[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39395-39399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15664]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-69856; File No. SR-EDGA-2013-16]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Offer and
Establish Fees for a New Exchange Service, EdgeRisk Gateways
June 25, 2013.
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 14, 2013, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as
it pertains to the fees for EdgeRisk Gateway\SM\ (the ``Service'') as
``establishing or charging a due, fee or other charge'' under Section
19b(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the
Commission. Additionally, the Exchange has designated the proposed rule
change as it pertains to the EdgeRisk Gateway service as constituting a
``non-controversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\5\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\6\ which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. 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).
\4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
\5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to offer and establish fees for the Service,
a risk management tool available to Members \7\ and non-Members \8\ of
the Exchange. All of the changes described herein are applicable to
EDGA Members. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Internet Web site at www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ As defined in Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
\8\ Specifically, service bureaus that act as a conduit for
orders entered by Members that are their customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
Proposed Addition of EdgeRisk Gateway Service
The Exchange currently offers logical ports through which Members
and non-Members enter orders in the Exchange's System,\9\ receive drop
copies of orders and execution messages, and receive transmission of
depth of book data (``Logical Ports''). Each Logical Port is assigned
an access gateway that performs order validations and manages the cycle
of a submitted order's flow of information to the System and back to
the Member. The access gateway performs functions such as message
validation, acknowledgement messaging, risk checks, matching engine
routing and execution messaging. The Exchange currently assigns
Members' and non-Members' Logical Ports to the access gateways through
a standard method that accounts for the relative message traffic
expected over the Logical Port as well as redundancy requirements,
where an access gateway contains assigned Logical Ports for a number of
firms. The Exchange assigns Member and non-Member sessions to multiple
access gateways so that the failure of one gateway may not result in
the loss of access. On an ongoing basis, the Exchange carefully
monitors incoming and outgoing traffic on all access gateways to ensure
that available capacity is adequate to support Exchange message traffic
and installs additional access gateways as needed to ensure consistent
capacity levels are maintained. Although the Exchange monitors traffic
to ensure available capacity, it cannot completely address
[[Page 39396]]
the effect of a trading disruption caused by any Member or Non-Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ As defined in Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to assist Members' and non-Members' efforts to mitigate
the impact of trading disruptions, the Exchange proposes to offer
EdgeRisk Gateway as a new, optional fee-based service that provides
Members and non-Members the option to obtain dedicated primary and
backup access gateways in addition to, or in place of, a shared access
gateway. Such Members and non-Members that choose to obtain the Service
(each, a ``Subscriber'', and collectively ``Subscribers'') would
benefit from enhanced risk mitigation, as it would reduce the impact of
another firm's message peaks or programming mistakes on the
Subscriber's trading experience. The Exchange notes that the Commission
recently expressed concern regarding the potential ripple effects
caused by systems disruptions and message traffic-related issues in
particular.\10\ The Service would mitigate risks associated with
disruptions caused by excessive message traffic or programming mistakes
because the Subscriber's order flow on its dedicated access gateways
would be insulated from such external disruptions. Furthermore, by
reducing the impact that could arise from another firm, the Service
would provide improved performance, as the performance and capacity of
the access gateways would be determined solely by the Subscriber's
order behavior.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69077, 78 FR
18084, 18138 (March 25, 2013) (File No. S7-01-13) (proposing
Regulation SCI). In particular, the Commission noted that systems
disruptions ``could result in confusion about whether orders are
handled correctly or whether the systems issue . . . could have
caused capacity issues elsewhere.'' Id. at 18138. The Commission
went on to warn that, ``if an e-market-maker handling 20 percent of
message traffic experiences a systems issue, the order flow could be
diverted elsewhere, including to entities that are unable to handle
the increase in message traffic, resulting in a disruption to that
entity's systems as well. Similarly, a broker-dealer accidentally
could run a test during live trading and flood markets with message
traffic such that those markets hit their capacity limits, resulting
in a disruption.'' Id. at 18138, n. 336.
\11\ The Exchange notes that the capacity of any system is
finite and, as such, the risk associated with access gateway
capacity cannot be eliminated entirely, as infrastructure
components, the Subscriber's infrastructure, or the Subscriber's own
trading patterns can affect the Subscriber's overall trading
experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Service would include dedicated access to both a primary and a
backup access gateway to afford Subscribers access redundancy.
Accordingly, the backup access gateway would function as a safety
measure, allowing Subscribers to allocate their sessions across both
access gateways, protecting Subscribers from a loss of access due to a
server malfunction. Additionally, Subscribers may also request some of
their Logical Ports continue to be assigned to shared access gateways
for further risk mitigation.
The Exchange notes that both gateway options (shared and dedicated)
would offer full backup to the extent that a Member or non-Member's
sessions are spread across multiple gateways. The Exchange further
notes that it would, on an ongoing basis, continue to carefully monitor
incoming and outgoing message traffic across all access gateways
(shared and dedicated) so that available capacity is adequate to
support Exchange message traffic. Additionally, the Exchange would
continue to install additional shared access gateways as needed so that
consistent capacity levels are maintained.
Both shared and dedicated gateway options consist of identical
hardware and software with identical capacity and capabilities,
offering equivalent latency under the same loads. To the extent that
the load on a Subscriber's dedicated gateway is less than the load on a
shared gateway, a Subscriber normally would expect reduced latencies in
sending orders to the Exchange through its dedicated gateway. In this
regard, the Service is similar to other types of services provided by
self-regulatory organizations that offer higher levels of service for a
higher fee.\12\ Other than the possible reduced latencies due to
reduced gateway load, the Exchange believes that there are no material
differences in terms of access to the Exchange between Subscribers and
Members and non-Members that choose not to subscribe to the Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ For example, many exchanges allow their member and non-
member organizations the option to pay a higher price in exchange
for a more stable and/or efficient connection, such as that obtained
through co-location services or payment for logical ports. See,
e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21,
2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56) (approving
fees charged by NYSE for its co-location services); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62397 (June 28, 2010) 75 FR 38860 (July 6,
2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-019) (approving fees charged by NASDAQ for its
co-location services); see also NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, Price
List--Trading Connectivity, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2 (listing fees for use of logical
ports); BATS Exchange, Inc. & BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Exchange Fee
Schedule, http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/BATS-Exchanges_Fee_Schedules.pdf (listing fees for logical
ports); EDGX Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange Fee Schedule, http://www.directedge.com/Membership/FeeSchedule/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx
(listing fees for logical ports).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Fees Applicable to the Service
The Exchange proposes to offer the Service to Members and non-
Members for a monthly charge of $5,000. The Exchange is offering this
new pricing model in order to keep pace with changes in the industry
and evolving Member needs as new technologies emerge and products
continue to develop and change. As previously noted, purchase and use
of the Service would be entirely optional. To assure service quality as
discussed above, access gateways would be provisioned as a pair, in
which a second access gateway would be included for use as a backup,
allowing Subscribers to allocate their sessions across both access
gateways. Therefore, a Subscriber would receive a pair of access
gateways for a fee of $5,000 per month.
The Exchange notes that the Service and accompanying fees would be
subject to significant competitive forces because, as discussed in
detail below, the Service is similar to that currently provided by the
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'').\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 68324 (November 30,
2012), 77 FR 72901 (December 6, 2012) (SR-ISE-2012-89) (allowing
members to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways and adopting a fee
for the use of such gateways). See also, ISE, Schedule of Fees,
http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 per shared gateway per month and $2000
per dedicated gateway pair per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Date
The Exchange intends to implement the proposed rule change upon the
operative date of this filing and will announce its availability via an
information circular to be posted on the Exchange's Web site.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act,\14\ and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange. The
bases under the Act for the proposed rule change are: (i) The
requirement under Section 6(b)(4) \15\ that the rules of an exchange be
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities; and (ii) the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \16\ that
the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and
[[Page 39397]]
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
and not to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \17\ because it would provide for an
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges. In
particular, the proposed fee is equitable because the fee applies only
to those Members and non-Members that have purchased Logical Ports and
elected to become Subscribers. The Exchange notes that the Service
would be a fee-based service because it would be prohibitively
expensive for the Exchange to establish dedicated access gateways for
every Exchange participant. As discussed above, the Service would
provide Subscribers with improved risk mitigation at an increased cost.
Although non-Subscribers may indirectly benefit from the Service to the
extent that the Service would isolate shared gateways from potential
message disruptions as a result of Subscribers' trading patterns on the
dedicated gateways, the bulk of the benefits of the Service would
accrue only to Subscribers. It is therefore equitable that only
Subscribers be allocated a fee for the Service and that Members and
non-Members that choose to utilize only shared gateways continue to be
assessed no fee. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change constitutes an equitable allocation of fees because all
similarly situated Members and non-Members would be charged the same
amount (all shared gateways are free whereas all dedicated gateways
would be $5,000 per month), based on their preference for either a
shared gateway or a dedicated gateway.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed fee for the Service is
reasonable because the Service would be optional, available to all
Members and non-Members who have Logical Ports and that the fees
charged for the Service would be the same for all Subscribers. In
addition, the proposed fee would be reasonable because the fee is a
reflection of the cost of necessary hardware, software and
infrastructure costs, maintenance fees and staff support costs. The
revenue generated by the Service would pay for the development,
marketing, technical infrastructure and operating costs of the Service.
Profits generated above these costs would help offset the costs that
the Exchange incurs in operating and regulating a highly efficient and
reliable platform for the trading of U.S. equities. This increased
revenue stream would allow the Exchange to offer the Service at a
reasonable rate, consistent with the similar service currently provided
by the ISE and discussed in more detail below.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 68324 (November 30,
2012), 77 FR 72901 (December 6, 2012) (SR-ISE-2012-89) (allowing
members to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways and adopting a fee
for the use of such gateways). See also, ISE, Schedule of Fees,
http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 per shared gateway per month and $2000
per dedicated gateway pair per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees. As discussed
above, the Service would be optional. If Members and/or non-Members
deem the proposed fee for the Service to be unreasonable or to outweigh
the benefits of the Service, such Members and/or non-Members would be
under no obligation to subscribe to or continue to subscribe to the
Service. These market forces would act as a restraint on excessively
high fees because if the market judged that the Service was overpriced,
the resulting lack of interest would render the Service irrelevant.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that its fee for the Service is
reasonable because it is within industry norms, as it is comparable to
that assessed by ISE for its dedicated gateway service. Currently, ISE
charges its members a monthly fee of $250 per shared gateway and
provides the option to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways for a fee
of $2,000 per month.\19\ The Exchange believes that its pricing ($5,000
per dedicated gateway pair per month) is competitive with that offered
by ISE because, although the cost of a dedicated gateway pair would be
higher, the Exchange currently allows dedicated gateway Subscribers as
well as its other Members and non-Members to utilize multiple shared
gateways at no charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See ISE, Schedule of Fees, http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250
per shared gateway per month and $2000 per dedicated gateway pair
per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee is reasonable
because payment for the Service on a monthly basis would provide
flexibility and administrative benefits. Subscribers that choose to
cancel the Service within the thirty (30) days' notice would have no
recurring obligation. By offering payment for the Service on a month-
to-month basis, the Exchange assumes the risk of termination by
Subscribers prior to such time that it is able to recoup the costs of
hardware, software, and operational resources necessary to provide the
Service.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also
consistent with the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ which
requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules are not
designed to unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers
or dealers and are 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.
The Exchange believes that this proposal would not unfairly
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because
purchase of the Service would not be a prerequisite for participation
on the Exchange. Only those Members and non-Members that deem the
Service to be of sufficient overall value and usefulness would purchase
it. The fees applicable to the Service would apply uniformly to all
Subscribers. While Members and non-Members may opt for a dedicated
gateway, those that do not will continue to be able to access the
Exchange via a shared gateway. The Exchange further notes that it
would, on an ongoing basis, continue to carefully monitor incoming and
outgoing message traffic across all access gateways (shared and
dedicated) so that available capacity is adequate to support Exchange
message traffic. Additionally, the Exchange would continue to install
additional shared access gateways as needed so that consistent capacity
levels are maintained. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that both shared
and dedicated gateway options consist of identical hardware and
software with identical capacity and capabilities, offering equivalent
latency under the same loads. To the extent that the load on a
Subscriber's dedicated gateway is less than the load on a shared
gateway, a Subscriber normally would expect reduced latencies in
sending orders to the Exchange through its dedicated gateway. In this
regard, the Service is similar to other types of services
[[Page 39398]]
provided by self-regulatory organizations that offer higher levels of
service for a higher fee.\21\ Other than the reduced latencies due to
reduced gateway load, the Exchange believes that there are no material
differences in terms of access to the Exchange between Subscribers and
Members and non-Members that choose not to subscribe to the Service.
Thus, access to the Exchange would continue to be offered on fair and
non-discriminatory terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\21\ For example, many exchanges allow their member and non-
member organizations the option to pay a higher price in exchange
for a more stable and/or efficient connection, such as that obtained
through co-location services or payment for logical ports. See,
e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21,
2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56) (approving
fees charged by NYSE for its co-location services); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62397 (June 28, 2010) 75 FR 38860 (July 6,
2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-019) (approving fees charged by NASDAQ for its
co-location services); see also NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, Price
List--Trading Connectivity, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2 (listing fees for use of logical
ports); BATS Exchange, Inc. & BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Exchange Fee
Schedule, http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/BATS-Exchanges_Fee_Schedules.pdf (listing fees for logical
ports); EDGX Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange Fee Schedule, http://www.directedge.com/Membership/FeeSchedule/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx
(listing fees for logical ports).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In providing access to a pair of access gateways, the Service is
also designed to allow Subscribers to mitigate risks associated with
potentially fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices that may
adversely affect the Subscriber's trading experience. If, for example,
a firm attempted to manipulate the submission of order flow into shared
access gateways by directly or indirectly causing a surge in message
traffic to be sent to the Exchange, Subscribers would, to an extent,
mitigate the risks associated with such a manipulative tactic, as they
would be insulated from all such external order flow.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
The Exchange believes that the Service would neither increase nor
decrease intramarket competition because the Service is available to
all Members and non-Members on a uniform and voluntary basis. As the
Exchange currently supports access through shared access gateways and
strives to ensure that all access gateways maintain a consistent level
of capacity, the use of the Service by a Member or non-Member would be
driven in part by their relative tolerance for the risks associated
with trading disruptions.
The Exchange notes that there is significant competition among
market centers for higher quality services at a premium, including, but
not limited to, services related to connectivity. By introducing the
proposed Service, the Exchange believes that it would be providing an
additional service similar to that currently offered by ISE.\22\ As
such, the Service would increase competition by providing Members with
additional options related to connectivity. The Exchange therefore
believes that the Service would increase intermarket competition
because it may attract order flow from market participants interested
in the benefits offered by the Service that might otherwise send their
order flow to competing venues. Alternatively, if demand for the
Service does not meet expectations, the Service would neither increase
nor decrease intermarket competition because the Service would fail to
persuade market participants to send their order flow to the Exchange
rather than to competing venues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See ISE, Schedule of Fees, http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250
per shared gateway per month and $2000 per dedicated gateway pair
per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from its Members or other interested
parties.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The portion of the foregoing proposed rule change pertain to fees
for the EdgeRisk Gateway has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \23\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, because the portion of the foregoing proposed rule
change pertaining to the establishment of the EdgeRisk Gateway service
does not: (1) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (2) impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act\25\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has met this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the
30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative
immediately upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest so that Members and non-Members may immediately
obtain the EdgeRisk Gateway to potentially assist them in mitigating
risks associated with excess message traffic and programmatic
mistakes.\27\ Accordingly, the Commission hereby grants the Exchange's
request and designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File
[[Page 39399]]
Number SR-EDGA-2013-16 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2013-16. 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-EDGA-2013-16 and should be
submitted on or before July 22, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15664 Filed 6-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P