Pricing Tier

November 4, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on November 2, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and
Charges (``Fee Schedule'') to adopt an alternative method to qualify
for the Tier 2 pricing tier. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee
change effective November 2, 2020. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to adopt an
alternative method to qualify for the Tier 2 pricing tier.
    The proposed change responds to the current competitive environment
where order flow providers have a choice of where to direct liquidity-
providing orders by offering further incentives for ETP Holders \4\ to
send additional liquidity to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All references to ETP Holders in connection with this
proposed fee change include Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective
November 2, 2020.
Background
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (File No. S7-10-04) (Final
Rule) (``Regulation NMS'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Regulation NMS has enhanced competition, it has also fostered
a ``fragmented'' market structure where trading in a single stock can
occur across multiple trading centers. When multiple trading centers
compete for order flow in the same stock, the Commission has recognized
that ``such competition can lead to the fragmentation of order flow in
that stock.'' \6\ Indeed, equity trading is

currently dispersed across 16 exchanges,\7\ numerous alternative
trading systems,\8\ and broker-dealer internalizers and wholesalers,
all competing for order flow. Based on publicly-available information,
no single exchange currently has more than 18% market share.\9\
Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of equity order flow. More specifically, the Exchange
currently has less than 10% market share of executed volume of equities
trading.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61358, 75 FR 3594,
3597 (January 21, 2010) (File No. S7-02-10) (Concept Release on
Equity Market Structure).
    \7\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S Equities Market Volume Summary,
available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share. See
generally https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
    \8\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
    \9\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products. While it is not possible to know a firm's reason for shifting
order flow, the Exchange believes that one such reason is because of
fee changes at any of the registered exchanges or non-exchange venues
to which a firm routes order flow. With respect to non-marketable order
flow that would provide liquidity on an Exchange against which market
makers can quote, ETP Holders can choose from any one of the 16
currently operating registered exchanges to route such order flow.
Accordingly, competitive forces constrain exchange transaction fees
that relate to orders that would provide liquidity on an exchange.
    In response to the competitive environment described above, the
Exchange has established incentives for ETP Holders who submit orders
that provide liquidity on the Exchange. The proposed fee change is
designed to attract additional order flow to the Exchange by offering
an alternative method to qualify for the Tape 2 fees and credits to
incentivize ETP Holders to direct their liquidity-providing orders in
Tapes A, B and C securities.
Proposed Rule Change
    Currently, ETP Holders qualify for Tier 2 fees and credits by
providing liquidity an average daily share volume per month of 0.30% or
more, but less than 0.70% of US consolidated average daily volume (``US
CADV'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ US CADV means the United States Consolidated Average Daily
Volume for transactions reported to the Consolidated Tape, excluding
odd lots through January 31, 2014 (except for purposes of Lead
Market Maker pricing), and excludes volume on days when the market
closes early and on the date of the annual reconstitution of the
Russell Investments Indexes. Transactions that are not reported to
the Consolidated Tape are not included in US CADV. See Fee Schedule,
footnote 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to permit ETP Holders to alternatively
qualify for Tier 2 fees and credits if they (a) provide liquidity an
average daily share volume per month of 0.25% or more, but less than
0.70% of the US CADV, (b) execute removing volume in Tape B Securities
equal to at least 0.40% of US Tape B CADV, and (c) are affiliated with
an OTP Holder or OTP Firm that provides an ADV of electronic posted
Customer and Professional Customer executions in all issues on NYSE
Arca Options (excluding mini options) of at least 0.25% of total
Customer equity and ETF option ADV as reported by The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC''). The Exchange is not proposing any change to the
level of fees and credits applicable under Tier 2.
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to incentivize ETP
Holders to increase the liquidity-providing orders they send to the
Exchange, which would support the quality of price discovery on the
Exchange and provide additional liquidity for incoming orders. The
Exchange believes that the proposal would create an added incentive for
ETP Holders to bring additional order flow to a public market while
also providing an alternative method for ETP Holders to qualify for
Tier 2 fees and credits. The Exchange further believes that providing
fees and credits to ETP Holders that are affiliated with an OTP Holder
or OTP Firm could lead to increased trading on the Exchange's equities
and options markets.\12\ As noted above, the Exchange operates in a
competitive environment, particularly as it relates to attracting non-
marketable orders, which add liquidity to the Exchange. Because the
proposed alternative method requires that an ETP Holder, in addition to
providing liquidity at a level below the current requirement under Tier
2, also remove liquidity in Tape B securities coupled with the required
minimum of options volume, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change would provide an incentive for a greater number of ETP Holders
to send additional liquidity to the Exchange in order to qualify for
the Tier 2 fees and credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ There are currently 53 firms that are both ETP Holders and
OTP Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that, by providing for an additional method
of qualifying for Tier 2, this proposed change will provide a greater
incentive to attract additional liquidity from additional ETP Holders
so as to qualify for the Tier 2 fees and credits. The Exchange does not
know how much order flow ETP Holders choose to route to other exchanges
or to off-exchange venues. The Exchange anticipates, based on their
current trading profile, that a small number of ETP Holders could
qualify for Tier 2 under the proposed alternative method if they so
choose. However, without having a view of ETP Holders' activity on
other exchanges and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of
knowing whether this proposed rule change would result in any ETP
Holder directing orders to the Exchange in order to qualify for Tier 2
under the proposed alternative method.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems
that market participants would have in complying with the proposed
changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\14\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Fee Change is Reasonable
    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented
and competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37499.

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

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow, or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable
orders that provide liquidity on an Exchange, ETP Holders can choose
from any one of the 16 currently operating registered exchanges to
route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces reasonably
constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to orders that would
provide displayed liquidity on an exchange. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
    Given this competitive environment, the proposal represents a
reasonable attempt to attract additional order flow to the Exchange. In
particular, the Exchange believes the proposed amendment to Tier 2 is
reasonable because it provides ETP Holders affiliated with an OTP
Holder or OTP Firm with an additional way to qualify for the Tier 2
fees and credits through equity and options orders. The Exchange
believes that the proposed alternative to qualify for the pricing tier
utilizing a lower equity adding volume requirement coupled with a
minimum equity removing volume requirement and a minimum options volume
requirement is reasonable because the proposal provides firms with
greater flexibility to reach volume tiers across asset classes, thereby
creating an added incentive for ETP Holders to bring additional order
flow to a public exchange, thereby encouraging greater participation
and liquidity.
    The Exchange notes that volume-based incentives and discounts have
been widely adopted by exchanges, including the Exchange, and are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they are
available to all ETP Holders on an equal basis. They also provide
additional benefits or discounts that are reasonably related to the
value of the Exchange's market quality and associated higher levels of
market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or
growth patterns. Additionally, as noted above, the Exchange operates in
a highly competitive market. The Exchange is one of many venues and
off-exchange venues to which market participants may direct their order
flow, and it represents a small percentage of the overall market.
Competing exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures to that of
the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based
on members achieving certain volume thresholds. Moreover, the Exchange
believes the proposed amendment to Tier 2 is a reasonable means to
encourage ETP Holders to increase their liquidity on the Exchange and
their participation on NYSE Arca Options. The Exchange believes
amending the current pricing tier by adopting an alternative
requirement may encourage those ETP Holders who could not previously
achieve the pricing tier to increase their order flow on both the
Exchange and on NYSE Arca Options. Increased liquidity benefits all
investors by deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool, offering
additional flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings,
supporting the quality of price discovery, promoting market
transparency and improving investor protection.
The Proposed Fee Change is an Equitable Allocation of Fees and Credits
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to adopt an
alternative way to qualify for the Tier 2 fees and credits equitably
allocates its fees and credits among market participants because it is
reasonably related to the value of the Exchange's market quality
associated with higher equities and options volume. Additionally, a
number of ETP Holders have a reasonable opportunity to satisfy the
tier's criteria.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not know how much order flow ETP Holders choose
to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. The proposed
alternative method to qualify for the Tier 2 fees and credits would be
available to all ETP Holders that are affiliated with OTP Holders or
OTP Firms. There are currently 3 ETP Holders that qualify for the Tier
2 fees and credits. And as noted above, there are 53 firms that are
both ETP Holders and OTP Holders and a number of such firms could
qualify for Tier 2 pricing tier under the proposed alternative method.
However, without having a view of an ETP Holder's activity on other
markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing
whether this proposed rule change would result in any ETP Holder
affiliated with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm to increase participation in
the Exchange's equities and options markets to qualify for the Tier 2
fees and credits. The Exchange cannot predict with certainty how many
ETP Holders would avail themselves of this opportunity. The Exchange
believes the proposed amended tier could provide an incentive for other
ETP Holders to submit additional liquidity on the Exchange and on NYSE
Arca Options to qualify for the Tier 2 fees and credits. To the extent
an ETP Holder participates on the Exchange but not on NYSE Arca
Options, the Exchange believes that the proposal is still reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory with respect to such ETP
Holder based on the overall benefit to the Exchange resulting from the
success of NYSE Arca Options. In particular, such success would allow
the Exchange to continue to provide and potentially expand its existing
incentive programs to the benefit of all participants on the Exchange,
whether they participate on NYSE Arca Options or not.
    The proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on
any particular category of market participant. Rather, should an ETP
Holder not meet the proposed criteria, the ETP Holder can still qualify
for the same credit by meeting the current criteria which does not
require it to have any affiliation with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm and
conduct options trading on NYSE Arca Options.
The Proposed Fee Change is not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly
discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, ETP Holders
are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that
alternatives offer them better value.
    The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to provide
an alternative way to qualify for per share fees and credits, as each
would be provided on an equal basis to all ETP Holders that are
affiliated with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm that meet the proposed
alternative requirement of Tier 2. Further, the Exchange believes the
proposed alternative requirement would incentivize ETP Holders that are
affiliated with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm to send their options orders
to the Exchange to qualify for the pricing tier. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory
because it is reasonably related to the value to the Exchange's market
quality associated with higher volume.
    The proposal to amend the volume requirement to qualify for the
Tier 2 fees and credits neither targets nor will it have a disparate
impact on any particular category of market participant. The proposal
does not permit unfair discrimination because the amended threshold
would be applied to all similarly situated ETP Holders, who would all
be eligible for

the same fees and credits on an equal basis. Accordingly, no ETP Holder
already operating on the Exchange would be disadvantaged by this
allocation of fees.
    Finally, the submission of orders to the Exchange is optional for
ETP Holders in that they could choose whether to submit orders to the
Exchange and, if they do, the extent of its activity in this regard.
The Exchange believes that it is subject to significant competitive
forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement regarding the
burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\17\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for ETP Holders. As a result, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of
fostering integrated competition among orders, which promotes ``more
efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders, large
and small.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \18\ See Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37498-99.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional equities and options order flow to the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to the volume requirement
under Tier 2 would continue to incentivize market participants to
direct providing displayed order flow to the Exchange and greater
participation on NYSE Arca Options. Greater liquidity benefits all
market participants on the Exchange by providing more trading
opportunities and encourages ETP Holders to send orders to the
Exchange, thereby contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which
benefits all market participants. The proposed volume requirement would
be applicable to all similarly-situated market participants, and, as
such, the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden on
competition among market participants on the Exchange. As such, the
Exchange believes the proposed amendments to its Fee Schedule would not
impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily choose to
send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they
deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable. As noted
above, the Exchange's market share of intraday trading (i.e., excluding
auctions) is currently less than 10%. In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually adjust its fees and rebates to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with off-exchange venues. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in response,
and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing
practices, the Exchange does not believe its proposed fee change can
impose any burden on intermarket competition.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar order types and comparable
transaction pricing, by encouraging additional orders to be sent to the
Exchange for execution.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \19\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \20\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \21\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-97 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-97. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-97, and

should be submitted on or before December 1, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-24885 Filed 11-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 6, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8628-8630]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02634]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68798; File No. SR-BYX-2013-005]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 11.17, Entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions''

January 31, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 30, 2013, BATS-Y Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with
the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposal to extend a
pilot program related to Rule 11.17, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous
Executions.'' The Exchange also proposes to adopt new paragraph (h) to
Rule 11.17 in connection with the upcoming operation of the Plan to
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of
Regulation NMS under the Act (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or
``Plan'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to extend the effectiveness of the
Exchange's current rule applicable to Clearly Erroneous Executions and
to adopt new paragraph (h) to Rule 11.17 in connection with upcoming
operation of the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan.
Proposal To Extend Pilot
    Portions of Rule 11.17, explained in further detail below, are
currently operating as a pilot program set to expire on February 4,
2013.\6\ The Exchange proposes to extend the pilot program to September
30, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67521 (July 27, 2012),
77 FR 46132 (August 2, 2012) (SR-BYX-2012-016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 4, 2010, the Exchange filed an immediately effective
filing to adopt various rule changes to bring BYX Rules up to date with
the changes that had been made to the rules of BATS Exchange, Inc., the
Exchange's affiliate, while BYX's Form 1 Application to register as a
national security exchange was pending approval. Such changes included
changes to the Exchange's Rule 11.17, on a pilot basis, to provide for
uniform treatment: (1) of clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-
stock events involving twenty or more securities; and (2) in the event
transactions occur that result in the issuance of an individual stock
trading pause by the primary market and subsequent transactions that
occur before the trading pause is in effect on the Exchange.\7\ The
Exchange also adopted additional changes to Rule 11.17 that reduced the
ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in Rule 11.17.\8\ The Exchange believes the benefits to market
participants from the more objective clearly erroneous executions rule
should continue on a pilot basis through September 30, 2013, which is
the date that the Exchange anticipates that the phased implementation
of the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan will be complete. As explained in
further detail below, although the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is intended
to prevent executions that would need to be nullified as clearly
erroneous, the Exchange believes that certain protections should be
maintained while the industry gains initial experience operating with
the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, including the provisions of Rule 11.17
that currently operate as a pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63097 (October 13,
2010), 75 FR 64767 (October 20, 2010) (SR-BYX-2010-002).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Limit Up-Limit Down Provision to Rule 11.17
    The Exchange proposes to adopt new paragraph (h) to Rule 11.17, to
provide that the existing provisions of Rule 11.17 will continue to
apply to all Exchange transactions, including transactions in
securities subject to the Plan, other than as set forth in proposed
paragraph (h). Accordingly, other than as proposed below, the Exchange
proposes to maintain and continue to apply the Clearly Erroneous
Execution standards in the same way that it does today. Notably, this
means that the Exchange might nullify transactions that occur within
the price bands disseminated pursuant to the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan
to the extent such

transactions qualify as clearly erroneous under existing criteria. As
an example, assume that a Tier 1 security pursuant to the Plan has a
reference price pursuant to both the Plan and Rule 11.17 of $100.00.
The lower pricing band under the Plan would be $95.00 and the upper
pricing band under the Plan would be $105.00. An execution could occur
on the Exchange in this security at $96.00, as this is within the
Plan's pricing bands. However, if subjected to review as potentially
clearly erroneous, the Exchange would nullify an execution at $96.00 as
clearly erroneous because it exceeds the 3% threshold that is in place
pursuant to Rule 11.17(c)(1) for securities priced above $50.00 (i.e.,
with a reference price of $100.00, any transactions at or below $97.00
or above $103.00 could be nullified as clearly erroneous). Accordingly,
this proposal maintains the status quo with respect to reviews of
Clearly Erroneous Executions and the application of objective numerical
guidelines by the Exchange. The proposal does not increase the
discretion afforded to the Exchange in connection with reviews of
Clearly Erroneous Executions.
    The Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is designed to prevent executions from
occurring outside of dynamic price bands disseminated to the public by
the single plan processor as defined in the Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan.\9\ The possibility remains that the Exchange could experience a
technology or systems problem with respect to the implementation of the
price bands disseminated pursuant to the Plan. To address such
possibilities, the Exchange proposes to adopt language to make clear
that if an Exchange technology or systems issue results in any
transaction occurring outside of the price bands disseminated pursuant
to the Plan, an Officer of the Exchange or senior level employee
designee, acting on his or her own motion or at the request of a third
party, shall review and declare any such trades null and void. Absent
extraordinary circumstances, any such action of the Officer of the
Exchange or other senior level employee designee shall be taken in a
timely fashion, generally within thirty (30) minutes of the detection
of the erroneous transaction. When extraordinary circumstances exist,
any such action of the Officer of the Exchange or other senior level
employee designee must be taken by no later than the start of Regular
Trading Hours \10\ on the trading day following the date on which the
execution(s) under review occurred. Although the Exchange will act as
promptly as possible and the proposed objective standard (i.e., whether
an execution occurred outside the band) should make it feasible to
quickly make a determination, there may be circumstances in which
additional time may be needed for verification of facts or coordination
with outside parties, including the single plan processor responsible
for disseminating the price bands and other market centers.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes it necessary to maintain some
flexibility to make a determination outside of the thirty (30) minute
guideline. In addition, the Exchange proposes that a transaction that
is nullified pursuant to new paragraph (h) would be appealable in
accordance with the provisions of Rule 11.17(e)(2). In addition, the
Exchange proposes to make clear that in the event that a single plan
processor experiences a technology or systems problem that prevents the
dissemination of price bands, the Exchange would make the determination
of whether to nullify transactions based on Rule 11.17(a)-(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Limit Up-Limit Down Release, supra note 5.
    \10\ Regular Trading Hours commence at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time.
See BYX Rule 1.5(w).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that cancelling trades that occur outside of
the price bands disseminated pursuant to the Plan is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the Plan, as such transactions are not
intended to occur in the first place. If transactions do occur outside
of the price bands and no exception applies--which necessarily would be
caused by a technology or systems issue--then the Exchange believes the
appropriate result is to nullify such transactions.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\11\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system. The Exchange believes that the pilot
program promotes just and equitable principles of trade in that it
promotes transparency and uniformity across markets concerning review
of transactions as clearly erroneous. More specifically, the Exchange
believes that the extension of the pilot would help assure that the
determination of whether a clearly erroneous trade has occurred will be
based on clear and objective criteria, and that the resolution of the
incident will occur promptly through a transparent process. The
proposed rule change would also help assure consistent results in
handling erroneous trades across the U.S. markets, thus furthering fair
and orderly markets, the protection of investors and the public
interest. Although the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan will be operational
during the same time period as the proposed extended pilot, the
Exchange believes that maintaining the pilot for at least through the
phased implementation of the Plan is operational will help to protect
against unanticipated consequences. To that end, the extension will
allow the Exchange to determine whether Rule 11.17 is necessary once
the Plan is operational and, if so, whether improvements can be made.
Further, the Exchange believes it consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest to adopt objective criteria to
nullify transactions that occur outside of the Plan's price bands when
such transactions should not have been executed but were due to a
systems or technology issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates any competitive issues. To the contrary, the Exchange
believes that FINRA and other national securities exchanges are also
filing similar proposals, and thus, that the proposal will help to
ensure consistent rules across market centers.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if

consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
as it will allow the pilot program to continue uninterrupted, thereby
avoiding the investor confusion that could result from a temporary
interruption in the pilot program. For this reason, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BYX-2013-005 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BYX-2013-005. 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 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 offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-BYX-2013-005, and should be submitted on or before
February 27, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-02634 Filed 2-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P