[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 92 (Wednesday, May 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26662-26666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12702]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-39970; File No. SR-PCX-97-28]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change and Notice of Filing and
Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 2 to the Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Exchange-Sponsored Hand-Held Terminals for
Options Floor Brokers
May 7, 1998.
I. Introduction
On July 3, 1997, and December 12, 1997, respectively, the Pacific
Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'' or ``Exchange'') submitted to the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change and Amendment No.
1 thereto to adopt rules to allow the use of Exchange-Sponsored Floor
Broker Hand-Held Terminals (``Exchange-Sponsored Terminals'') on the
floor of the Exchange. The Exchange also proposed an interpretation to
Rule 6.67 which would not require members' orders entered through
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals to be in writing. Finally, the Exchange
proposed Rule 6.88(b) to prohibit the use of a floor broker hand-held
terminal for market making. On March 30, 1998, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change with the Commission.\3\ In
Amendment No. 2, the Exchange amends Rule 6.67, Commentary .02 to
indicate that orders sent through proprietary Terminals would also be
deemed to be written orders for the purposes of Rule 6.67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Letter from Michael D. Pierson, Senior Attorney,
Regulatory Policy PCX to David Sieradzki, Attorney, Division of
Market Regulation (``Division''), SEC dated March 27, 1998
(``Amendment No. 2'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change, and Amendment No. 1 thereto were
published for comment in the Federal Register on January 16, 1998.\4\
No comments were received on the proposal. This order approves the
proposal as amended, including Amendment No. 2 on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39532 (Jan. 9, 1998), 63
FR 2711 (Jan. 16, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposal
A. General Description
The Exchange's Member Firm Interface (``MFI'') \5\ currently
permits Exchange Member Firms to use an electronic link with the
Exchange to send their option orders directly to the Exchange for
delivery to POETS (Pacific Option Exchange Trading System).\6\ Under
the proposal, member firms
[[Page 26663]]
would be able to use the MFI connection to route orders directly to the
member firm booth (not by default) or to a floor broker's Exchange-
Sponsored Terminal located in the trading crowd.\7\ The Commission
notes that the PCX's proposal does not restrict the use of other Hand-
Held terminal systems provided that they do not interfere
electronically with existing Exchange systems.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The MFI is an electronic order delivery and reporting system
that allows member firms to route orders for execution by the
automatic execution feature of POETS as well as to route limit
orders to the Options Public Limit Order Book. Orders that do not
reach those two destinations are defaulted to a member firm booth.
MFI also provides member firms with instant confirmation of
transactions to their systems. Member firms may access POETS by
establishing an MFI mainframe-to-mainframe connection.
\6\ Orders entered via MFI are delivered to one of three
destinations: (a) To Auto-Ex, where they are automatically executed
at the disseminated bid or offering price; (b) to Auto-Book, which
maintains non-marketable limit orders based on limit price and time
of receipt; or (c) to a Member Firm's default destination--a
particular firm booth or remote entry site--if the order fails to
meet the eligibility criteria necessary for either Auto-Ex or Auto-
Book or if the Member Firm requests such default for its orders. See
generally Exchange Act Release No. 27633 (Jan. 18, 1990), 55 FR 2466
(Jan. 24 1990) (``POETS Approval Order'').
\7\ In that regard, the Exchange is proposing to add a new Rule
6.88(a), which provides: ``Members and Member Organizations may send
orders electronically through the Exchange's Member Firm Interface
and route them directly to POETS, to a Member Firm booth on the
Options Floor, to a Floor Broker Hand-Held Terminal located on the
Options Floor, or to any other location designated by the Exchange,
provided that the Member or Member Organization has been approved by
the Exchange to do so.''
\8\ See note 16 infra and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the program, Member Firms will be permitted to send their
orders electronically to the Exchange via MFI and route them to one of
three destinations on the trading floor: (a) To a floor broker standing
in the trading crowd; (b) to a Member Firm booth location on the
trading floor; or (c) to POETS, where they will be automatically
executed by Auto-Ex or maintained in Auto-Book. All orders so
transmitted will first be sent through the PCX's system that stores and
processes all data for the Exchange-Sponsored Terminals
(``Server'').\9\ Orders sent to a Member Firm booth via the Server may
be sent subsequently either to POETS or to a floor broker in the
trading crowd. Orders sent via the Server to a floor broker in the
trading crowd may subsequently be transmitted to a Member Firm booth,
to POETS, or to another floor broker on the trading floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Accordingly, the Exchange stated that there will be no
appreciable delay in order entry due to the transmission of orders
through the Server. The Exchange also stated that if a Member Firm
routes an order to POETS via MFI for automatic execution or
maintenance in Auto-Book, the order will not be sent through the
Server. Only orders to be transmitted through the Hand-Held Terminal
system will be sent through the Server.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange intends to furnish Exchange-Sponsored Terminals to be
used by floor brokers under the program. In addition, the Exchange will
supply booth devices that will have the capability to retrieve and
display all orders that were submitted through the device. The Exchange
intends to assess users a monthly rental fee for such use after the
implementation of the floor-wide program in Phase II.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Exchange will submit a separate rule filing to the
Commission to establish these fees. See note 19 infra and
accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exchange rules on order representation and order execution will be
unchanged under the program.\11\ However, the Exchange is proposing to
modify one of its rules on orders to provide that an order sent
electronically through MFI will be deemed to be a ``written order'' for
purposes of Rule 6.67. The order information that must be reported to
the Exchange in connection with each transaction that is executed on
the trading floor will be also unchanged under the program.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., PCX Rules 5.1(e), 6.43-6.48 and Options Floor
Procedure Advices A-1--A-11 and G-1--G12.
\12\ See PCX Rule 6.69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the proposal, initially, floor brokers using Exchange-
Sponsored Terminals will not need to write up order tickets because the
trade-related floor broker terminal information will be passed
electronically to POETS and then to POPS (Pacific Options Processing
Information) for clearing purposes. Yet the party on the other side of
the trade, if it is executed by a market maker or a floor broker not
using a terminal, will have to submit a paper order ticket to the
Exchange for processing. Later, when advancements in technology allow
for it, no paper tickets will be required because all market makers and
floor brokers will be able to interface with each other through
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals.\13\ The order ticket requirement shall be
the same with Exchange-Sponsored Terminals as it is for proprietary
hand held terminals,\14\ i.e., if the trade information is not sent to
the Exchange electronically, it will have to be conveyed by means of a
written order ticket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The Commission notes that the Exchange should consult with
the Commission to determine if any future changes in technology used
on the Exchange floor would be required to be submitted to the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act. Moreover, any
additional conditions or limitations placed on the use of hand held
terminals should be submitted to the Commission as a proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act. See Interactive Brokers
LLC, Admin. Proc. File No. 3-9237 (March 19, 1998) (opinion of the
Commission).
\14\ See note 15 infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once an order has been executed, the Exchange-Sponsored Terminal
system will route trade information to POETS, which, in turn, will
route the information to a computer for trade match and clearing
purposes. At the same time, the Exchange will send a trade report to
the Member Firm that entered the order. In addition, the Exchange will
transmit trade information to OCC, OPRA and certain vendors.
Order information sent through the Exchange Sponsored Terminal
system will become audit trail information that is available to the
Exchange for regulatory purposes. However, if an order is routed to the
Member Firm booth by telephone or wire, and not through MFI, and the
order is then sent to POETS or to a floor broker in the crowd using the
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals, the audit trail information will commence
when the order is sent from the booth. An audit trail of all actions
taken by the Exchange-Sponsored Terminal that result in an interaction
with the Server will be maintained. Upon receipt of an order in the
Server from POETS or a booth device, the order will be time stamped and
retained in the Server's database. When orders are executed at a
Exchange-Sponsored Terminal, they will be time stamped upon receipt by
the Server. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the audit trail
information should be more accurate than current information, which is
recorded manually on order tickets.
The Exchange will not prohibit floor brokers from using proprietary
hand-held terminals \15\ for order entry on the Options Floor as long
as they do not interfere with any Exchange-Sponsored Terminals, with
POETS or with other equipment on the floor.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Commission notes that a rule filing to permit Exchange
floor brokers to use proprietary order routing terminals on the
Options Trading Floor is currently pending before the Commission.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38270 (Feb. 11, 1997), 62 FR
7286 (Feb. 18, 1997) (Notice of filing of SR-PSE-97-02).
\16\ The term ``interfere'' refers to electronic interference
that may occur between a member's proprietary device and another
electronic system or piece of equipment on the Trading Floor. For
example, if the use of a proprietary devise on the floor caused the
POETS automatic execution to halt, or if it disrupted telephonic
communications on the floor, or if it prevented another member firm
from being able to receive electronic orders through another order-
routing system, then the device causing the interference could not
be used on the floor until it was rendered compatible with the order
electronic systems in use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Prohibition of Market Making Function
The Exchange is proposing to adopt new Rule 6.88(b) providing that
no Floor Broker may knowingly use a Exchange-Sponsored Terminal, on a
regular and continuous basis, to simultaneously represent orders to buy
and sell options contracts in the same series for the account of the
same beneficial holder. The rule further provides that if the Exchange
determines that a person or entity has been sending, on a regular and
continuous basis, orders to simultaneously buy and sell option
contracts in the same series for the account of the same beneficial
holder, the Exchange may prohibit orders for the account of such person
or entity
[[Page 26664]]
from being sent through the Exchange's Member Firm Interface for such
period of time as the Exchange deems appropriate.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The Commission notes that a member would have the right to
appeal any decision to suspend a member from using an Exchange-
Sponsored Terminal pursuant to Exchange Rule 11.7, Hearings and
Review of Committee Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Implementation
The Exchange is proposing a two-phase approach to integrating the
new hand-held technology into the floor environment. In Phase I, the
Exchange will allow limited implementation of the program to evaluate
the use of Exchange-Sponsored Terminals and to identify and correct any
problems that may arise. In this regard, the Exchange will select a
representative cross-section of floor members and off-floor members for
the execution of various types of order flow in both lightly-traded and
heavily-traded issues. Phase I will last for about four months. It will
involve approximately two off-floor Member Firms, two Member Firm booth
devices and 12 Exchange-Sponsored Terminals. The Exchange, in
conjunction with its Options Floor Trading Committee, will select
Members and Member Firms to participate in Phase I on an objective
basis.\18\ During Phase I, floor brokers will not be permitted to
transmit orders to other floor brokers (they will be limited to
transmitting orders either to POETS or to a Member Firm booth).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Factors will include the nature of order flow (retail or
institutional), the nature of the issue (lightly-traded or heavily-
traded), nature of the floor brokerage operation, time of
application, limitations in the number of participants who may
participate, and other such factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Phase II, the Exchange will roll out the program on a floor-wide
basis, allowing any qualified Floor Member or off-floor Member who
wishes to participate in the program to do so.\19\ When Phase II is
implemented, the Exchange-Sponsored Terminals program will be fully
rolled out. Exchange-Sponsored Terminals will be approved for use in
all trading crowds and will allow floor brokers to transmit orders to
other floor brokers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The term ``qualified Floor Member or off-floor Member''
refers to the requirement that all floor brokers and order flow
providers who participate in the program must be approved by the
Exchange to do so. Floor brokers are eligible to participate if they
are registered with the Exchange as floor brokers pursuant to Rule
6.44 and have arranged with a member firm to receive order flow
through the system. Member firms are eligible to participate in the
program if they have made arrangements with a floor broker for the
transmission and execution of orders. Moreover, after Phase II is
implemented, the Exchange has represented that it intends to impose
a fee upon participants in the program in an amount to be specified
in a rule change proposal to be filed with the Commission under
Section 19(b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \20\ requires that the rules of an
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, and
in general to protect investors and the public interest. Section
6(b)(7) of the Act \21\ requires that the rules of an Exchange be in
accordance with Section 6(d) of the Act,\22\ and in general that an
Exchange provide a fair procedure for the disciplining of members and
determining whether to prohibit or limit a person's access to services
offered by the exchange. Section 6(b)(8) of the Act \23\ requires that
the rules of an exchange not impose any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(ii) of the Act \24\ states that it is in the
public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure fair competition
among brokers and dealers. For the reasons set forth below, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, the
requirements of Sections 6(b)(5), 6(b)(7), 6(b)(8), and 11A(a)(1)(C) of
the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(d). Section 6(d) of the Act, among other
things, require that an exchange, in any proceeding to determine
whether a member should be disciplined, bring specific charges,
notify such member of and provide him with an opportunity to defend
himself against such charges, and keep a record.
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C).
\25\ In approving these rules, the Commission has considered the
proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal should foster
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market, and protect investors and the public interest by
expediting and making more efficient the process by which members can
receive and execute options orders on the floor of the Exchange. The
proposal also will promote fair competition among brokers and dealers
and facilitate transactions in options on the Exchange. Finally, for
the reasons described in more detail below, the Commission believes
that the market making prohibition on the use of the Exchange-Sponsored
Terminals adequately balances the potential benefits to be derived from
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals with the important regulatory issues that
are raised in connection with the potential use of Exchange-Sponsored
Terminals for market making.
As described above, proposed Rule 6.88(b) provides that no Floor
Broker may knowingly use an Exchange-Sponsored Terminal, on a regular
and continuous basis, to simultaneously represent orders to buy and
sell options contracts in the same series for the account of the same
beneficial holder. The Rule further provides that if the Exchange
determines that a person or entity has been sending, on a regular and
continuous basis, orders to simultaneously buy and sell option
contracts in the same series for the account of the same beneficial
holder, the Exchange may prohibit orders for the account of such person
or entity from being sent through the Exchange's Member Firm Interface
for such period of time as the Exchange deems appropriate.
The Commission finds that the market making restriction is
consistent with the Act for the following reasons. The Commission
believes that the PCX's restriction on market making through the use of
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals has been effected in a clear and
reasonable manner that is not ambiguous nor overbroad, and that takes
into account regulatory and market impact concerns, including those
relating to quote competition and price discovery.\26\ Notably, the
Exchange's proposal does not bar all two-sided limit orders. Instead it
only restricts the acceptance of two-sided limit orders placed by the
same beneficial holder in the performance of a market making function.
The distinction between market making and brokerage activity is well
established among market participants. Moreover, the language of
proposed Rule 6.88(b) expressly restricts a floor broker from, on a
regular and continuous basis, simultaneously representing orders to buy
and sell options contracts in the same series for the account of the
same beneficial holder, not the occasional entry of two-sided limit
orders. This definition of
[[Page 26665]]
market making activity is consistent with the definition of market
maker under the Act which states that a market maker ``holds himself
out as being willing to buy and sell [a] security for his own account
on a regular or continuous basis.'' \27\ Thus, the market making
restriction on Exchange-Sponsored Terminal use for routing limit orders
it he minimum necessary for the Exchange to bar Terminal use for off-
floor market making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Cf., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 25842 (June 23,
1988), 53 FR 24539 (approving certain restrictions on the use of
telephones on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange), aff'd per
curiam, 866 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1989).
\27\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(38).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, as the Commission has previously stated in approving
market making restrictions similar to that being adopted by PCX, the
Commission does not believe it unreasonable for a market to determine
that the introduction of unregulated market making through floor
brokerage hand held terminals may undermine its market maker system and
potentially create disincentives for market makers to remain on an
exchange trading floor.\28\ Accordingly, any burden on competition that
arguably exists from PCX's restriction on using Exchange-Sponsored
Terminals for market making is, in the Commission's view, justified as
reasonable and appropriate to ensure adequate regulation of the PCX
market.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38054 (Dec. 16,
1996), 61 FR 67365 (Dec. 20, 1996) (order approving SR-CBOE-95-48).
\29\ While the Commission recognizes that there may be ways to
address the regulatory issues presented by off-floor market making
through the use of floor broker hand-held terminals, the Act does
not dictate that any particular approach be taken. The Commission
believes that the manner in which the Exchange has chosen to address
the regulatory issues presented by off-floor market making reflects
the considered judgment of the PCX regarding the attributes of
Exchange membership and the organization of its trading floor, and
is a fair exercise of its powers as a national securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange represents that it intends to implement the use of
Exchange-Sponsored Terminals through the use of a two-phase approach.
The Commission believes that it is consistent with the Act for the
Exchange to limit the introduction of Exchange-Sponsored Terminals at
this time given the Exchange's stated desire to identify and correct
any problems that may arise. Further, the Exchange has stated that
participants in Phase I will be selected on the basis of certain
objective criteria.\30\ The Commission notes that after the completion
of Phase I, which the Exchange represents should last approximately
four months, Phase II will begin, allowing any qualified Floor Member
or off-floor member who wishes to participate in the program to do
so.\31\ As noted by the Exchange, all floor brokers that have
registered with the Exchange as floor brokers pursuant to Rule 6.44 and
have arranged with a member firm to receive order flow through the
system will be eligible to participate in the Exchange-Sponsored
Terminals program. The Commission expects the Exchange to allow any
floor broker that meets the above requirements to participate in the
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See supra note 18.
\31\ The term ``qualified Floor Member or off-floor Member''
refers to the requirement that all floor brokers and order flow
providers who participate in the program must be approved by the
Exchange to do so. Floor brokers are eligible to participate if they
are registered with the Exchange as floor brokers pursuant to Rule
6.44 and have arranged with a member firm to receive order flow
through the system. Member firms are eligible to participate in the
program if they have made arrangements with a floor broker for the
transmission and execution of orders. Moreover, after Phase II is
implemented, program participants will be required to pay the
Exchange a fee in an amount to be specified in a rule change
proposal to be filed with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed
interpretation to Rule 6.67, under which the transmission of an order
that is received by means of an Exchange-Sponsored Terminal or
proprietary hand-held terminal will be deemed to constitute a written
order for the purposes of Rule 6.67, in general, protects investors and
the public interest. The Commission believes the proposed commentary to
Rule 6.67 will provide a more efficient means of communicating orders
on the floor. The Commission notes that while this proposed Commentary
effects the format of the order ticket, the Exchange has represented
and the Commission expects that the required content of the order
ticket would not be altered.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Telephone conversation between Michael D. Pierson, Senior
Attorney, Regulatory Policy PCX and David Sieradzki, Attorney,
Division, SEC on April 22, 1998. The Commission notes that any
change to the required content of an order ticket would have to be
submitted to the Commission as a proposed rule change under Section
19(b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, regarding the use of proprietary hand-held terminal
systems on the floor of the Exchange; the Exchange has represented that
it intends to allow the use of proprietary hand-held terminal systems
on the floor of the Exchange provided that they do not electronically
interfere \33\ with existing Exchange systems.\34\ As discussed above,
the Exchange notes that if, for example, the use of a proprietary
devise on the floor caused the POETS automatic execution to halt, or if
it disrupted telephonic communications on the floor, or if it prevented
another member firm from being able to receive electronic orders
through another order-routing system, then the device causing the
interference could not be used on the floor until it was rendered
compatible with the other electronic systems in use. The Commission
finds that this restriction is reasonable given that it is limited to
electronic interference with other exchange systems and that an
interfering system would be permitted to return to the floor once it is
made compatible with other exchange systems. The Commission notes that
any implementation of this provision to restrict competition or the
introduction of new technology onto the floor of the Exchange would be
inconsistent with the Exchange's rules and with the Act. In summary,
the Commission emphasizes and finds it very important that approval of
the PCX's Exchange-Sponsored Terminals proposal will not restrict
members from using their own proprietary terminal systems provided that
they do not electronically interfere with existing Exchange
systems.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ The term ``interfere'' refers to electronic interference
that may occur between a member's proprietary device and another
electronic system or piece of equipment on the Trading Floor.
\34\ The Exchange has represented that this policy includes
allowing Exchange members to interface electronically with MFI,
POETS or the limit order book; provided that the proprietary system
is properly configured to interface with these systems. Telephone
conversation between Michael D. Pierson, Senior Attorney, Regulatory
Policy, PCX and David Sieradzki, Attorney, Division, SEC on April 6,
1998.
\35\ See supra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds good cause for approving Amendment No. 2 to
the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of
publication of notice of filing thereof in the Federal Register.
Amendment No. 2 amends the language in proposed Commentary .02 to Rule
6.67 to indicate that orders received through proprietary hand held
terminals will be considered to be in writing for the purposes of Rule
6.67. Commentary .02, as originally proposed, applied only to Exchange-
Sponsored Terminals. Amendment No. 2 ensures that all systems, whether
Exchange sponsored or not will have the same regulatory requirements.
As a result, the Commission does not believe that Amendment No. 2
raises any new regulatory issues. Further, the Commission notes that
the original proposal was published for the full 21-day comment period
and no comments were received by the Commission. Accordingly, the
Commission believes there is good cause, consistent with Sections
6(b)(5) and 19(b) \36\ of the Act, to approve Amendment No. 2 to the
[[Page 26666]]
Exchange's proposal on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning Amendment No. 2 including whether the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written
submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington,
DC 20549. 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 inspection and
copying at the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the above-mentioned self-regulatory organization.
All submissions should refer to File No. SR-PCX-97-28 and should be
submitted by June 3, 1998.
V. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\37\ that the proposed rule change (SR-PCX-97-28) is approved as
amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-12702 Filed 5-12-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
