Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Thereto, Relating to Procedures for At-Risk Cross Transactions, 32687-32688 [E7-11367]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 13, 2007 / Notices
General as independent and objective units
to conduct and supervise audits and
investigations relating to Federal programs
and operations. Executive Order 12301
(March 26, 1981) established the President’s
Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE).
On May 11, 1992, Executive Order 12805
reaffirmed the PCIE and also established the
Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency
(ECIE). Both councils are interagency
committees chaired by the Office of
Management and Budget’s Deputy Director
for Management. Their mission is to
coordinate and enhance governmental efforts
to promote integrity and efficiency and to
detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in
Federal programs. The PCIE is comprised
principally of the 29 Presidential appointed
Inspectors General (IGs), ECIE members
include the 32 Inspectors General appointed
by their respective agency heads.
II. PCIE/ECIE Performance Review Board
Under 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1)–(5), and in
accordance with regulations prescribed by
the Office of Personnel Management, each
agency is required to establish one or more
Senior Executive Service (SES) performance
review boards. The purpose of these boards
is to review and evaluate the initial appraisal
of a senior executive’s performance by the
supervisor, along with any recommendations
to the appointing authority relative to the
performance of the senior executive. The
current members of the PCIE/ECIE
Performance Review Board, as of October 2,
2006, are as follows:
Renee M. Pettis,
Assistant Inspector General for Management.
[FR Doc. E7–11377 Filed 6–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–10–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–55875; File No. SR–Amex–
2006–170]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Thereto,
Relating to Procedures for At-Risk
Cross Transactions
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
June 7, 2007.
I. Introduction
On February 17, 2006, the American
Stock Exchange LLC (‘‘Amex’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
adopt a new crossing procedure, the ‘‘atrisk cross,’’ as an alternative to the
1 15
2 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:30 Jun 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Exchange’s existing facilitation cross
procedure. On November 9, 2006, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change, and on December
1, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment
No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on January 17, 2007.3 On
March 28, 2007, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule
change, and on May 3, 2007, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 4 to the
proposed rule change. Amendment Nos.
3 and 4 to the proposed rule change
were published for comment in the
Federal Register on May 14, 2007 for a
15-day comment period.4 The comment
period ended on May 29, 2007. The
Commission received no comments on
the proposal. This order grants
accelerated approval to the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment
Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4.
II. Description of the Proposal
The Exchange proposes to adopt an
‘‘at-risk cross’’ procedure for equity
options by adding Commentary .03 to
Amex Rule 950–ANTE(d). This new ‘‘at
risk cross’’ procedure would
supplement the existing facilitation
cross procedure set forth in
Commentary .02 to Amex Rule 950–
ANTE(d)5 The proposed at-risk crossing
procedure would permit a floor broker,
after satisfying all public customer
orders, to execute a cross that is at-risk
to the market on behalf of a member
organization trading against its own
customer’s order between the quoted
market, once priority has been
established.
The at-risk cross transaction
procedure would be available for use
only by floor brokers attempting to cross
an order of a public customer against an
order from the same member
organization, and the minimum eligible
order size for the at-risk cross
transaction would be 50 contracts. A
floor broker attempting to execute an
order as an at-risk cross would be
required first to request bids and offers
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55068
(January 9, 2007), 72 FR 2044 (‘‘Notice’’).
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55719
(May 3, 2007), 72 FR 27155 (‘‘Notice of Amendment
Nos. 3 and 4’’).
5 Commentary .02(c) to Amex Rule 950–ANTE(d)
sets forth the facilitation cross procedures for
options trading generally. Commentary .02(d) to
Amex Rule 950–ANTE(d) sets forth conditions and
procedures by which a member firm facilitating its
own public customer’s order is entitled to
participate from its proprietary account as the
contra-side of that order to the extent of 40 percent
of the contracts remaining after public customers
have been satisfied, provided the order trades at or
between the quoted market.
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32687
from the trading crowd for all
components of the public customer
order.6 After the trading crowd has
provided a quote, the floor broker would
then represent the customer order to the
trading crowd, indicating that it is a
customer order and providing the
order’s size, side of the market, and a
price, giving the customer the
opportunity for price improvement.
After the trading crowd has provided
a quote in response to the customer
order, the proposed rule would permit
the floor broker to improve the trading
crowd’s quote on behalf of the member
organization and thereby establish
priority over the trading crowd at this
new price.7 The bid or offer on behalf
of the member organization would be
required to be one minimum price
variation (‘‘MPV’’) away from the
customer order. The floor broker could
then attempt to consummate a cross
transaction with the customer at that
price. However, the cross transaction
would be ‘‘at risk’’ to the market,
because the trading crowd would still
have the ability to break up the cross
before its consummation, either by
trading with the customer order at the
customer’s price or trading with the
member organization’s order at its
attempted cross price.
Under the Exchange’s existing
facilitation crossing procedures, a
member firm seeking to facilitate its
own public customer’s order is entitled
to participate in the firm’s proprietary
account as the contra-side of that order
up to 40 percent of the remaining
contracts (the ‘‘Member Firm
Guarantee’’), provided that the order
trades at a price that matches or
improves the market, after public
customer orders on the specialist’s book
or customer orders represented by a
floor broker in the crowd have been
filled.8 Under the proposed at-risk
crossing procedure, the floor broker on
behalf of the member firm effectively
would relinquish the Member Firm
Guarantee in an attempt to cross the
entire order.
III. Discussion
After careful review, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change, as
amended, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
6 The floor broker would be required to disclose
on the order ticket for the public customer order all
the terms of the order, including, if applicable, any
contingency involving other options, underlying
securities, or related securities.
7 At this point, the floor broker may alternatively
decide to follow the procedures of Commentary
.02(d) to Amex Rule 950–ANTE(d).
8 See Commentary .02(d)(1) to Amex Rule 950–
ANTE(d).
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
32688
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 13, 2007 / Notices
and regulations thereunder applicable to
a national securities exchange and, in
particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,9 which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, 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, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest.10
The Commission believes that the
proposed at-risk cross procedure is
consistent with the Act in that it is
intended to provide public customer
orders with additional opportunity for
price improvement without affording
unfair advantage to the member firms
that submit such customer orders and
seek to trade against them. Under the
proposal, a floor broker may attempt to
cross a public customer order entirely
against an order from the member firm
from which it originated only after the
floor broker, on behalf of the member
firm, improves the price quoted to the
customer by the trading crowd, and
thereafter affords the crowd an
opportunity to break up the cross by
improving the price still one MPV
better. Moreover, the trading crowd
alternatively could break up the
attempted cross by trading with the
member firm’s order at the member
firm’s price.
In addition, the Commission believes
that the at-risk cross procedure may
encourage the members of the trading
crowd to put forth their best bids or
offers when the customer order is first
presented to the crowd. This is because
the floor broker would be able to
establish priority by improving the
trading crowd’s quoted market, and then
would be permitted to cross the entire
order at the improved price.
Accordingly, the Commission believes
that members of the trading crowd will
have a greater incentive to make larger,
tighter markets in response to customer
orders, thereby improving the auction
market.
The Commission notes further that if
a public customer order either on the
book or represented in the trading
crowd has priority over the at-risk cross,
the member firm would be permitted to
participate only in those contracts
remaining after the public customer’s
9 15
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
10 In
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:30 Jun 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
order has been filled.11 In addition, if
there is a public customer order on the
book or represented in the trading
crowd on the same side of the market
as, and priced at or better than, the
public customer order that is part of the
at-risk cross, the public customer order
on the book or represented in the
trading crowd would have priority.12
The Commission also finds that the
Exchange’s at-risk cross proposal is
consistent with Section 11(a) under the
Act.13 The Commission notes that
orders relying on the exemption
provided by Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the
Act (for ‘‘G Orders’’) 14 from the
prohibitions of Section 11(a) may be
executed as an at-risk cross only if the
requirements of Section 11(a)(1)(G) are
met. Specifically, the Exchange has
noted that if a G Order is entered by a
floor broker as part of an at-risk cross
transaction, the G Order will not be
permitted to execute ahead of any nonmember order on the book.15
The Commission finds good cause for
approving the proposed rule change, as
amended, prior to the thirtieth day after
publishing notice of Amendment Nos. 3
and 4 in the Federal Register. The
Commission notes that the proposal, as
modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2,
was published for a full notice and
comment period,16 and that the
Commission received no comment
letters on the proposal. Further,
Amendment Nos. 3 and 4 were
published for a 15-day comment period,
and the Commission received no
comment letters. Amendment No. 3
made technical and clarifying changes
and confirmed previous verbal
representations made by the Exchange.
The Commission believes that these
clarifications serve to enhance the
proposal and raise no new or novel
issues. Amendment No. 4 proposed to
permit the at-risk crossing procedure to
apply to options classes that are part of
the options penny pilot program
(‘‘penny pilot options’’).17 The
Commission believes that orders in the
penny pilot options should be afforded
the same potential for price
improvement through the at-risk cross
11 See Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 950–
ANTE(d) and Notice, supra note 3, at n.7. See also
Notice of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4, supra note 4.
12 See Notice of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4, supra
note 4.
13 15 U.S.C. 78k(a).
14 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(G).
15 See Notice, supra note 3.
16 See id.
17 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55162
(January 24, 2007), 72 FR 4738 (February 1, 2007)
(SR–Amex–2006–106). Amendment No. 4 also
made non-substantive rule text changes and showed
the text of the final proposal as marked against the
current text of Amex Rule 950–ANTE(d).
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
procedure as other options classes, and
that applying the at-risk cross procedure
to penny pilot options raises no
additional significant regulatory issues
that were not considered in the original
proposal. Therefore, the Commission
believes that no purpose is served by
delaying approval of the proposal, as
amended. Accordingly, the Commission
finds good cause, consistent with
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 to approve
the proposal, as modified by
Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, on an
accelerated basis.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,19 that the
proposed rule change (SR–Amex–2006–
17), as modified by Amendment Nos. 1,
2, 3, and 4, be, and hereby is, approved
on an accelerated basis.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.20
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–11367 Filed 6–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–55874; File No. SR–CBOE–
2006–101]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto To
Amend CBOE’s Rules To Reflect the
Migration of Its TPF Technology
Platform Over to the Existing
CBOEdirect Technology Platform
June 7, 2007.
I. Introduction
On November 30, 2006, the Chicago
Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
introduce a third trading platform into
its existing CBOEdirect system, ‘‘Hybrid
3.0.’’ The Exchange submitted
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change on February 15, 2007. The
Exchange submitted Amendment No. 2
18 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
20 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
19 5
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 13, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32687-32688]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11367]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-55875; File No. SR-Amex-2006-170]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Thereto, Relating to Procedures for At-
Risk Cross Transactions
June 7, 2007.
I. Introduction
On February 17, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt a new crossing procedure, the ``at-risk
cross,'' as an alternative to the Exchange's existing facilitation
cross procedure. On November 9, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No.
1 to the proposed rule change, and on December 1, 2006, the Exchange
filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, was published for
comment in the Federal Register on January 17, 2007.\3\ On March 28,
2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change,
and on May 3, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 4 to the proposed
rule change. Amendment Nos. 3 and 4 to the proposed rule change were
published for comment in the Federal Register on May 14, 2007 for a 15-
day comment period.\4\ The comment period ended on May 29, 2007. The
Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order grants
accelerated approval to the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55068 (January 9,
2007), 72 FR 2044 (``Notice'').
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55719 (May 3, 2007),
72 FR 27155 (``Notice of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposal
The Exchange proposes to adopt an ``at-risk cross'' procedure for
equity options by adding Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d). This
new ``at risk cross'' procedure would supplement the existing
facilitation cross procedure set forth in Commentary .02 to Amex Rule
950-ANTE(d)\5\ The proposed at-risk crossing procedure would permit a
floor broker, after satisfying all public customer orders, to execute a
cross that is at-risk to the market on behalf of a member organization
trading against its own customer's order between the quoted market,
once priority has been established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Commentary .02(c) to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d) sets forth the
facilitation cross procedures for options trading generally.
Commentary .02(d) to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d) sets forth conditions and
procedures by which a member firm facilitating its own public
customer's order is entitled to participate from its proprietary
account as the contra-side of that order to the extent of 40 percent
of the contracts remaining after public customers have been
satisfied, provided the order trades at or between the quoted
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The at-risk cross transaction procedure would be available for use
only by floor brokers attempting to cross an order of a public customer
against an order from the same member organization, and the minimum
eligible order size for the at-risk cross transaction would be 50
contracts. A floor broker attempting to execute an order as an at-risk
cross would be required first to request bids and offers from the
trading crowd for all components of the public customer order.\6\ After
the trading crowd has provided a quote, the floor broker would then
represent the customer order to the trading crowd, indicating that it
is a customer order and providing the order's size, side of the market,
and a price, giving the customer the opportunity for price improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The floor broker would be required to disclose on the order
ticket for the public customer order all the terms of the order,
including, if applicable, any contingency involving other options,
underlying securities, or related securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After the trading crowd has provided a quote in response to the
customer order, the proposed rule would permit the floor broker to
improve the trading crowd's quote on behalf of the member organization
and thereby establish priority over the trading crowd at this new
price.\7\ The bid or offer on behalf of the member organization would
be required to be one minimum price variation (``MPV'') away from the
customer order. The floor broker could then attempt to consummate a
cross transaction with the customer at that price. However, the cross
transaction would be ``at risk'' to the market, because the trading
crowd would still have the ability to break up the cross before its
consummation, either by trading with the customer order at the
customer's price or trading with the member organization's order at its
attempted cross price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ At this point, the floor broker may alternatively decide to
follow the procedures of Commentary .02(d) to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Exchange's existing facilitation crossing procedures, a
member firm seeking to facilitate its own public customer's order is
entitled to participate in the firm's proprietary account as the
contra-side of that order up to 40 percent of the remaining contracts
(the ``Member Firm Guarantee''), provided that the order trades at a
price that matches or improves the market, after public customer orders
on the specialist's book or customer orders represented by a floor
broker in the crowd have been filled.\8\ Under the proposed at-risk
crossing procedure, the floor broker on behalf of the member firm
effectively would relinquish the Member Firm Guarantee in an attempt to
cross the entire order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Commentary .02(d)(1) to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules
[[Page 32688]]
and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange
and, in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ which requires,
among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that the proposed at-risk cross procedure
is consistent with the Act in that it is intended to provide public
customer orders with additional opportunity for price improvement
without affording unfair advantage to the member firms that submit such
customer orders and seek to trade against them. Under the proposal, a
floor broker may attempt to cross a public customer order entirely
against an order from the member firm from which it originated only
after the floor broker, on behalf of the member firm, improves the
price quoted to the customer by the trading crowd, and thereafter
affords the crowd an opportunity to break up the cross by improving the
price still one MPV better. Moreover, the trading crowd alternatively
could break up the attempted cross by trading with the member firm's
order at the member firm's price.
In addition, the Commission believes that the at-risk cross
procedure may encourage the members of the trading crowd to put forth
their best bids or offers when the customer order is first presented to
the crowd. This is because the floor broker would be able to establish
priority by improving the trading crowd's quoted market, and then would
be permitted to cross the entire order at the improved price.
Accordingly, the Commission believes that members of the trading crowd
will have a greater incentive to make larger, tighter markets in
response to customer orders, thereby improving the auction market.
The Commission notes further that if a public customer order either
on the book or represented in the trading crowd has priority over the
at-risk cross, the member firm would be permitted to participate only
in those contracts remaining after the public customer's order has been
filled.\11\ In addition, if there is a public customer order on the
book or represented in the trading crowd on the same side of the market
as, and priced at or better than, the public customer order that is
part of the at-risk cross, the public customer order on the book or
represented in the trading crowd would have priority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d) and Notice,
supra note 3, at n.7. See also Notice of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4,
supra note 4.
\12\ See Notice of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also finds that the Exchange's at-risk cross
proposal is consistent with Section 11(a) under the Act.\13\ The
Commission notes that orders relying on the exemption provided by
Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act (for ``G Orders'') \14\ from the
prohibitions of Section 11(a) may be executed as an at-risk cross only
if the requirements of Section 11(a)(1)(G) are met. Specifically, the
Exchange has noted that if a G Order is entered by a floor broker as
part of an at-risk cross transaction, the G Order will not be permitted
to execute ahead of any non-member order on the book.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a).
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(G).
\15\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule
change, as amended, prior to the thirtieth day after publishing notice
of Amendment Nos. 3 and 4 in the Federal Register. The Commission notes
that the proposal, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, was published
for a full notice and comment period,\16\ and that the Commission
received no comment letters on the proposal. Further, Amendment Nos. 3
and 4 were published for a 15-day comment period, and the Commission
received no comment letters. Amendment No. 3 made technical and
clarifying changes and confirmed previous verbal representations made
by the Exchange. The Commission believes that these clarifications
serve to enhance the proposal and raise no new or novel issues.
Amendment No. 4 proposed to permit the at-risk crossing procedure to
apply to options classes that are part of the options penny pilot
program (``penny pilot options'').\17\ The Commission believes that
orders in the penny pilot options should be afforded the same potential
for price improvement through the at-risk cross procedure as other
options classes, and that applying the at-risk cross procedure to penny
pilot options raises no additional significant regulatory issues that
were not considered in the original proposal. Therefore, the Commission
believes that no purpose is served by delaying approval of the
proposal, as amended. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause,
consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\18\ to approve the
proposal, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See id.
\17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55162 (January 24,
2007), 72 FR 4738 (February 1, 2007) (SR-Amex-2006-106). Amendment
No. 4 also made non-substantive rule text changes and showed the
text of the final proposal as marked against the current text of
Amex Rule 950-ANTE(d).
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\19\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2006-17), as modified
by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, be, and hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 5 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-11367 Filed 6-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P