[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53358-53361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27048]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-39202; File No. SR-CBOE-97-45]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change by the Chicago
Board Options Exchange, Inc., Relating to Certain Rules Governing
Market-Maker Obligations With Respect to the Trading of Options on the
DJIA
October 3, 1997.
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 8, 1997,\3\ the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons
and is granting accelerated approval to the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change, the substance of which is incorporated into this notice. See
letter from Timothy H. Thompson, Senior Attorney, CBOE, to John
Ayanian, Special Counsel, Market Regulation, Commission, dated
September 16, 1997 (``Amendment No. 1'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The CBOE proposes to amend certain of its rules governing market-
maker obligations with respect to the trading of options on the Dow
Jones Industrial Average (``DJIA'' or ``Index''). The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Office of the Secretary, CBOE
and at the Commission.
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 self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item III below. The self-regulatory
organization 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 Exchange is proposing to amend certain Exchange rules governing
market-maker obligations with respect to the trading of options on the
DJIA (trading symbol ``DJX''). Specifically, the Exchange is proposing
to make the following changes with respect to trading in options on the
DJIA: (i) Amending Rule 24.17 to apply the rules governing the Retail
Automatic Execution System (``RAES'') eligibility in options on the
Standard & Poor's 100 Stock Index (``S&P 100'') (``OEX'') to options on
the DJIA; (ii) amending Rule 24.17 to add an interpretation and policy
that the provisions of paragraph (b)(v)(C) and (D) will not apply to
DJX market makers until December 1, 1997; (iii) creating Rule 24.17A,
RAES Operations in Options on the DJIA, which applies the RAES
operations in OEX to DJX and states that the Exchange can determine the
maximum order size for RAES orders for options on the DJIA up to 100
contracts, a higher level than for OEX; (iv) amending paragraph (a)(2)
of Rule 8.51 (and related interpretations) governing the minimum firm
quote requirement, for a market-maker trading crowd; (v) applying the
terms of the previously approved OEX firm quote program to the DJX
trading crowd, and amending the fine amount under the Minor Rule Plan
for violations of the Firm Quote Rule; (vi) amending the fine schedule
for violations of the Firm Quote Rule for OEX; and (vii) amending Rule
8.16, RAES Eligibility in Equity Options, to indicate that it does not
apply to DJIA options.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Exchange's OEX firm quote program was approved by the
Commission under Section 19(b) of the Act in Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 37388 (June 28, 1996), 61 FR 35821 (July 8, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose for these proposed rule changes is to enhance market-
maker obligations with respect to the trading of options on the DJIA.
The Exchange expects these change to enhance the depth and liquidity of
the market for options on the DJIA. The Exchange also notes that
because option contracts on the DJIA will be based upon one-one
hundredth of the value of the DJIA, these options contracts will
overlie approximately one-tenth of the value that other broad-based
index options overlie, such as options on the Standard & Poor's 500
Stock Index (``SPX'') and on OEX. This is so because the values of the
S&P 500 Index and the S&P 100 Index currently are approximately one-
tenth of the value of the DJIA, yet OEX and SPX are based on the full
value of their respective underlying indexes. Consequently, the
Exchange believes an increase in these market-maker obligations is
necessary to ensure an appropriate level of market-maker commitment.
Under the proposed rule change, the rules applicable to RAES in OEX
will apply to RAES in DJX. The proposed rule change revises Rule 24.17,
RAES Eligibility in OEX to refer to ``Option Class'' instead of OEX.
``Option Class'' will mean either OEX or DJX, as appropriate. Also, the
Rule will be revised to refer to the ``appropriate Committee'' which
will mean the OEX Market Performance Committee'' the
[[Page 53359]]
case of OEX and ``the Exchange Committee to which the Exchange
delegates the market performance function for options on the DJIA'' in
the case of DJX. The proposed rule change also adds Interpretation and
Policy .02 to Rule 24.17 to state that the provisions of paragraphs
(b)(v) (C) and (D) (formerly paragraphs (a)(v) (C) and (D)) shall not
apply to DJX market makers until December 1, 1997.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Rule 24.17(b)(v) (C) and (D) state that a market maker in
RAES who wants to participate in OEX (and now DJX) must execute at
lease seventy-five percent of his market-maker contracts for the
preceding calendar month in OEX and execute at least seventy-five
percent of his market maker trades for the preceding calendar month
in OEX (and now DJX) in person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change also adds a new Rule 24.17A that sets
forth the RAES Operations for Options on the DJIA, stating that RAES
will operate the same for DJX as for OEX, including that the Exchange
shall determine that series will be eligible for RAES in DJX. Over the
years, the Commission has approved OEX RAES operational policies to
Section 19(b) of the Act; however, these policies have not been
codified in the Exchange rules. CBOE now proposes that these policies
also extend to DJX.\6\ For example, the proposed rule change will apply
DJX RAES the OEX RAES that allows OEX RAES orders to trade ahead of
orders on the customer limit order book in situations where the
displayed bid or offer is equal in price to a customer order, reflected
in the limit order book. This is an exception to the normal protection
afforded customer orders on the book, where RAES orders entered when a
booked order matches the price of the disseminated bid (for a RAES
order to sell) or offer (for a RAES order to buy) are ``kicked out'' of
RAES and generally executed manually on the floor.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See letter from Timothy H. Thompson, Senior Attorney, CBOE,
to John Ayanian, Special Counsel, Market Regulation, Commission,
dated September 24, 1997 (``September letter''). See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 23490 (August 1, 1996), 51 FR 28788
(August 11, 1986) (firms on the Order Routing System will
automatically be on RAES for purposes of routing small public
customer market or marketable limit orders into RAES; the system
will automatically attach a price to an order when it receives the
order, which price will be determined from this displayed quote at
the time of the order's entry; RAES orders that match customer
orders on the book will not be kicked out but will be executed on
RAES against normal priority rules; participating market makers will
be assigned to the system as contraparties on a rotating basis;
Exchange rule shall not apply to the extent they are inconsistent
with the terms of the program; RAES orders will count towards
fulfillment of the in-person requirement of Rule 8.7); and 38702
(May 30, 1997), 62 FR 31184 (June 6, 1997) (all or none, immediate
or cancel, fill or kill, and minimum quantity contingency orders
that are otherwise RAES eligible may be executed on RAES).
\7\ See supra note 6 and letter from Timothy H. Thompson, Senior
Attorney, CBOE, to Michael Walinskas, Senior Special Counsel, Market
Regulation, Commission, dated October 2, 1997 (``October letter'').
OEX and IBM options are the only two classes where RAES orders are
granted priority over booked orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to apply this OEX RAES
policy to DJX, based upon the way in which the Exchange expects the DJX
trading crowd to function, the amount of protection it expects the
``stranded'' booked orders to receive on the floor, and the operational
difficulties associated with ``kicking out'' RAES orders for manual
execution on the floor.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See October letter supra note 7. The primary purpose and
benefit of this policy of ``kicking out'' RAES orders is to allow
the ``kicked out'' RAES order to interact with the booked order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, CBOE has stated that it expects this portion of the
proposed rule change to have only a nominal effect on the execution of
booked orders because, based on information gathered from talking to
firms and investors, it believes that DJX will attract a large order
flow and that large market-making firms will have a presence in the
trading crowd. The Exchange believes that this combination of active
order flow and liquid, well-capitalized traders will result in the DJX
trading floor operating much like the trading floors in OEX and IBM.
The Exchange believes that in this type of trading environment where
there is high liquidity, the likelihood that a booked order will not be
executed after the execution of a RAES order at the same price is
small. In addition, the CBOE notes that the likelihood of the
``stranded'' order not being executed is diminished by the Exchange's
existing priority rule, Rule 6.45, which ensures that no transaction
can take place on the floor at a price equal to or better than the
price of the booked order until the booked order has been filed.\9\
Finally, CBOE states that the adverse effects to customer orders that
would result if RAES orders were ``kicked out'' to be executed on the
trading floor, such as delayed and missed executions, outweigh the
potential disadvantage that might result to customer limit orders on
the book from the proposed limited exception to the normal priority
rules.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Commission notes that this does not take into account
the market moving through the booked order before it is executed.
\10\ The Exchange expects the number of DJX RAES orders that
would be ``kicked out'' under the normal priority rules would be
significant because of the fact that DJX is designed to appeal to
retail customers who are more likely to send in small RAES eligible
orders, the larger RAES eligible order size for DJX, and the greater
percentage of DJX series that will be eligible for RAES in DJX (all
series) than in OEX (only those series where the offer is $10 or
less are currently eligible).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 24.17A also states that the Exchange will have the
discretion to set the eligible order size for RAES orders up to one
hundred (100) contracts. The Exchange believes expanding the eligible
contract limit size for RAES will provide the benefits of: more timely
and cost-effective executions of customer options orders to a greater
number of orders than would be the case if no changes were made;
enhanced audit trail; enhanced fill reporting and price reporting;
increased customer confidence; and reduction of transactions that have
to be executed manually on the trading floor, thereby increasing the
efficiency in the handling of non-RAES orders. The Exchange also notes
that Rule 24.15(e) allows the Exchange to set an eligible order size of
up to ninety-nine contracts for SPX options. As noted, an SPX option
covers approximately ten times the value of an option on the DJIA.
CBOE believes that this proposed rule change will not impose any
significant burdens on the operation, security, integrity, or capacity
of RAES, but will increase the efficiency of the Exchange operations.
The Exchange also is proposing to amend Rule 8.51 to allow the firm
quote requirement for options on the DJIA to be set at a level of up to
one hundred (100) contracts. Under Rule 8.51, a trading crowd is
obligated to fill non-broker-dealer customer orders for up to the
specified number of contracts at the quotes that are displayed when the
order reaches the trading station at which the option is traded. The
reasons specified above justifying the change in the maximum RAES order
size--the relatively smaller dollar value of options on one-one-
hundredth of the DJIA as compared to other broad-based index options
and the Exchange's desire to enhance the depth and liquidity of the
market for options on the DJIA--apply equally to this proposed change
in the firm quote requirement. The exchange is also proposing to amend
Interpretations .01 and .03 to Rule 8.51 to make these interpretations
consistent with the change to paragraph (a) of Rule 8.51.
Finally, the Exchange is proposing to apply the terms of the OEX
firm quote program to trading in DJX. Among the significant terms of
the firm quote program are that: Floor Officials may designate one or
more market-makers to take the contra side of a transaction if market-
makers do not voluntarily honor the trading crowd's obligation; market-
makers have the obligation to state the size of their markets if those
markets are for less than the DJX firm quote limit; market-maker and
broker-dealer quotes for less than the firm quote limit will
[[Page 53360]]
not be displayed; \11\ and Floor Brokers may choose one of two
alternatives in obtaining a fill under the Firm Quote Rule, as
described in the first circular attached as Exhibit B to the submitted
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The largest possible firm quote limit will be 100
contracts, which is approximately equal in value to 10 contracts in
OEX. In addition, broker-dealer orders for less than the applicable
firm quote requirement will not be disseminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second Firm Quote Circular, attached as Exhibit C to the
submitted filing, sets forth a schedule of fines that may be imposed
pursuant to the Minor Rule Violation rule for violation of the Firm
Quote Rule. The Exchange believes that both of these circulars are
essentially identical to the OEX firm quote program circulars except
that they apply to trading in DJX and they accordingly have a different
firm quote requirement. In addition, the Exchange has decided to adopt
a policy whereby the fine for a third and fourth violation of the firm
quote policy in both DJX and OEX would be $2,500, and for subsequent
violations there is a mandatory referral to the Business Conduct
Committee (``BCC'').\12\ The Exchange will reissue the OEX circular
with the revised fine schedule. The Exchange notes that although the
upper fine limit is being reduced, the Exchange will exercise its
authority to commence a disciplinary proceeding pursuant to Exchange
Rule 17.2 in egregious situations and will refer the case to the BCC
for violations past the fourth violation. Of course, in disciplinary
proceeding the violating member could be subject to even greater fines
and other sanctions including suspension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The current fine schedule for violations of the firm quote
policy for OEX states that the fine for third and subsequent
violations is $3,000 to $5,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange requests the Commission to find good cause, pursuant
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, for approving the proposed rule change
prior to the thirtieth day after publication in the Federal Register.
The Exchange believes that accelerated effectiveness of the proposed
change is appropriate because the Commission has approved other
proposals by options exchanges allowing similar increases in the number
of option contracts eligible for automatic execution \13\ and has
approved an essentially identical firm quote program for OEX. In
addition, for the same reasons, the Exchange believes an increase in
the firm quote requirement is justified and that the increase in the
firm quote requirement is a benefit to public customers without any
disadvantages to public customers. Also, because options on the DJIA
are based on one-one hundredth of the value of the Index, the value of
the Index underlying an option on the DJIA is only approximately one-
tenth or the value of the indexes underlying certain other broad based
indexes which have a RAES eligible order size of ten or more and a firm
quote requirement of ten. Therefore, the Exchange believes no unique or
novel questions are raised by this change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 38169 (January 14,
1997), 62 FR 3547 (January 23, 1997) (order approving File No. SR-
CBOE-96-72) (increasing the maximum order size eligibility for
interest rate options); 36601 (December 18, 1995), 60 FR 66817
(December 26, 1995) (order approving File No. SR-PHLX-95-39)
(increasing the maximum execution order size eligibility for public
customer orders for all equity and index options to 50 contracts);
33476 (January 13, 1994), 59 FR 3140 (January 20, 1994) (order
approving File No. SR-Amex-93-33) (increasing the size of Japan
Index options orders eligible for automatic execution to 99
contracts); and 25950 (July 28, 1988), 53 FR 29293 (August 3, 1988)
(order approving File No. SR-Amex-87-20) (increasing the number of
Institutional Index options eligible for automatic execution to 100
contracts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
By establishing market-maker obligations with respect to trading
options on the DJIA, including a firm quote requirement and a maximum
size for DJX orders eligible for execution through RAES, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will better serve the needs of
CBOE's public customers and the Exchange members who make a market for
such customers, and is consistent with and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in that it is designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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. 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 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
Exchange. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-97-45 and
should be submitted by November 3, 1997.
IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change
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. Specifically,
the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \15\ in that it is designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and to protect investors and the public interest.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\16\ In approving this rule, the Commission notes that it has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes it is reasonable for the Exchange to amend
Rule 24.17 to apply the OEX RAES eligibility requirements to DJX, and
to apply the terms of the previously approved firm quote program for
OEX to DJX because they are similar products that are expected to trade
in a similar manner and it is necessary to have a RAES rule and a firm
quote program in order to ensure efficient trading in DJX. Also, the
Commission believes it is reasonable under the Act to exempt DJX market
makers from the requirements in amended Rule 24.17(b)(v)(C) and (D)
\17\ until December 1, 1997 because when options on the DJIA begin to
trade on October 6, 1997 there will be no ``preceding month'' against
which to measure a DJX market maker's performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also believes it is reasonable for the Exchange to
establish
[[Page 53361]]
Rule 24.17A, RAES Operations in DJX, which will be the same for OEX
except for the maximum contract size eligible for RAES. The maximum
size for RAES in DJX will be up to 100 contracts, whereas the maximum
size for OEX is 10 contracts. Similar to OEX, the Exchange will have
the authority to choose which DJX series will be eligible for RAES.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The Commission requests that the CBOE distribute a Notice
to Members discussing all RAES operations and policies that will
apply to DJX. In addition, the Commission expects CBOE, in the near
future, to codify RAES operations for OEX and DJX in manner similar
to that for SPX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a general rule, the Commission believes that customer limit
orders in the limit order book should receive priority protection over
other orders when the quoted market touches the limit order.
Specifically, RAES orders generally should not be executed by market
makers when customer limit orders are also price eligible to interact
with the RAES orders. The Commission believes that exceptions to this
principle are only appropriate in limited circumstances where it is
unlikely that affected limit orders will receive an inferior execution.
The Commission has previously approved CBOE rule changes that afforded
such an exception in two highly liquid options classes, OEX index
options and IMB equity options. After careful review, the Commission
has determined that it is appropriate to allow DJX RAES orders to be
automatically executed notwithstanding the possibility that customer
limit orders could be priced identically to the prevailing disseminated
best bid or offer. The Commission notes that it is basing this approval
upon the fact that the Exchange expects DJX to be a heavily traded
index product. As a result, it is anticipated that most limit orders
will receive fair executions, particularly since CBOE Rule 6.45 ensures
that no transaction can take place on the floor at a price equal to or
better than the price of the booked order until the booked order has
been filled. The Commission expects the Exchange to monitor the actual
depth and liquidity of the DJCX trading floor and the treatment of
customer orders on the limit order book that are traded behind RAES
orders at the market.
The Commission also believes that increasing the number of DJX
contracts eligible for RAES and to increase the firm quote requirement
for DJX is consistent with the Act because options on the DJIA are
approximately one-tenth the value of options on indexes underlying
other broad-based indexes.\19\ Therefore, increasing the RAES
eligibility and firm quote requirements for DJX should enhance market
maker obligations and commitments in these options, as well as help add
depth and liquidity to the market for DJX. In addition, increasing the
size of the RAES eligibility for DJX will provide the benefits of RAES
execution to a larger number of customer orders and reduce the number
of transactions to be executed manually on the floor, which could
increase the efficiency of executing non-RAES orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The Commission notes that this reasoning applies to an
option contract based upon one-one-hundredth of the DJIA and that
the same reasoning would not apply if the COE were to start trading
an options contract based upon one-tenth of the DJIA. The Commission
expects the CBOE to reset the RAES eligible size and the firm quote
limit accordingly for an options contract based on one-tenth of the
DJIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes it is consistent with the Act to amend the
Minor Rule Plan fine amount for violations of the firm quote rule for
both OEX and DJX because the amended fine schedule should still ensure
adequate and effective enforcement of the firm quote program. The
amended fine amount for third and fourth violations of the firm quote
policy, which will be $2500 \20\ is a reasonable amount in order to
help deter non-compliance with the firm quote program, and there will
now be mandatory referral to the BCC for any violations after the
fourth violation. In addition, the Commission notes that the Exchange
always has the authority to commence a full disciplinary proceeding
under Exchange Rule 17.2 under its Minor Rule Plan program for any
violation of the firm quote program, and that the CBOE stated that it
will exercise this authority in egregious situations.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The current fine schedule for violations of the firm quote
program for OEX states that the fine for third and subsequent
violations is $3000 to $5000.
\21\ The Commission believes it is reasonable under the Act to
amend Rule 8.16, RAES Eligibility in Equity Options, to indicate
that it does not apply to DJIA options because DJX will now be
covered by the RAES eligibility rule for OEX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule
change prior the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice
of filing thereof in the Federal Register. The Commission believes that
accelerated approval of the proposal is appropriate because it believes
the proposed changes to the various trading rule should become
effective prior to the day that the CBOE begins to trade options on the
DJIA, in order to ensure that all rules applicable to trading DJIA
options are in place prior to when such trading commences. In addition,
the Commission has previously approved similar increases in the number
of options contracts eligible for automatic execution on other options
exchanges \22\ and has previously approved the almost identical firm
quote program for OEX.\23\ Finally, the Commission believes that the
proposed rule change does not raise any significant regulatory issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See supra note 4.
\23\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \24\ that the
proposed rule change, as amended, is hereby approved on an accelerated
basis.
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-27048 Filed 10-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M