[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9188-9192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02647]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-99470; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2024-09]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Rule 
6.62P-O

February 5, 2024.
    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 January 23, 2024, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or 
``Exchange'') 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 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 modify Rule 6.62P-O (Orders and Modifiers) 
to adopt electronic Customer Cross Order and Complex Customer Cross 
Order functionality and to amend Rule 1.1 (Definitions) to clarify the 
treatment of Professional Customer interest. 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 the 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.62P-O (Orders and Modifiers) 
to adopt electronically-entered Customer Cross (``C2C'') Orders and 
Complex Customer Cross (``Complex C2C'') Orders (collectively, 
``Customer Cross Orders''). The Exchange also proposes to amend the 
definition of ``Customer and Professional Customer'' (Rule 1.1.) to 
clarify the treatment of Professional Customer interest.
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2): Customer Cross Orders \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ To reflect the addition of Customer Cross Orders, the 
Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 6.62P-O(g) by removing the 
statement that ``[a] Cross Order is a Qualified Contingent Cross 
(``QCC'') Order'' and retaining the title of ``Cross Orders''. In 
addition, the Exchange proposes to update the title of paragraph 
Rule 6.62P-O (g)(1) to ``Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') 
Orders.'' The Exchange believes that these proposed changes would 
add clarity and transparency to, and improve the accuracy of, the 
Exchange's rules. See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g) and (g)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt rules governing electronically-
entered Customer Cross Orders, which rules are substantively identical 
to the recently-adopted Customer Cross Orders on the Exchange's 
affiliate, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2) (describing single-leg 
and complex Customer Cross Orders). See also Securities Exchange Act 
Release No. 99231 (December 22, 2023), 88 FR 89783 (December 28, 
2023) (SR-NYSEAMER-2023-66) (immediately effective rule change to 
adopt electronically-entered Customer Cross Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2) would describe Customer Cross Orders. 
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) would provide that a C2C Order and a 
Complex C2C Order must be comprised of a Customer (but not a 
Professional Customer) order to buy and a Customer (but not a 
Professional Customer) order to sell at the same price and for the same 
quantity. The proposal to limit eligible interest to Customer but not 
Professional Customer interest is substantively identical to the rules 
of NYSE American.\6\ In addition, as proposed, a C2C Order or Complex 
C2C Order that is not rejected on arrival would immediately trade in 
full at its limit price.\7\ Further, proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) 
would provide that C2C Orders and Complex C2C Orders would not route 
and may be entered with a Minimum Price Variation (``MPV'') of $0.01 
regardless of the MPV of the options series.\8\ Finally, the proposed 
Rule would specify that Commentary .01 to Rule 6.47A-O would apply to 
Customer Cross Orders, which means that OTP Holders and OTP Firms may 
not utilize Customer Cross Orders to increase their economic gain 
without first giving other trading interest on the Exchange an 
opportunity to participate in the trade or to trade at the transaction 
price when the OTP Holder or OTP Firm was already bidding or offering 
at that price.\9\ This proposed handling of Customer Cross Orders is 
substantively identical to the rules on NYSE

[[Page 9189]]

American regarding the handling of such orders on that exchange.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(A).
    \7\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) (providing, in relevant 
part, that ``[a] C2C Order or Complex C2C Order that is not rejected 
per Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B) [Execution of C2C Orders] or (C) 
[Execution of Complex C2C Orders], respectively, will immediately 
trade in full at its limit price'').
    \8\ Rule 1.1 defines ``Minimum Price Variation'' or ``MPV'' as 
the price variations established by the Exchange, which for quoting 
and trading options traded on the Exchange are set forth in 6.72-
O(a).
    \9\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A). See also Rule 6.47A-O, 
Commentary .01.
    \10\ See Rule 6.47A-O, Commentary .01 (providing an identical 
prohibition to the one set forth in NYSE American Rule 935NY, 
Commentary .01, which prevents order-senders from using the customer 
crossing mechanism to increase economic gain without first providing 
an opportunity of eligible interest to trade at the transaction 
price of the cross order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B) provides that a C2C Order that has 
one option leg would be rejected if received when the NBBO is crossed 
or if the C2C would trade at a price that (i) is at the same price as a 
displayed Customer order on the Consolidated Book and (ii) is not at or 
between the NBBO and the Exchange BBO. The Exchange believes that the 
proposal would provide for the efficient entry and execution of C2C 
Orders while continuing to protect same-priced, displayed Customer 
interest (i.e., by ensuring that the C2C Order does not trade ahead of 
displayed Customer interest resting in the Consolidated Book). As noted 
above, the proposed C2C Orders would operate in a manner that is 
identical to the handling of single-leg customer cross orders per NYSE 
American rules.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C) would describe the Exchange's 
pricing requirements for a Complex C2C Order, which requirements are 
identical to those set forth in NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C). 
As is the case per NYSE American rules, to validate the price of a 
Complex C2C Order, the Exchange would rely on the Derived BBO 
(``DBBO'') as described in Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5).\12\ If the Exchange is 
not able to calculate the DBBO for a complex strategy because of one of 
the circumstances described in Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5)(B)-(C), the Exchange 
will not execute an order for that strategy until the circumstance is 
resolved.\13\ Consistent with this handling, the Exchange proposes that 
it would reject a Complex C2C Order if the Exchange is unable to 
calculate the DBBO for a leg of the Complex C2C Order per Rule 6.91P-
O(a)(5)(B) or (a)(5)(C).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The DBBO provides for the establishment of a derived 
(theoretical) bid or offer for a particular complex strategy. See 
Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5) (defining the DBBO and providing that the bid 
(offer) price used to calculate the DBBO on each leg will be the 
Exchange BB (BO) (if available), bound by the maximum allowable Away 
Market Deviation). The Away Market Deviation, as defined in Rule 
6.91P-O(a)(1), ensures that an ECO does not execute too far away 
from the prevailing market. Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5) also provides for the 
establishment of the DBBO in the absence of an Exchange BB (BO), or 
ABB(ABO), or both. The Exchange's definition of DBBO and its use in 
relation to Complex C2C Orders is identical to how this concept is 
defined and utilized by NYSE American. Compare Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5) 
with NYSE American Rule 980NYP(a)(5).
    \13\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C). See also Rule 6.91P-
O(a)(5)(B) (providing that, ``[i]f, for a leg of a complex strategy, 
there is neither an Exchange BBO nor an ABBO, the Exchange will not 
allow the complex strategy to trade until, for that leg, there is 
either an Exchange BB or BO, or an ABB or ABO, on at least one side 
of the market'') and (a)(5)(C) (providing, in relevant part that, 
``[i]f the best bid and offer prices (when not based solely on the 
Exchange BBO) for a component leg of the complex strategy are locked 
or crossed, the Exchange will not allow an ECO for that strategy to 
execute against another ECO until this condition resolves''). This 
proposed handling of Complex C2C Orders is identical to the handling 
of such orders on NYSE American. Compare proposed Rule 6.62P-
O(g)(2)(C) with NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C).
    \14\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B). See also NYSE American 
Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C) provides that no option 
leg of a Complex C2C Order will trade at a price worse than the 
Exchange BBO and such order would be rejected if it fails to meet the 
following requirements:
     the transaction price must be at or between the DBBO and 
may not equal the DBBO if the DBBO is calculated using the Exchange BBO 
and the Exchange BBO of any component of the complex strategy on either 
side of the market includes displayed Customer interest. If the DBB 
(DBO) includes displayed Customer interest on the Exchange, the 
transaction price must improve the DBB (DBO) by at least one cent 
($0.01) (per proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C)(i)); and
     the transaction price must be at or between the best-
priced Complex Orders to buy and sell in the complex strategy and may 
not equal the price of a resting Customer Complex Order (per proposed 
Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C)(ii)).
    As noted above the pricing requirements for the proposed Complex 
C2C Orders are identical to NYSE American's requirement for such 
orders.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C)(i)-(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes a conforming change to Rule 6.91P-
O(b)(1) to include Complex Customer Cross Orders among the type of 
Electronic Complex Orders available for trading on the Exchange, which 
change would add clarity, transparency, and internal consistency to the 
Exchange's rules.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Rule 6.91P-O(b)(1) (providing that Electronic 
Complex Orders ``may be entered as Limit Orders, Limit Orders 
designated as Complex Only Orders, Complex QCCs, or as Complex 
Customer Cross Orders) (emphasis added). See also NYSE American Rule 
980NYP(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 1.1: Definitions of Customer and Professional Customer
    The Exchange proposes to modify the definition of ``Customer'' to 
provide that, ``unless otherwise specified'', the definition of 
``Customer'' includes a ``Professional Customer'', as described 
below.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed Rule (emphasis added). See also NYSE American 
Rule 980NYP(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Per Rule 1.1, for options traded on the Exchange, the terms 
``Customer'' and ``Professional Customer'' do not include a broker or 
dealer.\18\ When the Exchange adopted its definition of Professional 
Customer nearly a decade ago, it noted that its definition was 
``similar to designations that have been adopted by all other options 
exchanges.'' \19\ At that time, however, the Exchange explicitly stated 
that it was not proposing ``to revise any order execution or processing 
rules, including its priority rules, to change the treatment of 
Professional Customers'' but noted instead that ``Professional Customer 
orders will be treated as Customer orders under Exchange rules for all 
purposes, except those related to order marking.'' \20\ The Exchange 
further noted that ``[a]s the only options Exchange to have not yet 
adopted the Professional Customer definition, the Exchange's proposal 
will allow OTP Holders to mark their Professional Customer orders 
similarly regardless of whether the order is placed on the Exchange or 
another options exchange'' and that adopting the Professional Customer 
designation would ``facilitate cross-market initiatives (such as 
harmonizing rules relating to Obvious Errors).'' \21\ Although the 
Exchange was clear as to its intent when it adopted the Professional 
Customer designation, it did not modify its definition of ``Customer'' 
to reflect this intention. Thus, for avoidance of doubt and consistent 
with the Exchange's previously stated intent, the Exchange proposes to 
modify the definition of Customer to include

[[Page 9190]]

Professional Customer, ``unless otherwise specified'' in Exchange 
rules.\22\ The Exchange believes this rule change would add clarity and 
transparency to the Exchange's rules, making them easier to navigate 
and understand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Rule 1.1 (defining Customer and Professional Customer). 
For order counting purposes, the term ``Professional Customer'' 
applies to an individual or organization that ``places more than 390 
orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month 
for its own beneficial account(s).'' See id.
    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73665 (November 21, 
2014), 79 FR 70907, 70908 at n. 7 (November 28, 2014) (SR-NYSEARCA-
2014-133) (immediately effective rule change to adopt the definition 
of Professional Customer) (the ``2014 Proposal''). See id., 79 FR, 
at 70908 at n. 7 (citing other options markets that had already 
adopted the Professional Customer designation).
    \20\ See id., 79 FR at 70908, n. 8 (specifying that, at that 
time, at least two other options exchanges had adopted a definition 
of Professional Customer that was the ``same'' as the Exchange's 
then-proposed definition and that those exchanges likewise did ``not 
treat Professional Customers differently than Customers for purposes 
of execution or processing.''). Thus, from inception, the treatment 
of market participants designated as Professional Customers differed 
among options exchanges.
    \21\ See id., 79 FR at 70908.
    \22\ See proposed Rule 1.1 (providing that ``[f]or options 
traded on the Exchange, the term `Customer' does not include a 
broker or dealer and, unless otherwise specified, includes a 
``Professional Customer''(emphasis added) See, e.g., proposed Rule 
6.62P-O(g)(2) (specifying that Customer Cross Orders ``must be 
comprised of a Customer (but not a Professional Customer) order to 
buy and a Customer (but not a Professional Customer) order to sell 
at the same price and for the same quantity'')).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed 
rule change, the Exchange will announce the implementation date by 
Trader Update, which, subject to effectiveness of this proposed rule 
change, is anticipated to be in the first quarter of 2024.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\23\ in general, and furthers the 
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\24\ in particular, because it is 
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to 
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation 
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in 
securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a 
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to 
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Customer Cross Orders (for 
single-leg and complex interest) would remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market 
system because the proposed rules would allow OTP Holders and OTP Firms 
to electronically trade these types of crossing orders on the Exchange. 
The proposed functionality would benefit investors and the public 
interest because it would enhance and automate each order entry firms' 
ability to submit two-sided Customer orders--i.e., Customer Cross 
Orders (both single-leg and complex). As such, the proposed rule change 
would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with an efficient means of 
executing their Customer orders. In addition, the proposed Customer 
Cross Orders would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a 
free and open market and a national market system because OTP Holders 
and OTP Firms would be given an additional way to execute single-leg 
and Complex Orders on the Exchange. As noted herein, the proposed 
Customer Cross Orders functionality is identical to functionality 
described in the rules of the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE American.\25\ 
With this proposal, OTP Holders and OTP Firms would likewise have an 
additional venue on which to execute two-sided Customer orders 
electronically--i.e., Customer Cross Orders. As such, the proposed 
order types may attract additional Customer order flow (both two-sided 
and single-sided) to the Exchange, which may, in turn, result in 
greater liquidity available for trading on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the proposed single-leg C2C Order type, the Exchange 
believes that the adoption of this order type would provide for the 
efficient entry and execution of C2C Orders while continuing to protect 
same-priced, displayed Customer interest (i.e., by ensuring that the 
C2C Order does not trade ahead of displayed Customer interest resting 
in the Consolidated Book). Further, as noted herein, the proposed order 
type is not new or novel because each C2C Order would operate in a 
manner that is identical to the handling of single-leg customer cross 
orders per the rules of NYSE American.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Complex C2C Order would protect investors and the 
public interest by assuring that these orders comply with the existing 
priority and allocation rules applicable to the processing and 
execution of Complex Orders per Rule 6.91P-O. In particular, the 
proposed Complex C2C Orders would continue to protect same-priced, 
displayed Customer interest and would ensure that Complex C2C Orders do 
not trade ahead of such displayed Customer interest, whether in the leg 
markets or as Customer Complex Orders. The Exchange believes the 
proposed Complex C2C Orders would promote just and equitable principles 
of trade because (as discussed herein) the proposed orders--which are 
not new or novel--would operate in a manner that is identical to the 
handling of complex customer cross orders per the rules of NYSE 
American.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to the Rule 1.1 
definition of Customer and Professional Customer would remove 
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and 
a national market system because it would add clarity and transparency 
to--and improve the accuracy of--the Exchange's rules making them 
easier to comprehend to the benefit of all market participants.
    Finally, the proposed conforming changes to Rules 6.62P-O(g) and 
6.91P-O(b)(1) to accommodate the adoption of single-leg and Complex 
Customer Cross Orders on the Exchange would remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market 
system because the rule changes would add clarity and transparency to--
and improve the accuracy of--the Exchange's rules making them easier to 
comprehend to the benefit of all market participants.

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. Specifically, the Exchange's 
proposal to adopt a new electronically-entered crossing order type 
(i.e., the Customer Cross Order) would not impose any burden on 
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes 
of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed change would not 
impose a burden on intra-market competition because the proposed order 
types would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with the option of 
utilizing another means of executing two-sided Customer interest--both 
single-leg and Complex Orders on the Exchange. The proposed change 
would also benefit investors by providing another venue (i.e., in 
addition to NYSE American) on which Customer Cross Orders may be 
submitted electronically.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would enhance 
intermarket competition. The Exchange believes that adopting Customer 
Cross Orders would promote competition as it would afford OTP Holders 
and OTP Firms another venue on which to execute two-sided Customer 
orders for single-leg and complex trading interest. Further, the 
Exchange anticipates that this proposal will create new opportunities 
for the Exchange to attract new business to the Exchange. As such, the 
Exchange believes that this proposal does not create an undue burden on 
intermarket competition. Rather, the Exchange believes that the 
proposed rule would bolster intermarket competition by promoting fair 
competition among individual markets.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed amendment to the Rule 
1.1

[[Page 9191]]

definition of Customer and Professional Customer would impose any undue 
burden on intra-market or intermarket competition as all market 
participants on the Exchange would be subject to the updated 
definition. In addition, the proposal to limit the availability of the 
proposed Customer Cross Orders to interest submitted on behalf of 
Customers would align the Exchange with the rules of NYSE American, 
which has the same limitation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed conforming changes to Rules 6.62P-O(g) 
and 6.91P-O(b)(1) to accommodate the addition of single-leg and Complex 
Customer Cross Orders would not impose an undue burden on intra-market 
or intermarket competition but would instead add clarity, transparency, 
and internal consistency to the Exchange's rules.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \29\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\30\ 
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly affect the 
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any 
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as 
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of 
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become 
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \31\ Id. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its 
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief 
description and 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 satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \32\ normally 
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the 
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\33\ the Commission 
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the 
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked 
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal 
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange states that 
waiver of the operative delay will provide market participants with an 
additional venue for executing two-sided single-leg and complex 
Customer orders electronically. In addition, the proposed change to the 
definition of ``Customer'' is designed to reflect the Exchange's 
intention when it adopted the definition of definition of Professional 
Customer in 2014, as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed C2C and Complex C2C Orders are substantively identical 
to order types adopted by the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE American.\34\ 
Among other things, the proposed rules protect the priority of 
displayed Customer interest on the Exchange by providing that a C2C 
Order with one option leg will be rejected if it would trade at the 
same price as a displayed Customer order on the Exchange's Consolidated 
Book.\35\ In addition, a Complex C2C Order must trade at a price that 
is (i) better than the DBB (DBO) if the DBB (DBO) includes displayed 
Customer interest on the Exchange, and (ii) better than a resting 
Customer Complex Order on the Exchange.\36\ Consistent with the rules 
of other options exchanges that offer customer cross orders, the 
proposed Customer Cross Orders are limited to Customer orders.\37\ The 
proposed change to the definition of Customer is designed to ensure 
that the definition reflects the Exchange's intention, as described in 
the 2014 Proposal, to treat Professional Customers as Customers, unless 
otherwise specified. The proposed conforming changes to Exchange Rules 
6.62P-O(g)(1) and 6.91P-O(b)(1) will update the Exchange's rules to 
reflect the addition of Customer Cross Orders. The proposal, which does 
not raise new or novel regulatory issues, will provide market 
participants with an additional venue for crossing single-leg and 
complex Customer Cross Orders electronically. Accordingly, the 
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the 
proposed rule change operative upon filing.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2) and note 5, supra.
    \35\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B)(i).
    \36\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C).
    \37\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) and NYSE 
American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(A). See also Cboe Rule 5.38(f).
    \38\ 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 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.

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
file number SR-NYSEARCA-2024-09 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-2024-09. 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 (https://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 
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for 
inspection and copying at the principal office of the

[[Page 9192]]

Exchange. Do not include personal identifiable information in 
submissions; you should submit only information that you wish to make 
available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from 
publication submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright 
protection. All submissions should refer to file number SR-NYSEARCA-
2024-09 and should be submitted on or before March 1, 2024.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-02647 Filed 2-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P