[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14509-14513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05975]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77351; File No. SR-Phlx-2016-33]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Rebates and Fees 
for Adding and Removing Liquidity in SPY

March 11, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that 
on February 29, 2016, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``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 amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at 
Section I, entitled ``Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing 
Liquidity in SPY.''
    While changes to the Pricing Schedule pursuant to this proposal are 
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be 
operative on March 1, 2016.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.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

[[Page 14510]]

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 amend the Exchange's 
Pricing Schedule at Section I, entitled ``Rebates and Fees for Adding 
and Removing Liquidity in SPY,'' to (i) amend the Specialist \3\ and 
Market Maker \4\ Rebate for Adding Liquidity in Simple Orders; and (ii) 
reduce all Fees for Removing Liquidity in Simple Orders. The amendments 
will be described in greater detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Specialist'' applies to transactions for the 
account of a Specialist (as defined in Exchange Rule 1020(a)).
    \4\ The term ``Market Maker'' describes fees and rebates 
applicable to Registered Options Traders (``ROT''), Streaming Quote 
Traders (``SQT'') and Remote Streaming Quote Traders (``RSQT''). A 
ROT is defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b) as a regular member of the 
Exchange located on the trading floor who has received permission 
from the Exchange to trade in options for his own account. A ROT 
includes SQTs and RSQTs as well as on and off-floor ROTS. An SQT is 
defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A) as an ROT who has received 
permission from the Exchange to generate and submit option 
quotations electronically in options to which such SQT is assigned. 
An RSQT is defined in Exchange Rule in 1014(b)(ii)(B) as an ROT that 
is a member affiliated with an RSQTO 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. A Remote Streaming Quote Trader Organization 
or ``RSQTO,'' which may also be referred to as a Remote Market 
Making Organization (``RMO''), is a member organization in good 
standing that satisfies the RSQTO readiness requirements in Rule 
507(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fees and rebates applicable to options overlying Standard and 
Poor's Depositary Receipts/SPDRs (``SPY'') \5\ are located in Section I 
of the Exchange's Pricing Schedule. The Exchange specifies which fees 
and rebates apply to Simple Orders and Complex Orders.\6\ This proposal 
specifically applies to Simple Order pricing in SPY in Part A. The 
Exchange is not amending the Complex Order pricing in SPY in Part B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Options overlying Standard and Poor's Depositary Receipts/
SPDRs (``SPY'') are based on the SPDR exchange-traded fund 
(``ETF''), which is designed to track the performance of the S&P 500 
Index.
    \6\ A Complex Order is an order involving the simultaneous 
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options series in the 
same underlying security, priced as a net debit or credit based on 
the relative prices of the individual components, for the same 
account, for the purpose of executing a particular investment 
strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple Order--Rebate for Adding Liquidity
    Today, the Exchange pays a SPY Simple Order Rebate for Adding 
Liquidity of $0.20 per contract to Specialists and Market Makers. All 
other market participants do not receive a SPY Simple Order Rebate for 
Adding Liquidity. The Exchange proposes to replace the $0.20 per 
contract SPY Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity with tiered 
rebates.
    The Exchange proposes to pay a $0.15 per contract Specialist and 
Market Maker SPY Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity to 
participants that add 1 to 2,499 electronically executed Simple Order 
contracts per day in a month in SPY. The Exchange proposes to pay a 
$0.20 per contract Specialist and Market Maker SPY Simple Order Rebate 
for Adding Liquidity to participants that add 2,500 to 4,999 
electronically executed Simple Order contracts per day in a month in 
SPY. The Exchange proposes to pay a $0.25 per contract Specialist and 
Market Maker SPY Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity to 
participants that add 5,000 to 19,999 electronically executed Simple 
Order contracts per day in a month in SPY. Finally, the Exchange 
proposes to pay a $0.30 per contract Specialist and Market Maker SPY 
Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity to participants that add 
greater than 20,000 electronically executed Simple Order contracts per 
day in a month in SPY. The Exchange believes that the proposed four 
tier rebate structure would incentive market participants to add more 
Specialist and Market Maker liquidity in SPY on the Exchange.
    Today, if a SPY transaction originates from the Exchange floor, 
that transaction is subject to the Multiply Listed Options Fees.\7\ 
However, if one side of the transaction originates on the Exchange 
floor and any other side of the trade was the result of an 
electronically submitted order or a quote, then the Section I fees 
apply to the transactions which originated on the Exchange floor and 
contracts that are executed electronically on all sides of the 
transaction.\8\ The Exchange will continue to treat the one side of the 
transaction which originates on the Exchange floor in the same manner 
and will count the one side of the transaction which originates on the 
Exchange floor toward the number of contracts to qualify for the Simple 
Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity for Specialists and Market Makers in 
SPY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Multiply Listed Options Fees in Section II of the 
Exchange's Pricing Schedule.
    \8\ See Part C of Section I of the Exchange's Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple Order--Fee for Removing Liquidity
    Today, the Exchange assesses a $0.44 per contract Customer \9\ 
Simple Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in SPY and a $0.49 per contract 
Simple Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in SPY to Specialists, Market 
Makers, Firms,\10\ Broker-Dealers \11\ and Professionals.\12\ The 
Exchange proposes to decrease the Simple Order Fees for Removing 
Liquidity and assess a $0.43 per contract Customer Simple Order Fee for 
Removing Liquidity in SPY and a $0.47 per contract Simple Order Fee for 
Removing Liquidity in SPY to Specialists, Market Makers, Firms, Broker-
Dealers and Professionals. The Exchange believes that the reduction of 
the Simple Order Fees for Removing Liquidity in SPY will encourage 
participants to send additional order flow to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction that is 
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the 
Customer range at The Options Clearing Corporation which is not for 
the account of a broker or dealer or for the account of a 
``Professional'' (as that term is defined in Rule 1000(b)(14)).
    \10\ The term ``Firm'' applies to any transaction that is 
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the 
Firm range at The Options Clearing Corporation.
    \11\ The term ``Broker-Dealer'' applies to any transaction which 
is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable 
within a particular category.
    \12\ The term ``Professional'' applies to transactions for the 
accounts of Professionals, as defined in Exchange Rule 1000(b)(14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cross-Reference and Marketing Fee
    The Exchange proposes to correct a typographical error related to a 
cross reference in the beginning of this section by removing the 
reference to Section ``C'' and properly adding the Section ``I'' 
reference.
    The Exchange proposes to replace the words ``Payment for Order Flow 
Fee'' with the words ``Marketing Fee'' to conform this term throughout 
the Pricing Schedule. The Exchange recently amended this term 
throughout the Pricing Schedule in a prior rule change and 
inadvertently did not mark this term to be amended as well.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See SR-Phlx-2016-30 (not yet published).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 
6(b) of the Act \14\ in general, and furthers the

[[Page 14511]]

objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act \15\ in 
particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of 
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and 
other persons using any facility or system which the Exchange operates 
or controls, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination 
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their 
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining 
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation 
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market 
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in 
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current 
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in 
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most 
important to investors and listed companies.'' \16\ Likewise, in 
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission \17\ 
(``NetCoalition'') the DC Circuit upheld the Commission's use of a 
market-based approach in evaluating the fairness of market data fees 
against a challenge claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based 
approach.\18\ As the court emphasized, the Commission ``intended in 
Regulation NMS that `market forces, rather than regulatory 
requirements' play a role in determining the market data . . . to be 
made available to investors and at what cost.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 at 37499 (June 9, 
2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting Release'').
    \17\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
    \18\ See NetCoalition, at 534.
    \19\ Id. at 537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is 
`fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market 
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that 
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of 
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to 
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange 
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of 
order flow from broker dealers'. . . . '' \20\ Although the court and 
the SEC were discussing the cash equities markets, the Exchange 
believes that these views apply with equal force to the options 
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id. at 539 (quoting ArcaBook Order, 73 FR at 74782-74783).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange continues to offer pricing specific to SPY because 
these options are currently the most actively traded options class. 
Pricing by symbol is a common practice on many U.S. options exchanges 
as a means to incentive order flow to be sent to an exchange for 
execution.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See International Securities Exchange LLC's (``ISE'') 
Schedule of Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple Order--Rebate for Adding Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to replace the $0.20 per contract SPY 
Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity with tiered rebates is 
reasonable because the Exchange desires to incentivize market 
participants to transact a greater number of SPY options. All 
participants [sic] will continue to receive a SPY Simple Order Rebate 
for Adding Liquidity for Specialists and Market Makers provided they 
execute one electronic Simple Order SPY contract. In some cases, the 
rebate will be lower, if 2,499 or less electronic Simple Order SPY 
contracts are added, the SPY Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity 
for Specialists and Market Makers will be $0.15 as compared to $0.20 
per contract (today's rebate). Despite this decrease, the Exchange 
believes that participants will continue to be incentivized to add SPY 
order flow to the Exchange to receive the rebate. With this proposal, 
the Exchange is also offering the opportunity to earn higher rebates 
provided the participant adds at least 5,000 electronic Simple Order 
SPY contracts.\22\ In some cases the rebate will remain the same.\23\ 
The Exchange believes that the rebate will continue to encourage 
participants to direct SPY order flow to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The Exchange will pay a $0.25 per contract rebate if 
participant adds 5,000 to 19,999 contracts per day in a month and a 
$0.30 per contract rebate if participant adds greater than 20,000 
contracts per day in a month in SPY.
    \23\ The Exchange will continue to pay a $0.20 per contract 
rebate if participant adds 2,500 to 4,999 contracts per day in a 
month in SPY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to replace the $0.20 per contract SPY 
Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity for Specialists and Market 
Makers with tiered rebates is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory 
because Specialists and Market Makers have obligations to the market 
and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply to other 
market participants.\24\ They have obligations to make continuous 
markets, engage in a course of dealings reasonably calculated to 
contribute to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and not 
make bids or offers or enter into transactions that are inconsistent 
with a course of dealings. The differentiation as between Specialists 
and Market Makers and all other market participants recognizes the 
differing contributions made to the liquidity and trading environment 
on the Exchange by these market participants. An increase in the 
activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter 
spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order 
flow from other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Rule 1014 titled ``Obligations and Restrictions 
Applicable to Specialists and Registered Options Traders.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that continuing to pay the Simple Order 
Rebate for Adding Liquidity [sic] to all [sic] transactions executed 
within the Exchange's order book, including transactions where one side 
of the transaction originates on the Exchange floor and any other side 
of the trade was the result of an electronically submitted order or a 
quote, is reasonable because the Exchange's treatment of these orders 
is consistent with its treatment of all other orders executed in the 
order book as compared to a floor order executed on the Exchange's 
trading floor. Further, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to count 
the one side of the transaction which originates on the Exchange floor 
toward the number of contracts to qualify for the Simple Order Rebate 
for Adding Liquidity for Specialists and Market Makers in SPY because 
this treatment of the floor order which executes in the order book is 
consistent with the treatment of all other electronically executed 
orders which qualify for the Section I pricing.
    The Exchange believes that continuing to pay the Simple Order 
Rebate for Adding Liquidity to all transactions executed within the 
Exchange's order book, including transactions where one side of the 
transaction originates on the Exchange floor and any other side of the 
trade was the result of an electronically submitted order or a quote, 
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange is 
treating these orders similar to all other orders executed in the order 
book as compared to a floor order executed on the Exchange's trading 
floor. Further, the Exchange believes it is equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to count the one side of the transaction which 
originates on the Exchange floor toward the number of contracts to 
qualify for the Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity for 
Specialists and Market Makers because today all electronically executed 
orders qualify for the Section I pricing. The transaction where one 
side of the transaction originates on the Exchange

[[Page 14512]]

floor and any other side of the trade was the result of an 
electronically submitted order or a quote will be treated in the same 
manner as all other orders executed in the order book.
Simple Order--Fee for Removing Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to decrease the Customer Simple Order Fee 
in SPY for Removing Liquidity from $0.44 to $0.43 per contract and all 
other Simple Order Fees for Removing Liquidity in SPY for Specialists, 
Market Makers, Firms, Broker-Dealers and Professionals from $0.49 to 
$0.47 per contract is reasonable because the reduction of these fees 
will encourage participants to send additional order flow to the 
Exchange.
    The Exchange's proposal to decrease the Customer Simple Order Fee 
for Removing Liquidity in SPY from $0.44 to $0.43 per contract and all 
other Simple Order Fees for Removing Liquidity in SPY for Specialists, 
Market Makers, Firms, Broker-Dealers and Professionals from $0.49 to 
$0.47 per contract is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because 
all participants will be assessed the same lower Simple Order Fee for 
Removing Liquidity in SPY of $0.47 per contract, except for Customers. 
The Exchange believes that assessing Customers a lower fee is equitable 
and not unfairly discriminatory because Customer orders bring valuable 
liquidity to the market, which liquidity benefits other market 
participants. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by 
providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and 
Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants 
in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional 
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
Cross-Reference and Marketing Fee
    The Exchange's proposal to correct a typographical error related to 
a cross reference is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory because it will clarify the Pricing Schedule. This 
amendment is non-substantive.
    The Exchange's proposal to replace the words ``Payment for Order 
Flow Fee'' with the words ``Marketing Fee'' is reasonable, equitable 
and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposal will conform the 
rule text to other parts of the Rulebook. The usage of the term 
Marketing Fee would be consistent throughout the Rulebook.

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. In terms of inter-market 
competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly 
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor 
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be 
excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more 
favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust 
its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with 
alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance 
with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because 
competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because 
market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, 
the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this 
market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
    In terms of intra-market competition, the Exchange believes that 
its proposed rebates and fees continue to remain competitive in SPY, 
which is the most actively traded options class.\25\ In sum, if the 
changes proposed herein are unattractive to market participants, it is 
likely that the Exchange will lose market share as a result. 
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes 
will impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues 
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The Exchange continues to incentive market participants to 
transact SPY by offering rebates in this Penny Pilot Option similar 
to ISE which pays rebates on Penny Pilot Options. See ISE's Fee 
Schedule. ISE Gemini, LLC (``ISE Gemini'') assesses a SPY tiered 
taker fee ranging from $0.44 to $0.45 for a priority customer and a 
tiered taker fee ranging from $0.48 to $0.49 per contract for all 
other market participants. See ISE Gemini's Fee Schedule. Also, the 
Exchange's Simple Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in SPY is lower 
as compared to pricing at C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated 
(``C2''). C2's penny pilot options pricing is $0.47 per contract for 
Priority [sic] Customers and $0.48 per contract for all other 
participants when removing liquidity. See C2's Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple Order--Rebate for Adding Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to replace the $0.20 per contract SPY 
Simple Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity with tiered rebates does not 
impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because Specialists 
and Market Makers have obligations to the market and regulatory 
requirements, which normally do not apply to other market 
participants.\26\ The differentiation as between Specialists and Market 
Makers and other market participants recognizes the differing 
contributions made to the liquidity and trading environment on the 
Exchange by these market participants. An increase in the activity of 
these market participants in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which 
may cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other 
market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See note 24. Specialists and Market Makers have obligations 
to make continuous markets, engage in a course of dealings 
reasonably calculated to contribute to the maintenance of a fair and 
orderly market, and not make bids or offers or enter into 
transactions that are inconsistent with a course of dealings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that continuing to pay the SPY Simple Order 
Rebate for Adding Liquidity to all transactions executed within the 
Exchange's order book, including transactions where one side of the 
transaction originates on the Exchange floor and any other side of the 
trade was the result of an electronically submitted order or a quote, 
does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because the 
Exchange is treating these orders similar to all other orders executed 
in the order book as compared to a floor order executed on the 
Exchange's trading floor. Further, the Exchange believes counting the 
one side of the transaction which originates on the Exchange floor 
toward the number of contracts to qualify for the SPY Simple Order 
Rebate for Adding Liquidity for Specialists and Market Makers does not 
impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because today all 
electronically executed orders qualify for the Section I pricing. The 
transaction where one side of the transaction originates on the 
Exchange floor and any other side of the trade was the result of an 
electronically submitted order or a quote will be treated in the same 
manner as all other orders executed in the order book.
Simple Order--Fee for Removing Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to decrease the Customer Simple Order for 
Removing Liquidity in SPY from $0.44 to $0.43 per contract and all 
other Simple Order Fees for Removing Liquidity in SPY for Specialists, 
Market Makers, Firms, Broker-Dealers and Professionals from $0.49 to 
$0.47 per contract does not impose an undue burden on intra-market 
competition because all participants will be assessed

[[Page 14513]]

the same lower Simple Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in SPY of $0.47 
per contract, except for Customers. Customer orders bring valuable 
liquidity to the market, which liquidity benefits other market 
participants. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by 
providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and 
Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants 
in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional 
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
Cross-Reference and Marketing Fee
    The Exchange's proposal to correct a typographical error related to 
a cross reference does not impose an undue burden on intra-market 
competition because the amendment is non-substantive.
    The Exchange's proposal to replace the words ``Payment for Order 
Flow Fee'' with the words ``Marketing Fee'' does not impose an undue 
burden on intra-market competition because the proposal will conform 
the rule text to other parts of the Rulebook.

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.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i) 
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the 
protection of investors; or (iii) 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 [email protected]. Please include 
File Number SR-Phlx-2016-33 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2016-33. This file 
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help 
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all 
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are 
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to 
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other 
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the 
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and 
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All 
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does 
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should 
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All 
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2016-33 and should be 
submitted on or before April 7, 2016.

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

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

Lynn M. Powalski,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-05975 Filed 3-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P