Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change Related to Unusual Market Conditions and the Duty To Systemize Non-Electronic Orders Prior to Representation, 26724-26726 [2017-11870]
Download as PDF
26724
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 109 / Thursday, June 8, 2017 / Notices
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–
NYSEARCA–2017–63, and should be
submitted on or before June 29, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.15
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–11867 Filed 6–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–80854; File No. SR–CBOE–
2017–010]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Instituting
Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed
Rule Change Related to Unusual
Market Conditions and the Duty To
Systemize Non-Electronic Orders Prior
to Representation
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
June 2, 2017.
I. Introduction
On February 15, 2017, the Chicago
Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule
19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to amend its rules regarding the
circumstances in which CBOE Floor
Officials may declare a ‘‘fast’’ market
and the actions those Floor Officials
may take when a fast market is declared,
including the ability to suspend the
15 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Jun 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
duty to systemize a non-electronic order
prior to representing it in open outcry
trading. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on March 6, 2017.3 The
Commission received no comments on
the proposed rule change. On April 18,
2017, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,4 the Commission
designated a longer period within which
to approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or
institute proceedings to determine
whether to disapprove the proposed
rule change.5
The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested
persons and to institute proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Exchange Act 6 to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change, as discussed in Section III
below. The institution of proceedings
does not indicate that the Commission
has reached any conclusions with
respect to any of the issues involved,
nor does it mean that the Commission
will ultimately disapprove the proposed
rule change. Rather, as described in
Section III below, the Commission seeks
and encourages interested persons to
provide additional comment on the
proposed rule change in order to inform
the Commission’s analysis of whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.
II. Summary of Proposal
Currently, CBOE Rule 6.6(a) permits
two Floor Officials to declare a market
to be ‘‘fast’’ ‘‘because of an influx of
orders or other unusual conditions or
circumstances’’ when doing so would be
in ‘‘the interest of maintaining a fair and
orderly market.’’ 7 Once a market is
declared ‘‘fast,’’ Floor Officials have the
authority to take a number of actions.8
In its filing, CBOE proposes several
changes to Rule 6.6. First, CBOE
proposes to amend paragraph (a) of the
rule to require that at least one of the
two Floor Officials that declares a fast
market must be an Exchange employee.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to
provide a non-exhaustive list of
‘‘unusual conditions or circumstances’’
that Floor Officials may consider when
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80123
(February 28, 2017), 82 FR 12667 (‘‘Notice’’).
4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80481,
82 FR 18941 (April 24, 2017). The Commission
designated June 4, 2017, as the date by which the
Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change.
6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
7 See CBOE Rule 6.6(a).
8 See CBOE Rule 6.6(b).
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
determining whether to declare a market
to be ‘‘fast.’’ Specifically, proposed new
language in Rule 6.6(a) would provide
that: ‘‘[i]t may be in the interest of fair
and orderly markets to declare a fast
market when one or more of the
following conditions have been met: (i)
The previous day’s closing price of the
S&P 500 Index is more than 2% away
from the previous day’s opening price;
(ii) the front-month E-mini S&P 500
Future (symbol ES/1) is trading more
than 20 points above or below the
previous day’s closing values by 8:00
a.m. CT; or (iii) the intraday price of the
S&P 500 Index moves more than 1% in
any one hour interval during regular
trading hours.’’ In the Notice, CBOE
acknowledges that some of these
conditions occur with some degree of
frequency,9 but nevertheless asserts that
these measures could reflect volatile
trading conditions.10 The Exchange
asserts that including these guidelines
in the rule text would give better notice
to market participants as to when it
might declare a fast market.11
Further, CBOE proposes to allow two
Floor Officials to suspend during a fast
market the requirement of CBOE Rule
6.24 that non-electronic orders be
systematized prior to representation on
the trading floor.12 During such a
suspension, Trading Permit Holders
(‘‘TPHs’’) and TPH organizations would
be required to follow the procedures
described in Rule 6.24(b), which require
paper tickets to be used for orders
received during a malfunction or
disruption of the Exchange’s systems.13
The Exchange also would require that,
as soon as it declares an end to a fast
market, TPHs would be required
immediately to resume systematizing
orders prior to representing them and
use best efforts to, as soon as possible
and no later than the close of business,
input electronically into the Exchange’s
systems all relevant order information
received during the time period when
the order systematization requirement
was suspended.14
In justifying its proposal, CBOE
highlights that the risk that customers
and market participants may experience
losses if they miss the market as a result
of the time required for TPHs to
systematize orders, a risk that CBOE
9 See Notice, supra note 3, at 12669 (noting that,
over a prior eight month period, the intraday price
of the S&P 500 Index had moved more than 1% in
any one hour interval during regular trading hours
on at least 30 days, which the Exchange categorized
as a ‘‘not . . . infrequent occurrence’’).
10 See id. at 12668–69.
11 See id.
12 See proposed Rule 6.6(b).
13 See proposed Rule 6.6.01.
14 See id.
E:\FR\FM\08JNN1.SGM
08JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 109 / Thursday, June 8, 2017 / Notices
believes is exacerbated during fast
markets when there can be an unusually
large number of orders submitted to
brokers and market prices can change
quickly.15 The Exchange argues that
market participants may be better served
when the systemization requirement is
suspended, which the Exchange
believes could help TPHs more quickly
execute orders in open outcry.16
The Exchange asserts that its
proposed amendments to CBOE Rule 6.6
would not affect its ability to maintain
an accurate audit trail.17 CBOE argues
that suspending the systematization
requirement during a fast market would
merely delay its receipt of the audit trail
information, because that information
would still be recorded in a written
form according to the procedures set
forth under CBOE Rule 6.24, which
currently applies only when orders are
received during a malfunction or
disruption of the Exchange’s systems.18
Additionally, the Exchange asserts
that the proposed rule change would not
affect its ability to promptly report trade
and quotation information to the
Options Price Reporting Authority
(‘‘OPRA’’).19 The Exchange states that
market participants would still be
required to report the execution of
orders within 90 seconds even where
the systematization requirement had
been suspended under proposed Rule
6.6.20 Further, the Exchange states that
its collection and reporting of quotation
information to OPRA would not be
affected by the proposed rule change;
CBOE would continue to collect and
transmit bids and offers at stated prices
or limits with respect to individual
securities in which it provides a
market.21
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
III. Proceedings To Determine Whether
To Approve or Disapprove SR–CBOE–
2017–010 and Grounds for Disapproval
Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting
proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act 22 to
determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of such
proceedings is appropriate at this time
in view of the legal and policy issues
raised by the proposed rule change.
Institution of proceedings does not
15 See
Notice, supra note 3, at 12669.
id.
17 See id.
18 See id. Rule 6.24 does not explicitly require
order details to be captured prior to representation
of the order in open outcry.
19 See id. at 12670.
20 See id.
21 See id.
22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
16 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Jun 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
indicate that the Commission has
reached any conclusions with respect to
any of the issues involved. Rather, as
stated below, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to
provide comments on the proposed rule
change to inform the Commission’s
analysis of whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Exchange Act,23 the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for
disapproval under consideration, as
discussed below. The Commission
believes that instituting proceedings
will allow for additional analysis of, and
input from commenters with respect to,
the proposed rule change’s consistency
with: (1) Section 6(b)(1) of the Exchange
Act,24 which requires that a national
securities exchange is so organized and
has the capacity to be able to carry out
the purposes of the Exchange Act and to
comply, and to enforce compliance by
its members and persons associated
with its members, with the provisions of
the Exchange Act, the rules and
regulations thereunder, and the rules of
the exchange; and (2) Section 6(b)(5) of
the Exchange Act,25 which requires that
the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed, among other
things, 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
facilitating transactions in securities,
and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest.
Specifically, the Commission is
concerned whether the proposed rule
change could adversely impact the
ability of the Exchange to enforce
compliance by its members on the
CBOE trading floor with applicable
rules and regulations, including CBOE
rules designed to, among other things,
ensure the integrity of its audit trail to
help CBOE prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices. In
particular, the Commission wishes to
consider further whether CBOE has
sufficiently demonstrated how
suspending the systemization
requirement and relying upon paper
tickets, where the order details are not
captured prior to representation of the
order in open outcry trading, in an
environment of ‘‘extraordinary market
volatility,’’ when TPHs may receive ‘‘an
unusually large number of orders’’ and
‘‘market prices can change erratically,
extremely quickly, and in enormous
26725
swings’’ will foster compliance with its
audit trail rules, support the integrity of
the audit trail and the Exchange’s
surveillance that relies thereon, and not
otherwise diminish the Exchange’s
ability to ensure compliance with these
critically important rules and thereby
continue to maintain an accurate and
reliable audit trail to support its
regulatory operations and obligations.26
In its Notice for the current proposal,
the Exchange asserts that its proposed
amendments to CBOE Rule 6.6 would
not affect its ability to maintain an
accurate audit trail, but the Exchange
does not discuss how or why its
position on that issue has changed since
first instituting the requirement in
2005.27 The Commission is concerned
whether CBOE’s proposal to suspend
the systemization requirement in a fast
moving market is appropriately
designed to support the integrity and
reliability of its audit trail during active
trading and, in turn, whether it is
designed to support its surveillance
program and thereby help prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
protect investors and the public interest.
Further, the Commission is concerned
about the appropriateness of the
Exchange’s proposal to expand the
application of Rule 6.24(b), which
currently only allows order details to be
recorded in paper form when CBOE’s
systems are down, to now allow paper
tickets to be used during a ‘‘fast’’ market
when CBOE’s systems are working
properly.
IV. Procedure: Request for Written
Comments
The Commission requests that
interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and
arguments with respect to the issues
identified above, as well as any other
concerns they may have with the
proposal. In particular, the Commission
invites the written views of interested
persons concerning whether the
proposal is consistent with Sections
6(b)(1), 6(b)(5), 6(b)(8), or any other
provision of the Exchange Act, or the
rules and regulations thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any
issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by
an oral presentation of views, data, and
arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b–4, any
request for an opportunity to make an
oral presentation.28
26 Notice,
supra note 3, at 12668–69.
Notice, supra note 3, at 12669.
28 Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, as
amended by the Securities Act Amendments of
27 See
23 See
id.
U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
24 15
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Continued
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\08JNN1.SGM
08JNN1
26726
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 109 / Thursday, June 8, 2017 / Notices
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the
proposal should be approved or
disapproved by June 29, 2017. Any
person who wishes to file a rebuttal to
any other person’s submission must file
that rebuttal by July 13, 2017. The
Commission asks that commenters
address the sufficiency of the
Exchange’s statements in support of the
proposal, in addition to any other
comments they may wish to submit
about the proposed rule change.
Comments may be submitted by any
of the following methods:
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
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–
CBOE–2017–010 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Numbers SR–CBOE–2017–010. 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 these
filings also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
1975, Public Law 94–29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of
proceeding—either oral or notice and opportunity
for written comments—is appropriate for
consideration of a particular proposal by a selfregulatory organization. See Securities Act
Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on Banking,
Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Jun 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
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–CBOE–
2017–010 and should be submitted on
or before June 29, 2017. Rebuttal
comments should be submitted by July
13, 2017.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.29
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–11870 Filed 6–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–80853; File No. SR–MIAX–
2017–25]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami
International Securities Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend MIAX Options Rule
521, Nullification and Adjustment of
Options Transactions Including
Obvious Errors
June 2, 2017.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that
on May 30, 2017, Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC (‘‘MIAX
Options’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change
as described in Items I and II 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 is filing a proposal to
make a technical amendment to
Exchange Rule 521, Nullification and
Adjustment of Options Transactions
including Obvious Errors.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s Web site
at https://www.miaxoptions.com/rulefilings, at MIAX’s principal office, and
at the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
29 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(57).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange is proposing a technical
change to delete obsolete Rule 521(l)(5),
Complex Order Obvious Errors, from the
Exchange’s Rules.
Background
In 2015, the Exchange, in concert with
the other then-existing U.S. options
exchanges, adopted harmonized rules
related to the adjustment and
nullification of erroneous options
transactions and coordination among
the Exchanges in connection with largescale events involving erroneous
options transactions.3 The Exchange
believes that the changes the options
exchanges implemented with the new,
harmonized rule have led to increased
transparency and finality with respect to
the adjustment and nullification of
erroneous options transactions.
However, as part of that initiative, the
Exchange and other options exchanges
deferred a few specific matters for
further discussion, among them the
manner in which erroneous transactions
in complex orders would be handled.
In October, 2016, the Commission
approved a proposed rule change that
permitted the Exchange to adopt new
rules to govern the trading of complex
orders (the ‘‘Complex Orders Filing’’).4
Among the rules adopted in the
Complex Orders Filing was Rule
521(l)(5), Complex Order Obvious
Errors, which was not included in the
industry-wide, harmonized rules
described above.5 Rule 521(l)(5) governs
the handling of complex orders in
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74918
(May 8, 2015), 80 FR 27781 (May 14, 2015) (SR–
MIAX–2015–35).
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79072
(October 7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14, 2016)
(SR–MIAX–2016–26).
5 See supra note 3.
E:\FR\FM\08JNN1.SGM
08JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 109 (Thursday, June 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26724-26726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11870]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-80854; File No. SR-CBOE-2017-010]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change Related to Unusual Market
Conditions and the Duty To Systemize Non-Electronic Orders Prior to
Representation
June 2, 2017.
I. Introduction
On February 15, 2017, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend its rules
regarding the circumstances in which CBOE Floor Officials may declare a
``fast'' market and the actions those Floor Officials may take when a
fast market is declared, including the ability to suspend the duty to
systemize a non-electronic order prior to representing it in open
outcry trading. The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on March 6, 2017.\3\ The Commission received no
comments on the proposed rule change. On April 18, 2017, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,\4\ the Commission designated a
longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80123 (February 28,
2017), 82 FR 12667 (``Notice'').
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80481, 82 FR 18941
(April 24, 2017). The Commission designated June 4, 2017, as the
date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons and to institute
proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \6\ to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as
discussed in Section III below. The institution of proceedings does not
indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect
to any of the issues involved, nor does it mean that the Commission
will ultimately disapprove the proposed rule change. Rather, as
described in Section III below, the Commission seeks and encourages
interested persons to provide additional comment on the proposed rule
change in order to inform the Commission's analysis of whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Summary of Proposal
Currently, CBOE Rule 6.6(a) permits two Floor Officials to declare
a market to be ``fast'' ``because of an influx of orders or other
unusual conditions or circumstances'' when doing so would be in ``the
interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market.'' \7\ Once a market
is declared ``fast,'' Floor Officials have the authority to take a
number of actions.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See CBOE Rule 6.6(a).
\8\ See CBOE Rule 6.6(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its filing, CBOE proposes several changes to Rule 6.6. First,
CBOE proposes to amend paragraph (a) of the rule to require that at
least one of the two Floor Officials that declares a fast market must
be an Exchange employee. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to provide
a non-exhaustive list of ``unusual conditions or circumstances'' that
Floor Officials may consider when determining whether to declare a
market to be ``fast.'' Specifically, proposed new language in Rule
6.6(a) would provide that: ``[i]t may be in the interest of fair and
orderly markets to declare a fast market when one or more of the
following conditions have been met: (i) The previous day's closing
price of the S&P 500 Index is more than 2% away from the previous day's
opening price; (ii) the front-month E-mini S&P 500 Future (symbol ES/1)
is trading more than 20 points above or below the previous day's
closing values by 8:00 a.m. CT; or (iii) the intraday price of the S&P
500 Index moves more than 1% in any one hour interval during regular
trading hours.'' In the Notice, CBOE acknowledges that some of these
conditions occur with some degree of frequency,\9\ but nevertheless
asserts that these measures could reflect volatile trading
conditions.\10\ The Exchange asserts that including these guidelines in
the rule text would give better notice to market participants as to
when it might declare a fast market.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 12669 (noting that, over a
prior eight month period, the intraday price of the S&P 500 Index
had moved more than 1% in any one hour interval during regular
trading hours on at least 30 days, which the Exchange categorized as
a ``not . . . infrequent occurrence'').
\10\ See id. at 12668-69.
\11\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, CBOE proposes to allow two Floor Officials to suspend
during a fast market the requirement of CBOE Rule 6.24 that non-
electronic orders be systematized prior to representation on the
trading floor.\12\ During such a suspension, Trading Permit Holders
(``TPHs'') and TPH organizations would be required to follow the
procedures described in Rule 6.24(b), which require paper tickets to be
used for orders received during a malfunction or disruption of the
Exchange's systems.\13\ The Exchange also would require that, as soon
as it declares an end to a fast market, TPHs would be required
immediately to resume systematizing orders prior to representing them
and use best efforts to, as soon as possible and no later than the
close of business, input electronically into the Exchange's systems all
relevant order information received during the time period when the
order systematization requirement was suspended.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See proposed Rule 6.6(b).
\13\ See proposed Rule 6.6.01.
\14\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In justifying its proposal, CBOE highlights that the risk that
customers and market participants may experience losses if they miss
the market as a result of the time required for TPHs to systematize
orders, a risk that CBOE
[[Page 26725]]
believes is exacerbated during fast markets when there can be an
unusually large number of orders submitted to brokers and market prices
can change quickly.\15\ The Exchange argues that market participants
may be better served when the systemization requirement is suspended,
which the Exchange believes could help TPHs more quickly execute orders
in open outcry.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 12669.
\16\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange asserts that its proposed amendments to CBOE Rule 6.6
would not affect its ability to maintain an accurate audit trail.\17\
CBOE argues that suspending the systematization requirement during a
fast market would merely delay its receipt of the audit trail
information, because that information would still be recorded in a
written form according to the procedures set forth under CBOE Rule
6.24, which currently applies only when orders are received during a
malfunction or disruption of the Exchange's systems.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See id.
\18\ See id. Rule 6.24 does not explicitly require order details
to be captured prior to representation of the order in open outcry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Exchange asserts that the proposed rule change
would not affect its ability to promptly report trade and quotation
information to the Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'').\19\
The Exchange states that market participants would still be required to
report the execution of orders within 90 seconds even where the
systematization requirement had been suspended under proposed Rule
6.6.\20\ Further, the Exchange states that its collection and reporting
of quotation information to OPRA would not be affected by the proposed
rule change; CBOE would continue to collect and transmit bids and
offers at stated prices or limits with respect to individual securities
in which it provides a market.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See id. at 12670.
\20\ See id.
\21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-CBOE-
2017-010 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \22\ to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of such
proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy
issues raised by the proposed rule change. Institution of proceedings
does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with
respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, as stated below, the
Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide comments
on the proposed rule change to inform the Commission's analysis of
whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act,\23\ the
Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under
consideration, as discussed below. The Commission believes that
instituting proceedings will allow for additional analysis of, and
input from commenters with respect to, the proposed rule change's
consistency with: (1) Section 6(b)(1) of the Exchange Act,\24\ which
requires that a national securities exchange is so organized and has
the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act
and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its members and persons
associated with its members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act,
the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the exchange;
and (2) Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,\25\ which requires that
the rules of a national securities exchange be designed, among other
things, 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
facilitating transactions in securities, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See id.
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Commission is concerned whether the proposed rule
change could adversely impact the ability of the Exchange to enforce
compliance by its members on the CBOE trading floor with applicable
rules and regulations, including CBOE rules designed to, among other
things, ensure the integrity of its audit trail to help CBOE prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices. In particular, the
Commission wishes to consider further whether CBOE has sufficiently
demonstrated how suspending the systemization requirement and relying
upon paper tickets, where the order details are not captured prior to
representation of the order in open outcry trading, in an environment
of ``extraordinary market volatility,'' when TPHs may receive ``an
unusually large number of orders'' and ``market prices can change
erratically, extremely quickly, and in enormous swings'' will foster
compliance with its audit trail rules, support the integrity of the
audit trail and the Exchange's surveillance that relies thereon, and
not otherwise diminish the Exchange's ability to ensure compliance with
these critically important rules and thereby continue to maintain an
accurate and reliable audit trail to support its regulatory operations
and obligations.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Notice, supra note 3, at 12668-69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its Notice for the current proposal, the Exchange asserts that
its proposed amendments to CBOE Rule 6.6 would not affect its ability
to maintain an accurate audit trail, but the Exchange does not discuss
how or why its position on that issue has changed since first
instituting the requirement in 2005.\27\ The Commission is concerned
whether CBOE's proposal to suspend the systemization requirement in a
fast moving market is appropriately designed to support the integrity
and reliability of its audit trail during active trading and, in turn,
whether it is designed to support its surveillance program and thereby
help prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and protect investors and
the public interest. Further, the Commission is concerned about the
appropriateness of the Exchange's proposal to expand the application of
Rule 6.24(b), which currently only allows order details to be recorded
in paper form when CBOE's systems are down, to now allow paper tickets
to be used during a ``fast'' market when CBOE's systems are working
properly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 12669.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal is
consistent with Sections 6(b)(1), 6(b)(5), 6(b)(8), or any other
provision of the Exchange Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views,
data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule
19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, as amended by the
Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975),
grants the Commission flexibility to determine what type of
proceeding--either oral or notice and opportunity for written
comments--is appropriate for consideration of a particular proposal
by a self-regulatory organization. See Securities Act Amendments of
1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No.
75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26726]]
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposal should be approved or
disapproved by June 29, 2017. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal
to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by July 13,
2017. The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of
the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, in addition to
any other comments they may wish to submit about the proposed rule
change.
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-CBOE-2017-010 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Numbers SR-CBOE-2017-010. 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 these filings 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-CBOE-2017-010 and should be
submitted on or before June 29, 2017. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by July 13, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11870 Filed 6-7-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P