28018 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98 /Thursday, May 21, 1998 / Notices

discovery and that any manner of

response allowed by the rules of the

forum may be employed.

2. When the Postal Service becomes

aware of an indication of a violation or

potential violation of law, whether civil,

criminal, or regulatory in nature, and

whether arising by general statute or

particular program statute, or by

regulation, rule, or order issued

pursuant thereto, or in response to the

appropriate agency’s request on a

reasonable belief that a violation has

occurred, the relevant records may be

referred to the appropriate agency,

whether federal, state, local, or foreign,

charged with the responsibility of

investigating or prosecuting such

violation or charged with enforcing or

implementing the statute, rule,

regulation, or order issued pursuant

thereto.

3. Disclosure may be made to a

congressional office from the record of

an individual in response to an inquiry

from the congressional office made at

the prompting of that individual.

4. Records or information from this

system may be disclosed to an expert,

consultant, or other person who is

under contract to the Postal Service to

fulfill an agency function, but only to

the extent necessary to fulfill that

function. This may include disclosure to

any person with whom the Postal

Service contracts to reproduce, by

typing, photocopy, or other means, any

record for use by Postal Service officials

in connection with their official duties

or to any person who performs clerical

or stenographic functions relating to the

official business of the Postal Service.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING,

RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND

DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

STORAGE:

Name and address of customer will be

automated during conversion and then

stored off-line on magnetic media.

RETRIEVABILITY:

Postal Service-assigned job number

and customer name and customer

identification number.

SAFEGUARDS:

Access to these records is limited to

those persons whose official duties

require such access. Access to

automated records is restricted by the

use of encryption technology, dedicated

lines, and authorized access codes.

Licensees who have access to

information are required by the terms of

the license agreement to protect the

information from unauthorized access;

to limit its use to that provided by the

license agreement; and to apply

appropriate administrative and physical

safeguards to protect the information.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:

Records supporting a customer order

will be destroyed 30 days from

completion of order, unless maintained

longer at customer’s request. Disposal

will be by data deletion from magnetic

media.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:

Chief Marketing Officer & Senior Vice

President, United States Postal Service,

475 L’Enfant Plz SW, Washington DC

20260–2400.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:

Individuals wanting to know whether

information about them is maintained in

this system of records must address

inquiries in writing to the system

manager. Inquiries must contain name,

customer identification number,

address, and order number, if known.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:

Requests for access must be made in

accordance with the Notification

Procedure above and the Postal Service

Privacy Act regulations regarding access

to records and verification of identity

under 39 CFR 266.6.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:

See Notification and Record Access

Procedures above.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

Information is furnished by record

subjects (customers) requesting the

service.

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 98–13591 Filed 5–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

requirement of Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

which provides opportunity for public

comment on new or revised data

collections, the Railroad Retirement

Board (RRB) will publish periodic

summaries of proposed data collections.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether

the proposed information collection is

necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the agency, including

whether the information has practical

utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s

estimate of the burden of the collection

of the information; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected; and (d)

ways to minimize the burden related to

the collection of information on

respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Title and purpose of information

collection: Sick Pay and Miscellaneous

Payment Report; OMB 3220–0175

Under Section 6 of the Railroad

Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA)

and Section 9 of the Railroad Retirement

Act (RRA), the Railroad Retirement

Board (RRB) maintains for each railroad

employee a record of compensation paid

to that employee by all railroad

employers for whom the employee

worked after 1936. This record, which is

used by the RRB to determine eligibility

for, and amount of, benefits due under

the laws its administers, is conclusive as

to the amount of compensation paid to

an employee during such period(s)

covered by the report(s) of the

compensation by the railroad

employer(s). Further, the Railroad

Retirement Solvency Act of 1983 added

subsection 1(h)(8) to the RRA which

expanded the definition of

compensation for purposes of

computing the Tier 1 portion of an

annuity to include sickness payments

and certain payments other than sick

pay which are considered compensation

within the meaning of Section 1(h)(8).

The information reporting requirements

for employers are prescribed in 20 CFR

209.

To enable the RRB to establish and

maintain the record of compensation,

employers are required under Section 6

of the RUIA and Section 9 of the RRA

to file with the RRB, in such manner

and form and at such times as the RRB

by rules and regulation may prescribe,

reports of compensation of employees.

The RRB utilizes Form BA–10, Report

of Miscellaneous Compensation and

Sick Pay, to collect information

regarding sick pay and certain other

types of payments, referred to as

miscellaneous compensation, under

Section 1(h)(8) of the Railroad

Retirement Act from railroad employers.

In addition, the form is used by

employers to report any necessary

adjustments in the amounts of sick pay

or miscellaneous compensation.

Employers have the option of

submitting the reports on the

aforementioned form, or, in like format,

on magnetic tape, tape cartridges or PC

diskettes. Submission of the mandatory

reports is requested annually. One

response is required of each respondent.

No changes are proposed to Form BA–

10. The completion time for Form BA–

10 is estimated at 55 minutes per

response.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98 /Thursday, May 21, 1998 / Notices 28019

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarifies the

operation of the proposed rule change. More

specifically, the Amendment explains the process

of designating options to which the proposed

automatic execution feature applies as well as

reasons for suspending the new feature. See Letter

from Timothy Thompson, Director, Regulatory

Affairs, Legal Department, CBOE, to Ken Rosen,

Attorney, Division of Market Regulation,

Commission, dated May 11, 1998 (‘‘Amendment

No. 1’’). 3See Amendment No. 1.

Additional Information or Comments:

To request more information or to

obtain a copy of the information

collection justification, forms, and/or

supporting material, please call RRB

Clearance Officer at (312) 751–3363.

Comments regarding the information

collection should be addressed to

Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement

Board, 844 N. Rush Street, Chicago,

Illinois 60611–2092. Written comments

should be received on or before July 20,

1998.

Chuck Mierzwa,

Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–13582 Filed 5–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–39992; File No. SR–CBOE–

98–13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and

Amendment No. 1 Thereto by the

Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.

Relating to the Automatic Execution of

Small Retail Orders in Equity Options

May 14, 1998

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’) 1, notice is hereby given that on

April 6, 1998, 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, II, and

III below, which Items have been

prepared by the CBOE. On May 13,

1998, the CBOE submitted to the

Commission Amendment No. 1 to the

proposed rule change.2 The Commission

is publishing this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change

from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The CBOE proposes amend CBOE

Rule 6.8 and Interpretation and Policy

.02 thereunder to provide added

flexibility to the Exchange’s Retail

Automatic Execution System (‘‘RAES’’)

where the best bid or offer on the

Exchange for a given equity option is

inferior to the best bid or offer for the

same option in another market where

the option is traded.

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

CBOE included statements concerning

the purpose of and basis for the

proposed rule change. The text of these

statements may be examined at the

places specified in Item IV below. The

CBOE 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

The purpose of the proposed rule

change is to provide for the automatic

execution on RAES of eligible retail

orders to buy or sell equity options at

a price that may be one tick better than

the best price currently quoted on the

Exchange if the better price is then

being quoted in another market where

the same options are traded. Under

existing CBOE Rule 6.8(a)(ii), the

execution price automatically attached

to an equity option order executed in

RAES is the prevailing market quote on

CBOE at the time the order is entered

into the system. If at that same time

another market is displaying a better

quote for the option, under the existing

Rules the order is not automatically

executed, but instead, pursuant to

Interpretation and Policy .02 under

CBOE Rule 6.8, is rerouted for nonautomated handling. In most cases,

especially where the market away from

the CBOE is better by only one ‘‘tick’’

(i.e., by one minimum quote interval),

the order is usually manually executed

on CBOE at the better price.

The proposed rule change will

automate the process of filing equity

option orders through RAES at any

better price being quoted in another

market, so long as the price is better by

no more than one tick. If the market

away from the CBOE purports to be

better than the CBOE’s quoted market by

more than one tick, the existing

procedure will continue to apply

whereby the order is rerouted out of

RAES to the Designated Primary Market

Maker or Order Book Official for nonautomated handling.

By automating the execution of

eligible retail orders for equity options

in the manner described above (referred

to as ‘‘RAES Auto-Step-Up’’), investors

will be assured the prompt, automatic

execution of these orders at the best

available prices, even if those prices are

being quoted in a market by more than

one tick. This proposal should minimize

the delay inherent in manually handling

orders in this circumstance, and thereby

reduce the risk to investors that, as a

result of an adverse move in the market

while their orders are being manually

handled, they may receive an inferior

execution.

The Exchange continues to believe

that manual handling is called for where

prices apparently quoted in other

markets are more than one tick better

than the Exchange’s best quotes,

because the quotes in other markets may

be displayed in error or may otherwise

not be likely to be available, and

because even if Exchange market makers

determine to provide an execution at

such better prices, this decision should

be made on a case-by-case basis by the

market makers rather than

automatically. In addition, the proposed

rule change authorizes the Chairman of

the appropriate Floor Procedure

Committee or his or her designee to

disable RAES Auto-Step-Up for

specified classes or series of options or

in respect of specified markets when

such action is deemed to be warranted

by circumstances or conditions

applicable to such options or markets.

This authority would be expected to be

exercised in circumstances such as

communication or system problems, fast

markets, and similar situations that

could make quotes unreliable.

While the Exchange expects that

eventually the Floor Procedure

Committees will determine to apply the

RAES Auto-Step-Up to all or nearly all

option classes traded on the floor, the

proposed rule change would permit the

program to be initiated on a class by

class or trading station by station basis.3

To provide for the orderly introduction

of this change to the exchange’s RAES

procedures and to measure its effect

before expanding it to equity options

floor-wide, the Exchange intends to

introduce the change RAES procedure

to selected classes of equity options

during an initial evaluation period, and

then over time to expand the changed

procedure to cover a larger number of

equity options unless, upon evaluation,

such expansion appears not to be

warranted. Members will be given