[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 30, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71896-71899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-34554]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Coffee, Sugar & Cocoa Exchange, Inc. Petition for Exemption From 
the Dual Trading Prohibition Set Forth in Section 4j(a) of the 
Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulation 155.5

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Order.

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

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``Commission'') is 
granting the petition of the Coffee, Sugar & Cocoa Exchange, Inc. 
(``CSCE'' or ``Exchange'') for exemption from the prohibition against 
dual trading in its Cocoa futures contract.

DATES: This Order is effective December 23, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Duane C. Andersen, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, 
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 
21st., N.W., Washington, DC 20581; telephone (202) 418-5490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 19, 1993, the Coffee, Sugar & 
Cocoa Exchange, Inc., (``CSCE'' or ``Exchange'') submitted a Petition 
for Exemption from the Dual Trading Prohibition contained in Section 4j 
of the Commodity Exchange Act (``Act'') and Regulation 155.5 for then-
affected contract markets, including its Sugar #11 and Coffee ``C'' 
futures contracts.\1\ The Exchange submitted an amended petition of 
March 21, 1997.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Affected contract market'' means a contract market with an 
average daily volume equal to or in excess of 8,000 contracts for 
each of four quarters during the most recent volume year. Commission 
Regulation 155.5(a)99). See Section 4j(a)(4). Under Section 4j(a) of 
the Act and Regulation 155.5(b), the dual trading prohibition 
applies to each affected contract market. The Commission, therefore, 
must consider separately each such contract market.
    \2\ In its amended petition, the Exchange petitioned for dual 
trading exemptions for six contract markets: Coffee ``C'', Sugar #11 
and Cocoa futures and futures option contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following its review of the March 21, 1997 petition the Commission 
found that the Exchange met all applicable statutory and regulatory 
standards for an exemption from the dual trading prohibition for its 
Sugar #11 futures contract market, the only affected contract market at 
the Exchange at that time. The Commission subsequently granted CSCE an 
unconditional exemption for that contract market by Order dated July 8, 
1997.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 37563 (July 14, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequent to the publication of the Order, the Cocoa futures 
contract became an affected contract market. Consequently, on February 
3, 1998, CSCE updated its petition to request that the Cocoa futures 
contract market be granted an exemption from the dual trading 
petition.\4\ Notice of availability of the CSCE's updated petition was 
published in the Federal Register on March 4, 1998.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Under Regulation 155.5(c)(3), the effective date of a dual 
trading prohibition shall be no more than 30 calendar days after the 
current computation date for that contract market. The computation 
date for the Cocoa futures contract market was January 6, 1998. 
Thus, CSCE timely submitted its amended petition before February 5, 
1998, the effective date of the dual trading prohibition in the 
newly affected contract market.
    \5\ 63 FR 10596 (March 4, 1998). The petition, as hereinafter 
discussed, includes the original 1993 petition, the 1997 amendment, 
and the 1998 update unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon consideration of CSCE's petition, as supplemented,\6\ and 
other data and analysis, including, but not limited to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ On December 22, 1997, the memberships of both the CSCE and 
the New York Cotton Exchange (``NYCE'') voted to merge and form the 
Board of Trade of the City of New York (``NYBT''). The merger was 
approved by the Commission on April 24, 1998, and initially closed 
on June 10, 1998. Data discussed herein generally focus on 1997, the 
period covered by the petition update, and precede the merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Exchange audit trail test results reconciling imputed 
trade execution times to underlying trade documentation and verifying 
data on window sizes;
     Actions taken in response to the Commission's November 
1994 Report on Adult Trail Status and Re-Test;
     Commission trade practice investigations and compliance 
reviews conducted in conjunction with rule enforcement reviews or other 
investigatory or surveillance activities;
     Division of Trading and Markets Memoranda dated June 19, 
1997, and December 4, 1998;

and upon review of each element of CSCE's trade monitoring system and 
of CSCE's trade monitoring as a whole, the Commission hereby finds that 
CSCE meets the standards for granting a dual trading exemption 
contained in Section 4j(a) of the Act as interpreted in Commission 
Regulation 155.5.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The burden to provide that the exemption standards of the 
Act and Commission regulations are met rests exclusively on the 
contract market. The dual trading provisions set forth in Section 4j 
of the Act and the standards for trade monitoring systems provided 
in Section 5a(b) of the Act were enacted as part of the Futures 
Trading Practices Act of 1992 (``FTPA''). Pub. L. No. 102-546, 101, 
106 Stat. 3590 (1992). The FTPA's legislative history makes clear 
that the burden to prove that the exemption standards are met rests 
upon the contract market. For instance, the 1992 House-Senate 
Conference Committee stated that ``a board of trade may satisfy the 
initial burden of demonstrating that each of its designated contract 
markets complies with trade monitoring system requirements of 
section 5a(b) of the Act, subject to requests for further 
information by the Commission by showing that it has maintained an 
ongoing record of compliance with those requirements.'' H.R. Conf. 
Rep. No. 102-978 at 53 (1992). The Conference Committee adopted the 
1991 House Bill's (H.R. 707) dual trading provisions, with 
amendments relating to exemptions. Id. at 50. The 1991 Senate Bill 
(S. 207) similarly placed on the exchange the burden to demonstrate 
the ability of its systems to meet the standards and reiterated the 
view, previously expressed in the 1989 Senate Bill (S. 1729), that 
an exchange has the best access to its own records and therefore is 
in the best position to show that its systems are effective and 
satisfactory. S. Rep. No. 102-22 at 32 (1991); S. Rep. No. 101-191 
at 39-40 (1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subject to CSCE's continuing ability to demonstrate that it meets 
applicable requirements, the Commission specifically finds with respect 
to the Cocoa futures contract market that CSCE maintains a trade 
monitoring system which is capable of detecting and deterring, and is 
used on a regular basis to detect and to deter, all types of violations 
attributable to dual trading and, to the full extent feasible, all 
other violations involving the making of trades and execution of 
customer orders, as required by Section 5a(b) of the Act and Commission 
Regulation 155.5. The Commission further finds that CSCS's trade 
monitoring system includes audit trail and recordkeeping systems that 
satisfy the Act and regulations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Section 4j(a)(3) of the Act requires the Commission to 
exempt a contract market from the prohibition against dual trading 
unconditionally upon finding that the trade monitoring system in 
place at the contract market satisfies the requirements of Section 
5a(b) with regard to violations attributable to dual trading at the 
contract market. If the trade monitoring system does not satisfy the 
requirements, Section 4j(a)(3) requires the Commission to deny the 
exemption or in the alternative to exempt a contract market from the 
prohibition against dual trading on stated conditions upon finding 
that there is a substantial likelihood that a dual trading 
prohibition would harm the public interest in hedging or price 
basing and that corrective actions are sufficient and appropriate to 
bring the contract market into compliance with the standards set 
forth in Section 5a(b). Regulation 155.5(b) prohibits floor brokers 
from dual trading in an affected contract market unless that 
contract market is exempted under Regulation 155.5(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to each required component of the trade monitoring

[[Page 71897]]

system, the Commission finds as follows:
    Physical Observation of Trading Areas--CSCS's trade monitoring 
system satisfies the requirements of Section 5a(b)(1)(A) in that CSCE 
maintains and executes as adequate program for physical observation of 
Exchange trading areas and integrates the information obtained from 
such observation into its compliance programs. The Exchange conducts 
daily floor surveillance during the open and close on all affected 
contract markets and at random times during each trading day. CSCE also 
performs floor surveillance when warranted by special market 
conditions, such as exceptional volatility or contract expirations. The 
Exchange uses information obtained from such surveillance in evaluating 
audit trail data and otherwise in executing its compliance programs.
    Audit Trail System--The Exchange's trade monitoring system 
satisfies the audit trail standards of Section 5a(b)(1) of the Act and 
Regulation 155.5(d)(2)(ii), which provide that a contract market's 
audit trail system must be able, and must be used, to capture essential 
data on the terms, participants, and sequence of transactions 
(including relevant data on unmatched trades and outtrades) and 
otherwise satisfy the requirements of Regulation 1.35 and Section 
5a(b)(3).
    CSCE's audit trail system records ``reliably accurate'' trade times 
in increments of no more than one minute in length as required by 
Section 5a(b)(2) of the Act, Regulation 1.35(g), and Appendix A to 
Regulation 155.5. Section 5a(b)(2) establishes that each exchange's 
audit trail system must, consistent with Commission regulations, 
reliably record accurate one-minute execution times of trades and 
sequence trades for each floor trader and broker. Section II of 
Appendix A to Regulation 155.5 states that the contract market must 
``[d]emonstrate the highest degree of accuracy practicable (but in no 
event less than 90% accuracy) of trade execution times required under 
Regulation 1.35(g) (within one minute, plus or minus, of execution) 
during four consecutive months within the 12-month period ending with 
the month preceding the submission of the exemption petition.\9\ In 
addition, Section II provides that the contract market must 
``[d]emonstrate the effective integration of such trade timing data 
into the contract market's surveillance system with respect to dual 
trading-related abuses.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Appendix A further requires that the contract market provide 
a description of the trade time imputation algorithm, ``including 
how and why it reliably establishes the accuracy of the imputed 
trade execution times.'' In analyzing various audit trail test 
results for imputed timing systems, the Commission has articulated 
these standards in terms of verifiability of audit trail times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchanges which assign one-minute trade execution times based upon 
an imputation algorithm, including CSCE, must demonstrate for each 
affected contract market that 90 percent or more of imputed trade times 
are reliable, precise, and verifiable as demonstrated by being imputed 
within a timing window of two minutes or less (``90 percent performance 
standard''). Section 5a(b)(2), enacted, in 1992, codified the 
Regulation 1.35(g) requirement that ``[a]ctual times of execution shall 
be stated in increments of no more than one minute in length.'' 
Although strict application of the regulation would mandate that 100 
percent of trade execution times meet that requirement, Regulation 
155.5 requires that the exchange demonstrate that no less than 90 
percent of trade execution times meet the Regulation 1.35(g) 
standard.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ further, imputed timing systems do not capture actual trade 
execution times. Rather, these systems use various trade and timing 
data to form a timing window within which a trade most likely 
occurred and then apply computerized logic, known as an algorithm, 
to impute a time for that trade. That imputed time is a proxy for 
the actual trade execution time. Consequently, even where an 
exchange can demonstrate a trade timing window of two minutes or 
less, it is not possible to determine where within that window the 
trade occurred. Thus, a two-minute window for imputed trade times 
represents a further liberal construction of the Regulation 1.35(g) 
one-minute timing requirement. The Commission has made clear that an 
accurate and verifiable imputed trade execution time only can be 
demonstrated by a timing window that narrows the time assigned to a 
trade to a two-minute period within which the trade is most likely 
to have occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CSCS has established for the Cocoa futures contract market that it 
satisfies the 90 percent performance standard--that is, 90 percent or 
more of imputed trade times, as assigned by the Exchange's trade timing 
system for Cocoa futures, are reliable, precise, and verifiable as 
demonstrated by being imputed within a timing window of two minutes or 
less.
    Finally, the Exchange's trade monitoring system satisfies the 
standards of Section 5a(b)(3) of the Act, which imposed heightened 
audit trail standards, effective October 1995, requiring exchanges to 
capture for large-volume markets unalterable and continual times. The 
exchanges also must identify times independently through an automatic 
mechanism, or a means which captures similarly reliable times, and 
sequence trades in a precise manner, to the extent practicable.\11\ 
With respect to sequencing, CSCS's system is adequately precise to 
determine the sequence of all trades by each floor trader and the 
sequence of all trades by each floor broker. Consistent with the 
guidelines to Regulation 155.5 CSCE demonstrated the use of trade 
timing data in its surveillance systems for dual trading-related and 
other trading-related abuses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ These provisions apply ``except to the extent the 
Commission determines that circumstances beyond the control of the 
contract market prevent compliance despite the contract market's 
affirmative good faith efforts to comply.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

One-Minute Execution Time Accuracy

    CSCE's Audit Trail system (``ATS'') imputes a one-minute execution 
time for every trade. Trade times are imputed based upon time and 
sequencing data entered by both buyers and sellers for customer and 
proprietary trades, including trading card and line order entry 
sequence numbers, certain execution times required to be manually 
entered, time and sales data, and 30-minute bracket codes.12 
The Exchange endeavors to capture each transaction as a time and sales 
print. Additional trade data are input by members' clerks to the trade 
processing system, which matches trades for clearing. Based on these 
data, ATS uses a series of trade data comparisons to match both sides 
of a trade, to narrow further the time windows, and ultimately to 
assign an imputed execution time for the trade.13

[[Page 71898]]

With respect to the accuracy of the ATS imputed trade execution times, 
all trade timing data obtained since 1994 indicate that CSCE met the 90 
percent performance standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Exchange members are required to record manually the 
execution time of the first trade on the card, as well as any 
customer type indicator trades (trades for another member present on 
the floor or an account controlled by that other member) and cross 
trades. Members are encouraged to record manually the execution time 
of the fifth trade on each trading card.
    CSCE does not use order ticket timestamp data in the processing 
logic for imputing times. Instead, the system attempts to obtain and 
use a time and sales print for all trades, extensive sequencing data 
(such as line numbers) and the various required manually entered 
times to impute trade execution times. Order ticket entry and exit 
times have been verified in the course of tests of the CSCE audit 
trail as being consistent with imputed times.
    \13\ As discussed in the Order dated July 7, 1998, CSCE planned 
to upgrade its ring reporter system through development and 
implementation of the Automated Sequential Trade Reporting System 
(``ASTRS''). With ASTRS, each ring reporter would use an upgraded 
handheld terminal and would be able to enter, in addition to the 
prince information currently entered to the extent practicable the 
selling member's acronym or short code. In December 1997 CSCE 
conducted a two-week pilot test that involved using ASTRS to impute 
trade times in parallel with the existing ATS system. The Exchange 
found that, in spite of the best efforts of the price reporters to 
capture and enter the selling broker's ID on all price reports, only 
a 60 percent capture rate was experienced and there was no means to 
verify accuracy. Consequently, CSCE has determined not to replace 
the ATS system, which the Exchange represents has a 93-95 percent 
accuracy rate, with ASTRS. Instead, the Exchange plans to use ASTRS 
on a periodic basis as a means to determine the accuracy rate, with 
ASTRS. Instead, the Exchange plans to use ASTRS on a periodic basis 
as a means to determine the accuracy of the times imputed by ATS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to determine the accuracy of the execution times, the 
audit trail tests designed and reviewed by the Commission and conducted 
by the Exchange in response to a November 23, 1994 Commission letter 
involved a determination of the consistency of imputed trade execution 
times with all underlying audit trail records and data. Based upon that 
process, trade timing accuracy and sequencing rates for CSCE's imputed 
system were computed.\14\ In reviewing the results of the test designed 
to evaluate trade timing accuracy, Commission staff determined that 94 
percent of CSCE's trade times satisfied the standard for consistency 
and underlying data and 91 percent of those trade times had timing 
windows of two minutes or less and thus could be verified.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ To the extent that the time imputed by a computer algorithm 
was consistent with required trade documentation, time and sequence 
data and time and sales information for the subject trade and 
surrounding trades, that time was deemed accurate. If the imputed 
time fell within a two-minute level of precision as measured by the 
size of the final time window determined by the algorithm, that 
imputed time is considered to be verifiable, reliable, and precise.
    \15\ Audit Trail Report at 9, 22. The test sample included 400 
trades randomly selected on a proportionate basis from the three 
futures contract markets which then had average daily volumes in 
excess of 8000 contracts: Coffee ``C'', Sugar #11, and Cocoa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More recent data reflecting trade execution times in the Cocoa 
futures contract market confirms that the Exchange continues to meet 
the 90 percent performance standard. In order to verify the accuracy of 
ATS imputed trade execution times, Exchange staff conducted one ATS 
review in the Cocoa futures contract market during 1997.\16\ The 
Exchange manually reconstructed, from the underlying sources of timing 
data, the 352 trades executed in bracket F on May 16, 1997, in the 
Cocoa futures market.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ CSCE computer data reflect that 96 percent of trades 
executed in the Cocoa futures contract market from September 1997 
through December 1997 were assigned ATS execution times within one 
minute, plus or minus, of execution.
    \17\ The Exchange found that 99 percent of the trades executed 
in that bracket were assigned times within one minute, plus or 
minus, of execution. Commission staff subsequently independently 
reviewed the trades executed during that bracket and determined that 
345 of the 352 trades, or 98 percent, were assigned times within one 
minute, plus or minus, of execution.
    CSCE also completed one ATS review in the Sugar #11 futures 
contract market during 1997. The Exchange confirmed that 92 percent 
of the trades executed in bracket C in the Sugar #11 futures 
contract on November 4, 1997, were assigned times within one minute, 
plus or minus, of execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff reviewed the data to determine whether CSCE met 
the 90 percent performance standard. The staff's review revealed that 
322 of the 352 trades, or 91.5 percent, were assigned ATS times that 
met that standard--that is, 91.5 percent of the trades had imputed 
execution times that were within the same minute as the time and sales 
print or within the minutes after the time and sales print, a window of 
120 second.\18\ Since 1994, CSCE has demonstrated for the cocoa futures 
contract market that 90 percent or more of imputed trade times are 
reliable, precise, and verifiable as demonstrated by being imputed 
within a timing window of two minutes or less.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Times and sales prints, but not ATS times, are captured in 
seconds. Thus, an execution time was considered to be within a two 
minute window as illustrated by the following: If the time and sales 
print was anywhere between 10:39:00 and 10:39:59, ATS times of 10:39 
or 10:40 would fall within the two-minute window. In this example, 
the two minute window could not exceed the period from 10:39:00 to 
10:40:59.
    \19\ For this purpose, the Commission is specifically relying 
upon the above-mentioned windows data calculated by Commission staff 
in 1994 and 1997. The other noted timing data were generated by the 
Exchange and are not expressly relied upon for this purpose, given 
that the data were calculated differently. However, the Exchange-
generated data do tend to support the conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Components of CSCE's Audit Trail System

    The Exchange also meets the remaining standards with respect to an 
audit trail system. With regard to unalterability, as mandated by 
Section 5a(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act, trade records are unalterable, since 
trades are recorded on trading cards and order tickets in nonerasable 
ink and trade corrections are not permitted to obscure original data. 
With respect to the requirement that trade data be provided continually 
to the Exchange in accordance with Section 5a(b)(3)(A)(ii), trade data 
are provided continually to the Exchange in that members must enter 
data into the automated trade data entry and matching system by one-
half hour after the end of the bracket period in which the trade was 
executed. CSCE's imputed timing system meets the Section 
5a(b)(3)(A)(iii) standards for independence, to the extent practicable, 
in that the timing system uses data from sources other than the trader, 
as well as data provided by the trader, to derive times. CSCE also 
meets sequencing standards that in the Exchange requires that all 
trades, both proprietary and customer, be recorded in sequence on 
trading cards. Consistent with Section 5a(b)(1)(B), CSCE's trade entry 
and outtrade resolution programs capture essential data on cleared 
trades, unmatched trades, errors, and outtrades. Finally, CSCE enforces 
its audit trail requirements and integrates audit trail data into its 
surveillance system for dual trading-related abuses.

Broker Receipt Time

    The Commission finds that it is not practicable at this time for 
CSCE to capture the time that each order is received by a floor broker 
for execution as is required, to the extent practicable as determined 
by the Commission by rule or order, by Section 5a(b)(3)(B) of the 
Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Section 5a(b)(3)(B) codified existing requirements for 
capturing the times that an order is received on the floor and 
reported as executed and established a new requirement for capturing 
the time that an order is received by the floor broker. This Section 
requires a contract market to make a good faith effort, to the 
extent practicable as determined by the Commission, to ``record the 
time that each [customer's] order is received on the floor of the 
board of trade, is received by the floor broker for execution . . . 
and is reported from the floor of the board of trade as executed'' 
through an unalterable, continual, precise, independent, and 
automatic or similarly reliable means.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recordkeeping System--CSCE's trade monitoring system satisfies the 
requirements of Section 5a(b)(1)(B) in that CSCE maintains an adequate 
recordkeeping system that is capable of capturing essential data on the 
terms, participants, and sequence of transactions. The Exchange uses 
such information and information on violations of recordkeeping 
requirements on a consistent basis to bring appropriate disciplinary 
actions.
    CSCE conducts trading card and order ticket reviews three times a 
year for a sample of customer orders and personal trades and uses 
information from these reviews to generate investigations. The 
documents reviewed constitute a ``representative sample'' of 
documentation required to be prepared and maintained by each floor 
member and member firm regarding the execution of customer orders and 
other trading. Further, the sample is adequate to demonstrate 
compliance with all applicable rules and regulations.
    Surveillance Systems and Disciplinary Actions--As required by 
Section 5a(b)(1) (C), (D) and (F), CSCE generally uses information 
generated by its trade monitoring and audit trail systems on a 
consistent basis to bring appropriate disciplinary action for 
violations relating to the making of trades and execution of customer 
orders. In addition, CSCE assesses meaningful penalties against 
violators and refers appropriate cases to the Commission.

[[Page 71899]]

    On a daily basis, CSCE's different management information system 
programs analyze trade data to detect possible instances of dual 
trading-related and other trading-related abuses. Systems are designed 
to permit subjection of all relevant trade data to these reviews. The 
computerized exception reports generated by the Exchange are designed 
to identify such suspicious trading activity as accommodation trading, 
including direct and indirect trading against a customer, direct and 
indirect trading ahead of a customer, and improper cross trading. 
Investigators can design customized exception reports to identify 
certain specific trading activity, to isolate suspicious trading 
patterns, to filter and to sort data within reports, and to expand 
review activities.
    During 1997, the Exchange initiated 129 investigations and/or 
reviews into all types of possible abuses. Approximately 80 percent of 
the investigations opened and closed during that period were closed 
within the four-month standard set forth in Regulation 8.06. During 
1997, the Exchange initiated 59 dual trading-related investigations as 
a result of its routine reviews of exception reports and referred 15 
brokers and four firms to a disciplinary action committee. During that 
same period, CSCE assessed $14,500 in fines in 11 dual trading-related 
cases involving ten members and two member firms and ordered $928.00 in 
restitution in four of these cases.
    Commitment of Resources--The Commission finds that CSCE meets the 
requirements of Section 5a(b)(1)(E) by committing sufficient resources 
for its trade monitoring system, including automating elements of such 
trade surveillance system, to be effective in detecting and deterring 
violations and by maintaining an adequate staff to investigate and to 
prosecute disciplinary actions. For fiscal year 1997, CSCE committed 25 
personnel to the Compliance and Market Surveillance Departments and 
reported its total self-regulatory costs to be $4,320,500.\21\ CSCE 
reported its volume for 1997 as 13,066,042 contracts and 2,200,567 
trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ In June 1998 NYBT began to implement plans to combine and 
integrate the NYCE and CSCE compliance staffs into one department. 
This combined department is budgeted for 25 positions, including a 
Vice President of Compliance, two Senior Managers, four Managers, 
and a Staff Attorney. In July 1998 compliance staff members were 
physically relocated into one area. The Commission finds that the 
overall number of staff members assigned to compliance matters at 
NYBT is appropriate to the size of the NYBT and anticipated volume 
of trading and does not anticipate any material change in the 
performance of the trade monitoring system with respect to the Cocoa 
futures contract or with respect to the other affected contract 
markets at NYBT, Cotton No. 2 futures on NYCE and Sugar #11 futures 
on CSCE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, on this date, the Commission HEREBY GRANTS CSCE's 
Petition for Exemption from the dual trading prohibition for trading in 
its Cocoa futures contract.
    For this exemption to remain in effect, CSCE must demonstrate on a 
continuing basis that it meets the relevant statutory and regulatory 
requirements. The Commission will monitor continued compliance through 
its rule enforcement review program and any other information it may 
obtain about CSCE's program.
    Unless otherwise specified, the provisions of this Order shall be 
effective on the date on which it is issued and shall remain in effect 
unless and until it is revoked in accordance with Section 8e(b)(3)(B) 
of the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. Sec. 12e(b)(3)(B). If other 
CSCE contracts become affected contracts after the date of this Order, 
the Commission may expand this Order in response to an updated petition 
that includes those contracts.
    It is so ordered.

    Dated: December 23, 1998.
Catherine D. Dixon,
Assistant Secretary to the Commission.
Concurring Opinion of Commissioner Barbara P. Holum On the Order 
Granting a Dual Trading Exemption to the Coffee, Sugar & Cocoa 
Exchange, Inc.
    I concur in the Commission's decision to grant a dual trading 
exemption to the Coffee, Sugar & Cocoa Exchange, Inc. (CSCE) for the 
Cocoa futures contract. CSCE has demonstrated that its trade monitoring 
system as a whole does detect and deter dual trading abuses. While I 
concur in the Commission's decision to grant CSCE a dual trading 
exemption, I think that it is important to clarify the reason for my 
decision. The trade monitoring system is comprised of five elements: 
physical observation of trading areas; audit trail system; 
recordkeeping and surveillance systems; disciplinary actions; and 
commitment of resources to effectively detect, deter and discipline 
dual trading violations. No single element should dictate granting, 
conditioning or denying an exemption, CSCE's trade monitoring system 
taken as a whole meets the relevant statutory and regulatory 
requirements for a dual trading exemption.

    Dated: December 22, 1998.
Barbara P. Holum,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 98-34554 Filed 12-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M