83 FR 64384 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Amend Its Provision Related to Its Risk Monitor Mechanism
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 240 (December 14, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 240 (December 14, 2018)
| Page Range | 64384-64388 | |
| FR Document | 2018-27086 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 240 (Friday, December 14, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 64384-64388] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-27086] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84778; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-058] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Amend Its Provision Related to Its Risk Monitor Mechanism December 10, 2018. 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 November 30, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'') 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 Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b- 4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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. \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'') proposes to amend its provision related to its Risk Monitor Mechanism. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5. The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. [[Page 64385]] 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 aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 21.16 which governs the Risk Monitor Mechanism. Background By way of background, the Risk Monitor Mechanism providers Users \5\ with the ability to manage their order and execution risk. Particularly, Rule 21.16 provides that the System will maintain a counting program for each User. A User may configure a single counting program or multiple counting programs to govern its trading activity (i.e., on a per port basis). The counting program counts executions, contract volume and notional value, within a specified time period established by each User (``specified time period'') and on an absolute basis for the trading day (``absolute limits''). The specified time period will commence for an option when a transaction occurs in any series in such option. The counting program will also count a User's executions, contract volume and notional value across all options which a User trades (``Firm Category''). When the system determines that a User's Specified Engagement Trigger (i.e., a volume trigger, notional trigger, count trigger and percentage trigger) has reached its established limit, the Risk Monitor Mechanism cancels or rejects such User's orders or quotes \6\ in all series of the class and cancels or rejects any additional orders or quotes from the User in the class until the counting program resets. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(ee). The term ``User'' means any Member or Sponsored Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the System pursuant to Rule 11.3. As discussed below, the Exchange is proposing to replace references to ``Users'' in Rule 21.16 with ``Member''. \6\ See infra discussion accompanying footnotes 6-7 [sic]. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 21.16 to (i) adopt the Risk Monitor Mechanism rule language used by its affiliated exchange, Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2'') (ii) provide the ability for Users [sic] to configure limits applicable to a group of EFIDs, and (iii) adopt a new a new risk parameter. Rule Harmonization First, the Exchange proposes to harmonize its Risk Monitor Mechanism Rule to that of its affiliated Exchange, C2. Particularly, C2 Rule 6.14 governs, among other things, its Risk Monitor Mechanism functionality. The Exchange notes the functionality of the Risk Monitor Mechanism is substantively the same as the Risk Monitor Mechanism on EDGX. Indeed, the Exchange notes that C2 just recently adopted Rule 6.14 in connection with the technology migration of C2 onto the options platform of EDGX, and at such time conformed its previous Risk Monitor Mechanism functionality to the functionality that already existed on EDGX.\7\ Although the functionality is substantively the same, the rule structure and terminology used in the EDGX and C2 rules differ. The Exchange wishes to provide harmonization with respect to this rule across the two exchanges and accordingly proposes to conform EDGX Rule 21.16 to C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5) (i.e., delete current Rule 21.16 in its entirety with the exception of subparagraphs (d) and (e), which will be relocated as described below, and adopt in whole the language from the relevant provisions of C2 Rule 6.14). As noted above, the Exchange is also proposing substantive enhancements to its current functionality, which is described further below. The Exchange notes that C2 is simultaneously proposing the same Risk Monitor Mechanism enhancements and those enhancements are included in the new proposed conformed rule language. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83214 (May 11, 2018), 83 FR 22796 (May 16, 2018) (SR-C2-2018-005). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- First, the Exchange notes that proposed Rule 21.16 will not use the term ``User'', and instead will use the term ``Member''.\8\ The Exchange notes that the definition of User is broader than Member, as it specifically captures Sponsored Participants. The Exchange believes ``Member'' is the more appropriate term to use with respect to the Risk Monitor Mechanism as the rule describes how the functionality works with respect to Members, and not necessarily Sponsored Participants. The Exchange notes that it currently does not have any Sponsored Participants, and to the extent it expects to have any in the future, it will revise the rule as needed to incorporate how the Risk Monitor Mechanism would function with respect to Sponsored Participants. The Exchange notes that ``User'' will be referred to herein as ``Member''. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(n). The term ``Member'' shall mean any registered broker or dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A Member will have the status of a ``member'' of the Exchange as that term is defined in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act. Membership may be granted to a sole proprietor, partnership, corporation, limited liability company or other organization which is a registered broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, and which has been approved by the Exchange. The Exchange notes that corresponding C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5) will use the term ``TPH'', as ``Member'' is not a defined term used by C2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Next, in connection with adopting C2's Risk Monitor Mechanism Rule language, the Exchange notes that it will be eliminating the term ``class'' and replacing it with ``underlying''. Specifically, the Exchange notes that the Risk Monitor Mechanism is configured to count the risk parameters (referred to as ``Specified Engagement Triggers'' in current EDGX Rule 21.16) across underlying securities or indexes. As an example, any option related to Apple (AAPL), would be considered to have the same underlying. Accordingly, if a corporate action resulted in AAPL1, AAPL and APPL1 one [sic] would be considered to share the same underlying symbol AAPL. Only a single symbol-level rule for underlying AAPL would be configurable by the Risk Monitor Mechanism. The Exchange notes that the term ``underlying'' is also utilized in the Exchange's technical specification documents. The Exchange therefore believes underlying is a more accurate term to use. The Exchange also intends to clarify and codify in the new rule language what occurs in the event a Member does not reactivate its ability to send quotes or orders after its configured risk parameter limits have been reached. Currently, EDGX Rule 21.16 explains how a Member may reset its counting periods. The proposed rule language includes a provision that provides that if the Exchange cancels all of a Member's quotes and orders resting in the Book, and the Member does not reactivate its ability to send quotes or orders, the block will be in effect only for the trading day that the Member reached its limits. The Exchange notes this is not a substantive change, but rather is current practice, and that its affiliated Exchange, Cboe Options, [[Page 64386]] includes similar language in its rules.\9\ The Exchange believes adding this provision to the rules provides further transparency in its rules and reduces potential confusion as to what would happen in the situation where a Member fails to reset the counting program. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ See Cboe Options Rule 8.18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In connection with adopting C2's Risk Monitor Mechanism Rule language, the Exchange also proposes to include language regarding a reset limit. Particularly, C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5)(d)(iii) [sic] (which will be renumbered to C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5)(d)(iv) [sic]) provides that the Exchange may restrict the number of Member underlying, EFID and EFID Group resets per second. The Exchange believes adding this provision to its rules provides transparency in the rules that the Exchange can impose such a restriction. The Exchange notes this is not a substantive change, but rather current practice. The Exchange believes adding this provision to the rules provides further transparency in its rules and reduces potential confusion as to whether the Exchange may restrict resets. In connection with the harmonization of C2 Rue [sic] 6.14, the Exchange notes that certain terminology is also changing. For example, current EDGX Rule 21.16, provides that the counting program counts a Member's executions, contract volume and notional value across all options which a Member trades (``Firm Category''). Going forward, this concept will be restated to provide generally that the System will count the risk parameters across all underlyings of an EFID (``EFID limit''). The Exchange reiterates the concept is the same, but the language conforms to C2 rules and makes the rule easier to read. The Exchange also proposes to adopt a definition of EFID as it proposes to reference EFIDs in proposed EDGX Rule 21.16. Particularly, the Exchange proposes to add Rule 21.1(k) to define and describe EFIDs. Specifically, a Member may obtain one or more EFIDs from the Exchange (in a form and manner determined by the Exchange). The Exchange assigns an EFID to a Member, which the System uses to identify the Member and clearing number for the execution of orders and quotes submitted to the System with that EFID.\10\ Each EFID corresponds to a single Member and a single clearing number of a Clearing Member with the Clearing Corporation. A Member may obtain multiple EFIDs, which may be for the same or different clearing numbers. A Member may only identify for any of its EFIDs the clearing number of a Clearing Member that is a Designated Give Up or Guarantor of the Trading Permit Holder as set forth in Rule 21.12. A Member is able (in a form and manner determined by the Exchange) to designate which of its EFIDs may be used for each of its ports. If a Member submits an order or quote through a port with an EFID not enabled for that port, the System cancels or rejects the order or quote. The proposed rule change regarding EFIDs is not a substantive change but rather codifies current functionality and mirrors current C2 Rule 6.8(b). The Exchange believes including a description of the use of EFIDs in the Rules adds transparency to the Rules. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ The Exchange notes that currently EDGX's rules refer only to the term ``MPID'', which is a Member's market participant identifier used for equities trading. The Exchange does not utilize MPIDs on its options platform and uses EFIDS instead. EFIDS are generally equivalent to MPIDs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange also notes that the new harmonized rule language incorporates the use of the term ``quote'' and ``quotes''.\11\ Currently, however, when describing what happens when a Specified Engagement Trigger is reached, Rule 21.16(b)(i) only references what happens to a Member's ``orders''. The Exchange notes however, that the term ``order'' as is used in Rule 21.16 was intended to capture both orders and quotes. Particularly, an ``order'' is defined as a firm commitment to buy or sell option contracts submitted to the System by a Member, and a ``quote'' is defined as a bid or offer entered by a Market-Maker as a firm order that updates the Market-Maker's previous bid or offer, if any.\12\ Indeed, the Exchange notes that the proposed reference to ``quote'' and ``quotes'' is not a substantive change to how the Risk Monitor Mechanism currently works or will work going forward. Accordingly, the Exchange believes incorporating the term ``quote'' and ``quotes'' alleviates confusion and better reflects how the Risk Monitor Mechanism operates (i.e., both orders and quotes, as defined, can be affected). Similarly, the Exchange believes the proposal to eliminate the references to a ``User's order size'' and ``Market-Maker's quote size'' with respect to how the percentage trigger is calculated is not a substantive change. The Exchange notes the trigger is calculated the same on EDGX and C2, and although proposed EDGX Rule 21.16(a)(iv) doesn't reference orders and Market- Maker quotes in particular, the calculation will not be changing and the Exchange doesn't believe a reference to orders and Market-Maker quote size in particular under this provision is necessary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ See subparagraph (b), (c) and (d) of proposed EDGX Rule 21.16. \12\ See EDGX Rules 16.1(a)(42) and (51) and 21.1(c). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As noted above, the Exchange is not proposing to eliminate subparagraphs (d) or (e) of current EDGX Rule 21.16, but rather relocate these provisions. The Exchange proposes to first relocate the contents of current subparagraph (d) to new subparagraph (d)(vi) of proposed EDGX Rule 21.16 and clarify that the proposed provision governs ``other resets'' (i.e., resets that are not a result from a limit being reached).\13\ Particularly, the provision provides the System will reset the counting period for absolute limits when a Member refreshes its risk limit thresholds. The System will also reset the counting program and commence a new specified time period when (i) a previous specified time period has expired and a transaction occurs in any series of an underlying or (ii) a Member refreshes its risk limit thresholds prior to the expiration of the specified time period. The Exchange proposes to keep this language as it provides transparency in the rules as to when other resets occur without limits being reached.. Lastly, the Exchange notes that it proposes to relocate current subparagraph (e) to new subparagraph (f). Particularly, new subparagraph (f) provides that a Member may also engage the Risk Monitor Mechanism to cancel resting bids and offers, as well as subsequent orders as set forth in EDGX Rule 22.11.\14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ The Exchange notes that C2 is also proposing to add this provision to its C2 Rule 6.14 in order to provide further transparency in its rules governing the Risk Monitor Mechanism. \14\ The Exchange notes that C2 is proposing to also add this provision to its C2 Rule 6.14 in order to provide further transparency in its rules governing the Risk Monitor Mechanism. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFID Groups The Exchange next proposes to provide in the rules that in addition to underlying limits and EFID limits, the System will be able to count each of the risk parameters across all underlyings for a group of EFIDs (``EFID Group'') (``EFID Group limit'').\15\ Similar to when a underlying limit or EFID limit are reached, when a Member's EFID Group limit is reached, the Risk Monitor Mechanism will cancel or reject such Member's orders or quotes in all underlying and cancel or reject any additional orders or quotes from any EFID within that EFID Group in all underlyings until the counting program [[Page 64387]] resets. The System will not accept new orders or quotes from any EFID within an EFID Group after an EFID Group limit is reached until the Member manually notifies the Trade Desk to reset the counting program for the EFID Group, unless the Member instructs the Exchange to permit it to reset the counting program by submitting an electronic message to the System. The Exchange believes each Member is in the best position to determine risk settings appropriate for its firm based on its trading activity and business needs and that it may be based on a single EFID or EFID Group(s). The Exchange notes that its affiliate Exchange, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe Options'') similarly allows its members to set similar risk parameters at the acronym-level (which is similar to an EFID) or firm level (similar to an EFID Group).\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ An EFID may not belong to more than one EFID Group. The Exchange notes that the Members determine how many, if any, EFID Groups to establish and determine which EFIDs belong to a particular EFID Group, if any. \16\ See Cboe Options Rule 8.18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Risk Parameter The Exchange lastly proposes to adopt a new risk parameter. Specifically, under the proposed functionality, a Member may specify a maximum number of times that the risk parameters (i.e., volume, notional, count and/or percentage) are reached over a specified interval or absolute period (``risk trips''). When a risk trip limit has been reached, the Risk Monitor Mechanism will cancel or reject a Member's orders or quotes pursuant to subparagraph (b) of Rule 21.16. The Exchange notes that a similar risk parameter (i.e., a parameter based on the number of risk ``incidents'' that occur over a specified time) is available on its affiliate Exchange, Cboe Options.\17\ The Exchange believes the proposed changes to its Risk Monitor Mechanism rule sufficiently allows Members to adjust and adopt parameter inputs in accordance with their business models and risk management needs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ See Cboe Options Rule 8.18, which provides that a Hybrid Market Maker or a TPH Organization may specify a maximum number of Quote Risk Monitor Mechanism (``QRM'') QRM Incidents on an Exchange- wide basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\18\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \19\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be 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 mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \20\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). \20\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- First, the Exchange believes its proposal to harmonize Rule 21.16 to C2 Rule 6.14 provides uniformity across affiliated exchange rules that govern the same functionality and makes the rule easier to read, which reduces potential confusion. The Exchange also proposes to mirror C2 Rule 6.14 because it believes consistent rules will increase the understanding of the Exchange's operations for Members that are also participants on C2. As discussed above, notwithstanding the proposal to adopt new terminology and/or the absence of certain references, the Exchange intends no substantive changes to the meaning or application of Rule 21.16 other than what is described above with respect to EFID Groups and the new risk trips parameter. Particularly, the Exchange believes the adoption of the definition of ``EFID'' provides transparency in the rules and alleviates confusion, as the Exchange references EFIDs multiple times throughout proposed Rule 21.16 and utilizes EFIDs generally on the Exchange with respect to its options platform. The Exchange notes the proposed definition is substantively the same as the definition of EFIDs under C2's rules.\21\ The Exchange believes the use of ``quote'' and ``quotes'' also alleviates confusion as the current Risk Monitor Mechanism in fact affects both orders and quotes, as defined, and was intended to cover both a Member's orders and Market Maker quotes. Similarly, the Exchange believes using the term ``underlying'' instead of ``class'' and ``Member'' instead of ``user'' alleviates potential confusion as the proposed terms more accurately reflect how the Risk Monitor Mechanism operates. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ See C2 Rule 6.8(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange believes the rule changes to codify current practice alleviates potential confusion, provides transparency in the rules and makes the rules easier to read. For example, providing language regarding (i) a Member's failure to reset or initiate a reset of the counting program and (ii) the Exchange's ability to restrict resets, provides transparency in the rules as to what occurs in those situations, harmonizes rule language with that of the Exchange's affiliated Exchanges, and reduces potential confusion. The alleviation of confusion removes impediments to, and perfects the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protects investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes providing Members the ability to configure certain risk parameters across underlyings for an EFID Group is also appropriate because it permits a Member to protect itself from inadvertent exposure to excessive risk on an additional level (i.e., on an EFID group-level, not just underlying- or EFID-level). Reducing such risk will enable Members to enter quotes and orders with protection against inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn will benefit investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such increased liquidity benefits investors because they may receive better prices and because it may lower volatility in the options market. The Exchange also believes each Member is in the best position to determine risk settings appropriate for its firm based on its trading activity and business needs and that that may be based on an EFID Group(s). Additionally, as discussed above, Cboe Options similarly allows its members to set risk parameters at the acronym- level (which is similar to an EFID) or firm-level (similar to an EFID Group).\22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ See Cboe Options Rule 8.18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lastly, the Exchange believes the proposal to adopt the new risk parameter based on number of times a risk parameter or group of risk parameters are reached will provide Members with an additional tool for managing risks. Furthermore, as noted above, the Exchange's affiliated exchange offers similar functionality.\23\ Overall, the proposed rule change provides Members more protections that reduce the risks from potential system errors and market events. As a result, the proposed changes, including the new risk parameter for the Risk Monitor Mechanism, have the potential to promote just and equitable principles of trade. Additionally, the proposed changes apply to all Members. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ See Cboe Options Rule 8.18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 64388]] B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes with respect to its Risk Monitor Mechanism help promote fair and orderly markets and provide clarity and transparency the Rule. For example, the proposed rule change adds an additional risk control parameter and flexibility to help further prevent potentially erroneous executions, which benefits all market participants. The proposed changes apply uniformly to all Members and the Exchange notes that the proposed changes apply to all quotes and orders in the same manner. Additionally, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed enhancements apply only to trading on the Exchange. Additionally, the Exchange notes that it is voluntary for the Members to determine whether to make use of the new enhancements of the Risk Monitor Mechanism. To the extent that the proposed changes may make the Exchange a more attractive trading venue for market participants on other exchanges, such market participants may elect to become Exchange market participants. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on 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: A. significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; B. impose any significant burden on competition; and C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \25\ thereunder.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act \27\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \28\ 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 to provide Members with additional tools and greater flexibility for managing their potential risk as soon as possible. Accordingly, the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposal as operative upon filing.\29\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). \28\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). \29\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic 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-CboeEDGX-2018-058 on the subject line. Paper Comments Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-058. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-058 and should be submitted on or before January 4, 2019. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eduardo A. Aleman, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018-27086 Filed 12-13-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![64384 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Notices
of information to the Office of persons entitled thereto in accordance Please direct your written comments
Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for with Regulation Crowdfunding. to: Charles Riddle, Acting Director/Chief
extension and approval. The rules also require intermediaries Information Officer, Securities and
to implement and maintain systems to Exchange Commission, c/o Candace
Rules 300–304 of Regulation
comply with the information disclosure, Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
Crowdfunding enumerate the
communication channels, and investor DC 20549, or send an email to: PRA_
requirements with which intermediaries
notification requirements. These Mailbox@sec.gov.
must comply to participate in the offer requirements include providing
and sale of securities in reliance on Dated: December 10, 2018.
disclosure about compensation at
Section 4(a)(6) of the Securities Act of Eduardo A. Aleman,
account opening (Rule 302), obtaining
1933 (‘‘Section 4(a)(6)’’). Rule 300 Deputy Secretary.
investor acknowledgements to confirm
requires an intermediary to be registered investor qualifications and review of [FR Doc. 2018–27093 Filed 12–13–18; 8:45 am]
with the Commission as a broker or as educational materials (Rule 303), BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
a funding portal and be a member of a providing investor questionnaires (Rule
registered national securities 303), providing communication
association.1 channels with third parties and among SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
investors (Rule 303), notifying investors COMMISSION
Rule 301 requires intermediaries to
have a reasonable basis for believing of investment commitments (Rule 303), [Release No. 34–84778; File No. SR–
that an issuer seeking to offer and sell confirming completed transactions CboeEDGX–2018–058]
securities in reliance on Section 4(a)(6) (Rule 303) and confirming or
reconfirming offering cancellations Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe
through the intermediary’s platform
(Rule 304). EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing
complies with the requirements in
The Commission staff estimates that and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Section 4A(b) of the Securities Act and Proposed Rule Change Relating To
the related requirements in Regulation there are 62 intermediaries engaged in
crowdfunding activity and therefore Amend Its Provision Related to Its Risk
Crowdfunding. Rule 302 provides that Monitor Mechanism
no intermediary or associated person of subject to Rules 300–304. The
an intermediary may accept an Commission staff estimates that December 10, 2018.
investment commitment in a transaction annualized industry burden would be Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
15,621 hours to comply with Rules 300– Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
involving the offer or sale of securities
304. This estimate is composed of a one- ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
made in reliance on Section 4(a)(6) until
time burden for new intermediaries to notice is hereby given that on November
the investor has opened an account with
comply with the rules and develop the 30, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.
the intermediary and the intermediary
platform and ongoing burdens (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘EDGX’’) filed with
has obtained from the investor consent associated with maintaining the
to electronic delivery of materials. Rule the Securities and Exchange
platform. The Commission staff Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
303 requires an intermediary to make estimates that the costs associated with
publicly available on its platform the proposed rule change as described in
complying with Rules 300–304 are Items I and II below, which Items have
information that an issuer of estimated to be approximately a total
crowdfunding securities is required to been prepared by the Exchange. The
amount of $5,772,327. These costs are Exchange filed the proposal as a ‘‘non-
provide to potential investors, in a composed of a one-time burden for new
manner that reasonably permits a controversial’’ proposed rule change
intermediaries to comply with the rules pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of
person accessing the platform to save, and develop the platform and ongoing
download or otherwise store the the Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)
burdens associated with maintaining the thereunder.4 The Commission is
information, for a minimum of 21 days platform.
before any securities are sold in the publishing this notice to solicit
Written comments are invited on: (a)
offering, during which time the comments on the proposed rule change
Whether the proposed collection of
intermediary may accept investment from interested persons.
information is necessary for the proper
commitments. Rule 303 also requires performance of the functions of the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
intermediaries to comply with the Commission, including whether the Statement of the Terms of Substance of
requirements related to the maintenance information shall have practical utility; the Proposed Rule Change
and transmission of funds. An (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the
intermediary that is a registered broker estimates of the burden of the proposed ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘EDGX’’) proposes to
is required to comply with the collection of information; (c) ways to amend its provision related to its Risk
requirements of Rule 15c2–4 of the enhance the quality, utility, and clarity Monitor Mechanism. The text of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of the information to be collected; and proposed rule change is provided in
(‘‘Exchange Act’’) (Transmission or (d) ways to minimize the burden of the Exhibit 5.
Maintenance of Payments Received in collection of information on The text of the proposed rule change
Connection with Underwritings).2 An respondents, including through the use is also available on the Exchange’s
intermediary that is a registered funding of automated collection techniques or website (http://www.cboe.com/
portal must direct investors to transmit other forms of information technology. AboutCBOE/CBOELegal
the money or other consideration Consideration will be given to RegulatoryHome.aspx), at the
directly to a qualified third party that comments and suggestions submitted in Exchange’s Office of the Secretary, and
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
has agreed in writing to hold the funds writing within 60 days of this at the Commission’s Public Reference
for the benefit of, and to promptly publication. Room.
transmit or return the funds to, the An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
1 Currently, FINRA is the only registered national respond to, a collection of information 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
securities association. under the PRA unless it displays a 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
2 17 CFR 240.15c2–4. currently valid OMB control number. 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Dec 13, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_64624/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Notices 64385
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s User in the class until the counting that the definition of User is broader
Statement of the Purpose of, and program resets. than Member, as it specifically captures
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Sponsored Participants. The Exchange
Proposed Rule Change
Change believes ‘‘Member’’ is the more
The Exchange proposes to amend appropriate term to use with respect to
In its filing with the Commission, the Rule 21.16 to (i) adopt the Risk Monitor the Risk Monitor Mechanism as the rule
Exchange included statements Mechanism rule language used by its describes how the functionality works
concerning the purpose of and basis for affiliated exchange, Cboe C2 Exchange, with respect to Members, and not
the proposed rule change and discussed Inc. (‘‘C2’’) (ii) provide the ability for necessarily Sponsored Participants. The
any comments it received on the Users [sic] to configure limits applicable Exchange notes that it currently does
proposed rule change. The text of these to a group of EFIDs, and (iii) adopt a not have any Sponsored Participants,
statements may be examined at the new a new risk parameter. and to the extent it expects to have any
places specified in Item IV below. The in the future, it will revise the rule as
Exchange has prepared summaries, set Rule Harmonization
needed to incorporate how the Risk
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of First, the Exchange proposes to Monitor Mechanism would function
the most significant aspects of such harmonize its Risk Monitor Mechanism with respect to Sponsored Participants.
statements. Rule to that of its affiliated Exchange, The Exchange notes that ‘‘User’’ will be
C2. Particularly, C2 Rule 6.14 governs, referred to herein as ‘‘Member’’.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
among other things, its Risk Monitor
Statement of the Purpose of, and Next, in connection with adopting
Mechanism functionality. The Exchange
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule C2’s Risk Monitor Mechanism Rule
notes the functionality of the Risk
Change language, the Exchange notes that it will
Monitor Mechanism is substantively the
1. Purpose same as the Risk Monitor Mechanism on be eliminating the term ‘‘class’’ and
EDGX. Indeed, the Exchange notes that replacing it with ‘‘underlying’’.
The Exchange proposes to amend C2 just recently adopted Rule 6.14 in Specifically, the Exchange notes that the
Rule 21.16 which governs the Risk connection with the technology Risk Monitor Mechanism is configured
Monitor Mechanism. migration of C2 onto the options to count the risk parameters (referred to
platform of EDGX, and at such time as ‘‘Specified Engagement Triggers’’ in
Background
conformed its previous Risk Monitor current EDGX Rule 21.16) across
By way of background, the Risk Mechanism functionality to the underlying securities or indexes. As an
Monitor Mechanism providers Users 5 functionality that already existed on example, any option related to Apple
with the ability to manage their order EDGX.7 Although the functionality is (AAPL), would be considered to have
and execution risk. Particularly, Rule substantively the same, the rule the same underlying. Accordingly, if a
21.16 provides that the System will structure and terminology used in the corporate action resulted in AAPL1,
maintain a counting program for each EDGX and C2 rules differ. The Exchange AAPL and APPL1 one [sic] would be
User. A User may configure a single wishes to provide harmonization with considered to share the same underlying
counting program or multiple counting respect to this rule across the two symbol AAPL. Only a single symbol-
programs to govern its trading activity exchanges and accordingly proposes to level rule for underlying AAPL would
(i.e., on a per port basis). The counting conform EDGX Rule 21.16 to C2 Rule be configurable by the Risk Monitor
program counts executions, contract 6.14(c)(5) (i.e., delete current Rule 21.16 Mechanism. The Exchange notes that
volume and notional value, within a in its entirety with the exception of the term ‘‘underlying’’ is also utilized in
specified time period established by subparagraphs (d) and (e), which will be the Exchange’s technical specification
each User (‘‘specified time period’’) and relocated as described below, and adopt documents. The Exchange therefore
on an absolute basis for the trading day in whole the language from the relevant believes underlying is a more accurate
(‘‘absolute limits’’). The specified time provisions of C2 Rule 6.14). As noted term to use.
period will commence for an option above, the Exchange is also proposing The Exchange also intends to clarify
when a transaction occurs in any series substantive enhancements to its current and codify in the new rule language
in such option. The counting program functionality, which is described further what occurs in the event a Member does
will also count a User’s executions, below. The Exchange notes that C2 is not reactivate its ability to send quotes
contract volume and notional value simultaneously proposing the same Risk or orders after its configured risk
across all options which a User trades Monitor Mechanism enhancements and parameter limits have been reached.
(‘‘Firm Category’’). When the system those enhancements are included in the Currently, EDGX Rule 21.16 explains
determines that a User’s Specified new proposed conformed rule language. how a Member may reset its counting
Engagement Trigger (i.e., a volume First, the Exchange notes that periods. The proposed rule language
trigger, notional trigger, count trigger proposed Rule 21.16 will not use the includes a provision that provides that
and percentage trigger) has reached its term ‘‘User’’, and instead will use the if the Exchange cancels all of a
established limit, the Risk Monitor term ‘‘Member’’.8 The Exchange notes Member’s quotes and orders resting in
Mechanism cancels or rejects such the Book, and the Member does not
User’s orders or quotes 6 in all series of 7 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83214 reactivate its ability to send quotes or
the class and cancels or rejects any (May 11, 2018), 83 FR 22796 (May 16, 2018) (SR– orders, the block will be in effect only
additional orders or quotes from the C2–2018–005).
8 See Exchange Rule 1.5(n). The term ‘‘Member’’
for the trading day that the Member
reached its limits. The Exchange notes
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
shall mean any registered broker or dealer that has
5 See Exchange Rule 1.5(ee). The term ‘‘User’’
been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A this is not a substantive change, but
means any Member or Sponsored Participant who Member will have the status of a ‘‘member’’ of the rather is current practice, and that its
is authorized to obtain access to the System Exchange as that term is defined in Section 3(a)(3)
pursuant to Rule 11.3. As discussed below, the
affiliated Exchange, Cboe Options,
of the Act. Membership may be granted to a sole
Exchange is proposing to replace references to proprietor, partnership, corporation, limited
‘‘Users’’ in Rule 21.16 with ‘‘Member’’. liability company or other organization which is a Exchange. The Exchange notes that corresponding
6 See infra discussion accompanying footnotes 6– registered broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15 C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5) will use the term ‘‘TPH’’, as
7 [sic]. of the Act, and which has been approved by the ‘‘Member’’ is not a defined term used by C2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Dec 13, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_64624/page/2.svg)
![64386 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Notices
includes similar language in its rules.9 Clearing Corporation. A Member may Exchange doesn’t believe a reference to
The Exchange believes adding this obtain multiple EFIDs, which may be for orders and Market-Maker quote size in
provision to the rules provides further the same or different clearing numbers. particular under this provision is
transparency in its rules and reduces A Member may only identify for any of necessary.
potential confusion as to what would its EFIDs the clearing number of a As noted above, the Exchange is not
happen in the situation where a Member Clearing Member that is a Designated proposing to eliminate subparagraphs
fails to reset the counting program. Give Up or Guarantor of the Trading (d) or (e) of current EDGX Rule 21.16,
In connection with adopting C2’s Risk Permit Holder as set forth in Rule 21.12. but rather relocate these provisions. The
Monitor Mechanism Rule language, the A Member is able (in a form and manner Exchange proposes to first relocate the
Exchange also proposes to include determined by the Exchange) to contents of current subparagraph (d) to
language regarding a reset limit. designate which of its EFIDs may be new subparagraph (d)(vi) of proposed
Particularly, C2 Rule 6.14(c)(5)(d)(iii) used for each of its ports. If a Member EDGX Rule 21.16 and clarify that the
[sic] (which will be renumbered to C2 submits an order or quote through a port proposed provision governs ‘‘other
Rule 6.14(c)(5)(d)(iv) [sic]) provides that with an EFID not enabled for that port, resets’’ (i.e., resets that are not a result
the Exchange may restrict the number of the System cancels or rejects the order from a limit being reached).13
Member underlying, EFID and EFID or quote. The proposed rule change Particularly, the provision provides the
Group resets per second. The Exchange regarding EFIDs is not a substantive System will reset the counting period
believes adding this provision to its change but rather codifies current for absolute limits when a Member
rules provides transparency in the rules functionality and mirrors current C2 refreshes its risk limit thresholds. The
that the Exchange can impose such a Rule 6.8(b). The Exchange believes System will also reset the counting
restriction. The Exchange notes this is including a description of the use of program and commence a new specified
not a substantive change, but rather EFIDs in the Rules adds transparency to time period when (i) a previous
current practice. The Exchange believes the Rules. specified time period has expired and a
adding this provision to the rules The Exchange also notes that the new transaction occurs in any series of an
provides further transparency in its harmonized rule language incorporates underlying or (ii) a Member refreshes its
rules and reduces potential confusion as the use of the term ‘‘quote’’ and risk limit thresholds prior to the
to whether the Exchange may restrict ‘‘quotes’’.11 Currently, however, when expiration of the specified time period.
resets. describing what happens when a The Exchange proposes to keep this
In connection with the harmonization Specified Engagement Trigger is language as it provides transparency in
of C2 Rue [sic] 6.14, the Exchange notes reached, Rule 21.16(b)(i) only references the rules as to when other resets occur
that certain terminology is also what happens to a Member’s ‘‘orders’’. without limits being reached.. Lastly,
changing. For example, current EDGX The Exchange notes however, that the the Exchange notes that it proposes to
Rule 21.16, provides that the counting term ‘‘order’’ as is used in Rule 21.16 relocate current subparagraph (e) to new
program counts a Member’s executions, was intended to capture both orders and subparagraph (f). Particularly, new
contract volume and notional value quotes. Particularly, an ‘‘order’’ is subparagraph (f) provides that a Member
across all options which a Member defined as a firm commitment to buy or may also engage the Risk Monitor
trades (‘‘Firm Category’’). Going sell option contracts submitted to the Mechanism to cancel resting bids and
forward, this concept will be restated to System by a Member, and a ‘‘quote’’ is offers, as well as subsequent orders as
provide generally that the System will defined as a bid or offer entered by a set forth in EDGX Rule 22.11.14
count the risk parameters across all Market-Maker as a firm order that
underlyings of an EFID (‘‘EFID limit’’). EFID Groups
updates the Market-Maker’s previous
The Exchange reiterates the concept is bid or offer, if any.12 Indeed, the The Exchange next proposes to
the same, but the language conforms to Exchange notes that the proposed provide in the rules that in addition to
C2 rules and makes the rule easier to reference to ‘‘quote’’ and ‘‘quotes’’ is not underlying limits and EFID limits, the
read. a substantive change to how the Risk System will be able to count each of the
The Exchange also proposes to adopt Monitor Mechanism currently works or risk parameters across all underlyings
a definition of EFID as it proposes to will work going forward. Accordingly, for a group of EFIDs (‘‘EFID Group’’)
reference EFIDs in proposed EDGX Rule the Exchange believes incorporating the (‘‘EFID Group limit’’).15 Similar to when
21.16. Particularly, the Exchange term ‘‘quote’’ and ‘‘quotes’’ alleviates a underlying limit or EFID limit are
proposes to add Rule 21.1(k) to define confusion and better reflects how the reached, when a Member’s EFID Group
and describe EFIDs. Specifically, a Risk Monitor Mechanism operates (i.e., limit is reached, the Risk Monitor
Member may obtain one or more EFIDs both orders and quotes, as defined, can Mechanism will cancel or reject such
from the Exchange (in a form and be affected). Similarly, the Exchange Member’s orders or quotes in all
manner determined by the Exchange). believes the proposal to eliminate the underlying and cancel or reject any
The Exchange assigns an EFID to a references to a ‘‘User’s order size’’ and additional orders or quotes from any
Member, which the System uses to ‘‘Market-Maker’s quote size’’ with EFID within that EFID Group in all
identify the Member and clearing respect to how the percentage trigger is underlyings until the counting program
number for the execution of orders and calculated is not a substantive change.
quotes submitted to the System with The Exchange notes the trigger is
13 The Exchange notes that C2 is also proposing
that EFID.10 Each EFID corresponds to a to add this provision to its C2 Rule 6.14 in order
calculated the same on EDGX and C2, to provide further transparency in its rules
single Member and a single clearing and although proposed EDGX Rule governing the Risk Monitor Mechanism.
number of a Clearing Member with the
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
21.16(a)(iv) doesn’t reference orders and 14 The Exchange notes that C2 is proposing to also
Market-Maker quotes in particular, the add this provision to its C2 Rule 6.14 in order to
9 See Cboe Options Rule 8.18. provide further transparency in its rules governing
10 The Exchange notes that currently EDGX’s
calculation will not be changing and the the Risk Monitor Mechanism.
rules refer only to the term ‘‘MPID’’, which is a 15 An EFID may not belong to more than one EFID
11 See subparagraph (b), (c) and (d) of proposed
Member’s market participant identifier used for Group. The Exchange notes that the Members
equities trading. The Exchange does not utilize EDGX Rule 21.16. determine how many, if any, EFID Groups to
MPIDs on its options platform and uses EFIDS 12 See EDGX Rules 16.1(a)(42) and (51) and establish and determine which EFIDs belong to a
instead. EFIDS are generally equivalent to MPIDs. 21.1(c). particular EFID Group, if any.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Dec 13, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_64624/page/3.svg)
![64388 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2018 / Notices
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s A proposed rule change filed Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Statement on Burden on Competition pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the Washington, DC 20549–1090.
The Exchange does not believe that Act 27 normally does not become All submissions should refer to File
the proposed rule change will impose operative for 30 days after the date of its Number SR–CboeEDGX–2018–058. This
any burden on competition that is not filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 28 file number should be included on the
necessary or appropriate in furtherance permits the Commission to designate a subject line if email is used. To help the
of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the shorter time if such action is consistent Commission process and review your
Exchange believes that the proposed with the protection of investors and the comments more efficiently, please use
changes with respect to its Risk Monitor public interest. The Exchange has asked only one method. The Commission will
Mechanism help promote fair and the Commission to waive the 30-day post all comments on the Commission’s
orderly markets and provide clarity and operative delay to provide Members internet website (http://www.sec.gov/
transparency the Rule. For example, the with additional tools and greater rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
proposed rule change adds an flexibility for managing their potential submission, all subsequent
additional risk control parameter and risk as soon as possible. Accordingly, amendments, all written statements
the Commission believes that waiver of with respect to the proposed rule
flexibility to help further prevent
the 30-day operative delay is consistent change that are filed with the
potentially erroneous executions, which
with the protection of investors and the Commission, and all written
benefits all market participants. The
public interest. Therefore, the communications relating to the
proposed changes apply uniformly to all
Commission hereby waives the proposed rule change between the
Members and the Exchange notes that
operative delay and designates the Commission and any person, other than
the proposed changes apply to all
proposal as operative upon filing.29 those that may be withheld from the
quotes and orders in the same manner. At any time within 60 days of the
Additionally, the Exchange does not public in accordance with the
filing of the proposed rule change, the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
believe that the proposed rule change Commission summarily may
will impose any burden on intermarket available for website viewing and
temporarily suspend such rule change if printing in the Commission’s Public
competition that is not necessary or it appears to the Commission that such
appropriate in furtherance of the Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
action is necessary or appropriate in the Washington, DC 20549 on official
purposes of the Act because the public interest, for the protection of
proposed enhancements apply only to business days between the hours of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
trading on the Exchange. Additionally, 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
the purposes of the Act. If the
the Exchange notes that it is voluntary filing also will be available for
Commission takes such action, the
for the Members to determine whether inspection and copying at the principal
Commission shall institute proceedings
to make use of the new enhancements office of the Exchange. All comments
to determine whether the proposed rule
of the Risk Monitor Mechanism. To the received will be posted without change.
change should be approved or
extent that the proposed changes may Persons submitting comments are
disapproved.
make the Exchange a more attractive cautioned that we do not redact or edit
trading venue for market participants on IV. Solicitation of Comments personal identifying information from
other exchanges, such market Interested persons are invited to comment submissions. You should
participants may elect to become submit written data, views, and submit only information that you wish
Exchange market participants. arguments concerning the foregoing, to make available publicly. All
including whether the proposed rule submissions should refer to File
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Number SR–CboeEDGX–2018–058 and
change is consistent with the Act.
Statement on Comments on the should be submitted on or before
Comments may be submitted by any of
Proposed Rule Change Received From January 4, 2019.
the following methods:
Members, Participants, or Others
For the Commission, by the Division of
The Exchange neither solicited nor Electronic Comments
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
received comments on the proposed • Use the Commission’s internet authority.30
rule change. comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Eduardo A. Aleman,
rules/sro.shtml); or Deputy Secretary.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the • Send an email to rule-comments@
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for [FR Doc. 2018–27086 Filed 12–13–18; 8:45 am]
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
Commission Action CboeEDGX–2018–058 on the subject
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Because the foregoing proposed rule line.
change does not: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
A. significantly affect the protection Paper Comments
COMMISSION
of investors or the public interest; • Send paper comments in triplicate
B. impose any significant burden on to Secretary, Securities and Exchange [SEC File No. 270–359, OMB Control No.
competition; and 3235–0410]
C. become operative for 30 days from give the Commission written notice of its intent to
the date on which it was filed, or such file the proposed rule change, along with a brief Submission for OMB Review;
description and text of the proposed rule change, Comment Request
shorter time as the Commission may at least five business days prior to the date of filing
designate, it has become effective of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time Upon Written Request Copies Available
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the as designated by the Commission. The Exchange From: Securities and Exchange
Act 24 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 25 has satisfied this requirement.
27 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
thereunder.26 28 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
24 15
29 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 20549–2736.
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). operative delay, the Commission also has
25 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). considered the proposed rule’s impact on
Extension:
26 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 30 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Dec 13, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM 14DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_64624/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-12-14 03:50:40
Document Modified: 2018-12-14 03:50:40
| 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 | 83 FR 64384 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR