Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Mercury LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Amend ISE Mercury Rule 723 and To Make Pilot Program Permanent, 91982-91987 [2016-30392]
Download as PDF
91982
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.27
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–30391 Filed 12–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–2736.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Extension:
Rule 104, SEC File No. 270–411, OMB
Control No. 3235–0465.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments
on the existing collection of information
provided for in Rule 104 of Regulation
M (17 CFR 242.104), under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission
plans to submit this existing collection
of information to the Office of
Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for
extension and approval.
Rule 104—Stabilizing and Other
Activities in Connection with an
Offering—permits stabilizing by a
distribution participant during a
distribution so long as the distribution
participant discloses information to the
market and investors. This rule requires
disclosure in offering materials of the
potential stabilizing transactions and
that the distribution participant inform
the market when a stabilizing bid is
made. It also requires the distribution
participants (i.e., the syndicate manager)
to maintain information regarding
syndicate covering transactions and
penalty bids and disclose such
information to the Self-Regulatory
Organization (SRO).
There are approximately 848
respondents per year that require an
aggregate total of 170 hours to comply
with this rule. Each respondent makes
an estimated 1 annual response. Each
response takes approximately 0.20
hours (12 minutes) to complete. Thus,
the total compliance burden per year is
170 hours. The total estimated internal
labor cost of compliance for the
respondents is approximately
$11,050.00 per year, resulting in an
estimated cost of compliance for each
respondent per response of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
approximately $13.03 (i.e., $11,050/848
responses).
Written comments are invited on: (a)
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s
estimates of the burden of the proposed
collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this
publication.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
under the PRA unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
Please direct your written comments
to: Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, c/o Remi PavlikSimon, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549 or send an email to:
PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: December 6, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–30373 Filed 12–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Upon Written Request Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–2736.
Extension:
Form 10–K, SEC File No. 270–48, OMB
Control No. 3235–0063.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget this
request for extension of the previously
approved collection of information
discussed below.
Form 10–K (17 CFR 249.310) is filed
by issuers of securities to satisfy their
annual reporting obligations under to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: December 6, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–30376 Filed 12–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
PO 00000
(‘‘Exchange Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)). The information provided by
Form 10–K is intended to ensure the
adequacy of information available to
investors and securities markets about
an issuer. Form 10–K takes
approximately 2003.7884 hours per
response to prepare and is filed by
approximately 8,137 respondents. We
estimate that 75% of the approximately
2003.7884 hours per response
(1,502.8413 hours) is prepared by the
company for an annual reporting burden
of 12,228,620 hours (1,502.8413 hours
per response × 8,137 responses).
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid
control number.
The public may view the background
documentation for this information
collection at the following Web site,
www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be
directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the
Securities and Exchange Commission,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Room 10102, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503,
or by sending an email to: Shagufta_
Ahmed@omb.eop.gov; and (ii) Pamela
Dyson, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Securities and Exchange
Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549
or send an email to: PRA_Mailbox@
sec.gov. Comments must be submitted to
OMB within 30 days of this notice.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–79539; File No. SR–
ISEMercury–2016–25]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE
Mercury LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change to Amend ISE
Mercury Rule 723 and To Make Pilot
Program Permanent
December 13, 2016
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on December
12, 2016, ISE Mercury, LLC (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘ISE Mercury’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
1 15
2 17
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
19DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
addition, ISE Mercury proposes to
modify the requirements for PIM
auctions involving less than 50
contracts where the National Best Bid
and Offer (‘‘NBBO’’) is only $0.01 wide.
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested
persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend ISE
Mercury Rule 723, concerning its Price
Improvement Mechanism (‘‘PIM’’).
Certain aspects of PIM are currently
operating on a pilot basis (‘‘Pilot’’),
which is set to expire on January 18,
2017.3 The Pilot concerns (i) the
termination of the exposure period by
unrelated orders; and (ii) no minimum
size requirement of orders eligible for
PIM. ISE Mercury seeks to make the
Pilot permanent, and also proposes to
change the requirements for providing
price improvement for Agency Orders of
less than 50 option contracts.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s Web site
at https://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of this proposed rule
change is to make permanent certain
pilots within Rule 723, relating to PIM.
Paragraph .03 of the Supplementary
Material to Rule 723 provides that there
is no minimum size requirement for
orders to be eligible for PIM. Paragraph
.05 concerns the termination of the
exposure period by unrelated orders. In
3 See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78342
(July 15, 2016), 81 FR 47481 (July 21, 2016) (SR–
ISEMercury–2016–13).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
Background
The Exchange adopted PIM as part of
its application to be registered as a
national securities exchange.4 In
approving PIM, the Commission noted
that it was largely based on a similar
functionality offered by the
International Securities Exchange, LLC
(‘‘ISE’’).5 The PIM is a process that
allows Electronic Access Members
(‘‘EAM’’) to provide price improvement
opportunities for a transaction wherein
the Member seeks to execute an agency
order as principal or execute an agency
order against a solicited order (a
‘‘Crossing Transaction’’). A Crossing
Transaction is comprised of the order
the EAM represents as agent (the
‘‘Agency Order’’) and a counter-side
order for the full size of the Agency
Order (the ‘‘Counter-Side Order’’). The
Counter-Side Order may represent
interest for the Member’s own account,
or interest the Member has solicited
from one or more other parties, or a
combination of both.
Rule 723 sets forth the criteria
pursuant to which the PIM is initiated.
Specifically, a Crossing Transaction
must be entered only at a price that is
equal to or better than the national best
bid or offer (‘‘NBBO’’) and better than
the limit order or quote on the Exchange
order book on the same side of the
Agency Order. The Crossing Transaction
may be priced in one-cent increments.
The Crossing Transaction may not be
canceled, but the price of the CounterSide Order may be improved during the
exposure period.
Rule 723 also sets forth requirements
relating to the exposure of orders in PIM
and the termination of the exposure
period. Upon entry of a Crossing
Transaction into the Price Improvement
Mechanism, a broadcast message that
includes the series, price and size of the
Agency Order, and whether it is to buy
or sell, will be sent to all Members. This
broadcast message will not be included
in the ISE Mercury disseminated best
bid or offer and will not be
disseminated through OPRA. Members
will be given 500 milliseconds to
indicate the size and price at which they
want to participate in the execution of
the Agency Order (‘‘Improvement
Orders’’). Improvement Orders may be
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76998
(January 29, 2016), 81 FR 6066 (February 4, 2016)
(File No. 10–221) (‘‘Exchange Approval Order’’).
5 See Exchange Approval Order, supra note 4.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
91983
entered by all Members for their own
account or for the account of a Public
Customer in one-cent increments at the
same price as the Crossing Transaction
or at an improved price for the Agency
Order, and for any size up to the size of
the Agency Order. During the exposure
period, Improvement Orders may not be
canceled, but may be modified to (1)
increase the size at the same price, or (2)
improve the price of the Improvement
Order for any size up to the size of the
Agency Order. During the exposure
period, responses (including the
Counter Side Order, Improvement
Orders, and any changes to either)
submitted by Members shall not be
visible to other auction participants.
The exposure period will automatically
terminate (i) at the end of the 500
millisecond period, (ii) upon the receipt
of a market or marketable limit order on
the Exchange in the same series, or (iii)
upon the receipt of a nonmarketable
limit order in the same series on the
same side of the market as the Agency
Order that would cause the price of the
Crossing Transaction to be outside of
the best bid or offer on the Exchange.
Rule 723 also describes how orders
will be executed at the end of the
exposure period. Specifically, at the end
of the exposure period, the Agency
Order will be executed in full at the best
prices available, taking into
consideration orders and quotes in the
Exchange market, Improvement Orders,
and the Counter-Side Order. The
Agency Order will receive executions at
multiple price levels if there is
insufficient size to execute the entire
order at the best price. At a given price,
Priority Customer interest is executed in
full before Professional Orders and any
other interest of Members (i.e.,
proprietary interest from Electronic
Access Members and Exchange market
makers).
After Priority Customer interest at a
given price, Professional Orders and
Members’ interest will participate in the
execution of the Agency Order based
upon the percentage of the total number
of contracts available at the price that is
represented by the size of the Members’
interest.
In the case where the Counter-Side
Order is at the same price as Members’
interest (after Priority Customer interest
at a given price), the Counter-Side order
will be allocated the greater of one (1)
contract or forty percent (40%) of the
initial size of the Agency Order before
other Member interest is executed.
Upon entry of Counter-Side orders,
Members can elect to automatically
match the price and size of orders,
quotes and responses received during
the exposure period up to a specified
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
91984
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
limit price or without specifying a limit
price. In this case, the Counter-Side
order will be allocated its full size at
each price point, or at each price point
within its limit price if a limit is
specified, until a price point is reached
where the balance of the order can be
fully executed. At such price point, the
Counter-Side order shall be allocated
the greater of one contract or forty
percent (40%) of the original size of the
Agency Order, but only after Priority
Customer Orders at such price point are
executed in full. Thereafter, all other
orders, Responses, and quotes at the
price point will participate in the
execution of the Agency Order based
upon the percentage of the total number
of contracts available at the price that is
represented by the size of the order,
Response or quote. An election to
automatically match better prices
cannot be cancelled or altered during
the exposure period.
When a market order or marketable
limit order on the opposite side of the
market from the Agency Order ends the
exposure period, it will participate in
the execution of the Agency Order at the
price that is mid-way between the best
counter-side interest and the NBBO, so
that both the market or marketable limit
order and the Agency Order receive
price improvement. Transactions will be
rounded, when necessary, to the $.01
increment that favors the Agency Order.
The Pilot
As described above, two components
of PIM are currently operating on a pilot
basis: (i) The termination of the
exposure period by unrelated orders;
and (ii) no minimum size requirement
of orders entered into PIM. The pilot has
been extended until January 18, 2017.6
As described in greater detail below,
during the pilot period the Exchange
has been required to submit, and has
been submitting, certain data
periodically as required by the
Commission, to provide supporting
evidence that, among other things, there
is meaningful competition for all size
orders within the PIM, that there is
significant price improvement for all
orders executed through the PIM, and
that there is an active and liquid market
functioning on the Exchange both
within PIM and outside of the Auction
mechanism. The Exchange has also
analyzed the impact of certain aspects of
the Pilot; for example, situation in
which PIM is terminated prematurely by
an unrelated order.
The Exchange now seeks to have the
Pilot approved on a permanent basis. In
addition, the Exchange proposes to
6 See
note 3 above.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
modify the scope of PIM so that, with
respect to PIM orders for less than 50
option contracts, members will be
required to receive price improvement
of at least one minimum price
improvement increment over the NBBO
if the NBBO is only $0.01 wide. For
orders of 50 contracts or more, or if the
difference in the NBBO is greater than
$0.01, the requirements for price
improvement remain the same.
Price Improvement for Orders Under 50
Contracts
Currently, the PIM may be initiated if
all of the following conditions are met.
A Crossing Transaction must be entered
only at a price that is equal to or better
than the NBBO and better than the limit
order or quote on the Exchange order
book on the same side of the Agency
Order. The Crossing Transaction may be
priced in one-cent increments. The
Crossing Transaction may not be
canceled, but the price of the CounterSide Order may be improved during the
exposure period.
ISE Mercury proposes to amend Rule
723(b) to require Electronic Access
Members to provide at least $0.01 price
improvement for an Agency Order if
that order is for less than 50 contracts
and if the difference between the NBBO
is $0.01. For the period beginning
January 19, 2017 until a date specified
by the Exchange in a Regulatory
Information Circular, which date shall
be no later than September 15, 2017, ISE
Mercury will adopt a member conduct
standard to implement this
requirement.7 Under this provision, the
Exchange is proposing to amend the
Auction Eligibility Requirements to
require that, if the Agency Order is for
less than 50 option contracts, and if the
difference between the NBBO is $0.01,
an Electronic Access Member shall not
enter a Crossing Transaction unless
such Crossing Transaction is entered at
a price that is one minimum price
improvement increment better than the
NBBO on the opposite side of the
market from the Agency Order and
better than any limit order on the limit
order book on the same side of the
market as the Agency Order. This
7 The Exchange notes that its indirect parent
company, U.S. Exchange Holdings, Inc. has been
acquired by Nasdaq, Inc. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 78119 (June 21, 2016), 81 FR 41611
(June 27, 2016) (SR–ISEMercury–2016–10).
Pursuant to this acquisition, ISE Mercury platforms
are migrating to Nasdaq platforms, including the
platform that operates PIM. ISE Mercury intends to
retain the proposed member conduct standard
requiring price improvement for options orders of
under 50 contracts where the difference between
the NBBO is $0.01 until the ISE Mercury platforms
and the corresponding symbols are migrated to the
platforms operated by Nasdaq, Inc.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requirement will apply regardless of
whether the Agency Order is for the
account of a public customer, or where
the Agency Order is for the account of
a broker dealer or any other person or
entity that is not a Public Customer.
Failure to provide such price
improvement will subject Members to
the fines set forth in Rule 1614(d)(4) of
the International Securities Exchange,
LLC (‘‘ISE’’).8
The Exchange will conduct electronic
surveillance of PIM to ensure that
members comply with the proposed
price improvement requirements for
option orders of less than 50 contracts.
Specifically, using an electronic
surveillance system that produces alerts
of potentially unlawful PIM orders, the
Exchange will perform a frequent
review of member firm activity to
identify instances of apparent
violations. Upon discovery of an
apparent violation, the Exchange will
attempt to contact the appropriate
member firm to communicate the
specifics of the apparent violation with
the intent to assist the member firm in
preventing submission of subsequent
problematic orders. The Exchange will
review the alerts monthly and
determine the applicability of the MRVP
and appropriate penalty. The Exchange
is not limited to the application of the
MRVP, and may at its discretion, choose
to escalate a matter for processing
through the Exchange’s disciplinary
program.
The Exchange is also proposing a
systems-based mechanism to implement
this price improvement requirement,
which shall be effective following the
migration of a symbol to INET, the
platform operated by Nasdaq, Inc. that
will also operate the PIM. Under this
provision, if the Agency Order is for less
than 50 option contracts, and if the
difference between the National Best
Bid and National Best Offer (‘‘NBBO’’)
is $0.01, the Crossing Transaction must
8 In a separate proposed rule change, ISE is
proposing to adopt similar price improvement
requirements for orders of less than 50 contracts for
its PIM. As part of that rule change, ISE is proposing
to amend ISE Rule 1614 (Imposition of Fines for
Minor Rule Violations) to add Rule 1614(d)(4),
which will provide that, beginning January 19,
2017, any Member who enters an order into PIM for
less than 50 contracts, while the National Best Bid
or Offer spread is $0.01, must provide price
improvement of at least one minimum price
improvement increment better than the NBBO on
the opposite side of the market from the Agency
Order, which increment may not be smaller than
$0.01. Failure to provide such price improvement
will result in members being subject to the
following fines: $500 for the second offense, $1,000
for the third offense, and $2,500 for the fourth
offense. Subsequent offenses will subject the
member to formal disciplinary action. ISE will
review violations on a monthly cycle to assess these
violations.
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
be entered at one minimum price
improvement increment better than the
NBBO on the opposite side of the
market from the Agency Order and
better than the limit order or quote on
the ISE order book on the same side of
the Agency Order.
The Exchange believes that these
changes to PIM may provide additional
opportunities for Agency Orders of
under 50 option contracts to receive
price improvement over the NBBO
where the difference in the NBBO is
$0.01 and therefore encourage the
increased submission of orders of under
50 option contracts. The Exchange notes
that the statistics for the current pilot,
which include, among other things,
price improvement for orders of less
than 50 option contracts under the
current auction eligibility requirements,
show relatively small amounts of price
improvement for such orders. ISE
Mercury believes that the proposed
requirements will therefore increase the
price improvement that orders of under
50 option contracts may receive in PIM.
The Exchange will retain the current
requirements for auction eligibility
where the Agency Order is for 50 option
contracts or more, or if the difference
between the NBBO is greater than $0.01.
Accordingly, the Exchange is amending
the Auction Eligibility Requirements to
state that, if the PIM Order is for 50
option contracts or more or if the
difference between the NBBO is greater
than $0.01, the Crossing Transaction
must be entered only at a price that is
equal to or better than the NBBO and
better than the limit order or quote on
the ISE Mercury order book on the same
side as the Agency Order.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
No Minimum Size Requirement
Supplemental Material .03 to Rule
723 provides that, as part of the current
Pilot, there will be no minimum size
requirement for orders to be eligible for
the Auction.9 As with the ISE PIM, the
Exchange proposed the no-minimum
size requirement for the PIM because it
believed that this would provide small
customer orders with the opportunity to
participate in the PIM and to receive
corresponding price improvement. In
initially approving the ISE PIM, the
Commission noted that the no minimum
9 The provision relating to the no minimum size
requirement also requires the Exchange to submit
certain data, periodically as required by the
Commission, to provide supporting evidence that,
among other things, there is meaningful
competition for all size orders within the PIM, that
there is significant price improvement for all orders
executed through the PIM, and that there is an
active and liquid market functioning on the
Exchange outside of the PIM. Any raw data which
is submitted to the Commission will be provided on
a confidential basis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
size requirement provided an
opportunity for more market
participants to participate in the
auction.10 The Commission also stated
that it would evaluate PIM during the
Pilot Period to determine whether it
would be beneficial to customers and to
the options market as a whole to
approve any proposal requesting
permanent approval to permit orders of
fewer than 50 contracts to be submitted
to the PIM.11
As noted above, throughout the Pilot,
the Exchange has been required to
submit certain data periodically to
provide supporting evidence that,
among other things, there is meaningful
competition for all size orders within
the PIM, that there is significant price
improvement for all orders executed
through the PIM, and that there is an
active and liquid market functioning on
the Exchange both within PIM and
outside of the Auction mechanism.
The Exchange believes that the data
gathered since the approval of the Pilot
establishes that there is liquidity and
competition both within PIM and
outside of PIM, and that there are
opportunities for significant price
improvement within PIM.12
In the period between February and
June 2016, the PIM executed a total of
613,353 contracts, which represented
26.36% of total ISE Mercury contract
volume and 0.04% of industry volume.
The percent of ISE Mercury volume
traded in PIM ranged from 0% in
February 2016 to 37.88% in June 2016.
The Exchange compiled price
improvement data in orders from
February through June 2016 that divides
the data into the following groups: (1)
Orders of over 50 contracts where the
Agency Order was on behalf of a Public
Customer and ISE Mercury was at the
NBBO; (2) orders of over 50 contracts
where the Agency Order was on behalf
of a Public Customer and ISE Mercury
was not at the NBBO; (3) orders of over
50 contracts where the Agency Order
was on behalf of a non-customer and
ISE Mercury was at the NBBO; (4)
orders of over 50 contracts where the
10 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50819
(December 8, 2004), 69 FR 75093 (December 15,
2004) (SR–ISE–2003–06) (‘‘ISE PIM Approval
Order’’).
11 Id.
12 Specifically, the Exchange gathered and
reported nine separate data fields relating to PIM
orders of fewer than 50 contracts, including (1) the
number of orders of fewer than 50 contracts entered
into the PIM; (2) the percentage of all orders of
fewer than 50 contracts sent to the Exchange that
are entered into the PIM; (3) the spread in the
option, at the time an order of fewer than 50
contracts is submitted to the PIM; and (4) of PIM
trades, the percentage done at the NBBO plus $.01,
plus $.02, plus $.03, etc. See Exhibit B to ISE
Mercury Exchange Application (File No. 10–209).
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
91985
Agency Order was on behalf of a noncustomer and ISE Mercury was not at
the NBBO; (5) orders of 50 contracts or
less where the Agency Order was on
behalf of a Public Customer and ISE
Mercury was at the NBBO; (6) orders of
50 contracts or less where the Agency
Order was on behalf of a Public
Customer and ISE Mercury was not at
the NBBO; (7) orders of 50 contracts or
less where the Agency Order was on
behalf of a non-customer and ISE
Mercury was at the NBBO; and (8)
orders of 50 contracts or less where the
Agency Order was on behalf of a noncustomer and ISE Mercury was not at
the NBBO.
For March 2016, where the order was
on behalf of a Public Customer, the
order was for 50 contracts or less, and
ISE Mercury was at the NBBO, the most
contracts traded (2,525) occurred when
the spread was $0.03, with an average
number of two participants.13 All of
these contracts received $0.01 price
improvement. When the spread was
$0.01 for this same category, a total of
734 contracts traded, with none of those
contracts receiving price improvement.
There was an average number of 3
participants when the spread was $0.01.
In comparison, where the order was
on behalf of a Public Customer, the
order was for greater than 50 contracts,
and ISE Mercury was at the NBBO, the
most contracts traded (934) occurred
when the spread was $0.10 to $0.20,
with an average number of 3
participants. The greatest number of
these contracts (429) received $0.05–
$0.10 price improvement.
In March 2016, where the order was
on behalf of a Public Customer, the
order was for 50 contracts or less, and
ISE Mercury was not at the NBBO, the
most contracts traded (3,772) occurred
when the spread $0.01. Of this category,
the greatest number of contracts (3,722)
received no price improvement, and 50
contracts received $0.01 price
improvement. There was an average
number of 2 participants when the
spread was $0.01.
In comparison, in March 2016, where
the order was on behalf of a Public
Customer, the order was for greater than
50 contracts, and ISE Mercury was not
at the NBBO, the most contracts traded
(1,431) occurred when the spread was
$0.02. Of these contracts, the greatest
number of contracts (758) received no
price improvement. There was an
13 This discussion of March 2016 data is intended
to be illustrative of data that was gathered between
February 2016 and July 2016. The complete
underlying data for February 2016 through June
2016 for these eight categories is attached as Exhibit
3.
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
91986
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
average number of 2 participants when
the spread was $0.02.
ISE Mercury believes that the data
gathered during the Pilot period
indicates that there is meaningful
competition in PIM auctions for all size
orders, there is an active and liquid
market functioning on the Exchange
outside of the auction mechanism, and
that there are opportunities for
significant price improvement for orders
executed through PIM. The Exchange
therefore believes that it is appropriate
to approve the no-minimum size
requirement on a permanent basis.
Early Conclusion of the PIM Auction
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Supplemental Material .05 to Rule
723 provides that Rule 723(c)(5) and
Rule 723(d)(4), which relate to the
termination of the exposure period by
unrelated orders shall be part of the
current Pilot. Rule 723(c)(5) provides
that the exposure period will
automatically terminate (i) at the end of
the 500 millisecond period,14 (ii) upon
the receipt of a market or marketable
limit order on the Exchange in the same
series, or (iii) upon the receipt of a
nonmarketable limit order in the same
series on the same side of the market as
the Agency Order that would cause the
price of the Crossing Transaction to be
outside of the best bid or offer on the
Exchange. Rule 723(d)(4) provides that,
when a market order or marketable limit
order on the opposite side of the market
from the Agency Order ends the
exposure period, it will participate in
the execution of the Agency Order at the
price that is mid-way between the best
counter-side interest and the NBBO, so
that both the market or marketable limit
order and the Agency Order receive
price improvement. Transactions will be
rounded, when necessary, to the $.01
increment that favors the Agency Order.
As with the no minimum size
requirement, the Exchange has gathered
data on these three conditions to assess
the effect of early PIM conclusions on
the Pilot.15
14 The Exchange notes that it is proposing to
modify the exposure period to a time period of no
less than 100 milliseconds and no more than one
second. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79354 (November 18, 2016), 81 FR 85295
(November 25, 2016) (SR–ISEMercury–2016–21).
15 The Exchange agreed to gather and submit the
following data on this part of the Pilot: (1) The
number of times that a market or marketable limit
order in the same series on the same side of the
market as the Agency Order prematurely ended the
PIM auction, and the number of times such orders
were entered by the same (or affiliated) firm that
initiated the PIM that was terminated; (2) the
percentage of PIM early terminations due to the
receipt of a market or marketable limit order in the
same series on the same side of the market that
occurred within a 1⁄2 second of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within one
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
For the period from January 2016
through June 2016, there were a total of
77 early terminated auctions. The
number of orders in early terminated
PIM auctions constituted 0.35% of total
PIM orders. There were a total of 1,581
contracts that traded through early
terminated auctions. The number of
contracts in early terminated PIM
auctions represented 0.26% of total PIM
contracts. Of the early terminated
auctions, 46.75% of those auctions
received price improvement, and
31.37% of contracts that traded in an
early-terminated auction received price
improvement. Of the PIM auctions that
terminated early and received price
improvement from February 2016
through June 2016, the total amount of
price improvement received was $16.53.
second of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within one and 1⁄2 second
of the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within 2 seconds of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within 2 and
1⁄2 seconds of the PIM auction; and the average
amount of price improvement provided to the
Agency Order where the PIM is terminated early at
each of these time periods; (3) the number of times
that a market or marketable limit order in the same
series on the opposite side of the market as the
Agency Order prematurely ended the PIM auction
and at what time the unrelated order ended the PIM
auction, and the number of times such orders were
entered by the same (or affiliated) firm that initiated
the PIM that was terminated; (4) the percentage of
PIM early terminations due to the receipt of a
market or marketable limit order in the same series
on the opposite side of the market that occurred
within a 1⁄2 second of the start of the PIM auction;
the percentage that occurred within one second of
the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within one and 1⁄2 second of the start of
the PIM auction; the percentage that occurred
within 2 seconds of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within 2 and 1⁄2 seconds
of the PIM auction; and the average amount of price
improvement provided to the Agency Order where
the PIM is terminated early at each of these time
periods; (5) the number of times that a
nonmarketable limit order in the same series on the
same side of the market as the Agency Order that
would cause the price of the Crossing Transaction
to be outside of the best bid or offer on the
Exchange prematurely ended the PIM auction and
at what time the unrelated order ended the PIM
auction, and the number of times such orders were
entered by the same (or affiliated) firm that initiated
the PIM that was terminated; (6) the percentage of
PIM early terminations due to the receipt of a
market or marketable limit order in the same series
on the same side of the market as the Agency Order
that would cause the price of the Crossing
Transaction to be outside of the best bid or offer on
the Exchange that occurred within a 1⁄2 second of
the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within one second of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within one
and 1⁄2 second of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within 2 seconds of the
start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within 2 and 1⁄2 seconds of the PIM
auction; and the average amount of price
improvement provided to the Agency Order where
the PIM is terminated early at each of these time
periods; and (7) the average amount of price
improvement provided to the Agency Order when
the PIM auction is not terminated early. See Exhibit
B to ISE Mercury Exchange Application (File No.
10–209).
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Based on the data gathered during the
pilot, the Exchange does not anticipate
that any of these conditions will occur
with significant frequency, or will
otherwise significantly affect the
functioning of the PIM. Of the early
terminated auctions, 46.75% of those
auctions received price improvement,
and 31.37% of contracts that traded in
an early-terminated auction received
price improvement. The total amount of
price improvement for PIM auctions
that terminated early was $16.53. The
Exchange therefore believes it is
appropriate to approve this aspect of the
Pilot on a permanent basis.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,16
in general and with Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,17 in that it is designed 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; and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers,
or to regulate by virtue of any authority
conferred by the Act matters not related
to the purposes of the Act or the
administration of the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is also consistent
with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act 18 in that
it does not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
Specifically, the Exchange believes
that PIM, including the rules to which
the Pilot applies, results in increased
liquidity available at improved prices,
with competitive final pricing out of the
complete control of the Electronic
Access Member that initiated the
auction. The Exchange believes that PIM
promotes and fosters competition and
affords the opportunity for price
improvement to more options contracts.
The Exchange believes that the changes
to the PIM requiring price improvement
of at least one minimum price
improvement increment over the NBBO
for Agency Orders of less than 50 option
contracts where the difference in the
NBBO is $0.01 will provide further
16 15
U.S.C. 78f.
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
17 15
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
19DEN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 243 / Monday, December 19, 2016 / Notices
price improvement for those orders, and
thereby encourage additional
submission of those orders into PIM.
The Exchange believes that the
proposal, which subjects members to
the Minor Rule Violation Plan for failing
to provide the required price
improvement, coupled with the
Exchange’s surveillance efforts, are
designed to facilitate members’
compliance with the proposed
requirement.
The Exchange believes that approving
the Pilot on a permanent basis is also
consistent with the Act. With respect to
the no minimum size requirement, the
Exchange believes that the data gathered
during the Pilot period indicates that
there is meaningful competition in the
PIM for all size orders, there is an active
and liquid market functioning on the
Exchange outside of the auction
mechanism, and that there are
opportunities for significant price
improvement for orders executed
through PIM, including for small
customer orders.
With respect to the early termination
of the PIM, the Exchange believes that
it is appropriate to terminate an auction
(i) at the end of the 500 millisecond
period, (ii) upon the receipt of a market
or marketable limit order on the
Exchange in the same series, or (iii)
upon the receipt of a nonmarketable
limit order in the same series on the
same side of the market as the Agency
Order that would cause the price of the
Crossing Transaction to be outside of
the best bid or offer on the Exchange.
The Exchange also believes that it is
consistent with the Act to require that,
when a market order or marketable limit
order on the opposite side of the market
from the Agency Order ends the
exposure period, it will participate in
the execution of the Agency Order at the
price that is mid-way between the best
counter-side interest and the NBBO, so
that both the market or marketable limit
order and the Agency Order receive
price improvement. Based on the data
gathered during the pilot, the Exchange
does not anticipate that any of these
conditions will occur with significant
frequency, or will otherwise disrupt the
functioning of the PIM. The Exchange
also notes that a significant percentage
of PIM auctions that terminated early
executed at a price that was better than
the NBBO at the time the auction began,
and that a significant percentage of
contracts in auctions that terminated
early received price improvement.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:55 Dec 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. The proposal
will apply to all Exchange members,
and participation in the PIM process is
completely voluntary. Based on the data
collected by the Exchange during the
Pilot, the Exchange believes that there is
meaningful competition in the PIM for
all size orders, there are opportunities
for significant price improvement for
orders executed through PIM, and that
there is an active and liquid market
functioning on the Exchange outside of
the PIM. The Exchange believes that
requiring increased price improvement
for Agency Orders may encourage
competition by attracting additional
orders to participate in the PIM. The
Exchange believes that approving the
Pilot on a permanent basis will not
significantly impact competition, as the
Exchange is proposing no other change
to the Pilot beyond implementing it on
a permanent basis.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period (i)
as the Commission may designate up to
90 days of such date if it finds such
longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii) as to which the Exchange consents,
the Commission shall: (a) By order
approve or disapprove such proposed
rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
91987
Paper comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ISEMercury-2016–25. 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 (https://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–
ISEMercury 2016–25 and should be
submitted on or before January 9, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.19
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–30392 Filed 12–16–16; 8:45 am]
IV. Solicitation of Comments
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
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 (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
ISEMercury 2016–25 on the subject line.
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–2736.
Extension:
19 17
E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
19DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 91982-91987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30392]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-79539; File No. SR-ISEMercury-2016-25]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Mercury LLC; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change to Amend ISE Mercury Rule 723 and To Make Pilot
Program Permanent
December 13, 2016
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 12, 2016, ISE Mercury, LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``ISE
Mercury'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
[[Page 91983]]
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend ISE Mercury Rule 723, concerning its
Price Improvement Mechanism (``PIM''). Certain aspects of PIM are
currently operating on a pilot basis (``Pilot''), which is set to
expire on January 18, 2017.\3\ The Pilot concerns (i) the termination
of the exposure period by unrelated orders; and (ii) no minimum size
requirement of orders eligible for PIM. ISE Mercury seeks to make the
Pilot permanent, and also proposes to change the requirements for
providing price improvement for Agency Orders of less than 50 option
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78342 (July 15,
2016), 81 FR 47481 (July 21, 2016) (SR-ISEMercury-2016-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at https://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 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 purpose of this proposed rule change is to make permanent
certain pilots within Rule 723, relating to PIM. Paragraph .03 of the
Supplementary Material to Rule 723 provides that there is no minimum
size requirement for orders to be eligible for PIM. Paragraph .05
concerns the termination of the exposure period by unrelated orders. In
addition, ISE Mercury proposes to modify the requirements for PIM
auctions involving less than 50 contracts where the National Best Bid
and Offer (``NBBO'') is only $0.01 wide.
Background
The Exchange adopted PIM as part of its application to be
registered as a national securities exchange.\4\ In approving PIM, the
Commission noted that it was largely based on a similar functionality
offered by the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'').\5\ The
PIM is a process that allows Electronic Access Members (``EAM'') to
provide price improvement opportunities for a transaction wherein the
Member seeks to execute an agency order as principal or execute an
agency order against a solicited order (a ``Crossing Transaction''). A
Crossing Transaction is comprised of the order the EAM represents as
agent (the ``Agency Order'') and a counter-side order for the full size
of the Agency Order (the ``Counter-Side Order''). The Counter-Side
Order may represent interest for the Member's own account, or interest
the Member has solicited from one or more other parties, or a
combination of both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76998 (January 29,
2016), 81 FR 6066 (February 4, 2016) (File No. 10-221) (``Exchange
Approval Order'').
\5\ See Exchange Approval Order, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 723 sets forth the criteria pursuant to which the PIM is
initiated. Specifically, a Crossing Transaction must be entered only at
a price that is equal to or better than the national best bid or offer
(``NBBO'') and better than the limit order or quote on the Exchange
order book on the same side of the Agency Order. The Crossing
Transaction may be priced in one-cent increments. The Crossing
Transaction may not be canceled, but the price of the Counter-Side
Order may be improved during the exposure period.
Rule 723 also sets forth requirements relating to the exposure of
orders in PIM and the termination of the exposure period. Upon entry of
a Crossing Transaction into the Price Improvement Mechanism, a
broadcast message that includes the series, price and size of the
Agency Order, and whether it is to buy or sell, will be sent to all
Members. This broadcast message will not be included in the ISE Mercury
disseminated best bid or offer and will not be disseminated through
OPRA. Members will be given 500 milliseconds to indicate the size and
price at which they want to participate in the execution of the Agency
Order (``Improvement Orders''). Improvement Orders may be entered by
all Members for their own account or for the account of a Public
Customer in one-cent increments at the same price as the Crossing
Transaction or at an improved price for the Agency Order, and for any
size up to the size of the Agency Order. During the exposure period,
Improvement Orders may not be canceled, but may be modified to (1)
increase the size at the same price, or (2) improve the price of the
Improvement Order for any size up to the size of the Agency Order.
During the exposure period, responses (including the Counter Side
Order, Improvement Orders, and any changes to either) submitted by
Members shall not be visible to other auction participants. The
exposure period will automatically terminate (i) at the end of the 500
millisecond period, (ii) upon the receipt of a market or marketable
limit order on the Exchange in the same series, or (iii) upon the
receipt of a nonmarketable limit order in the same series on the same
side of the market as the Agency Order that would cause the price of
the Crossing Transaction to be outside of the best bid or offer on the
Exchange.
Rule 723 also describes how orders will be executed at the end of
the exposure period. Specifically, at the end of the exposure period,
the Agency Order will be executed in full at the best prices available,
taking into consideration orders and quotes in the Exchange market,
Improvement Orders, and the Counter-Side Order. The Agency Order will
receive executions at multiple price levels if there is insufficient
size to execute the entire order at the best price. At a given price,
Priority Customer interest is executed in full before Professional
Orders and any other interest of Members (i.e., proprietary interest
from Electronic Access Members and Exchange market makers).
After Priority Customer interest at a given price, Professional
Orders and Members' interest will participate in the execution of the
Agency Order based upon the percentage of the total number of contracts
available at the price that is represented by the size of the Members'
interest.
In the case where the Counter-Side Order is at the same price as
Members' interest (after Priority Customer interest at a given price),
the Counter-Side order will be allocated the greater of one (1)
contract or forty percent (40%) of the initial size of the Agency Order
before other Member interest is executed. Upon entry of Counter-Side
orders, Members can elect to automatically match the price and size of
orders, quotes and responses received during the exposure period up to
a specified
[[Page 91984]]
limit price or without specifying a limit price. In this case, the
Counter-Side order will be allocated its full size at each price point,
or at each price point within its limit price if a limit is specified,
until a price point is reached where the balance of the order can be
fully executed. At such price point, the Counter-Side order shall be
allocated the greater of one contract or forty percent (40%) of the
original size of the Agency Order, but only after Priority Customer
Orders at such price point are executed in full. Thereafter, all other
orders, Responses, and quotes at the price point will participate in
the execution of the Agency Order based upon the percentage of the
total number of contracts available at the price that is represented by
the size of the order, Response or quote. An election to automatically
match better prices cannot be cancelled or altered during the exposure
period.
When a market order or marketable limit order on the opposite side
of the market from the Agency Order ends the exposure period, it will
participate in the execution of the Agency Order at the price that is
mid-way between the best counter-side interest and the NBBO, so that
both the market or marketable limit order and the Agency Order receive
price improvement. Transactions will be rounded, when necessary, to the
$.01 increment that favors the Agency Order.
The Pilot
As described above, two components of PIM are currently operating
on a pilot basis: (i) The termination of the exposure period by
unrelated orders; and (ii) no minimum size requirement of orders
entered into PIM. The pilot has been extended until January 18,
2017.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See note 3 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in greater detail below, during the pilot period the
Exchange has been required to submit, and has been submitting, certain
data periodically as required by the Commission, to provide supporting
evidence that, among other things, there is meaningful competition for
all size orders within the PIM, that there is significant price
improvement for all orders executed through the PIM, and that there is
an active and liquid market functioning on the Exchange both within PIM
and outside of the Auction mechanism. The Exchange has also analyzed
the impact of certain aspects of the Pilot; for example, situation in
which PIM is terminated prematurely by an unrelated order.
The Exchange now seeks to have the Pilot approved on a permanent
basis. In addition, the Exchange proposes to modify the scope of PIM so
that, with respect to PIM orders for less than 50 option contracts,
members will be required to receive price improvement of at least one
minimum price improvement increment over the NBBO if the NBBO is only
$0.01 wide. For orders of 50 contracts or more, or if the difference in
the NBBO is greater than $0.01, the requirements for price improvement
remain the same.
Price Improvement for Orders Under 50 Contracts
Currently, the PIM may be initiated if all of the following
conditions are met. A Crossing Transaction must be entered only at a
price that is equal to or better than the NBBO and better than the
limit order or quote on the Exchange order book on the same side of the
Agency Order. The Crossing Transaction may be priced in one-cent
increments. The Crossing Transaction may not be canceled, but the price
of the Counter-Side Order may be improved during the exposure period.
ISE Mercury proposes to amend Rule 723(b) to require Electronic
Access Members to provide at least $0.01 price improvement for an
Agency Order if that order is for less than 50 contracts and if the
difference between the NBBO is $0.01. For the period beginning January
19, 2017 until a date specified by the Exchange in a Regulatory
Information Circular, which date shall be no later than September 15,
2017, ISE Mercury will adopt a member conduct standard to implement
this requirement.\7\ Under this provision, the Exchange is proposing to
amend the Auction Eligibility Requirements to require that, if the
Agency Order is for less than 50 option contracts, and if the
difference between the NBBO is $0.01, an Electronic Access Member shall
not enter a Crossing Transaction unless such Crossing Transaction is
entered at a price that is one minimum price improvement increment
better than the NBBO on the opposite side of the market from the Agency
Order and better than any limit order on the limit order book on the
same side of the market as the Agency Order. This requirement will
apply regardless of whether the Agency Order is for the account of a
public customer, or where the Agency Order is for the account of a
broker dealer or any other person or entity that is not a Public
Customer. Failure to provide such price improvement will subject
Members to the fines set forth in Rule 1614(d)(4) of the International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Exchange notes that its indirect parent company, U.S.
Exchange Holdings, Inc. has been acquired by Nasdaq, Inc. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78119 (June 21, 2016), 81 FR
41611 (June 27, 2016) (SR-ISEMercury-2016-10). Pursuant to this
acquisition, ISE Mercury platforms are migrating to Nasdaq
platforms, including the platform that operates PIM. ISE Mercury
intends to retain the proposed member conduct standard requiring
price improvement for options orders of under 50 contracts where the
difference between the NBBO is $0.01 until the ISE Mercury platforms
and the corresponding symbols are migrated to the platforms operated
by Nasdaq, Inc.
\8\ In a separate proposed rule change, ISE is proposing to
adopt similar price improvement requirements for orders of less than
50 contracts for its PIM. As part of that rule change, ISE is
proposing to amend ISE Rule 1614 (Imposition of Fines for Minor Rule
Violations) to add Rule 1614(d)(4), which will provide that,
beginning January 19, 2017, any Member who enters an order into PIM
for less than 50 contracts, while the National Best Bid or Offer
spread is $0.01, must provide price improvement of at least one
minimum price improvement increment better than the NBBO on the
opposite side of the market from the Agency Order, which increment
may not be smaller than $0.01. Failure to provide such price
improvement will result in members being subject to the following
fines: $500 for the second offense, $1,000 for the third offense,
and $2,500 for the fourth offense. Subsequent offenses will subject
the member to formal disciplinary action. ISE will review violations
on a monthly cycle to assess these violations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange will conduct electronic surveillance of PIM to ensure
that members comply with the proposed price improvement requirements
for option orders of less than 50 contracts. Specifically, using an
electronic surveillance system that produces alerts of potentially
unlawful PIM orders, the Exchange will perform a frequent review of
member firm activity to identify instances of apparent violations. Upon
discovery of an apparent violation, the Exchange will attempt to
contact the appropriate member firm to communicate the specifics of the
apparent violation with the intent to assist the member firm in
preventing submission of subsequent problematic orders. The Exchange
will review the alerts monthly and determine the applicability of the
MRVP and appropriate penalty. The Exchange is not limited to the
application of the MRVP, and may at its discretion, choose to escalate
a matter for processing through the Exchange's disciplinary program.
The Exchange is also proposing a systems-based mechanism to
implement this price improvement requirement, which shall be effective
following the migration of a symbol to INET, the platform operated by
Nasdaq, Inc. that will also operate the PIM. Under this provision, if
the Agency Order is for less than 50 option contracts, and if the
difference between the National Best Bid and National Best Offer
(``NBBO'') is $0.01, the Crossing Transaction must
[[Page 91985]]
be entered at one minimum price improvement increment better than the
NBBO on the opposite side of the market from the Agency Order and
better than the limit order or quote on the ISE order book on the same
side of the Agency Order.
The Exchange believes that these changes to PIM may provide
additional opportunities for Agency Orders of under 50 option contracts
to receive price improvement over the NBBO where the difference in the
NBBO is $0.01 and therefore encourage the increased submission of
orders of under 50 option contracts. The Exchange notes that the
statistics for the current pilot, which include, among other things,
price improvement for orders of less than 50 option contracts under the
current auction eligibility requirements, show relatively small amounts
of price improvement for such orders. ISE Mercury believes that the
proposed requirements will therefore increase the price improvement
that orders of under 50 option contracts may receive in PIM.
The Exchange will retain the current requirements for auction
eligibility where the Agency Order is for 50 option contracts or more,
or if the difference between the NBBO is greater than $0.01.
Accordingly, the Exchange is amending the Auction Eligibility
Requirements to state that, if the PIM Order is for 50 option contracts
or more or if the difference between the NBBO is greater than $0.01,
the Crossing Transaction must be entered only at a price that is equal
to or better than the NBBO and better than the limit order or quote on
the ISE Mercury order book on the same side as the Agency Order.
No Minimum Size Requirement
Supplemental Material .03 to Rule 723 provides that, as part of the
current Pilot, there will be no minimum size requirement for orders to
be eligible for the Auction.\9\ As with the ISE PIM, the Exchange
proposed the no-minimum size requirement for the PIM because it
believed that this would provide small customer orders with the
opportunity to participate in the PIM and to receive corresponding
price improvement. In initially approving the ISE PIM, the Commission
noted that the no minimum size requirement provided an opportunity for
more market participants to participate in the auction.\10\ The
Commission also stated that it would evaluate PIM during the Pilot
Period to determine whether it would be beneficial to customers and to
the options market as a whole to approve any proposal requesting
permanent approval to permit orders of fewer than 50 contracts to be
submitted to the PIM.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The provision relating to the no minimum size requirement
also requires the Exchange to submit certain data, periodically as
required by the Commission, to provide supporting evidence that,
among other things, there is meaningful competition for all size
orders within the PIM, that there is significant price improvement
for all orders executed through the PIM, and that there is an active
and liquid market functioning on the Exchange outside of the PIM.
Any raw data which is submitted to the Commission will be provided
on a confidential basis.
\10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50819 (December 8,
2004), 69 FR 75093 (December 15, 2004) (SR-ISE-2003-06) (``ISE PIM
Approval Order'').
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, throughout the Pilot, the Exchange has been
required to submit certain data periodically to provide supporting
evidence that, among other things, there is meaningful competition for
all size orders within the PIM, that there is significant price
improvement for all orders executed through the PIM, and that there is
an active and liquid market functioning on the Exchange both within PIM
and outside of the Auction mechanism.
The Exchange believes that the data gathered since the approval of
the Pilot establishes that there is liquidity and competition both
within PIM and outside of PIM, and that there are opportunities for
significant price improvement within PIM.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Specifically, the Exchange gathered and reported nine
separate data fields relating to PIM orders of fewer than 50
contracts, including (1) the number of orders of fewer than 50
contracts entered into the PIM; (2) the percentage of all orders of
fewer than 50 contracts sent to the Exchange that are entered into
the PIM; (3) the spread in the option, at the time an order of fewer
than 50 contracts is submitted to the PIM; and (4) of PIM trades,
the percentage done at the NBBO plus $.01, plus $.02, plus $.03,
etc. See Exhibit B to ISE Mercury Exchange Application (File No. 10-
209).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the period between February and June 2016, the PIM executed a
total of 613,353 contracts, which represented 26.36% of total ISE
Mercury contract volume and 0.04% of industry volume. The percent of
ISE Mercury volume traded in PIM ranged from 0% in February 2016 to
37.88% in June 2016.
The Exchange compiled price improvement data in orders from
February through June 2016 that divides the data into the following
groups: (1) Orders of over 50 contracts where the Agency Order was on
behalf of a Public Customer and ISE Mercury was at the NBBO; (2) orders
of over 50 contracts where the Agency Order was on behalf of a Public
Customer and ISE Mercury was not at the NBBO; (3) orders of over 50
contracts where the Agency Order was on behalf of a non-customer and
ISE Mercury was at the NBBO; (4) orders of over 50 contracts where the
Agency Order was on behalf of a non-customer and ISE Mercury was not at
the NBBO; (5) orders of 50 contracts or less where the Agency Order was
on behalf of a Public Customer and ISE Mercury was at the NBBO; (6)
orders of 50 contracts or less where the Agency Order was on behalf of
a Public Customer and ISE Mercury was not at the NBBO; (7) orders of 50
contracts or less where the Agency Order was on behalf of a non-
customer and ISE Mercury was at the NBBO; and (8) orders of 50
contracts or less where the Agency Order was on behalf of a non-
customer and ISE Mercury was not at the NBBO.
For March 2016, where the order was on behalf of a Public Customer,
the order was for 50 contracts or less, and ISE Mercury was at the
NBBO, the most contracts traded (2,525) occurred when the spread was
$0.03, with an average number of two participants.\13\ All of these
contracts received $0.01 price improvement. When the spread was $0.01
for this same category, a total of 734 contracts traded, with none of
those contracts receiving price improvement. There was an average
number of 3 participants when the spread was $0.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ This discussion of March 2016 data is intended to be
illustrative of data that was gathered between February 2016 and
July 2016. The complete underlying data for February 2016 through
June 2016 for these eight categories is attached as Exhibit 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In comparison, where the order was on behalf of a Public Customer,
the order was for greater than 50 contracts, and ISE Mercury was at the
NBBO, the most contracts traded (934) occurred when the spread was
$0.10 to $0.20, with an average number of 3 participants. The greatest
number of these contracts (429) received $0.05-$0.10 price improvement.
In March 2016, where the order was on behalf of a Public Customer,
the order was for 50 contracts or less, and ISE Mercury was not at the
NBBO, the most contracts traded (3,772) occurred when the spread $0.01.
Of this category, the greatest number of contracts (3,722) received no
price improvement, and 50 contracts received $0.01 price improvement.
There was an average number of 2 participants when the spread was
$0.01.
In comparison, in March 2016, where the order was on behalf of a
Public Customer, the order was for greater than 50 contracts, and ISE
Mercury was not at the NBBO, the most contracts traded (1,431) occurred
when the spread was $0.02. Of these contracts, the greatest number of
contracts (758) received no price improvement. There was an
[[Page 91986]]
average number of 2 participants when the spread was $0.02.
ISE Mercury believes that the data gathered during the Pilot period
indicates that there is meaningful competition in PIM auctions for all
size orders, there is an active and liquid market functioning on the
Exchange outside of the auction mechanism, and that there are
opportunities for significant price improvement for orders executed
through PIM. The Exchange therefore believes that it is appropriate to
approve the no-minimum size requirement on a permanent basis.
Early Conclusion of the PIM Auction
Supplemental Material .05 to Rule 723 provides that Rule 723(c)(5)
and Rule 723(d)(4), which relate to the termination of the exposure
period by unrelated orders shall be part of the current Pilot. Rule
723(c)(5) provides that the exposure period will automatically
terminate (i) at the end of the 500 millisecond period,\14\ (ii) upon
the receipt of a market or marketable limit order on the Exchange in
the same series, or (iii) upon the receipt of a nonmarketable limit
order in the same series on the same side of the market as the Agency
Order that would cause the price of the Crossing Transaction to be
outside of the best bid or offer on the Exchange. Rule 723(d)(4)
provides that, when a market order or marketable limit order on the
opposite side of the market from the Agency Order ends the exposure
period, it will participate in the execution of the Agency Order at the
price that is mid-way between the best counter-side interest and the
NBBO, so that both the market or marketable limit order and the Agency
Order receive price improvement. Transactions will be rounded, when
necessary, to the $.01 increment that favors the Agency Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The Exchange notes that it is proposing to modify the
exposure period to a time period of no less than 100 milliseconds
and no more than one second. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79354 (November 18, 2016), 81 FR 85295 (November 25, 2016) (SR-
ISEMercury-2016-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As with the no minimum size requirement, the Exchange has gathered
data on these three conditions to assess the effect of early PIM
conclusions on the Pilot.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Exchange agreed to gather and submit the following data
on this part of the Pilot: (1) The number of times that a market or
marketable limit order in the same series on the same side of the
market as the Agency Order prematurely ended the PIM auction, and
the number of times such orders were entered by the same (or
affiliated) firm that initiated the PIM that was terminated; (2) the
percentage of PIM early terminations due to the receipt of a market
or marketable limit order in the same series on the same side of the
market that occurred within a \1/2\ second of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within one second of the start
of the PIM auction; the percentage that occurred within one and \1/
2\ second of the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within 2 seconds of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within 2 and \1/2\ seconds of the PIM
auction; and the average amount of price improvement provided to the
Agency Order where the PIM is terminated early at each of these time
periods; (3) the number of times that a market or marketable limit
order in the same series on the opposite side of the market as the
Agency Order prematurely ended the PIM auction and at what time the
unrelated order ended the PIM auction, and the number of times such
orders were entered by the same (or affiliated) firm that initiated
the PIM that was terminated; (4) the percentage of PIM early
terminations due to the receipt of a market or marketable limit
order in the same series on the opposite side of the market that
occurred within a \1/2\ second of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within one second of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within one and \1/2\ second of
the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that occurred within 2
seconds of the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within 2 and \1/2\ seconds of the PIM auction; and the
average amount of price improvement provided to the Agency Order
where the PIM is terminated early at each of these time periods; (5)
the number of times that a nonmarketable limit order in the same
series on the same side of the market as the Agency Order that would
cause the price of the Crossing Transaction to be outside of the
best bid or offer on the Exchange prematurely ended the PIM auction
and at what time the unrelated order ended the PIM auction, and the
number of times such orders were entered by the same (or affiliated)
firm that initiated the PIM that was terminated; (6) the percentage
of PIM early terminations due to the receipt of a market or
marketable limit order in the same series on the same side of the
market as the Agency Order that would cause the price of the
Crossing Transaction to be outside of the best bid or offer on the
Exchange that occurred within a \1/2\ second of the start of the PIM
auction; the percentage that occurred within one second of the start
of the PIM auction; the percentage that occurred within one and \1/
2\ second of the start of the PIM auction; the percentage that
occurred within 2 seconds of the start of the PIM auction; the
percentage that occurred within 2 and \1/2\ seconds of the PIM
auction; and the average amount of price improvement provided to the
Agency Order where the PIM is terminated early at each of these time
periods; and (7) the average amount of price improvement provided to
the Agency Order when the PIM auction is not terminated early. See
Exhibit B to ISE Mercury Exchange Application (File No. 10-209).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the period from January 2016 through June 2016, there were a
total of 77 early terminated auctions. The number of orders in early
terminated PIM auctions constituted 0.35% of total PIM orders. There
were a total of 1,581 contracts that traded through early terminated
auctions. The number of contracts in early terminated PIM auctions
represented 0.26% of total PIM contracts. Of the early terminated
auctions, 46.75% of those auctions received price improvement, and
31.37% of contracts that traded in an early-terminated auction received
price improvement. Of the PIM auctions that terminated early and
received price improvement from February 2016 through June 2016, the
total amount of price improvement received was $16.53.
Based on the data gathered during the pilot, the Exchange does not
anticipate that any of these conditions will occur with significant
frequency, or will otherwise significantly affect the functioning of
the PIM. Of the early terminated auctions, 46.75% of those auctions
received price improvement, and 31.37% of contracts that traded in an
early-terminated auction received price improvement. The total amount
of price improvement for PIM auctions that terminated early was $16.53.
The Exchange therefore believes it is appropriate to approve this
aspect of the Pilot on a permanent basis.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\16\ in general and with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\ in that it is designed 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; and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers, or to regulate by virtue of any authority conferred by the Act
matters not related to the purposes of the Act or the administration of
the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also
consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act \18\ in that it does not
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Exchange believes that PIM, including the rules
to which the Pilot applies, results in increased liquidity available at
improved prices, with competitive final pricing out of the complete
control of the Electronic Access Member that initiated the auction. The
Exchange believes that PIM promotes and fosters competition and affords
the opportunity for price improvement to more options contracts. The
Exchange believes that the changes to the PIM requiring price
improvement of at least one minimum price improvement increment over
the NBBO for Agency Orders of less than 50 option contracts where the
difference in the NBBO is $0.01 will provide further
[[Page 91987]]
price improvement for those orders, and thereby encourage additional
submission of those orders into PIM. The Exchange believes that the
proposal, which subjects members to the Minor Rule Violation Plan for
failing to provide the required price improvement, coupled with the
Exchange's surveillance efforts, are designed to facilitate members'
compliance with the proposed requirement.
The Exchange believes that approving the Pilot on a permanent basis
is also consistent with the Act. With respect to the no minimum size
requirement, the Exchange believes that the data gathered during the
Pilot period indicates that there is meaningful competition in the PIM
for all size orders, there is an active and liquid market functioning
on the Exchange outside of the auction mechanism, and that there are
opportunities for significant price improvement for orders executed
through PIM, including for small customer orders.
With respect to the early termination of the PIM, the Exchange
believes that it is appropriate to terminate an auction (i) at the end
of the 500 millisecond period, (ii) upon the receipt of a market or
marketable limit order on the Exchange in the same series, or (iii)
upon the receipt of a nonmarketable limit order in the same series on
the same side of the market as the Agency Order that would cause the
price of the Crossing Transaction to be outside of the best bid or
offer on the Exchange. The Exchange also believes that it is consistent
with the Act to require that, when a market order or marketable limit
order on the opposite side of the market from the Agency Order ends the
exposure period, it will participate in the execution of the Agency
Order at the price that is mid-way between the best counter-side
interest and the NBBO, so that both the market or marketable limit
order and the Agency Order receive price improvement. Based on the data
gathered during the pilot, the Exchange does not anticipate that any of
these conditions will occur with significant frequency, or will
otherwise disrupt the functioning of the PIM. The Exchange also notes
that a significant percentage of PIM auctions that terminated early
executed at a price that was better than the NBBO at the time the
auction began, and that a significant percentage of contracts in
auctions that terminated early received price improvement.
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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal will apply to all
Exchange members, and participation in the PIM process is completely
voluntary. Based on the data collected by the Exchange during the
Pilot, the Exchange believes that there is meaningful competition in
the PIM for all size orders, there are opportunities for significant
price improvement for orders executed through PIM, and that there is an
active and liquid market functioning on the Exchange outside of the
PIM. The Exchange believes that requiring increased price improvement
for Agency Orders may encourage competition by attracting additional
orders to participate in the PIM. The Exchange believes that approving
the Pilot on a permanent basis will not significantly impact
competition, as the Exchange is proposing no other change to the Pilot
beyond implementing it on a permanent basis.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please
include File Number SR-ISEMercury 2016-25 on the subject line.
Paper comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISEMercury-2016-25. 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 (https://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-ISEMercury 2016-25 and
should be submitted on or before January 9, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30392 Filed 12-16-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P