Notices. Notice of reporting requirements submitted for OMB review

4,940 words·~22 min read·/register/2005/02/08/05-2444

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51124; File No. SR-ODD-2004-03] Canadian Derivatives Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Accelerated Distribution of an Amended Options Disclosure Document February 2, 2005. On January 28, 2005, the Canadian Derivatives Clearing Corporation (“CDCC”), 1 on behalf of the Bourse de Montréal, Inc. (“Bourse de Montréal”), submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Rule 9b-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 five definitive copies of an amended options disclosure document (“ODD”) that describes the risks and characteristics of options traded on the Bourse de Montréal. 3 The CDCC has revised the ODD to, among other things, reflect the CDCC's new automatic exercise parameters for equity and bond options, to add an Annex to the ODD setting forth the holidays and early closings of the Bourse de Montréal, to update the discussion of Canadian federal income tax considerations applicable to non-residents, and to indicate that the S&P/TSE 60 Index is now named the S&P/TSX 60 Index. 1 The CDCC formerly was known as Trans Canada Options, Inc.

(“TCO”). The name of the corporation was changed in January 1996. 2 17 CFR 240.9b-1. 3 The Commission initially reviewed the ODD in 1984. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 21365 (October 2, 1984), 49 FR 39400 (October 5, 1984) (File No. ODD-84-1). Since then, the Commission has reviewed several amendments to the ODD. *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 44333 (May 21, 2001), 66 FR 29193 (May 29, 2001) (File No. SR-ODD-00-04) (amending the ODD to reflect, among other things, changes to the structure of the Canadian equity markets and to provide a discussion of Enhanced Capital Marketing); 37569 (August 14, 1996), 61 FR 43281 (August 21, 1996) (File No.

SR-ODD-96-01) (amending the ODD to reflect, among other things, the name change from TCO to CDCC); 29033 (April 1, 1991), 56 FR 14407 (April 9, 1991) (File No. SR-ODD-91-1) (amending the ODD to include, among other things, references to Toronto Stock Exchange 35 Composite Index options); 24480 (May 19, 1987), 52 FR 20179 (May 29, 1987) (File No. SR-ODD-87- 2) (amending the ODD to include, among other things, a discussion of Government of Canada Treasury Bill Price Index options; and 22349 (August 21, 1985), 50 FR 34956 (August 28, 1985) (File No.

SR-ODD-85-1) (amending the ODD to include, among other things, a discussion of the risks and uses of stock index and bond options). Rule 9b-1 under the Act provides that an options market must file five preliminary copies of an amended ODD with the Commission at least 30 days prior to the date when definitive copies of the amended ODD are furnished to customers, unless the Commission determines otherwise, having due regard to the adequacy of the information disclosed and the public interest and protection of investors. 4 4 This provision is intended to permit the Commission either to accelerate or extend the time period in which definitive copies of a disclosure document may be distributed to the public.

The Commission has reviewed the amended ODD and finds, having due regard to the adequacy of the information disclosed, that it is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest to allow the distribution of the amended ODD as of the date of this order. 5 *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Rule 9b-1 under the Act, 6 that the distribution of the revised ODD (SR-ODD-2004-03) as of the date of this order, is approved. 5 Rule 9b-1 under the Act provides that the use of an ODD shall not be permitted unless the options class to which the documents relates is the subject of an effective registration statement on Form S-20 under the Securities Act of 1933.

On April 19, 2004, the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority, declared effective the CDCC's most recent Post-Effective Amendment to its Form S-20 registration statement. *See* File No. 2-69458. 6 17 CFR 240.9b-1. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(39)(i). [FR Doc. E5-511 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51119;

File No. SR-Amex-2004-72] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto by the American Stock Exchange LLC to Amend Its Minor Rule Violation Plan February 1, 2005. On August 23, 2004, 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 amend Exchange Rule 590, its Minor Rule Violation Fine Plan (“Plan”).

On November 23, 2004, Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on December 22, 2004. 3 The Commission received no comments regarding the proposal. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50871 (December 16, 2004), 69 FR 76801. The Exchange proposed to make the following actions subject to its Plan: • Failure to comply with trade reporting requirements for options (Amex Rule 992); • Violation of Exchange rules regarding the deactivation of quote assist as it pertains to options (Amex Rules 950(g), Commentary .01 and 950-ANTE(g), Commentary .01); • Violation of Exchange rules regarding the Options Linkage Program relating to the responding to, and receiving of, Linkage Orders (Amex Rule 941(d) and (e)), Avoidance and Satisfaction of Trade-Throughs (Amex Rule 942(a)), and Locked Markets (Amex Rule 943); • Violation of Exchange policy regarding affirmative determination of the availability for borrowing of shares of Amex-listed issues prior to effecting short sale transactions (Circular 90-25); and • Effecting or causing to be effected a transaction outside of business hours through the Intermarket Trading System (Amex Rules 1, 100, and 233).

The Exchange also proposed to amend the Plan as follows: • Expand the requirement of reporting trade comparison data (Part 2(d)(3) of Amex Rule 590) to include all transactions effected on the Exchange and to relocate such rule to Part 1(g) of Amex Rule 590 so as to subject it to Amex Enforcement Department action rather than Amex Floor Official action; and • Revise Part 3 of Amex Rule 590 to reflect the current filing schedule for the Form 50 (Short Position), which is now also required to be filed at or about the end of the month for selected derivative products.

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. 4 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 5 which requires that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments and to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

The Commission also believes that the proposal is consistent with Sections 6(b)(1) 6 and 6(b)(6) 7 of the Act which require that the rules of an exchange enforce compliance and provide appropriate discipline for violations of Commission and Exchange rules. In addition, because Amex Rule 590 provides procedural rights to a person fined under the Plan to contest the fine and permit a hearing on the matter, the Exchange believes the proposal provides a fair procedure for the disciplining of members and persons associated with members, consistent with Sections 6(b)(7) 8 and 6(d)(1) 9 of the Act. 4 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(d)(1).

Finally, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act 10 which governs minor rule violation plans. The Commission believes that these changes to Amex's Plan will strengthen its ability to carry out its oversight and enforcement responsibilities as a self-regulatory organization in cases where full disciplinary proceedings are unsuitable in view of the minor nature of the particular violation. 10 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).

In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission in no way minimizes the importance of compliance with Amex rules and all other rules subject to the imposition of fines under the Exchange's Plan. The Commission believes that the violation of any self-regulatory organization's rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter. However, the Exchange's Plan provides a reasonable means of addressing rule violations that do not rise to the level of requiring formal disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in handling certain violations.

The Commission expects that Amex will continue to conduct surveillance with due diligence and make a determination based on its findings, whether fines of more or less than the recommended amount are appropriate for violations under the Plan, on case-by-case basis, or a violation requires formal disciplinary action. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act 11 and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act, 12 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2004-72), as amended, be, and hereby is, approved and declared effective. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 12 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2). 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(44).

For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-495 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51112; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-013] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Extend a Pilot Program Relating to Certain Limitations on Trade-Through Liability at the End of the Options Trading Day January 31, 2005.

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 January 26, 2005, 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 CBOE. On January 28, 2005, the CBOE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, 4 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 5 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 6 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1 the Exchange made certain technical corrections to Exhibit 5 to the filing. 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 5 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 6 The CBOE asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. *See* Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to extend a pilot program relating to certain limitations on trade-through liability at the end of the trading day. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the CBOE's Web site at *http://www.cboe.com* , at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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 IV below. The Exchange 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 purpose of the filing is to conform CBOE rules to Joint Amendment No. 14 to the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (the “Linkage Plan”) 7 to extend the pilot provision in the CBOE rules limiting trade-through liability at the end of the options trading day.

Pursuant to the Linkage Plan pilot as currently in effect, an options exchange member's trade-through liability is limited to 25 contracts per Satisfaction Order 8 for the period between five minutes prior to the close of trading in the underlying security and the close of trading in the options class. The participant option exchanges in the Linkage Plan (“Participants”) originally proposed this limitation on liability as a one-year pilot in Joint Amendment No. 4 to the Linkage Plan.

The Commission temporarily put into effectiveness the Linkage Plan pilot on January 31, 2003, 9 followed by permanent approval on June 18, 2003. 10 The Commission then granted two extensions to the Linkage Plan pilot, first until June 30, 2004 11 and then until January 31, 2005. 12 7 *See* Joint Amendment No. 14 to the Linkage Plan filed by the Exchange on January 27, 2005 in a letter from Edward J. Joyce, President and Chief Operating Officer, CBOE, to Jonathan G, Katz, Secretary, Commission, dated January 26, 2005. 8 A “Satisfaction Order” is an order sent through the Linkage to notify a Participant Exchange of a Trade-Through and to seek satisfaction of the liability arising from that Trade-Through. *See* Section 2(16)(c) of the Linkage Plan. 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47298 (January 31, 2003), 68 FR 6524 (February 7, 2003) (Temporary effectiveness of pilot program on a 120-day basis). 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48055 (June 18, 2003), 68 FR 37869 (June 25, 2003) (Order approving Joint Amendment No. 4). 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49146 (January 29, 2004), 69 FR 5618 (February 5, 2004) (Order approving Joint Amendment No. 8). 12 As a part of this extension of the Linkage Plan pilot program, the Participants increased the maximum liability from 10 to 25 contracts. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49863 (June 15, 2004), 69 FR 35081 (June 23, 2004) (Order approving Joint Amendment No. 12).

The Exchange is proposing to extend the pilot in CBOE's rules for an additional year, until January 31, 2006. In addition, the Exchange proposes to increase the limit on trade-through liability at the end of the day from 25 contracts to 50 contracts per Satisfaction Order. This increase in the limit on liability would be effective on February 1, 2005, when the current pilot expires. The period during which this limit will apply will remain the same, from five minutes prior to the close of trading in the underlying security until the close of trading in the options class. 2.

Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5), 14 in particular, in particular in that it should promote just and equitable principles of trade, serve to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and protect investors and the public interest. 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 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, as amended, will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change:

(1)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(2)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)does not become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 15 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 16 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 17 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the five-day pre-filing requirement and the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), and designate the proposed rule change immediately operative. 17 17 *Id* . The Commission believes that waiving the five-day pre-filing provision and the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 18 By waiving the pre-filing requirement and accelerating the operative date, the Pilot Program can continue without interruption. The Commission believes that allowing the pilot to continue will allow Participants to either gather sufficient information to justify the need for the pilot program or determine that the exemption from trade-through liability is no longer necessary. Increasing the maximum number of contracts to be satisfied with respect to Satisfaction Orders in the last seven minutes of trading in options to 50 contracts will enhance customer order protection. 18 For purposes of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2005-013 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2005-013. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). 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 in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2005-013 and should be submitted on or before March 1, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 19 19 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-496 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51123; File No. SR-NASD-2004-169] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 3 Thereto To Adopt Additional Listing Standards Applicable to the Securities of the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. or an Affiliate February 2, 2005. I. Introduction On November 2, 2004, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), 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 additional listing standards that would apply to securities of Nasdaq or its affiliate listed on The Nasdaq Stock Market. On December 14, 2004, and December 15, 2004, Nasdaq filed Amendments No. 1 and No. 2, respectively. 3 On December 15, 2004, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposal. 4 The proposed rule change was published for notice and comment in the **Federal Register** on December 29, 2004. 5 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended. II. Description of the Proposal Nasdaq proposes to adopt new Rule 4370 that would impose additional reporting requirements on Nasdaq should Nasdaq or an affiliate of Nasdaq (collectively, the “Nasdaq Affiliates” or “Nasdaq Affiliate”) 6 list a security on The Nasdaq Stock Market. In the event that a Nasdaq Affiliate lists a security on The Nasdaq Stock Market (the “Affiliate Security”), the proposed rule change would require Nasdaq to file a report with the Commission on a monthly basis detailing Nasdaq's monitoring of

(1)the Nasdaq Affiliate's compliance with the provisions of the Rule 4200, 4300 and 4400 Series, 7 and

(2)the trading of the Affiliate Security, including summaries of all related surveillance alerts, complaints, regulatory referrals, trades cancelled or adjusted pursuant to NASD Rule 11890, investigations, examinations, formal and informal disciplinary actions, exception reports and trading data. Nasdaq also would be required to notify the Commission at the same time it notifies the Nasdaq Affiliate if Nasdaq determines that the Nasdaq Affiliate was not in compliance with any of its listing standards. Nasdaq would be required to notify the Commission within five business days of its receipt of a plan of compliance from the Nasdaq Affiliate and advise the Commission on whether the plan of compliance was accepted by Nasdaq or what other action was taken with respect to the plan, and the time period provided to regain compliance with the Rule 4200, 4300 and 4400 Series, if any. In addition, Nasdaq would be required to commission an annual review and report by an independent accounting firm of the compliance of the Affiliate Security with the Rule 4200, 4300 and 4400 Series. Nasdaq would be required to furnish promptly a copy of the report to the Commission. Solely for the purposes of Rule 4370, Nasdaq proposes to exclude from the definition of “Affiliate Security” securities that meet the definition of “Portfolio Depository Receipts” under NASD Rule 4420(i)(1)(A) and “Index Fund Shares” under NASD Rule 4420(j)(1)(A). 8 Nasdaq believes that the additional requirements contained in Rule 4370 would provide additional assurance that any securities listed on The Nasdaq Stock Market by a Nasdaq Affiliate comply with Nasdaq's listing standards on an on-going basis. Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change would eliminate any perception of a potential conflict of interest if a Nasdaq Affiliate seeks to list a security on The Nasdaq Stock Market. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule change, as amended, and finds that it is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities association. 9 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal, as amended, is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 10 which requires that an association's rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and, in general, protect investors and the public interest. The Commission also finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 15A(b)(2) of the Act, 11 which requires a national securities association to be so organized and have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act and to enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its members with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the association. The listing of an Affiliate Security on The Nasdaq Stock Market could potentially create a conflict of interest between the NASD's, Nasdaq's, and NASD Regulation, Inc.'s (“NASDR”) regulatory responsibilities to vigorously oversee the listing and trading of an Affiliate Security on The Nasdaq Stock Market, and their own commercial or economic interests. Such “self-listing” may raise questions as to the NASD's, Nasdaq's, and NASDR's ability to independently and effectively enforce the Commission's and the NASD's rules against an affiliate of Nasdaq. In addition, such listing has the potential to exacerbate possible conflicts that may arise when these entities oversee competitors that may also be listed on The Nasdaq Stock Market. The Commission believes that the proposed rule change, by requiring heightened reporting by Nasdaq to the Commission with respect to oversight of the listing and trading on The Nasdaq Stock Market of an Affiliate Security, will help protect against concerns that Nasdaq will not effectively enforce its rules with respect to the listing and trading of these securities. In addition, the requirement that an independent accounting firm review such issuer's compliance with Nasdaq's listing standards adds a degree of independent oversight to Nasdaq's regulation of the listing of these securities, which may mitigate any potential or actual conflicts of interest. 12 IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 13 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NASD-2004-169), as amended, be and hereby is, approved. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2 were deficient for technical reasons and were withdrawn on December 14 and December 15, 2004, respectively. 4 Amendment No. 3 slightly modified the text of the proposed rule to make clear that the exclusion in the definition of an Affiliate Security would encompass both portfolio depository receipts and index fund shares. The amendment also further clarifies and explains the proposed rule change. Amendment No. 3 was incorporated into the notice. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50897 (December 21, 2004), 69 FR 78076. 6 The NASD currently would be considered a Nasdaq Affiliate for purposes of the proposed rule change. 7 These rules include quantitative (minimum bid price, number of round lot holders, number of publicly held shares, market value, etc.) and qualitative (concerning independent directors, audit committee, shareholder meetings, etc.) requirements for initial and continued inclusion of securities in The Nasdaq Stock Market, as well as issuer designation requirements. 8 These securities are types of exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”). 9 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). 10 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). 11 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(2). 12 On December 8, 2004, the Commission published for comment a proposed rulemaking that would impose reporting and other requirements on a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) that chooses to list or trade its own securities, the securities of any trading facility, the securities of an affiliate of the SRO, or the securities of an affiliate of a trading facility of the SRO. Unlike the NASD's proposed rule change, the Commission's proposed rule would apply to investment companies that track an index, such as exchange-traded funds. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50699, 69 FR 71126 (December 8, 2004). The NASD would, of course, have to conform its rules to any rules the Commission may adopt in the future. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E5-512 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements submitted for OMB review. SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to publish a notice in the **Federal Register** notifying the public that the agency has made such a submission. DATES: Submit comments on or before March 10, 2005. If you intend to comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please advise the OMB Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the deadline. Copies: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the Agency Clearance Officer. ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to: Agency Clearance Officer, Jacqueline White, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20416; and *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov,* fax number 202-395-7285 Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline White, Agency Clearance Officer, *jacqueline.white@sba.gov*

(202)205-7044. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* BusinessLINC Program. *Form No:* N/A. *Frequency:* On Occasion. *Description of Respondents:* Small Business Owners. *Responses:* 14. *Annual Burden:* 448. Jacqueline K. White, Chief, Administrative Information Branch. [FR Doc. 05-2444 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 6

Traces to 6 documents

CFR