Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

8964

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 10, 2021 / Notices
impose an undue burden on competition as this proposal will correct the rule text within Options 3, Section 6, and provide market participants with the expected outcome in this scenario.
The proposed amendment provides the market participant with greater certainty as to the order. Further, the Exchange offers market participants various options with respect to routing and time in force. A market participant may elect to route as a FIND or SRCH Order which provides the Exchange with instructions as to how an order may route anew once posted on the Order Book.42 A market participant may also choose to submit an order with varying TIF options e.g., DAY, IOC, GTC that provide the Exchange instructions as to how to either post an order on the Order Book or cancel back an order after exhausting its potential to trade upon entry.
The Exchanges proposal to amend current Options 3, Section 6aiiB4a, to replace cancelled immediately with the term rejected conforms the rule text to other uses of the word rejected within the Rulebook.
This amendment is non-substantive.
The Exchanges proposal to amend Supplementary Material .02 to Options 3, Section 6 does not impose an undue burden on competition as this amendment corrects out of date rule text. The System does not disseminate locked quotations, rather the System reprices orders. The amendment will remove an inaccurate statement and bring greater clarity to the Rulebook.
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchanges proposal to update certain terms within Options 3, Section 7 to conform to a prior rule change 43
does not impose an undue burden on competition. These changes are nonsubstantive.
The Exchanges proposal to amend All-or-None Orders within Options 3, Section 7b5 to add more language to the description of an All-or-None Order does not impose an undue burden on competition because the proposed rule text will bring greater transparency to this order type. The Exchange today provides that All-or-None Orders are non-displayed and non-routable. To expand on this notion, the Exchange proposes to amend the sentence to provide, All-or-None Orders are nonroutable. The Exchange does not disseminate bids or offers of All-orNone Orders to OPRA and the Top of PHLX Options feed, however All-orNone Orders are displayed in the PHLX
Orders and PHLX Depth of Book feed.
42 See
note 5 above.

43 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:53 Feb 09, 2021

Jkt 253001

This additional rule text will make clear that these order types are not disseminated on OPRA. Further, the Exchange proposes to add, If an All-orNone Order contingency cannot be met, the All-or-None Order would be bypassed until such time as the contingency could be met. This language is intended to make clear that an All-or-None Order will not cause other orders to queue until such time as the All-or-None Order may execute.
Rather, the All-or-None Order will rest on the Order Book until the contingency will be met, at which time that Public Customer All-or-None Order will have priority over other orders on the Book.
The Exchange believes the addition of this rule text will bring greater transparency to the current System handling of All-or-None Orders.
The Exchanges proposal to amend Options 3, Section 7c3, Opening Only, to amend incorrect rule text, and also add a clarifying sentence does not impose an undue burden on competition. An OPG Only Order may be executed by any market participant in the Opening Process pursuant to Options 3, Section 8. This order type would continue to not be not valid outside of the Opening Process.
Removing the phrase except for Automated Quotation Adjustments does not impose an undue burden on competition because, today, an OPG
Order is not subject to Automated Quotation Adjustments. The Opening Process itself has boundaries within which orders will be executed. Any participant may enter an Opening Only Order. Typically Market Makers and Lead Market Makers submit Valid Width Quotes, as provided for within Options 3, Section 8, during the Opening Process. Further, an Opening Sweep which is utilized by Market Makers and Lead Market Makers, is protected by Automation Quotation Adjustments. The Exchanges proposal to note that OPG orders may not route will bring greater transparency to the rule.
Options 3, Section 10
The Exchanges proposal to make a grammatical correction to Options 3, Section 10 is non-substantive.
Options 3, Section 13
The Exchanges proposal to update certain rule references within Options 3, Section 13 is non-substantive.
The Exchanges proposal to amend various references within Options 3, Section 13 to make clear the manner in which All-Or-None Orders are treated by the System within a PIXL Auction does not impose an undue burden on
PO 00000

Frm 00083

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

competition as this rule text will bring greater clarity to the current System operation. All market participants will be treated in a uniform manner when they enter an All-Or-None Order into PIXL.
The Exchanges proposal to add rule text, within Options 3, Section 13f, to provide that with respect to a PIXL
Order for the account of a Public Customer that is paired with an order for the account of another Public Customer, that All-Or-None Orders that can be satisfied are included within the Reference BBO does not impose an undue burden on competition. The proposed rule text within Options 3, Section 13f clarifies the current System operation. The Reference BBO
also pertains to Complex Orders because the cPBBO is derived from displayed quotes for the individual legs.
The Exchanges proposal to make clear where the Reference BBO is specified within this rule, or the Reference cPBBO, that All-or-None Orders are excluded does not impose an undue burden on competition. The Exchange proposes to note including Reference BBO within Options 3, Section 13b2C and 13f to conform the rule text. The Reference BBO also pertains to Complex Orders because the cPBBO is derived from displayed quotes for the individual legs. This represents current System operation.
The Exchanges proposal to amend Options 3, Section 13 in various places to replace one minimum price improvement increment, with $0.01
is a non-substantive amendment.
The Exchanges proposed amendments to Options 3, Section 13b7 and 8 do not impose an undue burden on competition because they clarify current rule text without any substantive amendment.
The remainder of the proposed changes within Options 3, Section 13
are grammatical or technical in nature and therefore non-substantive.
Options 3, Section 15
The Exchanges proposal to note that the Automated Quotation Adjustments protection removes both quotes and Immediate-or-Cancel Orders does not impose an undue burden on competition. Market Makers and Lead Market Makers utilize the Immediate-orCancel Orders within SQF to respond to auctions. The auction response requires the same protection afforded by the Automation Quotation Adjustments which it affords the underlying option in which the Market Maker or Lead Market Maker is quoting continuously among its assigned options classes. The Automation Quotation Adjustments
E:FRFM10FEN1.SGM

10FEN1