[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66611-66613]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25477]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93601; File No. SR-CFE-2021-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice
of a Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Block Trade
Recordkeeping Requirements

November 17, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on November 10, 2021 Cboe
Futures Exchange, LLC (``CFE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been
prepared by CFE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. CFE also
has filed this proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (``CFTC''). CFE filed a written certification with the CFTC
under Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') \2\ on
November 10, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
    \2\ 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule
Change

    The Exchange proposes to update the recordkeeping requirements
applicable to Block Trades. The scope of this filing is limited solely
to the application of the proposed rule change to security futures that
may be traded on CFE. Although no security futures are currently listed
for trading on CFE, CFE may list security futures for trading in the
future. The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4
to the filing but is not attached to the publication of this notice.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CFE 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. CFE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    CFE Rule 415 (Block Trades) governs Block Trades in CFE
products.\3\ Rule 415(e) currently requires each CFE Trading Privilege
Holder (``TPH'') that is a party to a Block Trade to record certain
details regarding the transaction on an order ticket. Those details
include (i) the Contract (including the expiration); (ii) the number of
contracts traded; (iii) the price of execution or premium; (iv) the
time of execution (i.e., the time at which the parties agreed to the
Block Trade); (v) the arrangement time, if any (i.e., the time at which
the parties agreed to enter into the Block Trade at a later time); (vi)
the identity of the counterparty; (vii) that the transaction is a Block
Trade; (viii) if applicable, the account number of the customer for
which the Block Trade was executed; and (ix) if applicable, the
expiration, strike price, and type of option (put or call) in the case
of an option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Block Trade is a large transaction in a Contract listed on
CFE that is negotiated off of CFE's trading facility and is then
reported to CFE which meets the parameters for a Block Trade under
CFE's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change proposes to revise Rule 415(e) to limit
the application of the Block Trade order ticket requirement to any TPH
that acts as an agent for a Block Trade and to no longer apply that
requirement to any TPH that is a party to a Block Trade in a principal
capacity and not acting in the capacity as an agent. The proposed rule
change also proposes to add a requirement to Rule 415(e) that each TPH
involved in any Block Trade either maintain records evidencing
compliance with the criteria set forth in Rule 415 or be able to obtain
those records from its customer involved in the Block Trade. Finally,
consistent with these changes, the proposed rule change proposes to
revise a current cross-reference in Rule 415(e) to an order ticket in
this context by referring to the order ticket as ``any required order
ticket'' instead of the current description of ``the order ticket
referred to in the preceding sentence.''
    These proposed rule amendments are consistent with comparable
provisions included in CFE Rule 414 (Exchange of Contract for Related
Position), which governs exchange of contract for related position
(``ECRP'') transactions involving CFE products.\4\ In particular, Rule
414(g) includes a similar provision to the provision in Rule 415(e)
regarding the details of an ECRP transaction that must be recorded on
an order ticket and that provision of Rule 414(g) is applicable solely
to any TPH that acts as an agent for an ECRP transaction. Similarly,
the new requirement that the proposed rule change is proposing to add
to Rule 415(e) regarding the maintenance of records evidencing
compliance with Rule 415 is the same requirement that is included in
the first sentence of Rule 414(h) related to ECRP transactions.
Accordingly, the proposed rule change proposes to align the order
ticket requirement appliable to Block Trades with the corresponding
order ticket requirement applicable to ECRP transactions. Additionally,
the proposed rule change proposes to make clear that any TPH involved
in a Block Trade must maintain records of the Block Trade evidencing
compliance with the criteria in Rule 415 or be able to obtain those
records from its customer involved in the Block Trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An ECRP transaction consists of a transaction in a Contract
listed on CFE and a transaction in a related position that is
negotiated off of CFE's trading facility and is then reported to CFE
which meets the parameters for an ECRP transaction under CFE's
rules. The related position must have a high degree of price
correlation to the underlying of the Contract transaction so that
the Contract transaction would serve as an appropriate hedge for the
related position. In every ECRP transaction, one party is the buyer
of (or the holder of the long market exposure associated with) the
related position and the seller of the corresponding Contract and
the other party is the seller of (or the holder of the short market
exposure associated with) the related position and the buyer of the
corresponding Contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Block Trades and ECRP transactions are the two primary types of
off-exchange transactions that are permitted under CFE rules. Given the
similarities between these two types of transactions, Block Trades and
ECRP transactions are subject to similar recordkeeping and reporting
requirements. Accordingly, CFE believes that it is appropriate to align
the order ticket requirement

appliable to Block Trades under Rule 415 with the corresponding order
ticket requirement applicable to ECRP transactions under Rule 414 and
that doing so will make it easier for TPHs to comply with the
Exchange's recordkeeping requirements.
    The Exchange also notes that it separately receives the information
that a TPH party to a Block Trade in a principal capacity is currently
required to record on an order ticket. Therefore, the Exchange will
still receive this information following the implementation of the
proposed rule change. Also, unlike with an order ticket which a TPH
creates and maintains in its own records, the Exchange receives this
information directly through the reporting process to the Exchange for
a Block Trade and thus this information becomes part of the Exchange's
records. Specifically, Rule 415(h) requires that the notification to
the Exchange of a Block Trade shall include (i) whether the Block Trade
is a single leg transaction, a transaction in a spread, or a
transaction in a strip; (ii) the Contract identifier (or product and
contract expiration for a future or product, expiration, strike price,
and type of option (put or call) in the case of an option), price (or
premium for an option) and quantity of the Block Trade and whether the
Block Trade is buy or sell; (iii) the time of execution (i.e., the time
at which the parties agreed to the transaction); (iv) the arrangement
time, if any (i.e., the time at which the parties agreed to enter into
the transaction at a later time); (v) Order Entry Operator ID; (vi)
executing firm ID (``EFID''); (vii) account; (viii) Clearing
Corporation origin code; (ix) Customer Type Indicator code; and (x) any
other information required by the Exchange. Additionally, among the
other information that the Exchange requires be included as part of the
notification to the Exchange of a Block Trade under Rule 415(h)(x) is
the identity of the counterparty.
    In addition, the proposed rule change recognizes that the use of an
order ticket is more applicable with respect to an agent involved in a
transaction than with respect to a principal involved in a transaction,
while at the same time still requiring that any TPH involved in a Block
Trade (whether that TPH is an agent or principal) maintain appropriate
records relating to the Block Trade. The primary purpose of an order
ticket is to record the information regarding an order that a customer
communicates to a broker. An order ticket records the authorization
that a customer has provided to a broker with respect to an order
placed with the broker on behalf of that customer. Because a principal
is trading on behalf of itself and not on behalf of a customer, there
is not the same need for the TPH entering into a Block Trade as
principal to record information on an order ticket regarding a
transaction that the TPH desires to effectuate on behalf of itself.
This is the case because there is not another party involved in the
transaction on whose behalf the principal is acting and thus it is not
necessary to record an authorization from that party with respect to an
order from that party. Consequently, it is not common practice for TPHs
trading as principal to utilize order tickets. The proposed rule change
recognizes that this is the case and that there is not the same need
for an order ticket when a TPH is acting as principal that exists when
a TPH is acting as an agent.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(1) \6\ and 6(b)(5) \7\ in particular, in
that it is designed:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To enable the Exchange to enforce compliance by its TPHs
and persons associated with its TPHs with the provisions of the rules
of the Exchange,
     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 proposed rule change proposes to set forth and make clear to
TPHs within CFE rules the recordkeeping requirements that apply with
regard to Block Trades. The proposed rule change proposes to align the
order ticket requirement appliable to Block Trades under Rule 415 with
the corresponding order ticket requirement applicable to ECRP
transactions under Rule 414. The Exchange believes that aligning these
requirements is appropriate given the similarities between Block Trades
and ECRP transactions, which are the two primary types of off-exchange
transactions that are permitted under CFE rules and which are subject
to similar recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Additionally, the
proposed rule change recognizes that the use of an order ticket is more
applicable with respect to an agent involved in a transaction than with
respect to a principal involved in a transaction in that the primary
purpose of an order ticket is to record the information regarding an
order that a customer communicates to a broker and that the need to
record a customer's authorization with respect to an order does not
exist when a TPH is trading as principal on behalf of itself. The
Exchange believes that clearly setting forth Block Trade recordkeeping
requirements in CFE rules, aligning the recordkeeping requirements for
Block Trades and ECRP transactions with regard to order tickets, and
applying the Block Trade order ticket requirement to agents and not to
principals in recognition that order tickets are more directed to use
with customer orders will make it easier for TPHs to comply with these
requirements. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will contribute to furthering compliance with Exchange rules.
    The Exchange separately receives the information that a TPH party
to a Block Trade in a principal capacity is currently required to
record on an order ticket when a Block Trade is reported to CFE.
Therefore, the Exchange will still receive this information following
the implementation of the proposed rule change.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change will
further the Exchange's ability to carry out its responsibilities as a
self-regulatory organization in that it will contribute to enhancing
the Exchange's ability to obtain trade information that it may utilize
in reviewing whether Block Trades comply with Rule 415 by requiring
that each TPH involved in any Block Trade either maintain records
evidencing compliance with the criteria set forth in Rule 415 or be
able to obtain those records from its customer involved in the Block
Trade.

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

    CFE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will not burden intra-market competition because
the proposed rule updates will apply equally to all TPHs. The Exchange
also believes that the proposed rule change will not burden inter-
market competition because the proposed rule change is designed to
further the Exchange's ability to carry out its responsibilities as a
self-regulatory

organization in that it will contribute to enhancing the Exchange's
ability to obtain trade information that it may utilize in reviewing
whether Block Trades comply with Rule 415.

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 proposed rule change will become operative on November 24,
2021. At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the
proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC,
may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the
proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CFE-2021-009 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-CFE-2021-009. 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-CFE-2021-009, and should be submitted on
or before December 14, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(73).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-25477 Filed 11-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18601-18603]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07352]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71817; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 900.3NY
To Specifically Address the Number and Size of Contra-Parties to a
Qualified Contingent Cross Order

March 27, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on March 19, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 900.3NY (Orders Defined) to
specifically address the number and size of contra-parties to a
Qualified Contingent Cross Order (``QCC Order''). The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule filing is to amend Rule 900.3NY to
specifically address the number and size of contra-parties to a QCC
Order. The proposed rule change, which mirrors a recently adopted rule
by the International Securities Exchange (``ISE'') \4\, is intended to
accommodate multiple contra-parties, so long as each contra-side order
meets the minimum size requirements as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71182 (December, 24,
2013), 78 FR 79721 (December 31, 2013) (SR-ISE-2013-71).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange adopted the QCC Order type on March 17, 2011.\5\ Under
current Rule 900.3NY(y), a QCC Order must be comprised of an order to
buy or sell at least 1,000 contracts \6\ that is identified as being
part of a qualified contingent trade,\7\ coupled with a contra-side
order to buy or sell an equal number of contracts. As Qualified
Contingent Cross Trades, QCC Orders are automatically executed upon
entry provided that the execution (i) is not at the same price as a
Customer Order in the Consolidated Book and (ii) is at or between the
NBBO.\8\ In addition, QCC Orders that cannot be executed when entered
will automatically cancel.\9\ Finally, QCC Orders may only be entered
in the regular trading increments applicable to the options class under
Rule 960NY (Trading Differentials).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64085 (March 17,
2011), 76 FR 16024 (March 22, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-14).
    \6\ In the case of mini options, the minimum size is 10,000
contracts.
    \7\ A ``qualified contingent trade'' must meet the following
conditions: (i) At least one component must be an NMS Stock; (ii)
all the components must be effected with a product price contingency
that either has been agreed to by all the respective counterparties
or arranged for by a broker-dealer as principal or agent; (iii) the
execution of one component must be contingent upon the execution of
all other components at or near the same time; (iv) the specific
relationship between the component orders (e.g., the spread between
the prices of the component orders) must be determined by the time
the contingent order is placed; (v) the component orders must bear a
derivative relationship to one another, represent different classes
of shares of the same issuer, or involve the securities of
participants in mergers or with intentions to merge that have been
announced or cancelled; and (vi) the transaction must be fully
hedged (without regard to any prior existing position) as a result
of other components of the contingent trade. In addition, ATP
Holders must demonstrate that the transaction is fully hedged using
reasonable risk-valuation methodologies. See supra n.5 (citing
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620 (April 4, 2008), 73 FR
19271 (April 9, 2008)).
    \8\ See Rule 985NY (Qualified Contingent Cross Trade).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, to remain competitive with other options
exchanges,\10\ the Exchange proposes to amend its rules to provide that
a QCC Order must involve a single order for at least 1,000 contracts on
the originating side, but that the contra-side order may be comprised
of multiple orders, which in the aggregate equal the size of the
originating order, so long as each of the contra-side orders is for at
least 1,000 contracts.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra n. 4.
    \11\ In the case of mini options, the minimum size is 10,000
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For instance, as proposed, a 5,000 contract originating QCC Order
to buy could, be coupled with a contra-side order comprised of two
different sell orders of 2,500 contracts each. Similarly, as proposed,
a 5,000 contract originating QCC Order to buy could be coupled with a
contra-side order comprised of two different sell orders, one for 4,000
contracts and one for 1,000 contracts. In the above examples, each sell
(contra-side) order needs to be for a minimum of 1,000 contracts,
provided that the total of all sell (contra-side) orders equals the
size of the originating order and that originating order is at least
1,000 contracts.
    Accordingly, the Exchange is proposing to amend the definition of
QCC Order, as contained in current Rule 900.3NY(y), to provide that an
originating order to buy or sell at least 1,000 contracts coupled with
a contra-side order or orders totaling an equal number of contracts is
permitted, so long as each contra-side order is for at least 1,000
contracts.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, in that it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically,
because the proposal provides that a QCC Order permits multiple contra-
parties, it should afford members and participants more certainty and,
therefore, provide more opportunity to participate in QCC trades,
consistent with the key principles behind the QCC Order.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, as it will enable the Exchange to compete
with other options exchanges, including the ISE,\12\ for QCC Orders
involving multiple parties, including where there are multiple contra-
parties. The Exchange believes that this would be beneficial to
participants because allowing multiple contra-parties of at least 1,000
contracts should foster competition for filling one side of a QCC Order
and thereby result in potentially better prices, as opposed to only
allowing one contra-party and, thereby requiring that contra-party to
do a larger size order which could result in a worse price for the
trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra n.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In fact, the proposal is
intended to relieve a burden on competition, which results from
different exchanges interpreting their rules differently. Among the
options exchanges, the Exchange believes that the proposal to allow
multiple contra-parties of at least 1,000 contracts should foster
competition for filling the contra-side of a QCC order and thereby
result in potentially better prices for such orders. In addition, the
proposal will enable the Exchange to more effectively compete with
other option exchanges like the ISE that have already implement similar
rule changes.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Because the foregoing 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 after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \15\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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 satisfied this requirement.

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

    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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-23 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-NYSEMKT-2014-23. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-23 and should
be submitted on or before April 23, 2014.

    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. 2014-07352 Filed 4-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P