[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51765-51769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20334]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-70206; File No. SR-NYSE-2013-59]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Describe the Billing Practice for Co-Location Services and Expand Co-
Location Services To Provide for a 40 Gigabit Liquidity Center Network
Connection
August 15, 2013.
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 August 12, 2013, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
\2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to (i) describe the Exchange's current
billing practice for co-location services received by Users that
connect to more than one market, and (ii) expand its co-location
services to provide for a 40 gigabit (``Gb'') Liquidity Center Network
(``LCN'') connection in the Exchange's data center. 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to (i) describe the Exchange's current
billing practice for co-location services received by Users that
connect to more than one market, and (ii) expand its co-location
services to provide a 40 Gb LCN connection in the Exchange's data
center.\4\ The Exchange's affiliates, NYSE
[[Page 51766]]
MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'') and NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca,'' and together
with NYSE MKT, ``Affiliates''), have filed substantially the same
proposed rule change.\5\ The Exchange will propose applicable fees for
the proposed 40 Gb LCN connection via a separate proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
initially approved the Exchange's co-location services in Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59310
(September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56) (the ``Original Co-location
Approval''). The Exchange's co-location services allow Users to rent
space in the data center so they may locate their electronic servers
in close physical proximity to the Exchange's trading and execution
system. See id. at 59310. For purposes of the Exchange's co-location
services, the term ``User'' includes (i) member organizations, as
that term is defined in NYSE Rule 2(b); (ii) Sponsored Participants,
as that term is defined in NYSE Rule 123B.30(a)(ii)(B); and (iii)
non-member organization broker-dealers and vendors that request to
receive co-location services directly from the Exchange. See, e.g.,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65973 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR
79232 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSE-2011-53).
\5\ See SR-NYSEMKT-2013-67 and SR-NYSEArca-2013-80 (August 1,
2013). The Commission initially approved NYSE MKT's co-location
services in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62961 (September 21,
2010), 75 FR 59299 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-80). For
purposes of NYSE MKT co-location services, the term ``User''
includes (i) member organizations, as that term is defined in the
definitions section of the General and Floor Rules of the NYSE MKT
Equities Rules, and ATP Holders, as that term is defined in NYSE
Amex Options Rule 900.2NY(5); (ii) Sponsored Participants, as that
term is defined in Rule 123B.30(a)(ii)(B)--Equities and NYSE Amex
Options Rule 900.2NY(77); and (iii) non-member organization and non-
ATP Holder broker-dealers and vendors that request to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See, e.g., Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 65974 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79249
(December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-81) and 65975 (December 15,
2011), 76 FR 79233 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-82). The
Commission initially approved NYSE Arca's co-location services in
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR
70048 (November 16, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-100). For purposes of
NYSE Arca co-location services, the term ``User'' includes (i) ETP
Holders and Sponsored Participants that are authorized to obtain
access to the NYSE Arca Marketplace pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 7.29 (see NYSE Arca Equities Rule 1.1(yy)); (ii) OTP Holders,
OTP Firms and Sponsored Participants that are authorized to obtain
access to the NYSE Arca System pursuant to NYSE Arca Options Rule
6.2A (see NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.1A(a)(19)); and (iii) non-ETP
Holder, non-OTP Holder and non-OTP Firm broker-dealers and vendors
that request to receive co-location services directly from the
Exchange. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65970
(December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79242 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-
2011-74) and 65971 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79267 (December 21,
2011) (SR-NYSEArca-2011-75).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Billing Practice
The Exchange and its Affiliates (collectively, the ``Exchanges'')
utilize a single data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the ``data
center'') to provide co-location services to their respective Users.\6\
The Exchanges offer identical co-location services in the data center
and charge identical fees for such services. A User only incurs a
single charge for a particular co-location service and is not charged
multiple times if it obtains such service as, for example, a member of
more than one Exchange. In other words, if a User receives a co-
location service in the data center, and, pursuant to separate non-co-
location fees, connects to all three Exchanges, the User is not charged
for such co-location service three separate times.\7\ Similarly, some
Users are content service provider Users (``CSP Users'') that do not
connect to any Exchange; rather, they provide services to other Users
co-located at the data center. CSP Users are nonetheless subject to the
relevant fees for the co-location services they use.\8\ Users have been
billed for co-location services in this manner beginning with the
availability of co-location services in the data center in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For purposes of this proposal, the term ``Users''
hereinafter refers collectively to the Exchanges' Users.
\7\ The three Exchanges operate five markets. The NYSE operates
an equities market. NYSE Arca operates an options market, and,
through its wholly owned subsidiary NYSE Arca Equities Inc., an
equities market. NYSE MKT operates an equities market, and through
NYSE Amex Options LLC, an options market. A User can only access a
market through co-location services if such User is authorized to
obtain such access as a member, OTP Holder, ETP Holder or Sponsored
Participant. See supra note 5.
\8\ CSP Users, may, for example, provide order routing/brokerage
services and/or market data delivery services to subscriber Users.
CSP Users are subject to the same fees as other Users. However,
rather than use a standard LCN connection, CSP Users send data to,
and communicate with, subscribing users via a dedicated LCN
connection (an ``LCN CSP'' connection). Accordingly, only CSP Users
are subject to the fees for LCN CSP connections. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67666 (August 15, 2012), 77 FR 50742
(August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed below, there are a number of reasons for billing co-
location in this manner. Co-location services do not directly result in
access to any of the Exchanges; other, non-co-location fees apply to
access. In addition, the level of co-location services requested by a
User does not, in and of itself, depend on whether the User connects
only to the Exchange, or to the Exchange and one or both of its
Affiliates; and, in fact, as noted above, not all Users connect to an
Exchange.
First, the fees for co-location services are not fees for direct
access to an Exchange; co-location services do not provide such direct
access to an Exchange. Rather, all orders sent to the Exchanges enter
their respective trading and execution systems through the same order
gateway--the Common Customer Gateway (``CCG'')--regardless of whether
the sender is co-located in the data center or not. The particular
trading and execution systems of the Exchanges to which an order is
eventually sent are determined by order/quote entry ports (``ports'').
Fees for ports are charged separately based on the particular Exchanges
to which the ports are configured to access/connect.\9\ Accordingly, a
User that accesses an Exchange pays for that access in the form of a
port fee, as does any member that is not a co-location User. In this
regard, and as noted in the Original Co-location Approval as well as
subsequent rule filings relating to changes in co-location services and
pricing, Users that receive co-location services from the Exchange do
not receive any means of access to any of the Exchange's trading and
execution systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other
Users.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For a more detailed description of the method of billing for
ports, see Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68229 (November 14,
2012), 77 FR 69688 (November 20, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-60).
\10\ See, e.g., Original Co-location Approval at 59311. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65973 (December 15, 2011), 76
FR 79232 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSE-2011-53) and 67666 (August 15,
2012), 77 FR 50742 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-18). In addition,
co-located Users do not receive any market data or data service
product that is not available to all Users, although Users that
receive co-location services normally would expect reduced latencies
in sending orders to, and receiving market data from, the Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the level of co-location services a User purchases does
not, in and of itself, depend on whether the User connects only to the
Exchange or to the Exchange and one or both of its Affiliates.
Similarly, the cost incurred by the Exchanges to provide co-location
services does not vary based on whether the User connects to one or to
several of the Exchanges' markets. The fees charged for co-location
services generally fall in three groups: (1) Equipment and hardware,
(2) labor-based services, and (3) administrative matters. Many of the
fees vary depending on the amount of such services used, so that as the
level of equipment and hardware or services used increases, so does the
cost.\11\ Therefore, a User that connects only to the Exchange and that
receives co-location services in the data center would be charged the
same amount as a User that receives the same level of co-location
services but connects to the Exchange and one or both of its Affiliates
or a User that does not connect to any Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Exchange notes that it also charges a fee to a User
that provides ``hosting'' to its own customers (``Hosted Users'').
See SR-NYSE-2011-53, supra note 3. Hosting includes, for example, a
User supporting its Hosted User's technology, whether hardware or
software, through the User's co-location space. As with the fees
described above, a User is charged additional fees as the level of
co-location services increases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 51767]]
For example, with respect to equipment and hardware, a User may
purchase cross connects, which are fiber cross connects between its
cabinets or between its cabinets and those of another User. The number
of cross-connects a User purchases directly depends on how it
configures its cabinets and whether it is a CSP User, not the number of
Exchanges to which it connects. Similarly, a User may purchase a
physical cage to house its servers and other equipment in the data
center. Fees for cages are based on the size of the cage. The more
cabinets a User has, the greater the size of the cage it is likely to
request and therefore the greater the cost. The number of the Exchanges
to which the User connects is not determinative of the number of
cabinets and size of the cage that the User purchases.
With respect to labor-related services, for example, the Exchanges
charge an ``Initial Install Services'' fee of $800 per cabinet, for
initial racking of equipment in a User's cabinet and the provision of
up to 10 cables. A ``Rack and Stack Installation'' charge of $200 per
server applies for handling, unpacking, tagging, and installation of
the server in the User's cabinet. Additionally, a ``Hot Hands Service''
is available and allows Users to use on-site data center personnel to
maintain User equipment, with hourly charges depending on whether the
service is during normal business hours and whether the service is
expedited. None of these charges vary based on the number of the
Exchanges' markets to which a User connects, but rather based on the
services sought.
With respect to administrative matters, for example, the Exchange
charges $50 per badge request for provision of a permanent data center
site access badge for a User representative. The Exchange also charges
$75 per hour for visitor security escorting, which is required during
User visits to the data center. These, like other co-location fees, are
not charged differently based on how many of the Exchanges' markets to
which a User connects.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange notes that not all Users of co-location
services actually connect to the Exchanges. If billing for co-location
services was based on the Exchanges to which a User connected, CSP
Users would not be charged at all. Therefore, billing once per co-
location service is also consistent with the fact that some CSP Users
do not connect to any of the Exchanges.
The Exchange will amend its Price List to describe the Exchange's
current billing practice for co-location services received by Users
that connect to more than one of the Exchanges.
40 Gb LCN Connection
The LCN is a local area network that is available in the data
center and that provides Users with access to the Exchange's trading
and execution systems via the CCG and to the Exchanges' proprietary
market data products. LCN access is currently available in one and 10
Gb capacities. LCN access with higher capacity is designed to achieve
lower latency in the transmission of data between Users and the
Exchange. The Exchange proposes to make a 40 Gb LCN connection
available in the Exchange's data center.\13\ This Exchange is proposing
this change in order to make an additional service available to its co-
location Users and thereby satisfy demand for more efficient, lower-
latency connections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ At this time, the Exchange is not proposing to make LCN CSP
connections available at a 40 Gb bandwidth because, at least
initially, CSP User demand is not anticipated to exist. Also, the
Exchange notes that, for a 40 Gb ``Bundle,'' SFTI and optic
connections would be at 10 Gb and only the LCN connections would be
at 40 Gb, because 40 Gb bandwidths are not currently offered for
SFTI and optic connections. The Exchange will include language in
the Price List in the related fee change to reflect this fact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, neither
a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to submit
orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is a
member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof (e.g.,
a service bureau providing order entry services). Additionally, as is
the case with existing co-location services, use of the co-location
services proposed herein would be completely voluntary and would be
available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the CCG, regardless of whether the sender is co-located in
the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do not receive
any market data or data service product that is not available to all
Users, although Users that receive co-location services normally
would expect reduced latencies in sending orders to, and receiving
market data from, the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\15\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ 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 regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to 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
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that its billing practice promotes just and
equitable principles of trade and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because
the level of co-location services requested by a User generally does
not, in and of itself, depend on whether the User connects only to the
Exchange, or to the Exchange and its Affiliates. For example, to charge
one User twice for a cage because that User connects to two Exchanges,
when another User that buys the same size cage only pays once, would
not promote just and equitable principles of trade. Similarly, the cost
incurred by the Exchanges to provide co-location services does not vary
based on whether the User connects to one or several of the Exchanges'
markets. CSP Users do not connect to any of the Exchanges, which would
make billing based on connection to the Exchanges impractical. The
Exchange also believes that its billing practice is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers because charging a User for co-location services based on how
many of the Exchanges' markets to which a User connects could result in
the Exchanges receiving the proceeds from multiple fees despite only
providing a service once.
The Exchange also believes that the proposed change would remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because co-location services do not directly result in
access to the Exchanges' markets, and, therefore, co-
[[Page 51768]]
location fees are not charges that depend on how many of the Exchanges'
markets a User connects to. In fact, certain Users do not connect to
any of the Exchanges. Instead, all orders sent to the Exchanges enter
their respective trading and execution systems through CCG, regardless
of whether the sender is co-located in the data center or not.
Additionally, the particular trading and execution systems of the
Exchanges to which an order is eventually sent are determined by ports,
for which fees are charged separately based on the particular Exchanges
to which the ports are configured to access/connect. In this regard,
Users that receive co-location services from the Exchanges do not
receive any means of access to the Exchanges' trading and execution
systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other Users.
The Exchange believes that the proposed 40 Gb LCN connection is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers because it would make a service available to Users
that require the increased bandwidth, but Users that do not require the
increased bandwidth could continue to request an existing lower-
bandwidth LCN connection. The Exchange believes that this would remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because it would provide Users with additional choices
with respect to the optimal bandwidth for their connections.
Finally, 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 these 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 will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because any market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange
could have access to the co-location services provided in the data
center. This is also true because, in addition to the services being
completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e., the same range of products and services are available to all
Users).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that its billing practice will not
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because all Users are only
charged once for each co-location service in the data center, even if
such User connects to more than one of the Exchanges' markets, or to
none of the Exchanges, and the pricing for co-location services is such
that as the level of services increases, so does the cost.
Additionally, the Exchange believes that its co-location billing
practice is consistent with the co-location services billing practice
of at least one of its competitors, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(``NASDAQ'').\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See NASDAQ Rule 7034 for a description of NASDAQ's co-
location services. The Exchange understands that NASDAQ only charges
its co-location users one fee for each co-location service received,
even if such user eventually connects to NASDAQ and any of its
affiliates (e.g., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. or NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that the proposed 40 Gb LCN connections
will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it will
satisfy User demand for more efficient, lower-latency connections.
Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed change will
enhance competition, in that NASDAQ offers a similar service to its co-
location users.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if, for example, they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive or if they determine that another venue's
products and services are more competitive than on the Exchange. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, the services it offers as well as any corresponding fees and
credits to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
reflects this competitive environment.
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: (1)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) impose any significant burden on competition; and (3) by
its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the date of this
filing, 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\20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with 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 met this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to 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 noted that the cost incurred by
the Exchange to provide co-location services does not vary based on
whether the User connects to one or several of the Exchange's
Affiliates, or to none of the Affiliates, and co-location services do
not directly result in access to the Exchange or its Affiliates. Also,
the proposal of a new 40Gb LCN connection would merely make higher-
bandwidth, lower-latency LCN connections available on a voluntary basis
to Users that require the increased bandwidth. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. With respect to the
Exchange's billing practices for co-location for Users that connect to
the Exchange and its Affiliates, the waiver of the 30-day operative
delay would allow the Exchange's fee schedule to immediately reflect
the Exchange's existing practice. Regarding the proposed 40 Gb LCN
Connection, it would allow Users to immediately benefit from an
additional choice with respect to the optimal bandwidth for
[[Page 51769]]
their connections.\22\ Accordingly, the Commission hereby grants the
Exchange's request and designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2013-59 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-NYSE-2013-59. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2013-59 and should be
submitted on or before September 11, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20334 Filed 8-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P