
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 191 (Thursday, October 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59537-59541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23480]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73237; File No. SR-BATS-2014-043]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt 
Rule 11.24 To Permit Members To Designate Their Retail Orders To Be 
Identified as Retail on the Exchange's Proprietary Data Feeds

September 26, 2014.
    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 September 18, 2014, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``BATS'') 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 Exchange. The Exchange 
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule 
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with 
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)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposed rule change to adopt a retail 
attribution program under new Rule 11.24. Under the program, Members 
\5\ will be able to designate that the orders they submit to the 
Exchange on behalf of retail customers be identified as Retail on the 
Exchange's proprietary data feeds.\6\ The proposed rule change is 
substantially similar to the existing rules of the BATS Y-Exchange, 
Inc. (``BYX'') \7\ and EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A ``Member'' is defined ``any registered broker or dealer 
that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A Member will 
have the status of a ``member'' of the Exchange as that term is 
defined in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act. Membership may be granted to 
a sole proprietor, partnership, corporation, limited liability 
company or other organization which is a registered broker or dealer 
pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, and which has been approved by 
the Exchange.'' BYX Rule 1.5(n).
    \6\ The Exchanges proprietary data feeds are set forth under 
Exchange Rule 11.22.
    \7\ See BYX Rule 11.24. Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 
68303 (November 27, 2012), 77 FR 71652 (December 3, 2012) (``RPI 
Approval Order'') (SR-BYX-2012-019); 69643 (May 28, 2013), 78 FR 
33136 (June 3, 2013) (Approval Order) (SR-BYX-2013-008); 71249 
(January 7, 2014), 79 FR 2229 (January 13, 2014) (SR-BYX-2014-001) 
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness to Extend the Pilot 
Period for the Retail Price Improvement Program); and 72730 (July 
31, 2014), 79 FR 45857 (SR-BYX-2014-013) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness to Amend Rule 11.24(a)(2) to Include 
Riskless Principal Orders to the Types of Orders that May Qualify as 
Retail Orders under the Retail Price Improvement Program).
    \8\ See Footnote 4 of the Exchange's Fee Schedule available at 
http://www.directedge.com/Trading/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx; Securities 
Exchange Act Release Nos. 68310 (November 28, 2012), 77 FR 71860 
(December 4, 2012) (SR-EDGX-2012-47) (Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend EDGX Rule 15.1(a) and 
(c)); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69378 (April 15, 2013), 78 
FR 23617 (April 19, 2013) (SR-EDGX-2013-13) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Footnote 4 
of the Exchange's Fee Schedule Regarding Retail Orders); 69852 (June 
25, 2013), 78 FR 39420 (July 1, 2013) (SR-EDGX-2013-20) (Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness to Amend Footnote 4 of the 
Exchange's Fee Schedule Regarding Retail Orders); and 72292 (June 2, 
2014), 79 FR 32798 (June 6, 2014) (SR-EDGX-2014-13) (Order Approving 
Proposed Rule Change to Amend Footnote 4 of the Exchange's Fee 
Schedule to Permit Members to Designate their Retail Orders to be 
Identified as Retail on the EDGX Book Feed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's 
Web site at http://www.batstrading.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 parts of such 
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt a retail attribution program under 
new Rule 11.24. Under the program, Members will be able to designate 
that the orders they submit to the Exchange on behalf of retail 
customers be identified as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data 
feeds. The proposed rule change is substantially similar to the 
existing rules of BYX and EDGX.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra notes 7 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Earlier this year, the Exchange and its affiliate BATS Y-Exchange, 
Inc. (``BYX'') received approval to effect a merger (the ``Merger'') of 
the Exchange's parent company, BATS Global Markets, Inc., with Direct 
Edge Holdings LLC, the indirect parent of EDGX and EDGA Exchange, Inc. 
(``EDGA,'' and together with BATS, BYX and EDGX, the ``BGM Affiliated 
Exchanges'').\10\ In the context of the Merger, the BGM Affiliated 
Exchanges are working to align certain system functionality, retaining 
only intended differences between the BGM Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, 
the proposal set forth below is intended to add certain system 
functionality currently offered by BYX and EDGX in order to provide a 
consistent technology offering for members of the BGM Affiliated 
Exchanges.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71375 (January 23, 
2014), 79 FR 4771 (January 29, 2014) (SR-BATS-2013-059; SR-BYX-2013-
039).
    \11\ The Exchange anticipates that EDGA will submit a similar 
proposed rule change in the future to add a definition for ``Retail 
Order'' and to permit members to designate that their Retail Orders 
be identified as Retail on their respective proprietary data feeds.

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

[[Page 59538]]

    Both BYX and EDGX \12\ have established programs in an attempt to 
attract retail order flow to the Exchange. Under BYX's Retail Price 
Improvement (``RPI'') Program, all exchange members are permitted to 
submit Retail Price Improvement Orders (``RPI Orders'') \13\ which are 
designed to provide potential price improvement for Retail Orders in 
the form of non-displayed interest that is better than the national 
best bid that is a Protected Quotation (``Protected NBB'') or the 
national best offer that is a Protected Quotation (``Protected NBO,'' 
and together with the Protected NBB, the ``Protected NBBO'').\14\ Under 
the EDGX program, eligible EDGX members may qualify for a rebate under 
the Retail Order Tier included in Footnote 4 of the EDGX fee schedule. 
Both the BYX and EDGX rules define a Retail Order \15\ and provides 
[sic] attestation requirements \16\ that Members must complete to send 
Retail Orders to the Exchange.\17\ Under the EDGX program, eligible 
members may designate also that their Retail Orders be identified as 
Retail on the EDGX book feed.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra notes 7 and 8.
    \13\ A ``Retail Price Improvement Order'' is defined in BYX Rule 
11.24(a)(3) as an order that consists of non-displayed interest on 
the Exchange that is priced better than the Protected NBB or 
Protected NBO by at least $0.001 and that is identified as such. See 
Rule 11.24(a)(3).
    \14\ The term Protected Quotation is defined in BYX Rule 1.5(t) 
and has the same meaning as is set forth in Regulation NMS Rule 
600(b)(58). The terms Protected NBB and Protected NBO are defined in 
BYX Rule 1.5(s). The Protected NBB is the best-priced protected bid 
and the Protected NBO is the best-priced protected offer. Generally, 
the Protected NBB and Protected NBO and the national best bid 
(``NBB'') and national best offer (``NBO,'' together with the NBB, 
the ``NBBO'') will be the same. However, a market center is not 
required to route to the NBB or NBO if that market center is subject 
to an exception under Regulation NMS Rule 611(b)(1) or if such NBB 
or NBO is otherwise not available for an automatic execution. In 
such case, the Protected NBB or Protected NBO would be the best-
priced protected bid or offer to which a market center must route 
interest pursuant to Regulation NMS Rule 611.
    \15\ Both BYX and EDGX define Retail Order (i) an agency or 
riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 
5320.03 that originates from a natural person; (ii) is submitted to 
EDGX by a Member, provided that no change is made to the terms of 
the order; and (iii) the order does not originate from a trading 
algorithm or any other computerized methodology. See supra notes 7 
and 8.
    \16\ Both BYX and EDGX require Members to submit a signed 
written attestation, in a form prescribed by the exchange, that they 
have implemented policies and procedures that are reasonably 
designed to ensure that substantially all orders designated by the 
Member as a ``Retail Order'' comply with the above requirements. See 
supra notes 7 and 8.
    \17\ The attestation requirements and definition of Retail Order 
under Exchange Rule 11.24 are substantially similar to Footnote 4 of 
the EDGX fee schedule. See supra notes 7 and 8.
    \18\ See Footnote 4 of the EDGX's fee schedule available at 
http://www.directedge.com/Trading/EDGXFeeSchedule.aspx. To align 
functionality with EDGX, BYX has also recently submitted a proposed 
rule change to the Commission to add paragraph (i) to Rule 11.24 to 
permit Members to designate that their Retail Orders submitted under 
the Exchange's RPI Program be identified as Retail on BYX's 
proprietary data feeds, rather than by their MPID. See SR-BYX-2014-
024 (filed September 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt a retail attribution program under 
new Rule 11.24. Under the program, Members who satisfy the requirements 
under proposed Rule 11.24 will be able to designate that their orders 
they submit to the Exchange on behalf of retail customers be identified 
as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. Specifically, 
proposed Rule 11.24 would: (i) Define a Retail Order and Retail Member 
Organization (``RMO''); (ii) set forth an RMO's qualification and 
application requirements; (iii) outline procedures for when an RMO 
fails to abide by the Retail Order requirements; and (iv) outline the 
procedures under which a Member may appeal the Exchange's decision to 
disapprove it or disqualify it as an RMO. The proposed rule change is 
substantially similar to the existing functionality and requirements on 
the BYX \19\ and EDGX.\20\ However, unlike the BYX and EDGX programs, 
the proposed rule change would not include any rebate provision or 
mechanics for price improvement, as described above. The proposed rule 
change would only allow an RMO to designate that their Retail Orders be 
identified as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds,\21\ as 
is currently provided for by EDGX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 7.
    \20\ See supra note 8.
    \21\ The Exchange will submit a proposed rule change to the 
Commission should it decide in the future to expand the program to 
include a rebate or price improvement mechanism for Retail Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions
    The Exchange proposes to adopt the following definitions under 
proposed Rule 11.24(a). First, the term ``Retail Member Organization'' 
would be defined as a Member (or a division thereof) that has been 
approved by the Exchange to submit Retail Orders. The proposed 
definition of Retail Member Organization is identical to that contained 
in BYX Rule 11.24(a)(1).\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the term ``Retail Order'' would be defined as an agency or 
riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 
that originates from a natural person and is submitted to the Exchange 
by an RMO, provided that no change is made to the terms of the order 
with respect to price or side of market and the order does not 
originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized 
methodology. The proposed definition of Retail Order is identical to 
that contained in BYX Rule 11.24(a)(1) and in Footnote 4 of the EDGX 
fee schedule.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See supra notes 7 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Program Requirements and Procedures
    The proposed rule change would also include qualification standards 
and a review process identical to BYX Rule 11.24(b). The qualification 
and review standards under proposed Rule 11.24(b) are designed to 
ensure that Members are properly qualified as an RMO and only attribute 
as Retail those orders that meet the definition of Retail Orders under 
proposed Rule 11.24(a)(1) described above. Like on BYX, under proposed 
Rule 11.24(b), any Member could qualify as an RMO if it conducts a 
retail business or handles Retail Orders on behalf of another broker-
dealer. Any Member that wishes to obtain RMO status would be required 
to submit: (1) An application form; (2) an attestation, in a form 
prescribed by the Exchange, that substantially all orders submitted by 
the Member as Retail Orders would meet the qualifications for such 
orders under proposed Rule 11.24(a)(1); and (3) supporting 
documentation sufficient to demonstrate the retail nature and 
characteristics of the applicant's order flow.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ For example, a prospective RMO could be required to provide 
sample marketing literature, Web site screenshots, other publicly 
disclosed materials describing the retail nature of their order 
flow, and such other documentation and information as the Exchange 
may require to obtain reasonable assurance that the applicant's 
order flow would meet the requirements of the Retail Order 
definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Like on BYX and EDGX, an RMO would be required to have written 
policies and procedures reasonably designed to assure that it will only 
designate orders as Retail Orders if all requirements of a Retail Order 
are met. Such written policies and procedures must require the Member 
to (i) exercise due diligence before entering a Retail Order to assure 
that entry as a Retail Order is in compliance with the requirements of 
this rule, and (ii) monitor whether orders entered as Retail Orders 
meet the applicable requirements. If the RMO represents Retail Orders 
from another broker-dealer customer, the RMO's supervisory procedures 
must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it receives from 
such broker-dealer customer that it designates as Retail Orders meet 
the definition of a Retail Order. The RMO

[[Page 59539]]

must (i) obtain an annual written representation, in a form acceptable 
to the Exchange, from each broker-dealer customer that sends it orders 
to be designated as Retail Orders that entry of such orders as Retail 
Orders will be in compliance with the requirements of this rule, and 
(ii) monitor whether its broker-dealer customer's Retail Order flow 
continues to meet the applicable requirements.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The Exchange or another self-regulatory organization on 
behalf of the Exchange will review an RMO's compliance with these 
requirements through an exam-based review of the RMO's internal 
controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Exchange disapproves the application, the Exchange would 
provide a written notice to the Member. The disapproved applicant could 
appeal the disapproval by the Exchange as provided in proposed Rule 
11.24(d), and/or reapply for RMO status 90 days after the disapproval 
notice is issued by the Exchange. The disapproval process is identical 
to BYX Rule 11.24(b)(4). An RMO also could voluntarily withdraw from 
such status at any time by giving written notice to the Exchange.
Failure of RMO To Abide by Retail Order Requirements
    Proposed Rule 11.24(c) addresses an RMO's failure to abide by 
Retail Order requirements, which are identical to existing BYX Rule 
11.24(c). If an RMO designates orders submitted to the Exchange as 
Retail Orders and the Exchange determines, in its sole discretion, that 
those orders fail to meet any of the requirements of Retail Orders, the 
Exchange may disqualify a Member from its status as an RMO. When 
disqualification determinations are made, the Exchange would provide a 
written disqualification notice to the Member. A disqualified RMO could 
appeal the disqualification as provided in proposed Rule 11.24(d) and/
or reapply for RMO status 90 days after the disqualification notice is 
issued by the Exchange.
Appeal of Disapproval or Disqualification
    Proposed Rule 11.24(d) provides appeal rights to Members, which are 
also identical to existing BYX Rule 11.24(d). If a Member disputes the 
Exchange's decision to disapprove it as an RMO under Rule 11.24(b) or 
disqualify it under Rule 11.24(c), such Member (``appellant'') may 
request, within five business days after notice of the decision is 
issued by the Exchange, that the Retail Attribution Panel (the 
``Panel'') review the decision to determine if it was correct.
    The Panel would consist of the Exchange's Chief Regulatory Officer 
(``CRO''), or a designee of the CRO, and two officers of the Exchange 
designated by the Chief Information Officer (``CIO''). The Panel would 
review the facts and render a decision within the time frame prescribed 
by the Exchange. The Panel could overturn or modify an action taken by 
the Exchange and all determinations by the Panel would constitute final 
action by the Exchange on the matter at issue.
Attribution
    Currently, Members may elect that their display-eligible orders 
entered into the Exchange utilize Attributable Orders \26\ to include 
their market participant identifier (``MPID'') with their published 
quotations on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. Under the EDGX 
program, eligible members may designate that their Retail Orders be 
identified as Retail on the EDGX book feed, rather than by their 
MPID.\27\ To align functionality with EDGX, the Exchange now proposes 
Rule 11.24(i) [sic] to permit Members to designate that their Retail 
Orders submitted under the Exchange's RPI Program be identified as 
Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds.\28\ Members will still 
be permitted to designate their Retail Orders by their MPID if they do 
not choose this optional functionality. The Exchange proposes to allow 
Members to designate their orders as Retail on an order-by-order basis 
or by establishing a port setting such that all orders submitted 
through a specific order entry port are designated as Retail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ An Attributable Order is defined as, ``[a]n order that is 
designated for display (price and size) including the User's market 
participant identifier (`MPID').'' See Rule 11.9(c)(14).
    \27\ See supra note 8.
    \28\ A Member's decision on whether to identify their Retail 
Order as Retail under the proposed rule change will not impact that 
Member's eligibility to qualify as a Retail Member Organization 
under Rule 11.24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent 
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\29\ in general, and furthers the 
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\30\ in particular, in that it 
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove 
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and 
a national market system. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule 
change is consistent with these principles because it would increase 
competition among execution venues, encourage additional liquidity, and 
offer the potential for increased execution opportunities to retail 
investors. The Exchange notes that a significant percentage of the 
orders of individual investors are executed over-the-counter.\31\ The 
Exchange believes that it is appropriate to create a [sic] such a 
retail attribution program to bring more retail order flow to a public 
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \31\ See Concept Release on Equity Market Structure, Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 61358 (January 14, 2010), 75 FR 3594 
(January 21, 2010) (noting that dark pools and internalizing broker-
dealers executed approximately 25.4% of share volume in September 
2009). See also Mary L. Schapiro, Strengthening Our Equity Market 
Structure (Speech at the Economic Club of New York, Sept. 7, 2010) 
(available on the Commission's Web site). In her speech, Chairman 
Schapiro noted that nearly 30 percent of volume in U.S.-listed 
equities was executed in venues that do not display their liquidity 
or make it generally available to the public and the percentage was 
increasing nearly every month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is substantially similar to the existing 
functionality and rules of the BYX \32\ and EDGX.\33\ The Exchange also 
notes that the Commission approved a similar programs [sic] by NYSE and 
NYSE MKT.\34\ The proposed retail attribution program would contain 
identical definitions, standards and qualification procedures as the 
BYX, NYSE, and NYSE MKT programs. However, unlike these programs, the 
proposed rule change would not include any rebate provision or 
mechanics for price improvement, as described above. Like the 
Commission approved for EDGX,\35\ the proposed rule change would only 
allow an RMO to designate that their Retail Orders be identified as 
Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See supra note 7.
    \33\ See supra note 8.
    \34\ See New York Stock Exchange, Inc.'s (``NYSE'') Rule 107C. 
See also NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'') Rule 107C; NYSE Arca, Inc. 
(``NYSE Arca'') Rule 7.44. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67347 
(July 3, 2012), 77 FR 40673 (July 10, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2011-55; SR-
NYSEAmex-2011-84) (the ``RLP Approval Order''). In conjunction with 
the approval of the NYSE Retail Liquidity Program, a nearly 
identical program was proposed and approved to operate on NYSE MKT 
LLC (formerly, the American Stock Exchange). For ease of reference, 
the comparisons made in this section only refer to NYSE Rule 107C, 
but apply equally to NYSE MKT Rule 107C. The Exchange notes that the 
NYSE and NYSE MKT programs do not allow members to elect that their 
retail orders be identified as Retail on the exchange's proprietary 
data feeds.
    \35\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal will benefit market 
participants and help to promote transparency by providing additional 
information regarding quotations displayed on the Exchange and

[[Page 59540]]

disseminated via the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. Specifically, 
any Member who satisfies the requirement under Rule 11.24(b) that 
wishes to disclose via the Exchange's proprietary data feeds that their 
order is a Retail Order will be permitted to do so, and such 
functionality is substantially similar to that currently offered by 
EDGX.\36\ The proposal also promotes transparency by disseminating 
additional order information from Members who may otherwise designate 
their order as non-attributable, and thereby not include their MPID 
with their published quote on the Exchange's proprietary data 
feeds.\37\ As a result, the proposal will provide Members additional 
visibility into the types of orders they may interact with when an 
order is identified as a Retail Order. The Exchange also believes that 
the proposed rule change is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory because it would encourage Members who wish to execute 
against Retail Orders to send additional orders to the Exchange. 
Therefore, the Exchange believes the increased liquidity would 
potentially stimulating further price competition for Retail Orders, 
deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool, supporting the quality of 
price discovery, and promoting market transparency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id.
    \37\ The Exchange understands that, to date, EDGX has not 
experienced members who attribute orders by their MPID electing to 
instead attribute their Retail Orders as Retail on the EDGX book 
feed. On the contrary, the Exchange understands that EDGX members 
who previously did not attribute their order have chosen to do so as 
Retail under the EDGX program. Therefore, the Exchange does not 
anticipate its Members who currently utilize Attributable Orders to 
now elect that their Retail Orders be attributed as Retail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes its proposed qualification standards and 
review process under Rule 11.24 promote just and equitable principles 
and are not unfairly discriminatory because they are designed to ensure 
that Members are properly qualified as an RMO and only attribute as 
Retail those orders that meet the definition of Retail Orders under 
proposed Rule 11.24(a)(1) described above. The qualification process 
proposed herein by the Exchange is not designed to permit unfair 
discrimination, but rather ensure that order that are designated to be 
attributed are Retail are, in fact, order submitted by a retail 
customer that satisfy the proposed definition of Retail Order. Lastly, 
the Exchange notes that these qualification and review provisions are 
identical to those includes in the rules of the BYX, NYSE, and NYSE MKT 
that have been previously approved by the Commission.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See supra notes 7 and 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that allowing a Member to designate orders as 
Retail on either an order-by-order or on a port-by-port basis is 
consistent with the Act for the same reasons as the proposal as a whole 
is consistent with the Act. The Exchange believes that either method of 
designation results in the same message being received and processed by 
the Exchange's systems, and thus, merely reflects a detail in 
connection with the implementation of the optional designation.
    Lastly, the proposed rule change is also generally intended to add 
certain system functionality currently offered by EDGX in order to 
provide a consistent technology offering for the Exchange and EDGX. A 
consistent technology offering, in turn, will simplify the technology 
implementation, changes and maintenance by Members of the Exchange that 
are also participants on EDGX. The proposed rule change would also 
provide Members with access to functionality that may result in the 
efficient execution of such orders and will provide additional 
flexibility as well as increased functionality to the Exchange's System 
and its Members.

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

    The Exchange believes its proposed rule change would not impose any 
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the 
proposed amendment will not burden intramarket competition because the 
ability to designate Retail Orders to be identified as Retail on the 
Exchange's proprietary data feeds, rather than by their MPID, would be 
open to all Members that wish to send Retail Orders to the Exchange. 
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would increase 
intermarket competition by identifying orders as Retail via the 
Exchange's proprietary data feeds would [sic] enable the Exchange to 
better compete with other exchanges that offer similar retail order 
programs.\39\ The Exchange believes that the amendment, by increasing 
the amount of disseminated information regarding Retail Orders, will 
increase the level of competition around retail executions resulting in 
better prices for retail investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See supra note 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange reiterates that the proposed rule change is being 
proposed in the context of the technology integration of the BGM 
Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, the Exchange believes this proposed rule 
change is necessary to permit fair competition among national 
securities exchanges. In addition, the Exchange believes the proposed 
rule change will benefit Exchange participants in that it is one of 
several changes necessary to achieve offering consistent functionality 
by the BGM Affiliated Exchanges.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on 
the proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \40\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\41\ 
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the 
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any 
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 
30 days from the date on which it was filed, 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 and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \41\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \42\ normally 
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the 
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\43\ the Commission 
may 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 Exchange believes 
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the 
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes 
that waiver will provide market participants with additional 
transparency by disseminating additional order information regarding 
the types of orders they may interact with when an order is identified 
as a Retail Order in

[[Page 59541]]

a timelier manner. The Exchange further believes that waiver will 
immediately encourage market participants to send additional orders to 
the Exchange, thereby potentially stimulating further price competition 
for Retail Orders, deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool, supporting 
the quality of price discovery, and promoting market transparency. The 
Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is consistent 
with investor protection and the public interest. As a result, the 
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the 
proposal operative upon filing.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \43\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \44\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, 
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule 
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule 
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or 
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or 
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission 
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to 
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic 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 Number SR-BATS-2014-043 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-BATS-2014-043. 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 such 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-BATS-2014-043, and should be 
submitted on or before October 23, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-23480 Filed 10-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


