81 FR 47223 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Paragraph (c) to Exchange Rule 11.21 To Describe Changes to System Functionality Necessary To Implement the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 139 (July 20, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 139 (July 20, 2016)
| Page Range | 47223-47229 | |
| FR Document | 2016-17090 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 20, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 47223-47229] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-17090] [[Page 47223]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-78330; File No. SR-BatsEDGA-2016-15] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Paragraph (c) to Exchange Rule 11.21 To Describe Changes to System Functionality Necessary To Implement the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program July 14, 2016. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that on June 29, 2016, Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange filed a proposal to adopt paragraph (c) to Exchange Rule 11.21 to describe changes to System \3\ functionality necessary to implement the Regulation NMS Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program (``Plan'' or ``Pilot'').\4\ In determining the scope of the proposed changes to implement the Pilot,\5\ the Exchange carefully weighed the impact on the Pilot, System complexity, and the usage of such order types in Pilot Securities. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ The term ``System'' is defined as the ``electronic communications and trading facility designated by the Board through which securities orders of Users are consolidated for ranking, execution and, when applicable, routing away.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(cc). \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74892 (May 6, 2015), 80 FR 27513 (May 13, 2015) (``Approval Order''). \5\ Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms used in this rule filing are defined as set forth in the Plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Background On August 25, 2014, NYSE Group, Inc., on behalf of the Exchange, Bats BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX''), Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''), Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc. (collectively ``Participants''), filed with the Commission, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act \6\ and Rule 608 of Regulation NMS thereunder, the Plan to implement a tick size pilot program.\7\ The Participants filed the Plan to comply with an order issued by the Commission on June 24, 2014.\8\ The Plan was published for comment in the Federal Register on November 7, 2014, and approved by the Commission, as modified, on May 6, 2015.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1. \7\ See Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Vice President, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., to Secretary, Commission, dated August 25, 2014. \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72460 (June 24, 2014), 79 FR 36840 (June 30, 2014). \9\ See Approval Order, supra note 4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Plan is designed to allow the Commission, market participants, and the public to study and assess the impact of increment conventions on the liquidity and trading of the common stocks of small- capitalization companies. Each Participant is required to comply, and to enforce compliance by its member organizations, as applicable, with the provisions of the Plan. The Pilot will include stocks of companies with $3 billion or less in market capitalization, an average daily trading volume of one million shares or less, and a volume weighted average price of at least $2.00 for every trading day. The Pilot will consist of a Control Group of approximately 1400 Pilot Securities and three Test Groups with 400 Pilot Securities in each Test Group selected by a stratified sampling.\10\ During the Pilot, Pilot Securities in the Control Group will be quoted and traded at the currently permissible increments. Pilot Securities in the first Test Group (``Test Group One'') will be quoted in $0.05 minimum increments but will continue to trade at any price increment that is currently permitted.\11\ Pilot Securities in the second Test Group (``Test Group Two'') will be quoted in $0.05 minimum increments and will trade at $0.05 minimum increments subject to a midpoint exception, a retail investor order exception, and a negotiated trade exception.\12\ Pilot Securities in the third Test Group (``Test Group Three'') will be subject to the same restrictions as Test Group Two and also will be subject to the ``Trade-at'' requirement to prevent price matching by a market participant that is not displaying at a price of a Trading Center's \13\ ``Best Protected Bid'' or ``Best Protected Offer,'' unless an enumerated exception applies.\14\ The same exceptions provided under Test Group Two will also be available under the Trade-at Prohibition, with an additional exception for Block Size orders and exceptions that mirror those under Rule 611 of Regulation NMS.\15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ See Section V of the Plan for identification of Pilot Securities, including criteria for selection and grouping. \11\ See Section VI(B) of the Plan. \12\ See Section VI(C) of the Plan. \13\ The Plan incorporates the definition of ``Trading Center'' from Rule 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS. Regulation NMS defines a Trading Center as ``a national securities exchange or national securities association that operates an SRO trading facility, an alternative trading system, an exchange market maker, an OTC market maker, or any other broker or dealer that executes orders internally by trading as principal or crossing orders as agent.'' \14\ See Section VI(D) of the Plan. \15\ 17 CFR 242.611. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Plan requires the Exchange to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to comply with applicable quoting and trading requirements specified in the Plan. Accordingly, the Exchange adopted paragraph (a) of Rule 11.21 to require Members \16\ to comply with the quoting [[Page 47224]] and trading provisions of the Plan.\17\ The Exchange also adopted paragraph (b) of Rule 11.21 to require Members to comply with the data collection provisions under Appendix B and C of the Plan.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(n). \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77792 (May 10, 2016), 81 FR 30397 (May 16, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGA-2016-08). \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77417 (March 22, 2016), 81 FR 17219 (March 28, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGA-2016-01). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed System Changes The Exchange proposes to adopt paragraph (c) of Exchange Rule 11.21 to describe changes to System functionality necessary to implement the Plan. Paragraph (c) of Rule 11.21 would set forth the Exchange's specific procedures for handling, executing, re-pricing and displaying of certain order types and order type instructions applicable to Pilot Securities. Unless otherwise indicated, paragraph (c) of Rule 11.21 would apply to order types and order type instructions in Pilot Securities in Test Groups One, Two, and Three and not to orders in Pilot Securities included in the Control Group. The proposed changes include select and discrete amendments to the operation of: (i) Market Orders; (ii) orders with a Market Peg instruction; (iii) MidPoint Peg Orders; (iii) orders with a Discretionary Range; (iv) orders with a Non-Displayed instruction; (v) Market Maker Peg Orders; (vi) Supplemental Peg Orders; and (vii) orders subject to the Display-Price Sliding process. In determining the scope of these proposed changes to implement the Plan, the Exchange carefully weighed the impact on the Pilot, System complexity, and the usage of such order types in Pilot Securities. These proposed changes are designed to directly comply with the Plan and to assist the Exchange in meeting its regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan. As discussed below, certain of these changes are also intended to reduce risk in the System by eliminating unnecessary complexity based on infrequent current usage of certain order types in Pilot Securities and/or their limited ability to execute under the Trade-at Prohibition. Therefore, the Exchange firmly believes that these changes will have little or no impact on the operation and data collection elements of the Plan. The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule changes are reasonably designed to comply with applicable quoting and trading requirements specified in the Plan. Market Orders A Market Order is an order to buy or sell a stated amount of a security that is to be executed at the NBBO when the order reaches the Exchange.\19\ Market Orders shall not trade through Protected Quotations. Any portion of a Market Order that would execute at a price more than $0.50 or 5 percent worse than the NBBO at the time the order initially reaches the Exchange, whichever is greater, will be cancelled.\20\ In order to comply with the minimum quoting increments set forth in the Plan, the Exchange proposes to state under proposed Rule 11.21(c)(1) that for purposes of determining whether a Market Order's execution price is more than 5 percent worse than the NBBO under Rule 11.8(a)(7), the execution price for a buy (sell) order will be rounded down (up) to the nearest $0.05 increment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ See Exchange Rule 11.8(a). \20\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Market Peg Instruction The Exchange proposes to amend the operation of orders with a Market Peg instruction to reduce risk in its System by eliminating unnecessary complexity based on infrequent current usage in Pilot Securities and their limited ability to execute under the Trade-at Prohibition in Test Group Three. An order with a Pegged instruction is automatically adjusted by the System in response to changes in the NBBO and will peg to the NBB or NBO or a certain amount away from the NBB or NBO.\21\ An order with a Market Peg instruction is pegged to the contra-side NBBO.\22\ A User \23\ entering an order with a Market Peg instruction can specify that such order's price will offset the inside quote on the contra-side of the market by an amount (the ``Offset'') set by the User. An order with a Market Peg instruction is not eligible to be displayed on the Exchange. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(j). \22\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(j)(1). \23\ A ``User'' is defined as any member or sponsored participant of the Exchange who is authorized to obtain access to the System pursuant to Rule 11.3. See Exchange Rule 1.5(ee). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Test Groups One and Two, the Exchange proposes to modify the behavior of an order with a Market Peg instruction when it is locked by an incoming order with a Post Only instruction \24\ that does not remove liquidity pursuant to Rule 11.6(n)(4).\25\ In such case, the order with a Market Peg instruction would be converted to an executable order and will remove liquidity against such incoming order.\26\ In no case would an order with a Market Peg instruction execute against an incoming order with a Post Only instruction if an order with higher priority is on the EDGA Book.\27\ Specifically, if an order other than an order with a Market Peg instruction maintains higher priority than one or more orders with a Market Peg instruction, the order(s) with a Market Peg instruction with lower priority will not be converted, as described above, and the incoming order with a Post Only instruction will be posted or cancelled in accordance with Rule 11.6(n)(4). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(n)(4). \25\ A Post Only Order will remove contra-side liquidity from the EDGA Book if the order is an order to buy or sell a security priced below $1.00 or if the value of such execution when removing liquidity equals or exceeds the value of such execution if the order instead posted to the EDGA Book and subsequently provided liquidity, including the applicable fees charged or rebates provided. See Exchange Rule 11.6(n)(4). \26\ The Exchange notes that an order with a Post Only instruction will, in most cases, remove liquidity from the EDGA Book because under its current taker-maker pricing structure, the remover of liquidity is provided a rebate while the provider of liquidity is charged a fee. Therefore, in most cases, value of the execution to remove liquidity will equal or exceed the value of such execution once posted to the EDGA Book, including the applicable fees charged or rebates received. \27\ The term ``EDGA Book'' is defined as the ``System's electronic file of orders.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(d). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange notes that orders with a Market Peg instruction are aggressive by nature and believes executing the order in such circumstance is appropriate. The Exchange also notes that the proposed behavior for orders with a Market Peg instruction in Test Groups One and Two is identical to the operation of orders with the Super Aggressive Routing instruction under Exchange Rule 11.6(n)(2). When an order with a Super Aggressive instruction is locked by an incoming order with a Post Only instruction that does not remove liquidity pursuant to Rule 11.6(n)(4), the order is converted to an executable order and will remove liquidity against such incoming order. In addition, like as proposed above, in no case would an order with a Super Aggressive instruction execute against an incoming order with a Post Only instruction if an order with higher priority is on the EDGA Book. The Exchange believes this change is reasonable and appropriate due to the limited usage of orders with a Market Peg instruction in Pilot Securities, to avoid unnecessary additional System complexity, and to ensure the order with a Market Peg instruction may execute in such circumstance. The Exchange also proposes to not accept orders with a Market Peg [[Page 47225]] instruction in Test Group Three based on limited current usage, additional System complexity, and their limited ability to execute under the Trade-at Prohibition. Exchange Rule 11.21(a)(6)(D) sets forth the ``Trade-at Prohibition,'' which is the prohibition against executions by a Member that operates a Trading Center of a sell order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Bid or the execution of a buy order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Offer during Regular Trading Hours,\28\ unless an enumerated exception applies.\29\ The Exchange believes that their de minimis usage and limited ability to execute due to the Trade-at Prohibition does not justify the complexity that would be created by supporting orders with a Market Peg instruction in Test Group Three. A vast majority of orders with a Market Pegged instruction are entered into the System with a zero Offset and, therefore, create a locked market with the contra-side NBBO. Under the Trade-at Prohibition, an order with a Market Peg instruction would not be eligible for execution at the locking price, including when a Trade-at Intermarket Sweep Order (``ISO'') \30\ is entered, because of non- cleared contra-side Protected Quotations. For example, assume the NBBO is $10.00 (NYSE) x $10.05 (Nasdaq) in a Test Group 3 security. An order with a Market Peg instruction to buy at $10.10 with a zero Offset is entered on the Exchange. The order would be ranked and hidden on the EDGA Book at $10.05. A Trade-at ISO to sell at $10.05 is then entered. In this example, no execution occurs on the Exchange because Nasdaq is displaying an order to sell at $10.05. The Trade-at ISO instruction only indicates that all of the better and equal priced buy orders have been cleared. It does not indicate that the seller has cleared any Protected Offers. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to not accept orders with a Market Peg instruction in Test Group Three in an effort to reduce unnecessary System complexity, avoid an internally locked book, and due to the limited execution opportunities for orders with a Market Peg instruction due to the Trade-at Prohibition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ The term ``Regular Trading Hours'' is defined as ``the time between 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(y). \29\ See also Section VI(D) of the Plan. \30\ A Trade-at ISO is a Limit Order for a Pilot Security that meets the following requirements: (i) When routed to a Trading Center, the limit order is identified as a Trade-at Intermarket Sweep Order; and (ii) simultaneously with the routing of the limit order identified as a Trade-at Intermarket Sweep Order, one or more additional limit orders, as necessary, are routed to execute against the full size of any protected bid, in the case of a limit order to sell, or the full displayed size of any protected offer, in the case of a limit order to buy, for the Pilot Security with a price that is better than or equal to the limit price of the limit order identified as a Trade-at Intermarket Sweep Order. See Exchange Rule 11.21(a)(7)(A)(i). These additional routed orders also must be marked as Trade-at Intermarket Sweep Orders. Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- MidPoint Peg Orders A MidPoint Peg Order is an order whose price is automatically adjusted by the System in response to changes in the NBBO to be pegged to the midpoint of the NBBO, or, alternatively, pegged to the less aggressive of the midpoint of the NBBO or one Minimum Price Variation \31\ inside the same side of the NBBO as the order.\32\ The Plan and current Exchange rules permit the acceptance of orders priced to execute at the midpoint of the NBBO to be ranked and accepted in increments of less than $0.05.\33\ Consistent with previous guidance issued by the Participants,\34\ the Exchange proposes to amend the operation of MidPoint Peg Orders to explicitly state that MidPoint Peg Orders in Pilot Securities may not be entered in increments other than $0.05. The System will execute a MidPoint Peg Order: (i) In $0.05 increments priced better than the midpoint of the NBBO; or (ii) at the midpoint of the NBBO, regardless of whether the midpoint of the NBBO is in an increment of $0.05. In order to comply with the minimum quoting and trading increments of the Plan and reduce unnecessary System complexity, a MidPoint Peg Order will not be permitted to alternatively peg to one Minimum Price Variation inside the same side of the NBBO as the order in Pilot Securities. The Exchange believes that the current de minimis usage of the alternative pegging functionality in Pilot Securities does not justify the complexity and risk that would be created by re-programming the System to support this functionality under the Plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(i). \32\ See Exchange Rule 11.8(d). \33\ See Sections VI(B), (C), and (D) of the Plan. See also Exchange Rules 11.21(a)(4), (a)(5), and (a)(6). \34\ See e.g., Question 42 of the Tick Size Pilot Program Trading and Quoting FAQs available at http://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/TSPP-Trading-and-Quoting-FAQs.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary Range Instruction The Exchange proposes to not accept orders with a Discretionary Range in all Test Groups, including the Control Group, to reduce risk in the System by eliminating unnecessary complexity based on infrequent current usage in Pilot Securities. In sum, an order with a Discretionary Range has a displayed or non-displayed ranked price and size and an additional non-displayed ``discretionary price''.\35\ The discretionary price is a non-displayed upward offset at which a User is willing to buy, if necessary, or a non-displayed downward offset at which a User is willing to sell, if necessary. The System changes necessary for orders with a Discretionary Range to comply with the Plan become increasingly complex because both the displayed price and discretionary price must comply with the Plan's minimum quoting and trading increments as well as the Trade-at restriction in Test Group Three. In addition, Users do not currently set discretionary prices less than $0.05 away from the order's displayed price and the Exchange does not anticipate Users doing so under the Plan. To date, orders with a Discretionary Range are rarely entered in Pilot Securities and the Exchange anticipates their usage to further decrease due to the Plan's minimum quoting increments. The Exchange believes that the current extremely limited usage of orders with a Discretionary Range in Pilot Securities does not justify the additional System complexity that would be created by supporting such orders. As a result of these factors the Exchange proposes to not accept orders with a Discretionary Range in all Test Groups and the Control Group. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \35\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(d). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Non-Displayed Instruction The Exchange proposes to re-price to the midpoint of the NBBO orders with a Non-Displayed instruction in Test Group Three that are priced in a permissible increment better than the midpoint of the NBBO. An order with a Non-Displayed instruction is not displayed on the Exchange.\36\ Exchange Rule 11.21(a)(6)(D) incorporates the ``Trade-at Prohibition'' in the Exchange's rules. The Trade-at Prohibition prevents the execution of a sell order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Bid or the execution of a buy order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Offer during Regular Trading Hours, unless an exception applies. A Trading Center that is displaying a quotation, via either a processor or an SRO quotation feed, that is a Protected Bid or Protected Offer is permitted to execute orders at that level, but only up to the amount of its displayed size. Unless an exception applies, an order with a Non-Displayed instruction that is able to execute at the price of the Protected Quotation would not be able to do so in Test Group Three [[Page 47226]] due to the Trade-at Prohibition and the Exchange's priority rule.\37\ Furthermore, such aggressively priced orders would not be able to post to the EDGA Book at the contra-side Protected Quotation, and re-pricing the order to the midpoint of the NBBO would increase execution opportunities under normal market conditions. However, orders that are priced to execute at the midpoint of the NBBO are exempt from the Trade-at Prohibition. Therefore, to increase the execution opportunities for orders with a Non-Displayed instruction in Test Group Three, the Exchange proposes to re-price to the midpoint of the NBBO orders with a Non-Displayed instruction that are priced in a permissible increment better than the midpoint of the NBBO. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \36\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(e)(2). \37\ Under Exchange Rule 11.9(a)(2)(A), displayed Limit Orders have priority over non-displayed Limit Orders. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Market Maker Peg Orders A Market Maker Peg Order is a Limit Order that is automatically priced by the System at the Designated Percentage (as defined in Exchange Rule 11.20(d)(2)(D)) away from the then current NBB and NBO, or if no NBB or NBO, at the Designated Percentage away from the last reported sale from the responsible single plan processor in order to comply with the quotation requirements for Market Makers set forth in Exchange Rule 11.20(d).\38\ Should the above pricing result in a Market Maker Peg Order being priced at an increment other than $0.05, the Exchange proposes to round an order to buy (sell) up (down) to the nearest $0.05 increment in order to comply with the minimum quoting increments of the Plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ See Exchange Rule 11.8(f). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supplemental Peg Orders The Exchange proposes to not accept Supplemental Peg Orders in Test Group Three in order to reduce risk in the System by eliminating unnecessary complexity based on infrequent current usage in Pilot Securities and their limited ability to execute under the Trade-at Prohibition. A Supplemental Peg Order is a non-displayed Limit Order that posts to the EDGA Book, and thereafter is eligible for execution at the NBB for buy orders and NBO for sell orders against routable orders that are equal to or less than the aggregate size of the Supplemental Peg Order interest available at that price.\39\ In sum, Supplemental Peg Orders are only executable at the NBBO against an order that is in the process of being routed away. In such case, the Exchange is not displaying a Protected Quotation and, therefore, the Supplemental Peg Order would be unable to execute in Test Group Three due to the Trade-at Prohibition.\40\ Therefore, the Exchange proposes to not accept Supplemental Peg Orders in Test Group Three. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ See Exchange Rule 11.8(g). \40\ The Exchange notes that the likelihood of a Supplemental Peg Order qualifying for an exception to the Trade-at Prohibition is small. For example, Supplemental Peg Orders are only executable against orders that are to be routed away and would not be eligible to execute against an incoming ISO or Trade-at ISO. Also, the Exchange would not be displaying a Protected Quotation. In addition, the Exchange does not frequently receive orders of Block Size and, in order to qualify for the Block exception, the contra-side Block Order must be routable and the Supplemental Peg Order be of Block Size. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Display-Price Sliding Under the Display-Price Sliding process, an order eligible for display by the Exchange that, at the time of entry, would create a violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS by locking or crossing a Protected Quotation of an external market, will be ranked at the locking price in the EDGA Book and displayed by the System at one minimum price variation (i.e., $0.05) below the current NBO (for bids) or one minimum price variation above the current NBB (for offers).\41\ The ranked and displayed prices of an order subject to the Display- Price Sliding process may be adjusted once or multiple times depending upon the instructions of a User and changes to the prevailing NBBO.\42\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(l)(1)(B). \42\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(l)(1)(B)(iii). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As described above, Exchange Rule 11.21(a)(6)(D) sets forth the Trade-at Prohibition, which is the prohibition against executions by a Member that operates a Trading Center of a sell order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Bid or the execution of a buy order for a Pilot Security in Test Group Three at the price of a Protected Offer during Regular Trading Hours, unless an exception applies. Orders that are priced to execute at the midpoint of the NBBO are exempt from the Trade-at Prohibition. Therefore, to increase the execution opportunities and qualify for the mid-point exception to the Trade-at Prohibition, the Exchange proposes to rank orders in Test Group Three that are subject to the Display-Price Sliding process at the midpoint of the NBBO in the BZX Book and display such orders one minimum price variation below the current NBO (for bids) or one minimum price variation above the current NBB (for offers). The Exchange also proposes to cancel orders subject to Display- Price Sliding in Test Group Three that are only to be adjusted once and not multiple times in the event the NBBO widens and a contra-side order with a Non-Displayed instruction is resting on the EDGA Book at the price to which the order subject to Display-Price Sliding would be adjusted. Due to the increased minimum quoting increments under the Plan, the Exchange is unable to safely re-price an order subject to single Display-Price Sliding in Test Group Three to the original locking price in such circumstances and doing so would add additional System complexity and risk. As discussed above, the Exchange proposes to rank orders in Test Group Three subject to the Display-Price Sliding process at the midpoint of the NBBO. In the event the NBBO changes such that an order subject to Display-Price Sliding would not lock or cross a Protected Quotation of an external market, the order will receive a new timestamp, and will be displayed at the order's limit price.\43\ Due to technological limitations arising from the increased minimum quoting increments under the Plan, however, the Exchange is unable to safely re-program its System to re-price such order to the original locking price when the NBBO widens and a contra-side order with a Non- Displayed instruction is resting on the EDGA Book at the price to which the order subject to Display-Price Sliding would be adjusted. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to cancel orders subject to the single Display-Price Sliding process in such circumstances. Users who prefer an execution in such a scenario may elect to use the multiple Display- Price Sliding process. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \43\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ministerial Change Currently, both Interpretation and Policy .03 to Rule 11.21(a) and Interpretation and Policy .11 to Rule 11.21(b) state that Rule 11.21 shall be in effect during a pilot period to coincide with the pilot period for the Plan (including any extensions to the pilot period for the Plan). The Exchange proposes to include this language at the beginning of Rule 11.21 and, therefore, proposes to delete both Interpretation and Policy .03 to Rule 11.21(a) and Interpretation and Policy .11 to Rule 11.21(b) as those provisions would be redundant and unnecessary. The Exchange also proposes to amend the last sentence of Rule 11.21(a)(4) to specify that the current permissible price increments are set forth under Exchange Rule 11.6(i), Minimum Price Variation. [[Page 47227]] Implementation Date If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, the proposed rule change will be effective upon Commission approval and shall become operative upon the commencement of the Pilot Period. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \44\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \45\ in particular, in that it is designed 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. The Plan requires the Exchange to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to comply with applicable quoting and trading requirements specified in the Plan. The proposed rule change is designed to comply with the Plan, reduce complexity and enhance System resiliency while not adversely affecting the data collected under the Plan. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are reasonably designed to comply with applicable quoting and trading requirements specified in the Plan and, as discussed further below, other applicable regulations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). \45\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange believes that the proposed changes regarding Market Orders, MidPoint Peg Orders, Market Maker Peg Orders, and Display-Price Sliding are consistent with the Act because they are intended to modify the Exchange's System to comply with the provisions of the Plan, and are designed to assist the Exchange in meeting its regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan. In approving the Plan, the SEC noted that the Pilot was an appropriate, data-driven test that was designed to evaluate the impact of a wider tick size on trading, liquidity, and the market quality of securities of smaller capitalization companies, and was therefore in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the extent that these proposals are intended to comply with the Plan, the Exchange believes that these proposals are in furtherance of the objectives of the Plan, as identified by the Commission, and is therefore consistent with the Act. The Exchange also believes that its proposed changes to orders with a Market Peg instruction, orders with a Discretionary Range, orders with a Non-Displayed instruction, Supplemental Peg Orders, and Display- Price Sliding are also consistent with the Act because they are intended to eliminate unnecessary System complexity and risk based on the de minimis current usage of such order types and instructions in Pilot Securities and/or their limited ability to execute under the Plan's minimum trading and quoting increments or Trade-at Prohibition.\46\ For example, during March 2016, the alternative pegging functionality of MidPoint Peg Orders, orders with a Market Peg instruction, orders with a Non-Displayed instruction, and Supplemental Peg Orders accounted for 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.92%, and 0.01%, respectively, of volume in eligible Pilot Securities on the Exchange, BYX, BZX and EDGX combined. Notably, orders with a Discretionary Range accounted for 0.00% of volume in eligible Pilot Securities on the Exchange, BYX, BZX and EDGX combined. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \46\ The Commission has also expressed concern regarding potential market instability caused by technological risks. See e.g., Chair Mary Jo White, Commission, Enhancing Our Equity Market Structure (June 5, 2014) available at https://www.sec.gov/News/Speech/Detail/Speech/1370542004312#.VD2HW610w6Y. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission adopted Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (``Regulation SCI'') in November 2014 to strengthen the technology infrastructure of the U.S. securities markets.\47\ Regulation SCI is designed to reduce the occurrence of systems issues, improve resiliency when systems problems do occur, and enhance the Commission's oversight and enforcement of securities market technology infrastructure. Regulation SCI required the Exchange to establish written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that their systems have levels of capacity, integrity, resiliency, availability, and security adequate to maintain their operational capability and promote the maintenance of fair and orderly markets, and that they operate in a manner that complies with the Exchange Act. Each of these proposed changes are intended to reduce complexity and risk in the System to ensure the Exchange's technology remains robust and resilient. In determining the scope of the proposed changes, the Exchange carefully weighed the impact on the Pilot, System complexity, and the usage of such order types in Pilot Securities.\48\ The potential complexity results from code changes for a majority of the Exchange's order types, which requires the implementation and testing of a separate branch of code for each Test Group. For example, the Exchange currently utilizes one branch of code for which to implement and test changes. Development work for the Pilot results in the creation of four additional branches of code that are to be developed and tested (e.g., Control Group + three Test Groups). The Exchange determined that the changes proposed herein are necessary to ensure continued System resiliency in accordance with the requirements of Regulation SCI. Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change promotes just and equitable principles of trade, removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \47\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19, 2014), 79 FR 72251 (December 5, 2014) (``Regulation SCI Approval Order''). \48\ But for the Plan, the Exchange notes that it would not have proposed to amend the operation of orders with a Market Peg instruction, orders with a Discretionary Range, orders with a Non- Displayed instruction, Supplemental Peg Orders, and Display-Price Sliding as described herein. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition, each of these proposed changes would have a de minimis to zero impact on the data reported pursuant to the Plan. As evidenced above, orders with a Market Peg instruction, orders with a Discretionary Range, the alternative pegging functionality of MidPoint Peg Orders, and Supplemental Peg Orders are infrequently used in Pilot Securities or the execution of such orders would be scarce due to the Plan's minimum trading and quoting requirement and Trade-at Prohibition. The limited usage and execution scenarios do not justify the additional system complexity which would be created by modifying the System to support such order types in order to comply with the Plan. Therefore, the Exchange believes each proposed change is a reasonable means to ensure that the System's integrity, resiliency, and availability continues to promote the maintenance of fair and orderly markets. Due to the additional complexity, limited usage and execution opportunities, the Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to apply the changes proposed herein to only Pilot Securities as such changes are necessary to reduce complexity and ensure continued System resiliency in accordance with the requirements of Regulation SCI. The Exchange also believes the proposed changes to orders with a Non- Displayed instruction, and orders subject to the Display-Price [[Page 47228]] Sliding process in Test Group Three are consistent with the Act because they are designed to increase the execution opportunities for such order types in compliance with the mid-point exception to the Trade-at Prohibition. The Exchange also believes the proposed change to Market Pegged Orders in Test Groups One and Two is consistent with the Act because it is identical to the operation of the Super Aggressive instruction under Exchange Rule 11.6(n)(2). The Exchange notes that Market Pegged Orders are aggressive by nature and believes executing the order in such circumstance is reasonable and appropriate. The Exchange also believes it is reasonable and appropriate to cancel an order subject to the single Display-Price Sliding process in Test Group Three in the event that the NBBO widens and a contra-side order with a Non-Displayed instruction is resting on the EDGA Book at the price to which the order subject to Display-Price Sliding would be adjusted. Due to technological limitations and the Plan's increased minimum quoting increments, the Exchange is unable to safely re-program its System to re-price such orders to the original locking price in such circumstances. The Exchange also anticipates that the scenario under which it proposes to cancel the Display-Price Sliding order will be infrequent in Tick Pilot Securities. Users who prefer an execution in such a scenario may elect to use the multiple Display-Price Sliding process. Therefore, the Exchange believes it is consistent with the Act to set forth this scenario in its rules so that Users will understand how the System operates and how their orders would be handled in this discrete scenario. Lastly, the Exchange believes the ministerial changes to Rule 11.21 are also consistent with the Act as they would: (i) Clarify a provision under paragraph (a)(4); and (ii) remove redundant provisions from the rule. B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is designed to assist the Exchange in meeting its regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan, reduce System complexity and enhance resiliency. The Exchange also notes that the proposed rule change will apply equally to all Members that trade Pilot Securities. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will: (a) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be 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. In particular, the Commission seeks comment on the issue described below. In the Approval Order, the Commission stressed the importance of testing the impact of wider tick sizes on the trading and liquidity of the securities of small capitalization companies, and doing so in a way that produces robust results that inform future policy decisions.\49\ The Commission acknowledged the complexity of the Pilot and the costs that its implementation would create for market participants, but concluded that the benefits of the empirical data that would be produced by the Pilot warranted incurring those costs.\50\ As a result, the Plan requires that each Participant, including the Exchange, adopt rules that are necessary for compliance with the provisions of the Plan.\51\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \49\ See Approval Order, supra note 4, at 80 FR 27515. \50\ Id. at 27516. \51\ See Section II(B) of the Plan. See also Section IV of the Plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- While the Exchange states that the proposed rule change describes the system changes necessary to implement the Pilot, the Commission notes that the scope of the proposed changes extends beyond those required for compliance with the Plan, and would eliminate certain order types for Pilot Securities during the Pilot Period, or modify their operation in ways not required by the Plan. For example, the Exchange proposes not to accept Market Pegged Orders, Discretionary Orders, and Supplemental Peg Orders, and certain types of Mid-Point Peg Orders, in some or all Test Groups of Pilot Securities for the duration of the Pilot Period.\52\ These proposals appear designed to permit the Exchange to avoid the costs of modifying these order types to comply with the Plan. The Exchange notes that these order types are infrequently used in Pilot Securities, and takes the position that ``[t]he limited usage and execution scenarios do not justify the additional system complexity which would be created by modifying the System to support such order types in order to comply with the Plan.'' \53\ At the same time, the Exchange also does not appear prepared to propose to eliminate these order types indefinitely. By contrast, the Exchange proposes to modify, in ways not required by the Plan, the operation of Market Pegged Orders and Non-Displayed Orders, and certain orders subject to the Display-Price Sliding process, in some or all Test Groups of Pilot Securities, and to incur the associated system change costs, in order to increase the ``execution opportunities'' for these order types for the duration of the Pilot Period.\54\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \52\ The Exchange also proposes to cancel certain orders subject to the Display-Price Sliding process in certain Pilot Securities for the duration of the Pilot Period. \53\ See supra Item II.A.2. \54\ See supra Item II.A.1-2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission is concerned that proposed rule changes, other than those necessary for compliance with Plan, that are targeted at Pilot Securities, that have a disparate impact on different Test Groups and the Control Group, and that are to apply temporarily only for the Pilot Period, could bias the results of the Pilot and undermine the value of the data generated in informing future policy decisions. Accordingly, the Commission is concerned that the proposed rule change may not be consistent with Act, including Section 6(b)(5) thereof and Rule 608 of Regulation NMS, or with the Plan. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic CommentsUse 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-BatsEDGA-2016-15 on the subject line. Paper Comments Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange [[Page 47229]] Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsEDGA-2016-15. 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-BatsEDGA-2016-15, and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2016. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\55\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \55\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2016-17090 Filed 7-19-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Notices 47223
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s market capitalization, an average daily
COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and trading volume of one million shares or
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule less, and a volume weighted average
[Release No. 34–78330; File No. SR– Change price of at least $2.00 for every trading
BatsEDGA–2016–15] In its filing with the Commission, the day. The Pilot will consist of a Control
Exchange included statements Group of approximately 1400 Pilot
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats concerning the purpose of and basis for Securities and three Test Groups with
EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing the proposed rule change and discussed 400 Pilot Securities in each Test Group
of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt any comments it received on the selected by a stratified sampling.10
Paragraph (c) to Exchange Rule 11.21 proposed rule change. The text of these During the Pilot, Pilot Securities in the
To Describe Changes to System statements may be examined at the Control Group will be quoted and
Functionality Necessary To Implement places specified in Item IV below. The traded at the currently permissible
the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement Exchange has prepared summaries, set increments. Pilot Securities in the first
a Tick Size Pilot Program forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of Test Group (‘‘Test Group One’’) will be
the most significant parts of such quoted in $0.05 minimum increments
July 14, 2016. statements. but will continue to trade at any price
increment that is currently permitted.11
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Pilot Securities in the second Test
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Statement of the Purpose of, and the Group (‘‘Test Group Two’’) will be
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule quoted in $0.05 minimum increments
notice is hereby given that on June 29, Change and will trade at $0.05 minimum
2016, Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the increments subject to a midpoint
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘EDGA’’) filed with the 1. Purpose
exception, a retail investor order
Securities and Exchange Commission Background exception, and a negotiated trade
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule On August 25, 2014, NYSE Group, exception.12 Pilot Securities in the third
change as described in Items I, II, and Inc., on behalf of the Exchange, Bats Test Group (‘‘Test Group Three’’) will be
III below, which Items have been BYX Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BYX’’), Chicago subject to the same restrictions as Test
prepared by the Exchange. The Stock Exchange, Inc., Bats BZX Group Two and also will be subject to
Commission is publishing this notice to Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BZX’’), Bats EDGX the ‘‘Trade-at’’ requirement to prevent
solicit comments on the proposed rule Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’), Financial price matching by a market participant
change from interested persons. Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. that is not displaying at a price of a
(‘‘FINRA’’), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., Trading Center’s 13 ‘‘Best Protected Bid’’
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, the Nasdaq or ‘‘Best Protected Offer,’’ unless an
Statement of the Terms of Substance of Stock Market LLC, New York Stock enumerated exception applies.14 The
the Proposed Rule Change Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’), NYSE MKT same exceptions provided under Test
The Exchange filed a proposal to LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc. (collectively Group Two will also be available under
adopt paragraph (c) to Exchange Rule ‘‘Participants’’), filed with the the Trade-at Prohibition, with an
11.21 to describe changes to System 3 Commission, pursuant to Section 11A of additional exception for Block Size
the Act 6 and Rule 608 of Regulation orders and exceptions that mirror those
functionality necessary to implement
NMS thereunder, the Plan to implement under Rule 611 of Regulation NMS.15
the Regulation NMS Plan to Implement
a tick size pilot program.7 The The Plan requires the Exchange to
a Tick Size Pilot Program (‘‘Plan’’ or
Participants filed the Plan to comply establish, maintain, and enforce written
‘‘Pilot’’).4 In determining the scope of with an order issued by the Commission
the proposed changes to implement the policies and procedures that are
on June 24, 2014.8 The Plan was reasonably designed to comply with
Pilot,5 the Exchange carefully weighed published for comment in the Federal
the impact on the Pilot, System applicable quoting and trading
Register on November 7, 2014, and requirements specified in the Plan.
complexity, and the usage of such order approved by the Commission, as Accordingly, the Exchange adopted
types in Pilot Securities. modified, on May 6, 2015.9 paragraph (a) of Rule 11.21 to require
The text of the proposed rule change The Plan is designed to allow the Members 16 to comply with the quoting
is available at the Exchange’s Web site Commission, market participants, and
at www.batstrading.com, at the the public to study and assess the 10 See Section V of the Plan for identification of
principal office of the Exchange, and at impact of increment conventions on the Pilot Securities, including criteria for selection and
the Commission’s Public Reference liquidity and trading of the common grouping.
Room. stocks of small-capitalization 11 See Section VI(B) of the Plan.
12 See Section VI(C) of the Plan.
companies. Each Participant is required
13 The Plan incorporates the definition of
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
to comply, and to enforce compliance
‘‘Trading Center’’ from Rule 600(b)(78) of
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. by its member organizations, as Regulation NMS. Regulation NMS defines a Trading
3 The term ‘‘System’’ is defined as the ‘‘electronic applicable, with the provisions of the Center as ‘‘a national securities exchange or
communications and trading facility designated by Plan. national securities association that operates an SRO
The Pilot will include stocks of trading facility, an alternative trading system, an
the Board through which securities orders of Users
exchange market maker, an OTC market maker, or
are consolidated for ranking, execution and, when companies with $3 billion or less in
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
any other broker or dealer that executes orders
applicable, routing away.’’ See Exchange Rule internally by trading as principal or crossing orders
1.5(cc). 6 15
U.S.C. 78k–1. as agent.’’
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74892 7 See
Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Vice 14 See Section VI(D) of the Plan.
(May 6, 2015), 80 FR 27513 (May 13, 2015) President, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., to 15 17 CFR 242.611.
(‘‘Approval Order’’). Secretary, Commission, dated August 25, 2014. 16 The term ‘‘Member’’ is defined as ‘‘any
5 Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms 8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72460
registered broker or dealer that has been admitted
used in this rule filing are defined as set forth in (June 24, 2014), 79 FR 36840 (June 30, 2014). to membership in the Exchange.’’ See Exchange
the Plan. 9 See Approval Order, supra note 4. Rule 1.5(n).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_47362/page/1.svg)
![47228 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Notices
Sliding process in Test Group Three are C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposes not to accept Market Pegged
consistent with the Act because they are Statement on Comments on the Orders, Discretionary Orders, and
designed to increase the execution Proposed Rule Change Received From Supplemental Peg Orders, and certain
opportunities for such order types in Members, Participants or Others types of Mid-Point Peg Orders, in some
compliance with the mid-point Written comments were neither or all Test Groups of Pilot Securities for
exception to the Trade-at Prohibition. solicited nor received. the duration of the Pilot Period.52 These
The Exchange also believes the proposals appear designed to permit the
proposed change to Market Pegged III. Date of Effectiveness of the Exchange to avoid the costs of
Orders in Test Groups One and Two is Proposed Rule Change and Timing for modifying these order types to comply
consistent with the Act because it is Commission Action with the Plan. The Exchange notes that
identical to the operation of the Super Within 45 days of the date of these order types are infrequently used
Aggressive instruction under Exchange publication of this notice in the Federal in Pilot Securities, and takes the
Rule 11.6(n)(2). The Exchange notes that Register or within such longer period (i) position that ‘‘[t]he limited usage and
Market Pegged Orders are aggressive by as the Commission may designate up to execution scenarios do not justify the
nature and believes executing the order 90 days of such date if it finds such additional system complexity which
in such circumstance is reasonable and longer period to be appropriate and would be created by modifying the
appropriate. publishes its reasons for so finding or System to support such order types in
The Exchange also believes it is (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, order to comply with the Plan.’’ 53 At
reasonable and appropriate to cancel an the Commission will: (a) By order the same time, the Exchange also does
order subject to the single Display-Price approve or disapprove such proposed not appear prepared to propose to
Sliding process in Test Group Three in rule change, or (b) institute proceedings eliminate these order types indefinitely.
the event that the NBBO widens and a to determine whether the proposed rule By contrast, the Exchange proposes to
contra-side order with a Non-Displayed change should be disapproved. modify, in ways not required by the
instruction is resting on the EDGA Book Plan, the operation of Market Pegged
at the price to which the order subject IV. Solicitation of Comments Orders and Non-Displayed Orders, and
to Display-Price Sliding would be Interested persons are invited to certain orders subject to the Display-
adjusted. Due to technological submit written data, views, and Price Sliding process, in some or all
limitations and the Plan’s increased arguments concerning the foregoing, Test Groups of Pilot Securities, and to
minimum quoting increments, the including whether the proposed rule incur the associated system change
Exchange is unable to safely re-program change is consistent with the Act. In costs, in order to increase the
its System to re-price such orders to the particular, the Commission seeks ‘‘execution opportunities’’ for these
original locking price in such comment on the issue described below. order types for the duration of the Pilot
circumstances. The Exchange also In the Approval Order, the Period.54
anticipates that the scenario under Commission stressed the importance of The Commission is concerned that
which it proposes to cancel the Display- testing the impact of wider tick sizes on proposed rule changes, other than those
Price Sliding order will be infrequent in the trading and liquidity of the necessary for compliance with Plan, that
Tick Pilot Securities. Users who prefer securities of small capitalization are targeted at Pilot Securities, that have
an execution in such a scenario may companies, and doing so in a way that a disparate impact on different Test
elect to use the multiple Display-Price produces robust results that inform Groups and the Control Group, and that
Sliding process. Therefore, the future policy decisions.49 The are to apply temporarily only for the
Exchange believes it is consistent with Commission acknowledged the Pilot Period, could bias the results of the
the Act to set forth this scenario in its complexity of the Pilot and the costs Pilot and undermine the value of the
rules so that Users will understand how that its implementation would create for data generated in informing future
the System operates and how their market participants, but concluded that policy decisions. Accordingly, the
orders would be handled in this discrete the benefits of the empirical data that Commission is concerned that the
scenario. would be produced by the Pilot proposed rule change may not be
Lastly, the Exchange believes the consistent with Act, including Section
warranted incurring those costs.50 As a
ministerial changes to Rule 11.21 are 6(b)(5) thereof and Rule 608 of
result, the Plan requires that each
also consistent with the Act as they Regulation NMS, or with the Plan.
Participant, including the Exchange,
would: (i) Clarify a provision under Comments may be submitted by any
adopt rules that are necessary for
paragraph (a)(4); and (ii) remove of the following methods:
compliance with the provisions of the
redundant provisions from the rule.
Plan.51 Electronic Comments
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s While the Exchange states that the
• Use the Commission’s Internet
Statement on Burden on Competition proposed rule change describes the
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/
The Exchange does not believe that system changes necessary to implement
rules/sro.shtml); or
the proposed rule change will result in the Pilot, the Commission notes that the • Send an email to rule-comments@
any burden on competition that is not scope of the proposed changes extends sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
necessary or appropriate in furtherance beyond those required for compliance BatsEDGA–2016–15 on the subject line.
of the purposes of the Act. The with the Plan, and would eliminate
certain order types for Pilot Securities Paper Comments
Exchange notes that the proposed rule
change is designed to assist the during the Pilot Period, or modify their • Send paper comments in triplicate
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Exchange in meeting its regulatory operation in ways not required by the to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
obligations pursuant to the Plan, reduce Plan. For example, the Exchange
52 The Exchange also proposes to cancel certain
System complexity and enhance 49 See Approval Order, supra note 4, at 80 FR orders subject to the Display-Price Sliding process
resiliency. The Exchange also notes that 27515. in certain Pilot Securities for the duration of the
the proposed rule change will apply 50 Id. at 27516. Pilot Period.
equally to all Members that trade Pilot 51 See Section II(B) of the Plan. See also Section 53 See supra Item II.A.2.
Securities. IV of the Plan. 54 See supra Item II.A.1–2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_47362/page/6.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Notices 47229
Commission, 100 F Street NE., SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Washington, DC 20549–1090. COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
All submissions should refer to File [Release No. 34–78327; File No. SR–FINRA–
Change
Number SR–BatsEDGA–2016–15. This 2016–026]
file number should be included on the 1. Purpose
subject line if email is used. To help the Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory FINRA has been developing a
Commission process and review your consolidated rulebook (‘‘Consolidated
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
comments more efficiently, please use FINRA Rulebook’’).4 That process
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
only one method. The Commission will Rule Change to Update Rule Cross- involves FINRA submitting to the
post all comments on the Commission’s References and Make Non-Substantive Commission for approval a series of
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Technical Changes to Certain FINRA proposed rule changes over time to
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Rules adopt rules in the Consolidated FINRA
submission, all subsequent Rulebook. The phased adoption and
amendments, all written statements July 14, 2016. implementation of those rules
with respect to the proposed rule Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the necessitates periodic amendments to
change that are filed with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 update rule cross-references and other
Commission, and all written (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 non-substantive changes in the
communications relating to the notice is hereby given that on July 7, Consolidated FINRA Rulebook.
proposed rule change between the 2016, Financial Industry Regulatory The proposed rule change would
Commission and any person, other than Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the make some of those changes, as well as
those that may be withheld from the Securities and Exchange Commission other non-substantive changes unrelated
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed to the adoption of rules in the
public in accordance with the
rule change as described in Items I and Consolidated FINRA Rulebook.
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
II below, which Items have been First, the proposed rule change would
available for Web site viewing and
prepared by FINRA. FINRA has update rule cross-references to reflect
printing in the Commission’s Public designated the proposed rule change as the adoption of a consolidated
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., constituting a ‘‘non-controversial’’ rule investment company securities rule. On
Washington, DC 20549, on official change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule June 9, 2016, FINRA filed with the SEC
business days between the hours of 19b-4 under the Act,3 which renders the a proposed rule change, for immediate
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the proposal effective upon receipt of this effectiveness, to adopt NASD Rule 2830
filing also will be available for filing by the Commission. The as FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment
inspection and copying at the principal Commission is publishing this notice to Company Securities), without any
office of the Exchange. All comments solicit comments on the proposed rule substantive changes. As part of that rule
received will be posted without change; change from interested persons. filing, FINRA also deleted in its entirety
the Commission does not edit personal NASD Rule 2830.5 Rule 2341 will be
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
identifying information from implemented on July 9, 2016. As such,
Statement of the Terms of the Substance
submissions. You should submit only the proposed rule change would update
of the Proposed Rule Change
information that you wish to make references to the new rule number in
available publicly. All submissions FINRA is proposing to update cross- FINRA Rules 2320 (Variable Contracts
should refer to File Number SR– references and make other non- of an Insurance Company) and 6630
BatsEDGA–2016–15, and should be substantive changes within FINRA (Applicability of FINRA Rules to
submitted on or before August 10, 2016. rules, due in part to the adoption of a Securities Previously Designated as
new consolidated FINRA rule. PORTAL Securities). The proposed rule
For the Commission, by the Division of The text of the proposed rule change change further would delete from the
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated is available on FINRA’s Web site at FINRA Manual the heading for the
authority.55 http://www.finra.org, at the principal NASD Rule 2800 Series (Special
Jill M. Peterson, office of FINRA and at the Products) and the placeholder for NASD
Assistant Secretary. Commission’s Public Reference Room. Rule 2870 (Reserved) to reflect that the
[FR Doc. 2016–17090 Filed 7–19–16; 8:45 am] II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s NASD Rule 2800 Series 6 has fully been
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Statement of the Purpose of, and consolidated into the FINRA rules.
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
4 The current FINRA rulebook consists of (1)
Change
FINRA Rules; (2) NASD Rules; and (3) rules
In its filing with the Commission, incorporated from NYSE (‘‘Incorporated NYSE
FINRA included statements concerning Rules’’) (together, the NASD Rules and Incorporated
NYSE Rules are referred to as the ‘‘Transitional
the purpose of and basis for the Rulebook’’). While the NASD Rules generally apply
proposed rule change and discussed any to all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE
comments it received on the proposed Rules apply only to those members of FINRA that
rule change. The text of these statements are also members of the NYSE (‘‘Dual Members’’).
The FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA members,
may be examined at the places specified unless such rules have a more limited application
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared by their terms. For more information about the
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, rulebook consolidation process, see Information
and C below, of the most significant Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook Consolidation
Process).
aspects of such statements. 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78130
(June 22, 2016), 81 FR 42016 (June 28, 2016) (Notice
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No.
2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. SR–FINRA–2016–019).
55 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 6 See supra note 5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_47362/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-08 07:57:04
Document Modified: 2018-02-08 07:57:04
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 47223 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR