[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 210 (Tuesday, October 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55399-55403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-26899]



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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-36409; File Nos. SR-NYSE-95-31; SR-PSE-95-25; SR-Amex-
95-42; SR-Phlx-95-71]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Order 
Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Changes by the New York 
Stock Exchange, Inc., the Pacific Stock Exchange, Inc., the American 
Stock Exchange, Inc., and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., To Add 
Two Positions and Exercise Limit Tiers for Qualifying Equity Option 
Classes and To Expand the Equity Option Hedge Exemption

October 23, 1995.
    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 September 26, October 5, October 16, October 17, 1995, respectively, 
the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE''), the Pacific Stock 
Exchange, Inc. (``PSE''), the American Stock Exchange, 

[[Page 55400]]
Inc. (``Amex``), and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'') 
(collectively the ``Exchanges''), filed with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes as 
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by 
the self-regulatory organizations. The PSE subsequently filed Amendment 
No. 1 to their proposed rule change on October 17, 1995.\3\ The 
Exchanges have requested accelerated approval of the proposals. The 
Commission is approving the proposals on an accelerated basis and 
soliciting comments.

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78s(b)(1) (1988).
    17 CFR 240.19b-4 (1994).
    \3\ See letter from Michael D. Pierson, Senior Attorney, Market 
Regulation, PSE, to Michael A. Walinskas, Branch Chief, Options 
Regulation, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated October 
13, 1995 (``Amendment No. 1''). In Amendment No. 1, the PSE 
requested accelerated approval for their proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organizations' Statements of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Changes

    The Exchanges propose to add two upper position and exercise limit 
\4\ tiers for those equity option classes that meet certain criteria 
for high liquidity in the underlying stocks. In addition, the Exchanges 
propose to expand the current equity option hedge exemption from twice 
to three times the standard or base position limit.\5\

    \4\ Positions limits impose a ceiling on the aggregate number of 
option contracts on the same side of the market that an investor, or 
group of investors acting in concert, may hold or write. Similarly, 
exercise limits impose a ceiling on the aggregate long positions in 
option contracts that an investor, or group of investors acting in 
concert, can or will have exercised within five consecutive business 
days.
    \5\ The equity hedge exemption currently exempts certain 
specified equity options positions from the stated (or base) 
position limits where the option contracts are hedged by 100 shares 
of stock or securities convertible into such stock (or hedged by the 
same number of shares represented by an adjusted option contract), 
up to a maximum allowable position of twice the standard or base 
limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchanges request the Commission to find good cause, pursuant 
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, for approving the proposed rule changes 
prior to the thirtieth day after publication in the Federal Register.

II. Self-Regulatory Organizations' Statements of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes

    In its filings with the Commission, the self-regulatory 
organizations included statements concerning the purpose of and basis 
for the proposed rule changes and discussed any comments they received 
on the proposed rule changes. The text of these statements may be 
examined at the places specified in Item III below. The self-regulatory 
organizations have prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and 
C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organizations' Statements of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes

1. Purpose
    The Exchanges are proposing to add two new tiers to their current 
three tier position and exercise limits.\6\ The requested tiers are 
identical to the new tiers that the Commission recently approved for 
the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (``CBOE'').\7\

    \6\ See NYSE Rules 704 and 705; PSE Rules 6.8 and 6.9; Amex 
Rules 904 and 905; and Phlx Rules 1001 and 1002.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36371 (October 13, 
1995) (File No. SR-CBOE-95-42) (``CBOE Approval Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchanges propose to add two position and exercise limit tiers 
at 25,000 and 20,000 contract levels. The criterion to qualify for the 
proposed 25,000 contract limit will require that the underlying 
security must have at least 300 million shares outstanding with 75 
million shares traded in the past six months, or have 100 million 
shares traded in the past six months. To qualify for the proposed 
20,000 contract limit, the underlying security must have at least 240 
million shares outstanding with 60 million shares traded in the past 
six months, or have 80 million shares traded in the past six months.
    According to the Exchanges, the number of equity option classes 
currently listed that would qualify for either of these new higher 
position and exercise limit tiers is small. The NYSE has 11 options 
classes, the PSE has 30 options classes, the Amex has 62 options 
classes, and the Phlx has 16 options classes that would qualify for the 
25,000 contract tier. Similarly, the NYSE has five options classes, the 
PSE has 13 options classes, the Amex has 28 options classes, and the 
Phlx has 11 options classes that would satisfy the 20,000 contract tier 
requirements.\8\

    \8\ The number of options classes listed on the Exchanges that 
would qualify for the two new position and exercise limit tiers 
should be considered in conjunction with the fact that the NYSE 
currently has 170 equity option classes listed, the PSE currently 
has 354 equity option classes listed, the Amex currently has 539 
equity option classes listed, and the Phlx currently has 350 equity 
option classes listed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the proposed 25,000 and 20,000 contract tiers, the 
Exchanges are also proposing to expand the equity option position limit 
hedge exemption.\9\ This proposal is also identical to the CBOE's 
recently approved rule amendment.\10\ The exemption provides that the 
maximum allowable position where each option contract is hedged by 100 
shares of stock or securities convertible into stock, will be three 
times instead of twice the standard or base limit currently 
provided.\11\

    \9\ See NYSE Rule 704(b)(ii); PSE Rule 6.8, Commentary .07; Amex 
Rule 904, Commentary .09; and Phlx Rule 1001, Commentary .07.
    \10\ See CBOE Approval Order, supra note 7.
    \11\ The Commission notes that the proposed increase in the 
maximum hedge exemption will apply to all position limit tiers, not 
just to the proposed 25,000 and 20,000 contract tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchanges are requesting approval of the proposed 20,000 and 
25,000 position and exercise limit tiers for qualifying equity option 
classes and an expansion of the current equity option hedge exemption 
to three times the base position limit because the Exchanges strongly 
believe that the investing community will benefit from the rule 
proposals. In particular, according to the Exchanges, investors with 
sizable holdings, accounts, or assets who employ equity options to 
hedge large holdings, and who have found the existing equity option 
position limit tiers and hedge exemption to be too restrictive will be 
greatly benefited through the rule proposals. The Exchanges do not 
believe that the increased limits and expanded equity hedge exemption 
proposed herein will increase the risk of, or exposure to, market 
disruption resulting from the higher number of equity option contracts 
permitted to be under common control.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchanges believe that the proposed rule changes are consistent 
with Section 6 of the Act in general, and furthers the objectives of 
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in particular,\12\ in that the proposals are 
designed to remove the impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a 
free and open market and a national market system by providing 
investors with enhanced hedging capabilities.

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) (1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organizations' Statements on Burden on Competition

    The Exchanges do not believe that the proposed rule changes will 
impose any burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organizations' Statements on Comments on the 
Proposed Rule Changes Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

[[Page 55401]]


III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments concerning the foregoing. Persons making written submissions 
should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and 
Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. 
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written 
statements with respect to the proposed rule changes that are filed 
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the 
proposed rule changes 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. Sec. 552, will be available for inspection and 
copying at the Commission's Public Reference Section, 450 Fifth Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such filings also will be 
available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the 
Exchanges. All submissions should refer to File Nos. SR-NYSE-95-31, SR-
PSE-95-25, SR-Amex-95-42, and SR-Phlx-95-71, and should be submitted by 
November 21, 1995.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of 
Proposed Rule Changes

A. Description and Background

    Since the inception of standardized options trading, the options 
exchanges have had rules imposing limits on the aggregate number of 
options contracts that a member or customer could hold or exercise. 
These rules are intended to prevent the establishment of large options 
positions that can be used or might create incentives to manipulate or 
disrupt the underlying market so as to benefit the options position. In 
particular, position and exercise limits are designed to minimize the 
potential for mini-manipulations \13\ and for corners or squeezes of 
the underlying market. In addition, they serve to reduce the 
possibility for disruption of the options market itself, especially in 
illiquid options classes.

    \13\ Mini-manipulation is an attempt to influence, over a 
relatively small range, the price movement in a stock to benefit a 
previously established derivatives position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In establishing position and exercise limits, the Commission has 
been careful to balance two competing concerns. First, the Commission 
has recognized that the limits must be sufficient to prevent investors 
from disrupting the market for the underlying security by acquiring and 
exercising a number of options contracts disproportionate to the 
deliverable supply and average trading volume of the underlying 
security. At the same time, the Commission has realized that limits 
must not be established at levels that are so low as to discourage 
participation in the options market by institutions and other investors 
with substantial hedging needs or to prevent specialists and market 
makers from adequately meeting their obligations to maintain a fair and 
orderly market.\14\

    \14\ See H.R. Rep. No. IFC-3, 96th Cong., 1st Sess. at 189-91 
(Comm. Print 1978) (``Options Study'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In October 1980, the Commission approved proposed rule changes by 
several options exchanges to increase position and exercise limits from 
1,000 to 2,000 contracts for all individual equity options classes.\15\ 
In conjunction with the approval, the Commission received commitments 
from the options exchanges to study the effects of the increased 
limits. The Commission indicated that the experience gained under the 
increased limits, if coupled with adequate monitoring and surveillance 
procedures, could serve as a basis for considering further position and 
exercise limit modifications.

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 17237 (October 22, 
1980), 45 FR 71454 (October 28, 1980) (order approving File Nos. SR-
PSE-80-15, SR-Amex-80-23, and SR-Phlx-80-21) (``1980 Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July 1983, the Commission approved a further increase in 
position and exercise limits for individual stock options based on a 
tiering approach.\16\ Limits for options on stocks with the greatest 
trading volume and public float were increased to 4,000 contracts and 
limits on all other options classes were increased to 2,500 
contracts.\17\ In approving the increased limits under a two-tiered 
framework, the Commission noted that tiering was consistent with the 
gradual, evolutionary approach that the Commission and the exchanges 
have adopted in increasing position and exercise limits.

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 19975 (July 15, 
1983), 48 FR 33389 (July 21, 1983) (order approving File Nos. SR-
PSE-83-09, SR-Amex-83-05, and SR-Phlx-83-04) (``1983 Release'').
    \17\ To be eligible for the 4,000 contract limit an underlying 
security was required to have had either (i) trading volume of at 
least 20 million shares during the most recent six month trading 
period; or (ii) trading volume of at least 15 million shares during 
the most recent six month trading period and at least 60 million 
shares currently outstanding. All other options not meeting these 
requirements were subject to the 2,500 contract limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1985, the Commission approved a further increase in position and 
exercise limits for individual equity options. This approval extended 
the tiering approach commenced by the options exchanges in 1983.\18\ 
The Commission noted in the 1985 Release that liberalizing position and 
exercise limits would further increase the potential depth and 
liquidity of the individual stock options markets without significantly 
increasing concerns regarding intermarket manipulations or disruptions 
of the market for the options or underlying securities.

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 21907 (March 29, 
1985), 50 FR 13440 (April 4, 1985) (order approving File Nos. SR-
PSE-85-01, SR-Amex-84-30, and SR-Phlx-84-25) (``1985 Release''). The 
1985 Release created a three-tiered system of position and exercise 
limits of 8,000, 5,500, and 3,000 contracts. To be eligible for the 
8,000 contract limit an underlying security was required to have had 
either (i) trading volume of at least 40 million shares during the 
most recent six month trading period; or (ii) trading volume of at 
least 30 million shares during the most recent six month trading 
period and at least 120 million shares currently outstanding. To be 
eligible for the 5,500 contract limit an underlying security was 
required to have had either (i) trading volume of at least 20 
million shares during the most recent six month trading period; or 
(ii) trading volume of at least 15 million shares during the most 
recent six month trading period and at least 40 million shares 
currently outstanding. All other options not meeting these 
requirements were subject to the 3,000 contract limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, in December 1993, the Commission approved the Exchanges' 
existing position and exercise limit framework for individual equity 
options.\19\ Depending on certain criteria related to the trading 
volume of the underlying stock or a combination of both the trading 
volume and the number of shares outstanding of the underlying stock, 
the Exchanges' current position and exercise limits were established at 
levels of 10,500 contracts, 7,500 contracts, and 4,500 contracts.\20\

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 33284 (December 3, 
1993), 58 FR 65215 (December 13, 1993) (order approving File No. SR-
NYSE-93-41); 33282 (December 3, 1993), 58 FR 65218 (December 13, 
1993) (order approving File No. SR-PSE-92-38); 33285 (December 3, 
1993), 58 FR 65201 (December 13, 1993) (order approving File No. SR-
Amex-93-27); and 33288 (December 3, 1993), 58 FR 65221 (December 13, 
1993) (order approving File No. SR-Phlx-93-07) (collectively ``1993 
Release'').
    \20\ To be eligible for the 10,500 contract limit an underlying 
security must have either (i) trading volume of at least 40 million 
shares during the most recent six month trading period; or (ii) 
trading volume of at least 30 million shares during the most recent 
six month trading period and at least 120 million shares currently 
outstanding. To be eligible for the 7,500 contract limit an 
underlying security must have either (i) trading volume of at least 
20 million shares during the most recent six month trading period; 
or (ii) trading volume of at least 15 million shares during the most 
recent six month trading period and at least 40 million shares 
currently outstanding. All other options not meeting these 
requirements are subject to the 4,500 contract limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchanges proposed to add two position and exercise limit tiers 
at 25,000 and 20,000 contract levels. As stated above, the criterion to 
qualify for 

[[Page 55402]]
the proposed 25,000 contract limit will require that the underlying 
security must have at least 300 million shares outstanding with 75 
million shares traded in the past six months, or have 100 million 
shares traded in the past six months. To qualify for the proposed 
20,000 contract limit, the underlying security must have at least 240 
million shares outstanding with 60 million shares traded in the past 
six months, or have 80 million shares traded in the past six months.
    In addition to the proposed 25,000 and 20,000 contract tiers, the 
Exchanges are also proposing to expand the equity hedge exemption. 
Under this proposal, the maximum allowable position, after exempting 
from the base limit specified positions where the option contract is 
hedged by 100 shares of stock or securities convertible into stock, 
will be three times instead of twice the standard or base limit 
currently provided.

B. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent 
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations 
thereunder applicable to the national securities exchanges, and, in 
particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5).\21\ Specifically, 
the Commission believes that the proposed addition of position and 
exercise limit tiers of 25,000 contracts and 20,000 contracts for 
qualifying equity options, and the proposed expansion of the equity 
hedge exemption to three times the standard or base limit will 
accommodate the needs of investors and market participants. The 
Commission also believes that the proposed rule changes will increase 
the potential depth and liquidity of the equity options market as well 
as the underlying cash market without significantly increasing concerns 
regarding intermarket manipulations or disruptions of the market for 
the options or underlying securities. Accordingly, as discussed below, 
the rule proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 
6(b)(5) that exchange rules facilitate transactions in securities while 
continuing to further investor protection and the public interest.

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) (1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In approving the increased limits, the Commission recognizes that 
securities with active and deep trading markets, as well as with broad 
public ownership, are more difficult to manipulate or disrupt than 
securities having less active and deep markets and having smaller 
public floats.\22\ The proposed additional position and exercise limit 
tiers recognize this by seeking to minimize the restraints on those 
options classes that can accommodate larger limits without 
significantly increasing manipulation concerns.\23\ In particular, the 
proposed limit of 25,000 contracts and 20,000 contracts for options on 
the most actively traded, widely held securities, permits the 
Commission to avoid placing unnecessary restraints on those options 
where the manipulative potential is the least and the need for 
increased positions likely is the greatest. Accordingly, the Commission 
believes that the additional position and exercise limit tiers and the 
expanded equity hedge exemption is warranted.

    \22\ The Commission notes that the quantitative options listing 
and maintenance standards require: (1) A minimum of 7 and 6.3 
million shares outstanding, respectively, which are owned by persons 
other than ``insiders,'' as defined in Section 16 of the Act; (2) a 
minimum of 2,000 and 1,600 shareholders, respectively; (3) trading 
volume of at least 2.4 and 1.8 million shares, respectively, during 
the past twelve months; (4) for an original listing, the market 
price per share of the underlying security must have closed at or 
above $7.50 during the majority of business days over the preceding 
three months; and (5) to maintain its listing, the market price per 
share of the underlying security must have closed at or above $5 
during the majority of business days over the preceding six months.
    \23\ The Commission continues to believe that proposals to 
increase position and exercise limits must be justified and 
evaluated separately. After reviewing the proposed exercise limits, 
along with the eligibility criteria for the two new tiers, the 
Commission has concluded that the proposed exercise limit additions 
do not raise manipulation problems or increase concerns over market 
disruption in the underlying securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed additions to the 
Exchanges' position and exercise limit tiers and increased hedge 
exemption appear to be both appropriate and consistent with the 
Commission's gradual, evolutionary approach. There are no ideal limits 
in the sense that options positions of any given size can be stated 
conclusively to be free of any manipulative concerns. The Commission, 
however, is relying on the absence of discernible manipulation problems 
under the current framework as an indicator that the proposed 
additional limit tiers and the expanded hedge exemption is justified.
    The Commission does not believe that the addition of the two new 
higher limit tiers and the expanded hedge exemption will have any 
adverse effects on the options markets. In approving the two-tiered 
system in 1983, the Commission stated that it did not believe that 
requiring traders to keep track of two limits rather than one was 
burdensome or confusing or would lead to accidental violations.\24\ The 
Commission does not believe that a change from the current three tiers 
to five tiers should change this conclusion. Similarly, as the 
Commission views the expansion of the equity hedge exemption as 
consistent with its steady progression in this area, the enactment of 
this portion of the proposed rule changes should not prove difficult to 
implement or cumbersome to monitor.

    \24\ In this regard, the Commission notes that the Exchanges 
routinely, and on a continuous basis, review the trading 
characteristics of the underlying stocks to determine the 
appropriate position and exercise limit tiers for the option 
classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that although position and exercise limits 
for options must be sufficient to protect the options and related 
markets from disruptions by manipulations, the limits must not be 
established at levels that are so low as to discourage participation in 
the options market by institutions and other investors with substantial 
hedging needs or to prevent market makers from adequately meeting their 
obligations to maintain a fair and orderly market. In this regard, the 
Exchanges have noted that customers and member firms view the current 
position and exercise limits for certain options classes as too low. 
The Commission believes that the Exchanges' proposals are a reasonable 
and appropriately tailored effort to accommodate the identified needs 
of options market participants. In this regard it is important to note 
that the proposals only add higher position and exercise limit tiers 
for classes of options overlying the most liquid stocks. As a result, 
the proposals affect only a small number of equity option classes that 
are traded on the Exchanges.
    From 1988 through 1990, the Commission approved pilot programs 
proposed by the Exchanges which provided exemptions from position 
limits for certain fully hedged equity option positions.\25\ The pilot 
programs created an exemption from equity option position and exercise 
limits for accounts that had established one of the four most commonly 
used hedged positions.\26\ Under this exemption, the maximum position 
limit (including the allowable exemptions) could not exceed twice the 
established option position limit.\27\

    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 25811 (June 20, 
1988), 53 FR 23821 (June 24, 1988) (order approving File No. SR-PSE-
88-09); 25738 (May 24, 1988), 53 FR 20201 (June 2, 1988) (order 
approving File Nos. SR-Amex-87-13 and SR-Phlx-87-37); and 27786 
(March 8, 1990), 55 FR 9523 (March 14, 1990) (order approving File 
No. SR-NYSE-89-09) (``Pilot Approval Orders.'').
    \26\ The four hedged positions are: (1) long stock and short 
call; (2) long stock and long put; (3) short stock and long call; 
and (4) short stock and short put.
    \27\ In May 1995, after several extensions, the Commission 
granted permanent approval to the Exchanges' hedge exemption pilot 
programs. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35738 (May 18, 
1995), 60 FR 27573 (May 24, 1995) (order approving File Nos. SR-
NYSE-95-04, SR-PSE-95-05, SR Amex-95-13, and SR-Phlx-95-10).

[[Page 55403]]

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

    The Exchanges currently propose to increase the hedge exemption to 
three times the applicable position limits. According to the Exchanges, 
as institutional accounts are unable to fully hedge their stock 
holdings due to the restrictive limits, investors are unnecessarily 
forced to keep a portion of their portfolio at risk. The Commission 
believes that the Exchanges' proposal to expand the hedge exemption is 
an appropriate method to accommodate the identified needs of options 
market participants. By increasing the hedge exemption, the Commission 
believes, large hedge funds and institutional accounts will be provided 
with the means necessary to adequately hedge their stock holdings 
without adding risk to the options market.
    Lastly, the Commission notes that despite an appreciable growth in 
equity options trading and the sophisticated and automated surveillance 
procedures employed by the Exchanges, the last change in position 
limits occurred in 1993. Based on the Exchanges' experience, the 
Commission believes that the proposed increased hedge exemption and 
additional limit tiers should result in little or no additional risk to 
the marketplace.\28\
    \28\ The Commission notes that to the extent the potential for 
manipulation increases because of the additional tiers and expanded 
hedge exemption, the Commission believes the Exchanges' surveillance 
programs will be adequate to detect as well as to deter attempted 
manipulative activity. The Commission will, of course, continue to 
monitor the Exchanges' surveillance programs to ensure that problems 
do not arise.
    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule 
changes prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of 
notice of filing thereof in the Federal Register. Specifically, by 
accelerating the approval of the Exchanges' rule proposals, the 
Commission is conforming the Exchanges' position and exercise limits 
with those levels recently approved for the CBOE.\29\ Accelerated 
approval of the proposed rule changes will thereby provide for the 
desired uniformity of the exchanges' position and exercise limits as 
well as hedge exemption rules. Any other course of action could lead to 
unnecessary investor confusion. In addition, the CBOE's proposal was 
noticed for the entire twenty-one day comment period and generated no 
negative responses.\30\ Accordingly, the Commission believes that it is 
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act to approve the proposed rule 
changes on an accelerated basis.

    \29\ See CBOE Approval Order, supra note 7.
    \30\ In response to the CBOE's proposal, the Commission received 
two comment letters. Both comment letters were generally supportive 
of the CBOE's proposed rule change, and are described more fully in 
the CBOE Approval Order, supra note 7.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \31\ of the 
Act that the proposed rule changes (File Nos. SR-NYSE-95-31, SR-PSE-95-
25, SR-Amex-95-42, and SR-Phlx-95-71) are hereby approved on an 
accelerated basis.

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78s(b)(2) (1988).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95-26899 Filed 10-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M