Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Relating to a Remote Specialist Fee, 37163-37165 [2011-15776]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
products would submit transactions in
eligible futures products to the account
for clearance.
OCC is amending its current By-Laws
and Rules governing internal crossmargining to create rules similar to the
rules of the long-standing crossmargining program between OCC and
CME, for example, for affiliated clearing
members. In the case of the crossmargining programs between OCC and
other DCOs, there are two accounts at
the clearing level—one at each of the
participating clearing organizations. In
the internal cross-margining program,
there is no need for two separate
accounts, which would in any event be
margined together and for which the
affiliated clearing members would in
any event be jointly and severally liable
as they are for the two accounts in the
case of the OCC–CME program.
Article VI, Section 25(b) of OCC’s ByLaws currently requires clearing
members to obtain a ‘‘Market
Professional’s Agreement for Internal
Cross-Margining’’ from each market
professional whose positions are
included in an Internal Non-Proprietary
Cross-Margining Account. OCC will use
a modified form of this agreement for
the account held jointly by a pair of
affiliated clearing members.6 OCC does
not intend to require current
participants in the internal crossmargining program to obtain reexecuted
agreements in updated form because the
modifications are clarifications only and
not substantive changes.
As in the case of the existing internal
cross-margining program, the Internal
Non-Proprietary Cross-Margining
Account would be treated as a
segregated futures account under
Section 4d of the CEA and, in
accordance with Appendix B to Part 190
of the CFTC’s regulations, would be
separately segregated from the regular
segregated futures account that an OCC
clearing member may maintain under
Article VI, Section 3(f) of OCC’s ByLaws. In order to expand the internal
cross-margining program to include
accounts carried by pairs of affiliated
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
6 The
proposed form of the agreement, titled
‘‘Market Professional’s Agreement for Internal
Cross-Margining (Affiliated Clearing Members)’’ is
attached as Exhibit 5A to the proposed rule change
filing. The existing ‘‘Market Professional’s
Agreement for Internal Cross-Margining’’ applicable
to the internal cross-margining program for single
clearing members has been renamed ‘‘Market
Professional’s Agreement for Internal CrossMargining (Single Clearing Member)’’ and is
attached as Exhibit 5B to the proposed rule change
filing. In addition to modifying the title to the form
of the agreement applicable to single clearing
members, a sentence has been added at the end of
paragraph seven of that agreement to conform it to
the corresponding provision in the form of the
agreement for affiliated clearing members.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
clearing members, OCC has requested
that the CFTC either issue a new or
amended order under Section 4d of the
CEA.7
III. Comment Letters
The Commission received one
comment letter opposing the proposed
rule change 8 and one comment letter in
favor of the proposed rule change.9 OCC
responded to the letter in opposition to
the proposal.10 The commenter
opposing OCC’s proposal stated that
there was ‘‘no universal advantage to
commingled monies or other valued
properties’’ and that he ‘‘visualize[d] the
possibility of from [sic] frequent
disagreements between the Dual
Registrants and OCC.’’ In its response,
OCC disagreed and stated that crossmargining programs ‘‘are consistent
with clearing agency responsibilities
under Section 17A of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and are highly
beneficial to the clearing organizations,
its clearing members and the public.’’11
OCC also stated in its response that the
internal cross-margining program is
limited to OCC clearing members and
that participation in the program is
completely voluntary. OCC response
also indicated that it was not aware of
any disagreements between dual
registrants and OCC over the many years
that the various cross-margining
agreements have been in operation.
The commenter in support of OCC’s
proposed rule change stated he
supported the proposal because it
‘‘would harmonize the manner in which
OCC conducts its internal crossmargining program with the manner in
which existing cross-margining
programs between OCC and other
derivatives clearing organizations (e.g.,
the Chicago Mercantile Exchange) are
conducted.’’ 12
IV. Discussion
Act 13
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
requires, among other things, that the
rules of a clearing agency be designed to
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a national system for the
prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions.
Since it granted approval of the first
7 OCC
will not implement the internal crossmargining program for affiliated clearing members
until after such time that the CFTC has issued an
order or amended order under Section 4d of the
CEA as discussed above.
8 Letter from Gene Thomas, supra note 3.
9 Letter from Andrew Margolin, supra note 3.
10 Letter from OCC, supra note 3.
11 Id at 1.
12 See BofA Letter at 2.
13 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37163
cross-margining program in 1988,14 the
Commission has found that crossmargining programs are consistent with
clearing agency responsibilities under
Section 17A of the Act 15 and highly
beneficial to the clearing organization,
its clearing members, and the public.
The Commission has found that crossmargining programs enhance clearing
member and systemic liquidity both in
times of normal market conditions and
in times of stress. They result in lower
initial margin deposits, which can
reduce the risk that a clearing member
will become insolvent in a distressed
market and the risk of a ripple effect of
multiple insolvencies caused by the
demise of a major market participant.16
V. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of the
Act and in particular with the
requirements of Section 17A of the
Act 17 and the rules and regulations
thereunder.
It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–
OCC–2011–03) be, and hereby is,
approved.19
For the Commission by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.20
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–15850 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–64705; File No. SR–Phlx–
2011–83]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ
OMX PHLX LLC Relating to a Remote
Specialist Fee
June 20, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
14 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34–26153
(October 3, 1988), 53 FR 39567 (October 7, 1988).
15 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.
16 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34–32708
(August 2, 1993), 58 FR 42586 (August 10, 1993).
17 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.
18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
19 In approving the proposed rule change, the
Commission considered the proposal’s impact on
efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
20 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
24JNN1
37164
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
(‘‘Act’’) 1, and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on June 13,
2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC
(‘‘Phlx’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed
rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
new fee entitled ‘‘Remote Specialist
Fee.’’
While fee changes pursuant to this
proposal are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated these changes
to be operative on July 2, 2011. The text
of the proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange’s Web site at https://
nasdaqtrader.com/
micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of the proposed rule
change is to recoup costs associated
with maintaining a remote specialist
post on the Exchange’s trading floor.
The Exchange recently amended Rule
501, Specialist Appointment, and Rule
1020, Registration and Functions of
Options Specialists, to allow qualified
Exchange members to act as off-floor
specialists in one or more options
classes (‘‘Remote Specialist’’).3 In
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64591
(June 8, 2011), 76 FR 33383 (June 2, 2011) (SR–
2 17
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
conjunction with recent amendments,
the Exchange will staff and administer
a physical location or post on the
trading floor to provide on-floor market
participants with a physical location to
trade in options classes allocated to a
Remote Specialist. This physical
location on the Exchange’s trading floor
will require Exchange operations and
regulatory staff to be present at this post.
As such, the Exchange would incur
additional operational and regulatory
costs to maintain this post and seeks to
defray such costs by assessing a Remote
Specialist Fee.
The Exchange is proposing to assess
Remote Specialists a monthly fee of $50
per option allocation.4 The Exchange
would cap the fee at $4,500 per month.
The Exchange notes that the $4,500
proposed cap is equivalent to the
Specialist Post Fee 5 which is currently
assessed on on-floor Specialists.6
While fee changes pursuant to this
proposal are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated these changes
to be operative on July 2, 2011.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7
in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 8 in particular,
in that it is an equitable allocation of
reasonable fees and other charges among
Exchange members.
The Exchange believes that this
Remote Specialist Fee is reasonable
because it seeks to recoup costs that are
incurred by the Exchange for
maintaining a defined physical location
Phlx–2011–79). A Remote Specialist is an options
specialist in one or more classes that may not have
a physical presence on an Exchange floor and is
approved by the Exchange pursuant to Rule 501.
4 Pursuant to Rule 507, Application for Approval
as an SQT or RSQT and Assignment in Options, a
Remote Specialist must meet certain requirements
to be approved as an RSQT. Rule 507(b)(i) describes
the process for the assignment of options. See
Exchange Rule 507. An RSQT is defined in
Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B) as an ROT that is a
member or member organization with no physical
trading floor presence who has received permission
from the Exchange to generate and submit option
quotations electronically in options to which such
RSQT has been assigned. An RSQT may only
submit such quotations electronically from off the
floor of the Exchange.
5 The Exchange assesses a Specialist Post fee of
$1,125 per month for a quarter post and $4,500 per
month for a full post with a maximum of $4,500 per
month. See Exchange’s Fee Schedule. The
Specialist posts are designed to facilitate Specialist
interaction with the trading crowd. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 59852 (April 30, 2009),
74 FR 21424 (May 7, 2009) (SR–Phlx–2009–39).
6 Specialists are members who are registered as
options specialists pursuant to Rule 1020(a). See
Exchange Rule 1020.
7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
or post on the Exchange’s trading floor
to facilitate interaction amongst market
participants located on the Exchange’s
physical trading floor. The Exchange
also believes the proposal is reasonable
because the Exchange proposes to cap
the Remote Specialist Fee at $4,500 per
month, which is equal to the maximum
fees the Exchange assesses on-floor
Specialists for the Specialist Post Fee.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed Remote Specialist Fee is
equitable because it would be uniformly
applied to all Remote Specialists.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.9 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 (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–Phlx–2011–83 on the
subject line.
9 15
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
24JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
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–Phlx–2011–83. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 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–Phlx–
2011–83 and should be submitted on or
before July 15, 2011.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.10
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–15776 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
10 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–64707; File No. 600–23]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of
Filing and Order Approving an
Extension of Temporary Registration
as a Clearing Agency
June 20, 2011.
The Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is
publishing this notice and order to
solicit comments from interested
persons and to extend the Fixed Income
Clearing Corporation’s (‘‘FICC’’)
temporary registration as a clearing
agency through June 30, 2013.1
On February 2, 1987, pursuant to
Sections 17A(b) and 19(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 17Ab2–1
promulgated thereunder,3 the
Commission granted the MBS Clearing
Corporation (‘‘MBSCC’’) registration as a
clearing agency on a temporary basis for
a period of eighteen months.4 The
Commission subsequently extended
MBSCC’s registration through June 30,
2003.5
On May 24, 1988, pursuant to
Sections 17A(b) and 19(a) of the Act6
and Rule 17Ab2–1 promulgated
thereunder,7 the Commission granted
the Government Securities Clearing
Corporation (‘‘GSCC’’) registration as a
clearing agency on a temporary basis for
a period of three years.8 The
Commission subsequently extended
GSCC’s registration through June 30,
2003.9
1 FICC is the successor to MBS Clearing
Corporation and Government Securities Clearing
Corporation.
2 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b) and 78s(a).
3 17 CFR 240.17Ab2–1.
4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 24046
(February 2, 1987), 52 FR 4218.
5 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 25957
(August 2, 1988), 53 FR 29537; 27079 (July 31,
1989), 54 FR 34212; 28492 (September 28, 1990), 55
FR 41148; 29751 (September 27, 1991), 56 FR
50602; 31750 (January 21, 1993), 58 FR 6424; 33348
(December 15, 1993), 58 FR 68183; 35132
(December 21, 1994), 59 FR 67743; 37372 (June 26,
1996), 61 FR 35281; 38784 (June 27, 1997), 62 FR
36587; 39776 (March 20, 1998), 63 FR 14740; 41211
(March 24, 1999), 64 FR 15854; 42568 (March 23,
2000), 65 FR 16980; 44089 (March 21, 2001), 66 FR
16961; 44831 (September 21, 2001), 66 FR 49728;
45607 (March 20, 2002), 67 FR 14755; 46136 (June
27, 2002), 67 FR 44655.
6 Supra note 2.
7 Supra note 3.
8 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 25740 (May
24, 1988), 53 FR 19839.
9 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 25740
(May 24, 1988), 53 FR 19639; 29236 (May 24, 1991),
56 FR 24852; 32385 (June 3, 1993), 58 FR 32405;
35787 (May 31, 1995), 60 FR 30324; 36508
(November 27, 1995), 60 FR 61719; 37983
(November 25, 1996), 61 FR 64183; 38698 (May 30,
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37165
On January 1, 2003, MBSCC was
merged into GSCC, and GSCC was
renamed FICC.10 The Commission
subsequently extended FICC’s
temporary registration through June 30,
2011.11
On April 11, 2011, FICC requested
that the Commission extend FICC’s
temporary registration until such time
as the Commission is prepared to grant
FICC permanent registration.12
On March 12, 2008, FICC filed a
proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act and Rule
19b–4 thereunder to introduce central
counterparty (‘‘CCP’’) and guarantee
settlement services to its MBS
Division.13 Currently, FICC acts as the
CCP and provides guarantee settlement
services for its Government Securities
Division members’ eligible U.S.
Government securities transactions but
does not act as the CCP or provide
guarantee settlement services for its
MBS Division members’ eligible
mortgage-backed securities transactions.
Pursuant to this Notice and Order, the
Commission is extending FICC’s
temporary registration as a clearing
agency in order that FICC may continue
to operate as a registered clearing
agency and may continue to provide
uninterrupted clearing and settlement
services to its users. The Commission
will consider permanent registration of
FICC at a future date after the
Commission has acted upon FICC’s
proposed rule change to introduce CCP
and guarantee settlement services to its
MBS Division.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
1997), 62 FR 30911; 39696 (February 24, 1998), 63
FR 10253; 41104 (February 24, 1999), 64 FR 10510;
41805 (August 27, 1999), 64 FR 48682; 42335
(January 12, 2000), 65 FR 3509; 43089 (July 28,
2000), 65 FR 48032; 43900 (January 29, 2001), 66
FR 8988; 44553 (July 13, 2001), 66 FR 37714; 45164
(December 18, 2001), 66 FR 66957; 46135 (June 27,
2002), 67 FR 44655.
10 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47015
(December 17, 2002), 67 FR 78531 (December 24,
2002) [File Nos. SR–GSCC–2002–07 and SR–
MBSCC–2002–01].
11 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 48116
(July 1, 2003), 68 FR 41031; 49940 (June 29, 2004),
69 FR 40695; 51911 (June 23, 2005), 70 FR 37878;
54056 (June 28, 2006), 71 FR 38193; 55920 (June 18,
2007), 72 FR 35270; 57949 (June 11, 2008), 73 FR
34808; 60189 (June 29, 2009), 74 FR 32198; and
62348 (June 22, 2010), 75 FR 36723.
12 Letter from Nikki Poulos, Managing Director
and General Counsel, FICC (April 11, 2011).
13 The filed proposed rule change can be viewed
at https://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/
rule_filings/2008/ficc/2008-01.pdf. See also FICC
White Paper: ‘‘A Central Counterparty For
Mortgage-Backed Securities: Paving The Way’’ at
https://www.dtcc.com/downloads/leadership/
whitepapers/ccp.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
24JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 122 (Friday, June 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37163-37165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15776]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-64705; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-83]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Relating
to a Remote Specialist Fee
June 20, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
[[Page 37164]]
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 13, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to adopt a new fee entitled ``Remote
Specialist Fee.''
While fee changes pursuant to this proposal are effective upon
filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be operative on
July 2, 2011. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at https://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to recoup costs
associated with maintaining a remote specialist post on the Exchange's
trading floor.
The Exchange recently amended Rule 501, Specialist Appointment, and
Rule 1020, Registration and Functions of Options Specialists, to allow
qualified Exchange members to act as off-floor specialists in one or
more options classes (``Remote Specialist'').\3\ In conjunction with
recent amendments, the Exchange will staff and administer a physical
location or post on the trading floor to provide on-floor market
participants with a physical location to trade in options classes
allocated to a Remote Specialist. This physical location on the
Exchange's trading floor will require Exchange operations and
regulatory staff to be present at this post. As such, the Exchange
would incur additional operational and regulatory costs to maintain
this post and seeks to defray such costs by assessing a Remote
Specialist Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64591 (June 8,
2011), 76 FR 33383 (June 2, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-79). A Remote
Specialist is an options specialist in one or more classes that may
not have a physical presence on an Exchange floor and is approved by
the Exchange pursuant to Rule 501.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange is proposing to assess Remote Specialists a monthly
fee of $50 per option allocation.\4\ The Exchange would cap the fee at
$4,500 per month. The Exchange notes that the $4,500 proposed cap is
equivalent to the Specialist Post Fee \5\ which is currently assessed
on on-floor Specialists.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Pursuant to Rule 507, Application for Approval as an SQT or
RSQT and Assignment in Options, a Remote Specialist must meet
certain requirements to be approved as an RSQT. Rule 507(b)(i)
describes the process for the assignment of options. See Exchange
Rule 507. An RSQT is defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B) as an
ROT that is a member or member organization with no physical trading
floor presence who has received permission from the Exchange to
generate and submit option quotations electronically in options to
which such RSQT has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such
quotations electronically from off the floor of the Exchange.
\5\ The Exchange assesses a Specialist Post fee of $1,125 per
month for a quarter post and $4,500 per month for a full post with a
maximum of $4,500 per month. See Exchange's Fee Schedule. The
Specialist posts are designed to facilitate Specialist interaction
with the trading crowd. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59852 (April 30, 2009), 74 FR 21424 (May 7, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-39).
\6\ Specialists are members who are registered as options
specialists pursuant to Rule 1020(a). See Exchange Rule 1020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While fee changes pursuant to this proposal are effective upon
filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be operative on
July 2, 2011.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \7\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that
it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges
among Exchange members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that this Remote Specialist Fee is reasonable
because it seeks to recoup costs that are incurred by the Exchange for
maintaining a defined physical location or post on the Exchange's
trading floor to facilitate interaction amongst market participants
located on the Exchange's physical trading floor. The Exchange also
believes the proposal is reasonable because the Exchange proposes to
cap the Remote Specialist Fee at $4,500 per month, which is equal to
the maximum fees the Exchange assesses on-floor Specialists for the
Specialist Post Fee.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Remote Specialist Fee is
equitable because it would be uniformly applied to all Remote
Specialists.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2011-83 on the subject line.
[[Page 37165]]
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-Phlx-2011-83. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 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-Phlx-2011-83 and should be
submitted on or before July 15, 2011.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-15776 Filed 6-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P