MSC Staff Notice 2012-44
National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading
The Manitoba Securities Commission is publishing the following on December 20, 2012:
•
Multilateral CSA Staff Notice 23-313 Blanket Orders Exempting Marketplace
Participants from Certain Provisions of National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading
and Related OSC Staff Position;
•
Canadian Securities Administrators Staff Notice 23-314 Frequently Asked Questions
about National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading; and
•
Manitoba Securities Commission Blanket Order 23-501
The MSC has also issued Blanket Order 23-501 dated December 20th which provides an
exemption from section 3(3)(a) National Instrument 23-103 until May 31, 2013, subject to
certain conditions contained in the order.
December 20, 2012
For additional information contact:
Doug Brown
Manitoba Securities Commission
Doug.Brown@gov.mb.ca
204-945-0605
Multilateral CSA Staff Notice 23-313
BLANKET ORDERS EXEMPTING MARKETPLACE PARTICIPANTS FROM
CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 23-103 ELECTRONIC
TRADING AND RELATED OSC STAFF POSITION
Background
National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading (NI 23-103) introduces a framework that
addresses risks associated with electronic trading. It comes into effect on March 1, 2013.
Since the publication
1
of the final version of NI 23-103, the Canadian Securities
Administrators (the CSA or we) have received comments and inquiries about the
implementation of certain provisions of NI 23-103. To better understand the level of
preparedness of marketplace participants in implementing NI 23-103, the CSA and the
Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) conducted a survey of
members of the Investment Industry Association of Canada (IIAC) on the
implementation of NI 23-103.
Certain IIAC members responded that they had concerns about their ability to adequately
complete testing of the automated pre-trade risk controls required under paragraph
3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 by March 1, 2013. Paragraph 3(3)(a) requires that a marketplace
participant’s risk management and supervisory controls, policies and procedures must be
reasonably designed to systematically limit the financial exposure of the marketplace
participant, including, for greater certainty, preventing:
(i) the entry of one or more orders that would result in exceeding pre-determined
credit or capital thresholds for the marketplace participant and, if applicable, its
client with marketplace access provided by the marketplace participant, and
(ii) the entry of one or more orders that exceed pre-determined price or size
parameters.
While we are of the view that the automated pre-trade risk controls required under
paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 are important to address the risks of electronic trading,
we are also of the view that these automated controls may pose other risks to our markets
if they are introduced before they have been adequately tested. Therefore, certain CSA
members have issued parallel blanket orders (orders) or related staff positions regarding
the testing and implementation of these automated pre-trade risk controls.
Interim relief for marketplace participants from implementing automated pre-trade
risk controls
CSA members in Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta have issued parallel orders,
effective March 1, 2013, that provide temporary relief to marketplace participants. The
1
(2012) 35 OSCB 6037
relief from paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 applies if a marketplace participant is testing
the automated pre-trade risk controls required under paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 by
March 1, 2013. The orders grant relief until May 31, 2013.
The orders are available on the following websites:
www.lautorite.qc.ca
www.albertasecurities.com
www.bcsc.bc.ca
We note that staff in the other CSA jurisdictions, other than Ontario, are considering
recommending to their decision makers that they also issue blanket orders that would
provide relief from paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103.
OSC Staff Position
The Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) will not be issuing a blanket order given that
orders of general application are not authorized under Ontario securities law.
OSC staff expect marketplace participants to use best efforts to comply with the
requirement for automated pre-trade risk controls under paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103
by March 1, 2013; however, OSC staff are of the view that it is not in the public interest
to recommend or pursue an enforcement action against a marketplace participant for
failure to fully implement an automated pre-trade risk control where the marketplace
participant:
(a) is testing the automated pre-trade risk controls required under paragraph
3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 by March 1, 2013; and
(b) has completed its testing and fully implemented the automated pre-trade risk
controls required under paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 by May 31, 2013.
All other requirements under NI 23-103 must be fully implemented by March 1, 2013.
We note that IIROC has followed a comparable approach to the Universal Market
Integrity Rule requirements related to the testing and implementation of automated pre
trade risk controls.
In order to address other inquiries about NI 23-103, CSA members expect to publish
shortly a Frequently Asked Questions document for NI 23-103 as a CSA Staff Notice.
Questions
If you have questions regarding this notice or the blanket orders please direct them to any
of the following:
Sonali GuptaBhaya
Ontario Securities Commission
sguptabhaya@osc.gov.on.ca
416-593-2331
Paul Romain
Ontario Securities Commission
promain@osc.gov.on.ca
416-204-8991
Élaine Lanouette
Autorité des marchés financiers
elaine.lanouette@lautorite.qc.ca
514- 395-0337 ext. 4321
Shane Altbaum
Alberta Securities Commission
shane.altbaum@asc.ca
403-355-3889
December 7, 2012
Tracey Stern
Ontario Securities Commission
tstern@osc.gov.on.ca
416-593-8167
Meg Tassie
British Columbia Securities Commission
mtassie@bcsc.ca
604-899-6819
Serge Boisvert
Autorité des marchés financiers
serge.boisvert@lautorite.qc.ca
514-395-0337 ext. 4358
CANADIAN SECURITIES ADMINISTRATORS
STAFF NOTICE 23-314
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 23-
103 ELECTRONIC TRADING
The purpose of this notice is to answer some of the frequently asked questions (FAQs)
regarding National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading (the rule or NI 23-103). NI 23-
103 is effective on March 1, 2013 and sets out requirements that apply to marketplace
participants, marketplaces and the use of automated order systems in order to address the
risks of electronic trading.
The list of FAQs below is not exhaustive, but it includes key issues and questions market
participants have posed to us. Staff of the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA or
we) may update these FAQs from time to time as necessary.
Some terms we use in this notice are defined in NI 23-103, National Instrument 21-101
Marketplace Operation (NI 21-101) or in National Instrument 23-101 Trading Rules.
A. SCOPE OF NI 23-103
A-1 Q: Does NI 23-103 apply to all securities trading activity on Canadian
marketplaces, including debt and derivatives?
A: The scope of NI 23-103 is set out in subsection 1.1(2) of Companion Policy 23-103CP
(CP). The rule applies to the electronic trading of securities, including debt securities, on
marketplaces in Canada. NI 23-103 requires marketplace participants to ensure
compliance with marketplace and regulatory requirements.
As set out in NI 21-101 and incorporated in NI 23-103, in Québec, standardized
derivatives are considered to be securities and therefore the electronic trading of
standardized derivatives on a marketplace in Québec would be subject to the
requirements of NI 23-103. NI 23-103 and the CP also provide interpretations of
“security” in Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario.
A-2 Q: Does NI 23-103 apply to all orders executed on a marketplace or only to
orders generated by an automated order system?
A: The rule applies to the electronic trading of securities on marketplaces in Canada.
Therefore, NI 23-103 applies to all orders sent electronically to a marketplace whether
generated by an automated order system or not. This means that NI 23-103 applies to
orders manually handled by a marketplace participant but sent electronically to a
marketplace.
B. PRE-TRADE RISK MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISORY CONTROLS
B-1 Q: What, if any, automated pre-trade controls are required for orders
intermediated by a marketplace participant?
A: Subsection 3(3) of NI 23-103 sets out the minimum requirements regarding pre-trade
risk controls including those relating to capital, credit, price and volume. Subsection 3(4)
of the CP provides further guidance on minimum risk management and supervisory
controls, policies and procedures.
It is important to note that each marketplace participant must examine its own business
model to manage its financial, regulatory and other risks associated with marketplace
access or providing clients with access to a marketplace. This examination will drive the
specific controls that the marketplace participant will have to establish.
B-2 Q: Do pre-trade credit checks apply to proprietary order flow?
A: The requirement under subparagraph 3(3)(a)(i) of NI 23-103 is that a marketplace
participant’s risk management and supervisory controls, policies and procedures must be
reasonably designed to prevent the entry of one or more orders that would result in
exceeding pre-determined credit or capital thresholds of the marketplace participant.
Therefore, all order flow that is sent electronically by a marketplace participant to a
marketplace, including proprietary order flow, would be subject to pre-trade capital or
credit checks as applicable.
B-3 Q: Where should pre-trade risk controls be placed with respect to smart order
routers?
A: NI 23-103 does not specify where the mandatory pre-trade risk controls should be
placed with respect to a smart order router and therefore it is up to the marketplace
participant to determine the optimal location of its pre-trade risk controls. Under section
3(2) of the rule, orders must pass through automated pre-trade risk filters that are under
the control of the marketplace participant before being entered on a marketplace.
Therefore, if orders do not pass through automated controls that have been set by the
marketplace participant prior to entry to a smart order router, the automated controls
would have to be placed at the smart order router level.
We also note that under subsection 5(1) of NI 23-103, a marketplace participant must
take all reasonable steps to ensure that the use of an automated order system, including a
smart order router, by itself or any client, does not interfere with fair and orderly markets.
Therefore, a marketplace participant must have a way to monitor if a smart order router
used by itself or any client malfunctions and erroneously sends orders to a marketplace.
2
B-4 Q: If a client is a DEA client and also sends orders to trading desks of the same
firm, does the marketplace participant need to enforce an aggregated pre-trade
capital limit on all of its client’s trading with the firm, whether by DEA, telephone
or orders sent to a sales trader?
A: If a marketplace participant does not enforce a pre-trade capital limit aggregated in
real-time on all of its client’s trading with the firm, a marketplace participant should
establish separate limits for the various trading channels (both electronic and non-
electronic) the DEA client uses at the firm. We emphasize that these limits need to be
established in light of the marketplace participant’s total financial exposure that can result
from its client’s order flow. A marketplace participant must first have a good
understanding of its total exposure with respect to a specific client and then set pre-trade
capital limits for each trading channel accordingly. The limits do not need to be
electronically linked, but do need to consider the total exposure the marketplace
participant faces with respect to its client.
B-5 Q: Is it acceptable for a marketplace participant to place separate pre-trade
limits on each electronic marketplace access channel used by a client and continue
to assess the aggregate risk posed by that client on a post-trade basis?
A: Yes. Pre-trade credit and capital limits may be applied to different electronic
marketplace access channels separately but need to be determined in the aggregate as
discussed in the answer to question B-4. We emphasize that it is important when setting
limits in this manner that the limits be established in order to manage the total financial
exposure of the marketplace participant that might result from its client.
B-6 Q: Must a marketplace participant’s pre-trade risk controls take into account
the threshold limits applicable to marketplaces established under section 8 of NI 23-
103?
A: IIROC is currently consulting industry participants regarding the manner and levels at
which the marketplace thresholds should be set. We note that the obligation in section 8
of NI 23-103 to not execute orders that exceed the price and volume thresholds as set by
a regulation services provider or a marketplace that directly monitors the conduct of its
participants rests with the marketplace, not the marketplace participant. Therefore, a
marketplace participant is not obligated under NI 23-103 to specifically prevent sending
orders that exceed a set marketplace threshold.
1
1
However, if the trading of the marketplace participant is subject to the Universal Market Integrity Rules,
IIROC will expect that the parameters be set to prevent an order exceeding the marketplace thresholds
applicable to the marketplace on which the order is intended to be entered to the extent that such
marketplace thresholds are publicly disclosed and readily ascertainable. See IIROC Notice 12-0364 - Rules
Notice – Guidance Note – UMIR – Guidance Respecting Electronic Trading (December 7, 2012). At this
time, IIROC has not established guidance on acceptable marketplace thresholds.
3
B-7 Q: Are pre-determined capital or credit thresholds to be based on: (i) all
outstanding open orders in the marketplace, (ii) all orders staged to go out to the
marketplace, open on the marketplace, and executed or (iii) executed orders only?
A: Guidance regarding the setting of pre-determined credit or capital thresholds is found
in subsection 3(5) of the CP. Specifically, the CP notes that pre-determined credit or
capital thresholds may be set based on different criteria, such as per order, per trade
account, trading strategies or using a combination of these factors. The CP also states
that the marketplace participant may also consider measuring compliance with set credit
or capital thresholds on the basis of orders entered rather than executions obtained. In
general, it is up to the marketplace participant to determine the best method as to how to
set the pre-determined capital or credit threshold in order to manage the risks associated
with marketplace access or providing clients with access to a marketplace. Regardless of
how the marketplace participant measures compliance with its thresholds, the
marketplace participant should consider whether to take into account the existence of
executed but unsettled trades, including those from previous days. We expect that this
consideration would be driven by the marketplace participant’s assessment of its business
model’s risks.
B-8 Q: Please clarify what aggregate margin and capital limits would be required.
A: We are of the view that a one-size-fits-all approach with respect to limits for capital
thresholds would not best serve our markets and therefore there are no specific capital
limits that are mandated under NI 23-103. The rule uses a principles based approach that
provides a marketplace participant with flexibility in setting limits that are appropriate to
its business model and risk tolerance. This approach is also in line with current global
standards.
B-9 Q: Is a marketplace participant required to set risk controls to avoid price
movements that trigger the single stock circuit breakers (i.e. reject orders that may
impact price by greater than 10%)?
A: No. NI 23-103 does not require a marketplace participant to set risk controls that
would prevent price movements that trigger the single stock circuit breakers; however,
this would not preclude a marketplace participant from doing so if it thought important to
manage its risks associated with marketplace access or providing clients with access to a
marketplace.
2
2
However, if the trading of the marketplace participant is subject to the Universal Market Integrity Rules,
IIROC will expect that the parameters be set to prevent an order exceeding the limits publicly disclosed by
IIROC for the exercise of the power of a Market Integrity Official under Rule 10.9 of UMIR. See IIROC
Notice 12-0364 – Rules Notice – Guidance Note – UMIR – Guidance Respecting Electronic Trading
(December 7, 2012). For the limits on price movement before IIROC will consider regulatory intervention
see IIROC Notice 12-0040 - Guidance Note – UMIR – Guidance Respecting the Implementation of Single-
Stock Circuit Breakers (February 2, 2012) and IIROC Notice 12-0258 – Guidance Note – UMIR –
Guidance on Regulatory Intervention for the Variation or Cancellation of Trades (August 20, 2012).
4
B-10 Q: As noted in the introduction of the CP, the intent of NI 23-103 is to focus on
the gate-keeping functions of the executing broker. It is also noted that the clearing
broker bears some responsibility in managing its risks under National Instrument
31-103 Registration Requirements, Exemptions and Ongoing Registrant Obligations
(NI 31-103). Are executing and clearing brokers required to share client
information for the purposes of managing the pre-trade risk settings under NI 23-
103?
A: There is no requirement under NI 23-103 for executing and clearing brokers to share
client information for the purposes of managing pre-trade risk thresholds; however, a
clearing broker may choose to require this information before continuing to provide its
clearing services in order to meet its requirement under NI 31-103 to manage the risks of
its business in accordance with prudent business practices.
B-11 Q: Since each ATS is also registered as a dealer, will an ATS be responsible for
assigning limits for its subscribers?
A: No. The marketplace participant is obligated under section 3(1) of NI 23-103 to
establish, maintain and ensure compliance with risk management and supervisory
controls, policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to manage the risks
associated with marketplace access or providing clients with access to a marketplace.
Third parties, including marketplaces, may provide the automated pre-trade risk controls
required under section 3(2); however, as set out in section 3(5) of NI 23-103, a
marketplace participant must directly and exclusively set and adjust the risk management
and supervisory controls, policies and procedures, including those provided by third
parties.
B-12 Q: May a third-party vendor set or adjust pre-trade risk limits at the specific
written request of a marketplace participant?
A: Yes. A third-party vendor would be able to effect the setting or adjusting of a specific
risk management or supervisory control, policy or procedure for a marketplace
participant but only if the marketplace participant solely determines the specific threshold
for each pre-trade risk control. We note that a third-party vendor may especially need to
perform the actual setting or adjusting of risk limits in the case when there are
connectivity issues or other outages between the vendor’s system and the marketplace
participant’s system.
5
C.
MONITORING OF TRADING ACTIVITY
C-1 Q: Does the requirement under subparagraph 3(3)(b)(iv) of NI 23-103 for
compliance staff of a marketplace participant to receive immediate order and trade
information refer to the compliance department of the firm or the business
supervisors that have a compliance function?
A: The reference to “compliance staff” in subparagraph 3(3)(b)(iv) is meant to be
interpreted broadly as the arrangements and set-up of compliance departments can widely
vary among marketplace participants. The required order and trade information should
go to the individual or group that has the main responsibility to review the compliance of
those orders and trades with securities laws and IIROC requirements for the marketplace
participant.
C-2 Q: What types of same-day reviews of order and trade information are required
under NI 23-103 given that prescribed capital and other risk checks will be applied
automatically in real time? Are there any specific criteria that should be reviewed
same day?
A: Order and trade information is to be reviewed regularly, in part to ensure that the
automated pre-trade risk checks are functioning appropriately and also to identify any
anomalous trading behaviour that cannot be identified merely through automated pre
trade risk controls. No specific criteria have been listed in NI 23-103 or the CP as to
what must be reviewed on a same-day basis; rather, it is left up to the marketplace
participant’s discretion to determine what the relevant criteria should be and how often
these criteria should be reviewed in order to prudently manage the risks of its business.
C-3 Q: In circumstances where introducing brokers know their clients best and set
pre-trade risk thresholds for their clients, must a carrying broker also set pre-trade
limits notwithstanding the introducing broker's pre-trade risk limits?
A: Section 4 of the CP explains that a participant dealer may, on a reasonable basis,
authorize an investment dealer to set or adjust a specific risk management or supervisory
control, policy or procedure on the participant dealer’s behalf by written contract and
after a thorough assessment of the investment dealer’s risk management or supervisory
control, policy or procedure. However, the participant dealer that is the executing dealer
must also have reasonable controls in place to manage the risks it incurs by executing
orders for other dealers. While an executing dealer may not need to set the limits for
specific risk management or supervisory controls, policies or procedures for the ultimate
client because it has authorized the introducing broker to do so, the executing dealer will
need to ensure it sets limits for the flow it receives from the introducing broker as a
whole.
Authorizing an investment dealer to set or adjust a risk management or supervisory
control, policy or procedure does not relieve the participant dealer of its obligations under
section 3 of NI 23-103. We note that subsection 4(d) of NI 23-103 requires the
6
participant dealer to regularly assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the setting or
adjusting of the risk management or supervisory control, policy or procedure by the
investment dealer.
D.
AUTOMATED ORDER SYSTEMS
D-1 Q: Section 5(1) of NI 23-103 provides that a marketplace participant must
ensure that the use of an automated order system by any client does not interfere
with fair and orderly markets. What does this entail? For example, does this
require an average daily volume check on client orders since a large market order
can freeze a symbol? Does this apply equally to equity as well as equity options and
other asset classes?
A: The requirement for a marketplace participant to take all reasonable steps to ensure
that the use of an automated order system by any client does not interfere with fair and
orderly markets is an overarching principle that obliges a marketplace participant to
monitor and manage the use of each automated order system by a client.
3
There is no
requirement to conduct an average daily volume check under NI 23-103, but if a
marketplace participant is of the view that this would be a useful tool to manage its risks
and help ensure that the use of an automated order system by a client does not interfere
with the fair and orderly functioning of the markets, the marketplace participant may
choose to institute such a check.
The requirement under section 5(1) of the rule applies to each instance where a client
uses an automated order system to trade a security, as that term is defined in each CSA
jurisdiction. For the scope of NI 23-103, see our response to question A-1.
D-2 Q: Subsection 5(3)(b) of NI 23-103 requires that every automated order system
used by a marketplace participant or any client is tested in accordance with prudent
business practices. Can a marketplace participant rely on a third-party vendor for
the testing of these systems and applications?
A: Section 5 of the CP outlines that a participating dealer does not necessarily have to
conduct tests on each automated order system used by its clients itself but must be
satisfied that these automated order systems have been appropriately tested.
A marketplace participant should consider how it documents the testing that has been
conducted on an automated order system used by itself or any client.
3
If the trading of the marketplace participant is subject to the Universal Market Integrity Rules, Rule 10.9
of UMIR allows IIROC to delay, halt or suspend trading in a security at any time and for such period of
time as IIROC may consider appropriate in the interest of a fair and orderly market. IIROC has issued
guidance on when trading activity may be considered to be interfering with a “fair and orderly market”. In
particular, see IIROC Notice 12-0040 – Guidance Notice – UMIR – Guidance Respecting the
Implementation of Single-Stock Circuit Breakers (February 2, 2012) and IIROC Notice 12-0258 –
Guidance Note – UMIR – Guidance on Regulatory Intervention for the Variation or Cancellation of Trades
(August 20, 2012).
7
D-3 Q: Subparagraph 5(3)(c)(ii) of NI 23-103 requires a marketplace participant to
have controls in place to immediately prevent orders generated by an automated
order system used by the marketplace participant or any client from reaching a
marketplace. Would a reasonable process involving human interaction be
considered to “immediately” stop orders from an automated order system from
being entered on a market? For example, would a process where a marketplace
participant calls a vendor or marketplace in order to terminate access for a third-
party smart order router be considered to meet that standard?
A: The overarching requirement of this provision is that a marketplace participant’s risk
management controls, policies and procedures are reasonably designed to manage, in
accordance with prudent business practices, the financial, regulatory and other risks
associated with marketplace access or providing clients with access to a marketplace. It
is therefore up to the marketplace participant, based on its business model, the type of
order flow that it handles, and the speed at which a malfunctioning automated order
system can harm market integrity, to determine whether an automated function or manual
process to stop orders from reaching a marketplace is appropriate.
Implementation of NI 23-103
Further to Multilateral CSA Staff Notice 23-313 Blanket Orders Exempting Marketplace
Participant from Certain Provisions of National Instrument 23-103 Electronic Trading
and Related OSC Staff Position
4
, we note that New Brunswick has also issued a blanket
order, effective March 1, 2013, that provides temporary relief from paragraph 3(3)(a) of
NI 23-103 to marketplace participants that are testing the automated pre-trade risk
controls required under paragraph 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 by March 1, 2013. The blanket
order grants relief until May 31, 2013.
If you have any questions about these FAQs or NI 23-103 generally, please contact any
of the following CSA staff:
Sonali GuptaBhaya
Tracey Stern
Ontario Securities Commission
Ontario Securities Commission
(416) 593-2331
(416) 593-8167
sguptabhaya@osc.gov.on.ca
tstern@osc.gov.on.ca
Paul Romain
Meg Tassie
Ontario Securities Commission
British Columbia Securities Commission
(416) 204-8991
(604) 899-6819
promain@osc.gov.on.ca
mtassie@bcsc.bc.ca
4
(2012) 35 OSCB 11134
8
Élaine Lanouette
Autorité des marchés financiers
(514) 395-0337 ext. 4321
elaine.lanouette@lautorite.qc.ca
Shane Altbaum
Alberta Securities Commission
(403) 355-3889
shane.altbaum@asc.ca
December 20, 2012.
Serge Boisvert
Autorité des marchés financiers
(514) 395-0337 ext. 4358
serge.boisvert@lautorite.qc.ca
9
TH E
MA N l "rOB A
SECUR ITIES
COMMISSI ON
THE SECURITIES ACT
Section 20 and
NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 23-103
Electronic Trading
BlAN KET ORDER 23-501
INTERPRETATION:
1. Terms defined in the Securities Act, R.S.M. 1989, c.SO, National Instrument 14-
101 Oefinitions, National Instrument 21-101 Marketplace Operation , or NI 23-
103 Electronic Trading have the same meaning in this Instrument.
WHEREAS:
Background
2.
NI 23-103 comes into force on March 1, 2013.
3.
Some marketplace participants expressed concern that they are unable to
complete testing of risk management and supervisory controls, policies and
procedures required under NI 23-103 by March 1, 2013.
The Commission is of the opinion that it would not be prejudicial to the public
interest to make this order.
IT IS ORDERED:
1.
THAT pursuant to s.20(1) of The Securities Act, section 3(3)(a) of NI 23-103 does
not apply to
persons who
management
and
supervisory
section 3(3)(a);
2.
THAT this order is effective March 1, 2013 and expires May 31, 2013.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
If
tlnll
III
\
111'111111111.'
JI\II
I
Order No, 6628
December 20, 2012
have
begun
testing
by
March
1, 2013, the
risk
controls,
policies
and
procedures
required
in
d &z=K~ Direct:'. Legal
0 .1
j
Ii
,'\ 0 I
I • \
\
\
111
'I
III h
.1
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.