Document ID: SEC-2013-1177-0001
Agency: sec
Document Type: Notice
Title: Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: EDGA Exchange, Inc.
Posted Date: 2013-07-01T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39395-39399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15664]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69856; File No. SR-EDGA-2013-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Offer and 
Establish Fees for a New Exchange Service, EdgeRisk Gateways

June 25, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given 
that on June 14, 2013, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``EDGA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and 
II below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory 
organization. The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as 
it pertains to the fees for EdgeRisk Gateway\SM\ (the ``Service'') as 
``establishing or charging a due, fee or other charge'' under Section 
19b(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which 
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the 
Commission. Additionally, the Exchange has designated the proposed rule 
change as it pertains to the EdgeRisk Gateway service as constituting a 
``non-controversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 
\5\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\6\ which renders the proposal 
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission 
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule 
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to offer and establish fees for the Service, 
a risk management tool available to Members \7\ and non-Members \8\ of 
the Exchange. All of the changes described herein are applicable to 
EDGA Members. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the 
Exchange's Internet Web site at www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's 
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As defined in Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
    \8\ Specifically, service bureaus that act as a conduit for 
orders entered by Members that are their customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization 
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the 
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the 
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at 
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization 
has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, of the 
most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
Proposed Addition of EdgeRisk Gateway Service
    The Exchange currently offers logical ports through which Members 
and non-Members enter orders in the Exchange's System,\9\ receive drop 
copies of orders and execution messages, and receive transmission of 
depth of book data (``Logical Ports''). Each Logical Port is assigned 
an access gateway that performs order validations and manages the cycle 
of a submitted order's flow of information to the System and back to 
the Member. The access gateway performs functions such as message 
validation, acknowledgement messaging, risk checks, matching engine 
routing and execution messaging. The Exchange currently assigns 
Members' and non-Members' Logical Ports to the access gateways through 
a standard method that accounts for the relative message traffic 
expected over the Logical Port as well as redundancy requirements, 
where an access gateway contains assigned Logical Ports for a number of 
firms. The Exchange assigns Member and non-Member sessions to multiple 
access gateways so that the failure of one gateway may not result in 
the loss of access. On an ongoing basis, the Exchange carefully 
monitors incoming and outgoing traffic on all access gateways to ensure 
that available capacity is adequate to support Exchange message traffic 
and installs additional access gateways as needed to ensure consistent 
capacity levels are maintained. Although the Exchange monitors traffic 
to ensure available capacity, it cannot completely address

[[Page 39396]]

the effect of a trading disruption caused by any Member or Non-Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As defined in Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to assist Members' and non-Members' efforts to mitigate 
the impact of trading disruptions, the Exchange proposes to offer 
EdgeRisk Gateway as a new, optional fee-based service that provides 
Members and non-Members the option to obtain dedicated primary and 
backup access gateways in addition to, or in place of, a shared access 
gateway. Such Members and non-Members that choose to obtain the Service 
(each, a ``Subscriber'', and collectively ``Subscribers'') would 
benefit from enhanced risk mitigation, as it would reduce the impact of 
another firm's message peaks or programming mistakes on the 
Subscriber's trading experience. The Exchange notes that the Commission 
recently expressed concern regarding the potential ripple effects 
caused by systems disruptions and message traffic-related issues in 
particular.\10\ The Service would mitigate risks associated with 
disruptions caused by excessive message traffic or programming mistakes 
because the Subscriber's order flow on its dedicated access gateways 
would be insulated from such external disruptions. Furthermore, by 
reducing the impact that could arise from another firm, the Service 
would provide improved performance, as the performance and capacity of 
the access gateways would be determined solely by the Subscriber's 
order behavior.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69077, 78 FR 
18084, 18138 (March 25, 2013) (File No. S7-01-13) (proposing 
Regulation SCI). In particular, the Commission noted that systems 
disruptions ``could result in confusion about whether orders are 
handled correctly or whether the systems issue . . . could have 
caused capacity issues elsewhere.'' Id. at 18138. The Commission 
went on to warn that, ``if an e-market-maker handling 20 percent of 
message traffic experiences a systems issue, the order flow could be 
diverted elsewhere, including to entities that are unable to handle 
the increase in message traffic, resulting in a disruption to that 
entity's systems as well. Similarly, a broker-dealer accidentally 
could run a test during live trading and flood markets with message 
traffic such that those markets hit their capacity limits, resulting 
in a disruption.'' Id. at 18138, n. 336.
    \11\ The Exchange notes that the capacity of any system is 
finite and, as such, the risk associated with access gateway 
capacity cannot be eliminated entirely, as infrastructure 
components, the Subscriber's infrastructure, or the Subscriber's own 
trading patterns can affect the Subscriber's overall trading 
experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Service would include dedicated access to both a primary and a 
backup access gateway to afford Subscribers access redundancy. 
Accordingly, the backup access gateway would function as a safety 
measure, allowing Subscribers to allocate their sessions across both 
access gateways, protecting Subscribers from a loss of access due to a 
server malfunction. Additionally, Subscribers may also request some of 
their Logical Ports continue to be assigned to shared access gateways 
for further risk mitigation.
    The Exchange notes that both gateway options (shared and dedicated) 
would offer full backup to the extent that a Member or non-Member's 
sessions are spread across multiple gateways. The Exchange further 
notes that it would, on an ongoing basis, continue to carefully monitor 
incoming and outgoing message traffic across all access gateways 
(shared and dedicated) so that available capacity is adequate to 
support Exchange message traffic. Additionally, the Exchange would 
continue to install additional shared access gateways as needed so that 
consistent capacity levels are maintained.
    Both shared and dedicated gateway options consist of identical 
hardware and software with identical capacity and capabilities, 
offering equivalent latency under the same loads. To the extent that 
the load on a Subscriber's dedicated gateway is less than the load on a 
shared gateway, a Subscriber normally would expect reduced latencies in 
sending orders to the Exchange through its dedicated gateway. In this 
regard, the Service is similar to other types of services provided by 
self-regulatory organizations that offer higher levels of service for a 
higher fee.\12\ Other than the possible reduced latencies due to 
reduced gateway load, the Exchange believes that there are no material 
differences in terms of access to the Exchange between Subscribers and 
Members and non-Members that choose not to subscribe to the Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For example, many exchanges allow their member and non-
member organizations the option to pay a higher price in exchange 
for a more stable and/or efficient connection, such as that obtained 
through co-location services or payment for logical ports. See, 
e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21, 
2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56) (approving 
fees charged by NYSE for its co-location services); Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 62397 (June 28, 2010) 75 FR 38860 (July 6, 
2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-019) (approving fees charged by NASDAQ for its 
co-location services); see also NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, Price 
List--Trading Connectivity, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2 (listing fees for use of logical 
ports); BATS Exchange, Inc. & BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Exchange Fee 
Schedule, http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/BATS-Exchanges_Fee_Schedules.pdf (listing fees for logical 
ports); EDGX Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange Fee Schedule, http://www.directedge.com/Membership/FeeSchedule/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx 
(listing fees for logical ports).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Fees Applicable to the Service
    The Exchange proposes to offer the Service to Members and non-
Members for a monthly charge of $5,000. The Exchange is offering this 
new pricing model in order to keep pace with changes in the industry 
and evolving Member needs as new technologies emerge and products 
continue to develop and change. As previously noted, purchase and use 
of the Service would be entirely optional. To assure service quality as 
discussed above, access gateways would be provisioned as a pair, in 
which a second access gateway would be included for use as a backup, 
allowing Subscribers to allocate their sessions across both access 
gateways. Therefore, a Subscriber would receive a pair of access 
gateways for a fee of $5,000 per month.
    The Exchange notes that the Service and accompanying fees would be 
subject to significant competitive forces because, as discussed in 
detail below, the Service is similar to that currently provided by the 
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'').\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 68324 (November 30, 
2012), 77 FR 72901 (December 6, 2012) (SR-ISE-2012-89) (allowing 
members to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways and adopting a fee 
for the use of such gateways). See also, ISE, Schedule of Fees, 
http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 per shared gateway per month and $2000 
per dedicated gateway pair per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange intends to implement the proposed rule change upon the 
operative date of this filing and will announce its availability via an 
information circular to be posted on the Exchange's Web site.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with 
the requirements of the Act,\14\ and the rules and regulations 
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange. The 
bases under the Act for the proposed rule change are: (i) The 
requirement under Section 6(b)(4) \15\ that the rules of an exchange be 
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, 
fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its 
facilities; and (ii) the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \16\ that 
the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable 
principles of trade to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and 
practices, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged 
in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect 
to, and

[[Page 39397]]

facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market 
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest 
and not to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, 
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent 
with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \17\ because it would provide for an 
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges. In 
particular, the proposed fee is equitable because the fee applies only 
to those Members and non-Members that have purchased Logical Ports and 
elected to become Subscribers. The Exchange notes that the Service 
would be a fee-based service because it would be prohibitively 
expensive for the Exchange to establish dedicated access gateways for 
every Exchange participant. As discussed above, the Service would 
provide Subscribers with improved risk mitigation at an increased cost. 
Although non-Subscribers may indirectly benefit from the Service to the 
extent that the Service would isolate shared gateways from potential 
message disruptions as a result of Subscribers' trading patterns on the 
dedicated gateways, the bulk of the benefits of the Service would 
accrue only to Subscribers. It is therefore equitable that only 
Subscribers be allocated a fee for the Service and that Members and 
non-Members that choose to utilize only shared gateways continue to be 
assessed no fee. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed 
rule change constitutes an equitable allocation of fees because all 
similarly situated Members and non-Members would be charged the same 
amount (all shared gateways are free whereas all dedicated gateways 
would be $5,000 per month), based on their preference for either a 
shared gateway or a dedicated gateway.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee for the Service is 
reasonable because the Service would be optional, available to all 
Members and non-Members who have Logical Ports and that the fees 
charged for the Service would be the same for all Subscribers. In 
addition, the proposed fee would be reasonable because the fee is a 
reflection of the cost of necessary hardware, software and 
infrastructure costs, maintenance fees and staff support costs. The 
revenue generated by the Service would pay for the development, 
marketing, technical infrastructure and operating costs of the Service. 
Profits generated above these costs would help offset the costs that 
the Exchange incurs in operating and regulating a highly efficient and 
reliable platform for the trading of U.S. equities. This increased 
revenue stream would allow the Exchange to offer the Service at a 
reasonable rate, consistent with the similar service currently provided 
by the ISE and discussed in more detail below.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 68324 (November 30, 
2012), 77 FR 72901 (December 6, 2012) (SR-ISE-2012-89) (allowing 
members to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways and adopting a fee 
for the use of such gateways). See also, ISE, Schedule of Fees, 
http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 per shared gateway per month and $2000 
per dedicated gateway pair per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly 
competitive market. In such an environment, the Exchange must 
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees. As discussed 
above, the Service would be optional. If Members and/or non-Members 
deem the proposed fee for the Service to be unreasonable or to outweigh 
the benefits of the Service, such Members and/or non-Members would be 
under no obligation to subscribe to or continue to subscribe to the 
Service. These market forces would act as a restraint on excessively 
high fees because if the market judged that the Service was overpriced, 
the resulting lack of interest would render the Service irrelevant.
    Furthermore, the Exchange believes that its fee for the Service is 
reasonable because it is within industry norms, as it is comparable to 
that assessed by ISE for its dedicated gateway service. Currently, ISE 
charges its members a monthly fee of $250 per shared gateway and 
provides the option to utilize a pair of dedicated gateways for a fee 
of $2,000 per month.\19\ The Exchange believes that its pricing ($5,000 
per dedicated gateway pair per month) is competitive with that offered 
by ISE because, although the cost of a dedicated gateway pair would be 
higher, the Exchange currently allows dedicated gateway Subscribers as 
well as its other Members and non-Members to utilize multiple shared 
gateways at no charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See ISE, Schedule of Fees, http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 
per shared gateway per month and $2000 per dedicated gateway pair 
per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee is reasonable 
because payment for the Service on a monthly basis would provide 
flexibility and administrative benefits. Subscribers that choose to 
cancel the Service within the thirty (30) days' notice would have no 
recurring obligation. By offering payment for the Service on a month-
to-month basis, the Exchange assumes the risk of termination by 
Subscribers prior to such time that it is able to recoup the costs of 
hardware, software, and operational resources necessary to provide the 
Service.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also 
consistent with the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ which 
requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules are not 
designed to unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers 
or dealers and are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts 
and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to 
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, 
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and 
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and 
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market 
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 
The Exchange believes that this proposal would not unfairly 
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because 
purchase of the Service would not be a prerequisite for participation 
on the Exchange. Only those Members and non-Members that deem the 
Service to be of sufficient overall value and usefulness would purchase 
it. The fees applicable to the Service would apply uniformly to all 
Subscribers. While Members and non-Members may opt for a dedicated 
gateway, those that do not will continue to be able to access the 
Exchange via a shared gateway. The Exchange further notes that it 
would, on an ongoing basis, continue to carefully monitor incoming and 
outgoing message traffic across all access gateways (shared and 
dedicated) so that available capacity is adequate to support Exchange 
message traffic. Additionally, the Exchange would continue to install 
additional shared access gateways as needed so that consistent capacity 
levels are maintained. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that both shared 
and dedicated gateway options consist of identical hardware and 
software with identical capacity and capabilities, offering equivalent 
latency under the same loads. To the extent that the load on a 
Subscriber's dedicated gateway is less than the load on a shared 
gateway, a Subscriber normally would expect reduced latencies in 
sending orders to the Exchange through its dedicated gateway. In this 
regard, the Service is similar to other types of services

[[Page 39398]]

provided by self-regulatory organizations that offer higher levels of 
service for a higher fee.\21\ Other than the reduced latencies due to 
reduced gateway load, the Exchange believes that there are no material 
differences in terms of access to the Exchange between Subscribers and 
Members and non-Members that choose not to subscribe to the Service. 
Thus, access to the Exchange would continue to be offered on fair and 
non-discriminatory terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \21\ For example, many exchanges allow their member and non-
member organizations the option to pay a higher price in exchange 
for a more stable and/or efficient connection, such as that obtained 
through co-location services or payment for logical ports. See, 
e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21, 
2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56) (approving 
fees charged by NYSE for its co-location services); Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 62397 (June 28, 2010) 75 FR 38860 (July 6, 
2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-019) (approving fees charged by NASDAQ for its 
co-location services); see also NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, Price 
List--Trading Connectivity, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2 (listing fees for use of logical 
ports); BATS Exchange, Inc. & BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Exchange Fee 
Schedule, http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/BATS-Exchanges_Fee_Schedules.pdf (listing fees for logical 
ports); EDGX Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange Fee Schedule, http://www.directedge.com/Membership/FeeSchedule/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx 
(listing fees for logical ports).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In providing access to a pair of access gateways, the Service is 
also designed to allow Subscribers to mitigate risks associated with 
potentially fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices that may 
adversely affect the Subscriber's trading experience. If, for example, 
a firm attempted to manipulate the submission of order flow into shared 
access gateways by directly or indirectly causing a surge in message 
traffic to be sent to the Exchange, Subscribers would, to an extent, 
mitigate the risks associated with such a manipulative tactic, as they 
would be insulated from all such external order flow.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would 
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
    The Exchange believes that the Service would neither increase nor 
decrease intramarket competition because the Service is available to 
all Members and non-Members on a uniform and voluntary basis. As the 
Exchange currently supports access through shared access gateways and 
strives to ensure that all access gateways maintain a consistent level 
of capacity, the use of the Service by a Member or non-Member would be 
driven in part by their relative tolerance for the risks associated 
with trading disruptions.
    The Exchange notes that there is significant competition among 
market centers for higher quality services at a premium, including, but 
not limited to, services related to connectivity. By introducing the 
proposed Service, the Exchange believes that it would be providing an 
additional service similar to that currently offered by ISE.\22\ As 
such, the Service would increase competition by providing Members with 
additional options related to connectivity. The Exchange therefore 
believes that the Service would increase intermarket competition 
because it may attract order flow from market participants interested 
in the benefits offered by the Service that might otherwise send their 
order flow to competing venues. Alternatively, if demand for the 
Service does not meet expectations, the Service would neither increase 
nor decrease intermarket competition because the Service would fail to 
persuade market participants to send their order flow to the Exchange 
rather than to competing venues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See ISE, Schedule of Fees, http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf (charging $250 
per shared gateway per month and $2000 per dedicated gateway pair 
per month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, 
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received 
any unsolicited written comments from its Members or other interested 
parties.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    The portion of the foregoing proposed rule change pertain to fees 
for the EdgeRisk Gateway has become effective pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A) \23\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \24\ 
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, because the portion of the foregoing proposed rule 
change pertaining to the establishment of the EdgeRisk Gateway service 
does not: (1) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the 
public interest; (2) impose any significant burden on competition; and 
(3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the date 
of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if 
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, 
the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act\25\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission 
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, 
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, 
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the 
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the 
Commission. The Exchange has met this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does 
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However, 
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter 
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and 
the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 
30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative 
immediately upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and 
the public interest so that Members and non-Members may immediately 
obtain the EdgeRisk Gateway to potentially assist them in mitigating 
risks associated with excess message traffic and programmatic 
mistakes.\27\ Accordingly, the Commission hereby grants the Exchange's 
request and designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, 
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule 
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule 
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or 
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or 
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of 
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File

[[Page 39399]]

Number SR-EDGA-2013-16 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy, 
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2013-16. This file 
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help 
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all 
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are 
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to 
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other 
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the 
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and 
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All 
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does 
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should 
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All 
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2013-16 and should be 
submitted on or before July 22, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15664 Filed 6-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P