Notices. Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land
23,883 words·~109 min read·
/register/2005/06/03/05-11116·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 35-27975] Filing Under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as Amended (“Act”) May 31, 2005. Notice is hereby given that the following filings have been made with the Commission pursuant to provisions of the Act and rules promulgated under the Act. All interested persons are referred to the application(s) and/or declaration(s) for complete statements of the proposed transaction(s) summarized below.
The application(s) and/or declaration(s) and any amendment(s) are available for public inspection through the Commission's Branch of Public Reference. Interested persons wishing to comment or request a hearing on the application(s) and/or declaration(s) should submit their views in writing by June 21, 2005, to the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, DC 20549-0609, and serve a copy on the applicant(s) and/or declarant(s), at the address(es) specified below.
Proof of service (by affidavit or, in the case of an attorney at law, by certificate) should be filed with the request. Any request for hearing should identify specifically the issues of fact or law that are disputed. A person who so requests will be notified of any hearing, if ordered, and will receive a copy of any notice or order issued in the matter. After June 21, 2005, the application-declaration, as filed or as amended, may be granted and/or permitted to become effective.
Cinergy Corp. (70-10281) Cinergy Corp. (“Cinergy”), a registered holding company, 139 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, has filed an Application-Declaration, as amended, (“Application”) under sections 6(a), 7, 9(a), 10, 12, 32 and 33 of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended and rules 45 and 53 under the Act. Background Cinergy directly or indirectly owns all the outstanding common stock of public utility companies operating in Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky, the most significant of which are PSI Energy, Inc.
(“PSI”) and The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company (“CG&E”). PSI is a vertically integrated electric utility operating in Indiana, serving more than 700,000 customers in 69 of the state's 92 counties. CG&E is a combination gas and electric public utility holding company exempt from registration pursuant to rule 2(b) and provides gas and electric service in the southwestern portion of Ohio. CG&E's principal subsidiary is The Union Light, Heat and Power Company (“ULH&P”) which provides gas and electric service in northern Kentucky.
Cinergy's three utility companies are jointly referred to as the “Operating Companies.” Cinergy also owns numerous nonutility subsidiaries engaged in businesses authorized under the Act, by Commission order or otherwise, including “exempt wholesale generators” (“EWGs”) as defined in Section 32 of the Act, “foreign utility companies” (“FUCOs”) as defined in Section 34 of the Act, “exempt telecommunications companies” as defined in Section 34 of the Act and “energy-related companies” as defined in rule 58.
Requested Authorization Summary of Transactions Cinergy requests authorization to engage in the transactions summarized below, 1 and described in more detail in section _ of this Notice, during the period from the effective date of the order issued in this filing through the period ending the earlier of
(a)consummation of the pending merger between Cinergy and Duke Energy Corporation, 2 and
(b)the expiration of 12 months from the date of the Commission's order in this matter granting and permitting to become effective some or all of the transactions requested in the underlying Application, (“Authorization Period”) and to replace and supersede the authority granted under the Prior Orders with the financing authority sought in the Application. Among other things, Cinergy requests authority to: 1 By prior orders Cinergy is authorized to engage in various financing transactions through June 23, 2005 and to issue and sell up to 50 million shares of its common stock under its stock-based employee benefit plans through December 8, 2010. Specifically, these orders are dated June 23, 2000, HCAR No. 27190 (the “Financing Order”); December 8, 2000, HCAR No. 27295 (the “Stock Plans Order”) and May 18, 2001, HCAR No. 27400 (the “EWG/FUCO Order) Collectively, the three orders are referred to as the “Prior Orders”. 2 On May 8, 2005 Cinergy filed a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Commission announcing the proposed merger with Duke Energy Corporation.
(1)Increase total capitalization by $5.0 billion through the issuance and sale of any combination of equity and debt securities as more fully described below; 3 3 As of September 30, 2004, Cinergy's total capitalization (excluding retained earnings and accumulated other income) was approximately $3.7 billion.
(2)Provide guarantees in an aggregate amount not to exceed $3.0 billion; 4 4 As of September 30, 2004, the aggregate amount of Cinergy's outstanding guarantees was $705 million.
(3)Form and utilize special-purpose financing subsidiaries to issue and sell equity and debt securities;
(4)Enter into transactions to manage interest rate and foreign currency exchange risk;
(5)Invest financing proceeds in EWG/FUCO projects in an amount not to exceed 100% of Cinergy's consolidated retained earnings plus $2.0 billion (the “EWG/FUCO Projects Limit”); Cinergy request that the Commission reserve jurisdiction over investments subject to the Restructuring Limit; and
(6)Invest financing proceeds in certain EWG associate companies, in the event of a transfer of part or all of certain CG&E generating facilities to one or more EWG associate companies, in an amount not to exceed the net book value of the generating facilities at the time of transfer. A. Parameters for Financing Authorization The following general terms would be applicable, as appropriate, to the financing transactions requested to be authorized in the Application:
(1)*Common Equity Ratio.* Cinergy states that, at all times during the Authorization Period, it will maintain a common stock equity ratio, as reflected in Cinergy's most recent quarterly or annual report on Form 10-Q or Form 10-K, equal to at least 30% of Cinergy's consolidated capitalization except that, even if common equity falls below that level, Cinergy requests authorization to issue common stock at any time during the Authorization Period without further action by the Commission. Consolidated capitalization, for purposes of determining the ratio, is comprised of common stock equity ( *i.e.,* common stock additional paid-in capital, retained earnings and/or treasury stock), minority interests, preferred stock preferred securities, equity linked securities, long-term debt and short-term debt. Cinergy states that, as of September 30, 2004, its common equity ratio was 41.1% of its consolidated capitalization.
(2)*Ratings.* Cinergy states that,
(i)within two business days after the occurrence of any Ratings Event, 5 Cinergy will notify the Commission of its occurrence (by means of a letter via fax, e-mail or overnight mail to the staff of the Office of Public Utility Regulation), and
(ii)within 30 days after the occurrence of any Ratings Event, Cinergy will submit to the Commission an explanation (in the form of an amendment to this Application) of the material facts and circumstances relating to that Ratings Event (including the basis on which, taking into account the interests of investors, consumers and the public as well as other applicable criteria under the Act, it remains appropriate for Cinergy to continue to avail itself of its authority to issue the securities for which authorization has been requested in this application so long as Cinergy continues to comply with the applicable terms and conditions specified in the Commission's order authorizing the transactions requested in this application). 5 For these purposes,
(A)a “Ratings Event” will be deemed to have occurred if during the Authorization Period
(i)any outstanding rated security of Cinergy is downgraded below investment grade, or
(ii)any security issued by Cinergy upon original issuance is rated below investment grade; and
(B)a security will be deemed “investment grade” if it is rated investment grade by any of Moody's Investors Service, Standard & Poor's, Fitch Ratings or any other nationally recognized statistical rating agency (as defined by the Commission in rules adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended).
(3)*Effective Cost of Money on Financings.* Cinergy states that the effective cost of capital on any series of debt security with a maturity of one year or less (“short term debt”) at the time of issuance, any series of debt security with a maturity of greater than one year (“long-term debt”) at the time of issuance, preferred securities or the debt component of equity-linked securities will not exceed the competitive market rates available at the time of issuance for securities having reasonably similar terms and conditions issued by similar companies of comparable credit quality (“Comparable Securities”). In no event, according to Cinergy, will the interest rate exceed, for short term debt, 300 basis points over the comparable term London Interbank Offered Rate; for long term debt, 500 basis points over the comparable term U.S. Treasury securities for preferred or equity-linked securities, 700 basis points over the comparable term Treasury securities.
(4)*Maturity.* Cinergy states that the maturity of any preferred stock or equity-linked securities (other than perpetual preferred stock) will not exceed 50 years and will be redeemed no later than 50 years after issuance, unless converted into common stock. Cinergy states that the maturity of long-term debt securities will not exceed 50 years.
(5)*Issuance Expenses.* According to Cinergy, the underwriting fees and commissions paid in connection with the issuance, sale or distribution of any securities authorized as a result of this Application will not exceed aggregate issuance expenses that are paid at the time in respect of Comparable Securities, provided that in no event will such issuance expenses exceed five percent (5%) of the principal or face amount of the securities issued or gross proceeds of the financing.
(6)*Use of Proceeds.* Cinergy states that it will use proceeds from the sale of securities, issued as a result of an authorization arising out of the Application, for any lawful purpose, including
(a)financing of capital expenditures and working capital requirements of the Cinergy System, including by means of loans to participating companies in accordance with the terms of the Cinergy System money pool,
(b)payment, redemption, acquisition and refinancing of outstanding securities issued by Cinergy,
(c)direct or indirect investments in companies or assets the acquisition of which are either exempt under the Act or by Commission rule or have been authorized by the Commission and
(d)general corporate purposes. B. Description of Specific Types of Financing
(1)*Common Stock and Equity-Linked Securities.* Cinergy requests authority to issue and sell additional shares of its common stock and equity-linked securities, as defined below, from time to time over the Authorization Period, subject to the limits and conditions specified in the Application. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell additional shares of its common stock
(a)through solicitations of proposals from underwriters or dealers,
(b)through negotiated transactions with underwriters or dealers,
(c)directly to a limited number of purchasers or to a single purchaser, and/or
(d)through agents or other third parties. The price applicable to additional shares sold in any such transaction will be based on several factors, including the current market price of the common stock and prevailing capital market conditions. These transactions may also include forward sales of Cinergy common stock. Cinergy also proposes to issue and sell from time to time options and warrants to acquire its common stock together with other equity-linked securities (collectively, “Equity-Linked Securities”), including but not limited to contracts (”Stock Purchase Contracts“) obligating holders to purchase from Cinergy, and/or Cinergy to sell to the holders, a number of shares of Cinergy common stock specified directly or by formula at an aggregate offering price either fixed at the time the Stock Purchase Contracts are issued or determined by reference to a specific formula set forth in the Stock Purchase Contracts. The Stock Purchase Contracts may be issued separately or as part of units (”Stock Purchase Units“) consisting of a stock purchase contract and debt and/or Treasury securities, securing holders' obligations to purchase the common stock of Cinergy under Stock Purchase Contracts. The Stock Purchase Contracts may require holders to secure their obligations under the contracts in a specified manner. Cinergy further proposes to issue common stock or Equity-Linked Securities as consideration, in whole or in part, for acquisitions of securities or assets of businesses of non-affiliates, the acquisition of which
(a)is exempt under the Act or the rules under the Act or
(b)has been authorized by prior Commission order issued to Cinergy, subject in either case to applicable limitations on total investments in any such business. The shares of Cinergy common stock issued (or, with respect to Equity-Linked Securities, that may be issued) in connection with any such transaction would be valued at market value based on
(i)the closing price on the day before closing of the sale,
(ii)average high and low prices for a period prior to the closing of the sale, or
(iii)some other method negotiated by the parties. Finally, Cinergy seeks Commission authorization to issue and sell common stock and Equity-Linked Securities in accordance with Cinergy's existing 401(k) plans and other stock-based plans for employees, officers and/or directors, as well as any additional stock-based plans Cinergy may adopt during the Authorization Period. A summary of the material terms and conditions of Cinergy's existing stock-based plans is set forth in Exhibit H attached to the Application.
(2)Preferred Securities. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell preferred securities in one or more series, subject to the limitations and conditions specified in the Application. According to Cinergy, the preferred securities of any series
(a)will have a specified par or stated value or liquidation value per security,
(b)will carry a right to periodic cash dividends and/or other distributions, subject among other things, to funds being legally available,
(c)may be subject to optional and/or mandatory redemption, in whole or in part, at par or at various premiums above the par or stated or liquidation value,
(d)may be convertible or exchangeable into common stock of Cinergy,
(e)and may bear such further rights, including voting, preemptive or other rights, and other terms and conditions, as set forth in the applicable certificate of designation, purchase agreement or similar instrument governing the issuance and sale of such series of preferred securities. Cinergy proposes to issue preferred securities in private or public transactions. With respect to private transactions, Cinergy proposes to issue and sell preferred securities of any series directly to one or more purchasers in privately negotiated transactions or to one or more investment banking or underwriting firms or other entities who would resell the preferred securities without registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) in reliance upon one or more applicable exemptions from registration under the Securities Act. From time to time Cinergy also proposes to issue and sell preferred securities of one or more series to the public through
(i)underwriters selected by negotiation or competitive bidding or
(ii)selling agents acting either as agent or as principal for resale to the public either directly or through dealers. According to Cinergy, the liquidation preference, dividend or distribution rates, redemption provisions, voting rights, conversion or exchange rights, and other terms and conditions of a particular series of preferred securities, as well as any associated placement, underwriting, structuring or selling agent fees, commissions and discounts, if any, will be established by negotiation or competitive bidding and reflected in the applicable certificate of designation, purchase agreement, underwriting agreement or other instrument setting forth such terms.
(3)*Debt Securities.* a. Short-Term Notes. Cinergy proposes, subject to the terms and conditions specified in the Application, from time to time within the Authorization Period, to make short-term borrowings from banks or other financial institutions. Cinergy states that such borrowings from banks or other financial institutions will be evidenced by
(a)“transactional” promissory notes to be dated the date of such borrowings and to mature not more than one year after the date thereof or
(b)“grid” promissory notes evidencing all outstanding borrowings from the respective lender, to be dated as of the date of the first borrowing, with each borrowing maturing not more than one year thereafter. Any such note may or may not be subject to prepayment, in whole or in part, with or without a premium in the event of prepayment. b. Commercial Paper. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell commercial paper through one or more dealers or agents or directly to purchasers from time to time during the Authorization Period, subject to the limits and conditions specified in the Application. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell the commercial paper at market rates with varying maturities not to exceed 364 days. According to Cinergy, the commercial paper will be in the form of book-entry unsecured promissory notes with varying denominations of not less than $1,000 each. Also, for commercial paper sales effected on a discount basis, no commission or fee will be payable in connection with those sales; however, the purchasing dealer will re-offer the commercial paper at a rate less than the rate to Cinergy. Further, the discount rate to dealers will not exceed the maximum market clearing discount rate per annum prevailing at the date of issuance for commercial paper of comparable quality and the same maturity and any purchasing dealer will re-offer the commercial paper in such a manner as not to constitute a public offering within the meaning of the Securities Act. c. Long-Term Notes. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell long-term debt securities (“Notes”) in one or more series from time to time within the Authorization Period, subject to the limits and conditions specified in the Application. Cinergy proposes to issue and sell Notes of any series as either senior or subordinated obligations of Cinergy. According to Cinergy, if issued on a secured basis, Notes would be secured solely by common stock, or other assets or properties, of one or more of Cinergy's nonutility subsidiaries (exclusive of any nonutility subsidiary held by CG&E or PSI). 6 Notes of any series
(i)will have maturities greater than one year,
(ii)may be subject to optional and/or mandatory redemption, in whole or in part, at par or at various premiums above the principal amount of the notes,
(iii)may be entitled to mandatory or optional sinking fund provisions, and
(iv)may be convertible or exchangeable into common stock of Cinergy. Interest accruing on Notes of any series may be fixed or floating or “multi-modal” ( *i.e.,* where the interest is periodically reset, alternating between fixed and floating interest rates for each reset period, with all accrued and unpaid interest together with interest on that interest becoming due and payable at the end of each such reset period). Under Cinergy's proposal, Notes may be issued under one or more indentures to be entered into between Cinergy and financial institution(s) acting as trustee(s); supplemental indentures may be executed in respect of separate offerings of one or more series of Notes. 6 According to Cinergy, the nonutility subsidiaries in question consist of one or more direct, wholly-owned nonutility subsidiaries of Cinergy, which currently comprise the following: Cinery Investments, Inc., which holds Cinergy's nonutility wholesale gas marketing business and cogeneration business, among others; Cinergy Global Resources, Inc., which holds most of Cinergy's foreign utility investments; CinTec LLC, which holds certain ETC investments; Cinergy Technologies, Inc., which holds certain ETC investments and nonutility energy-related businesses; and Cinergy Wholesale Energy, Inc., which holds certain currently inactive nonutility businesses. None of these nonutility subsidiaries (or their subsidiaries) has any material relationships with Cinergy's utility companies, other than with respect to certain Commission-approved and/or state public utility commission-approved affiliate contracts. Cinergy states that Notes may be issued in private or public transactions. With respect to the former, Notes of any series may be issued and sold directly to one or more purchasers in privately negotiated transactions or to one or more investment banking or underwriting firms or other entities who would resell the Notes without registration under the Securities Act in reliance upon one or more applicable exemptions from registration under the Securities Act. From time to time Cinergy may also issue and sell Notes of one or more series to the public either
(i)through underwriters selected by negotiation or competitive bidding or
(ii)through selling agents acting either as agent or as principal for resale to the public either directly or through dealers. Finally, according to Cinergy, the maturity dates, interest rates, redemption and sinking fund provisions, and conversion features, if any, with respect to the Notes of a particular series, as well as any associated placement, underwriting, structuring or selling agent fees, commissions and discounts, if any, will be established by negotiation or competitive bidding and reflected in the applicable indenture or supplement to the indenture in addition to any purchase agreement or underwriting agreement setting forth these terms.
(4)*Financing Entities.* In addition to issuing any of the foregoing debt or equity securities directly, Cinergy requests approval to form one or more subsidiaries that, subject to the limits and conditions of the Application, would
(a)issue and sell any of the foregoing securities,
(b)lend, distribute or otherwise transfer the proceeds of those securities to Cinergy or an entity designated by Cinergy and
(c)engage in transactions incidental to issuance or sale of those securities. Cinergy states that its proposed subsidiaries will comprise one or more financing subsidiaries (each, a “Financing Subsidiary”) and one or more special-purpose entities (each, a “Special-Purpose Entity”, and together with Financing Subsidiaries, “Financing Conduits”). In either case the subsidiaries' businesses will be limited to issuing and selling securities on behalf of Cinergy and transactions incidental to issuing or selling those securities; the subsidiaries will have no substantial physical assets or properties. Any securities issued by the Financing Conduits may be guaranteed by Cinergy, either directly or ultimately. Cinergy proposes to acquire shares of common stock or other equity interests of a Financing Subsidiary for an amount not less than the minimum required by applicable law. The business of a Financing Subsidiary will be limited to effecting financing transactions with third parties for the benefit of Cinergy and its subsidiaries. As an alternative in a particular instance to Cinergy directly issuing debt or equity securities, or through a Special-Purpose Entity, Cinergy may determine to use a Financing Subsidiary as the normal issuer of the particular debt or equity security. In that circumstance, Cinergy may provide a guarantee or other credit support with respect to the securities issued by the Financing Subsidiary, the proceeds of which would be lent, distributed or otherwise transferred to Cinergy or an entity designated by Cinergy. In passing it is worth noting that Section 13(b) of the Act and rules 87 and 90 under the Act provide for such services as long as the charge for those services does not exceed a market price. According to Cinergy, one of the primary strategic reasons behind the use of a Financing Subsidiary is to segregate financings for the different businesses conducted by Cinergy, distinguishing between securities issued by Cinergy to finance its investments in nonutility businesses and those issued to finance its investments in the core utility business. A separate Financing Subsidiary may be used by Cinergy with respect to different types of nonutility businesses. Cinergy proposes to use Special-Purpose Subsidiaries in connection with certain financing structures for issuing debt or equity securities, in order to achieve a lower cost of capital, or incrementally greater financial flexibility or other benefits, than would otherwise be the case.
(5)*Hedging Transactions and Certain Risk Management Instruments.* Cinergy requests authority to manage interest rate and foreign currency exchange risk through the entry into, purchase and sale of various risk management instruments commonly used in capital markets, such as interest rate and currency swaps, caps, collars, floors, options, warrants, forwards, forward issuance agreements and similar products designed to manage those risks (collectively, “Derivative Instruments”). Cinergy requests authorization to enter into Derivative Instruments (either directly or through Financing Conduits) for the purpose of managing interest rate and foreign currency exchange risk only with counterparties (“Authorized Counterparties”) whose senior debt, at the date of entry into the Derivative Instrument, is rated investment grade by at least one nationally recognized credit rating agency. Cinergy states that the Derivative Instruments will be for fixed periods and the notional principal amount will not exceed the principal amount of the underlying security, except to the extent necessary to adjust for differing price movements between the underlying security and the Derivative Instrument or to allow for the fees related to the transaction. Cinergy states that any fees and commissions that it pays in connection with any Derivative Instrument will not exceed the then-current market level. Cinergy states that it will not engage in “speculative” derivative transactions and will comply with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) 133 as amended (“Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities”) with respect to all Derivative Instruments entered into, purchased or sold together with such other standards, if any, relating to accounting for derivative transactions as may, over the course of the Authorization Period, be adopted and implemented by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). Cinergy will designate certain of the Derivative Instruments that may be authorized as a result of the Application as either fair value or cash flow hedges in accordance with SFAS 133 and as determined at the date of entry into the respective Derivative Instruments. In addition, as explained in Exhibit J attached to the Application, Cinergy states that it will enter into certain Derivative Instruments that, although accounted for under SFAS 133, will not receive hedge accounting treatment under SFAS 133.
(6)*Intra-System Financings and Guarantees.* Cinergy requests authority, subject to the limits and conditions specified in the Application, to guarantee, obtain letters of credit, enter into financing arrangements and otherwise provide credit support (each, a “Guarantee”) from time to time during the Authorization Period, in respect to the debt or other securities or obligations of any or all of Cinergy's subsidiary or associate companies (including those formed or acquired at any time over the Authorization Period), and otherwise to further the business of Cinergy. The terms and conditions of any Guarantees, and the underlying liabilities covered by those Guarantees would, according to Cinergy, be established at arm's length based upon market conditions. Cinergy requests authorization to charge a fee to the subsidiary on whose behalf Cinergy issues a Guarantee. Cinergy states that this fee will not exceed a reasonable estimate of the costs, if any that would have been incurred by the subsidiary in obtaining the liquidity necessary to perform under the Guarantee for the period it remains outstanding. Cinergy states that the total amount of Guarantees outstanding at any one time will be limited not only by the Guarantees Limit, but also, where issued in respect of EWGs or FUCOs or rule 58 Companies, by the investment limitations specified under rules 53 and 58 and applicable Commission orders, including the order requested under the Application. From time to time Cinergy expects to issue Guarantees in respect of obligations that are not, according to Cinergy, susceptible to exact quantification. For these cases Cinergy requests authority to determine its exposure under the Guarantees, for purposes of measuring compliance with the Guarantees Limit (and any applicable investment limits under rules 53 and 58), by appropriate means, including estimation of exposure based on loss experience or projected potential payment amounts under the underlying obligation. Cinergy proposes to make these estimates, if appropriate, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. These estimates will be re-evaluated periodically. Where, as discussed above, Cinergy may cause debt or equity securities to be issued through Financing Conduits authorized as a result of this Application, Cinergy requests authorization to provide a Guarantee in respect of the payment and other obligations of the Financing Conduit under the securities issued by it. Since any securities nominally issued by a Financing Conduit are in substance securities issued by Cinergy itself, Cinergy intends that any securities issued by a Financing Conduit count dollar-for-dollar against the Aggregate Financing Limit. Conversely, Cinergy states that any Guarantees of securities of Financing Conduits should be excluded entirely from the Guarantees Limit, since inclusion of those Guarantees would amount to “double counting,” in effect reducing Cinergy's Aggregate Financing Limit to the extent it used Financing Conduits. C. EWG/FUCO Investments Limit Cinergy requests authority, subject to the limits and conditions specified in the Application, to issue and sell securities for the purpose of funding investments in EWGs and FUCOs in an amount not to exceed the EWG/FUCO Investments Limit. The EWG/FUCO Investments Limit is comprised of two separate investment limits, the EWG/FUCO Projects Limit and the Restructuring Limit, permitting respective aggregate investments as follows:
(1)*EWG/FUCO Projects Limit.* With respect to EWG/FUCO Projects other than those subject to the Restructuring Limit, an aggregate investment not to exceed
(a)100% of Cinergy's consolidated retained earnings, plus
(b)$2.0 billion.
(2)*Restructuring Limit.* Solely with respect to the potential transfer of certain of CG&E's generating facilities to one or more Restructuring Subsidiaries, an aggregate investment in such Restructuring Subsidiaries not to exceed the net book value of any such transferred generating facilities at the date of transfer. With respect to the Restructuring Limit, Cinergy states that the net book value of CG&E's generating facilities at September 30, 2004 (excluding certain generating facilities to be transferred to ULH&P) 7 was approximately $1,544 million, including construction work in progress of $44 million. Ohio is the only state in the three-state region in which Cinergy's utilities operates that has enacted electric restructuring legislation. This legislation went into effect in January 2001, deregulating electric generation and supply and giving Ohio retail customers the right to choose electric suppliers. Cinergy states that CG&E may determine to transfer one or more of its generating facilities to one or more Restructuring Subsidiaries during the Authorization Period. In light of this and Ohio's restructuring law Cinergy states that it has included the Restructuring Limit as part of its overall proposal regarding EWG/FUCO investments. Pending completion of the record, however, Cinergy requests that the Commission reserve jurisdiction over the Restructuring Limit, including any potential investments in Restructuring Subsidiaries. 7 *See* HCAR No. 27940, Jan. 21, 2004 (notice with respect to declaration filed by Cinergy and CG&E in File No. 70-10254). Cinergy Corp., et al. (70-10303) Cinergy Corp. (“Cinergy”), a Delaware corporation registered under the Act, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company (“CG&E”), an electric and gas utility company and holding company, and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cinergy, and CG&E's wholly-owned subsidiaries The Union Light, Heat and Power Company (“ULH&P”), an electric and gas utility company, and Miami Power Corporation (“Miami”), an electric utility company, and KO Transmission Company (“KO”), a nonutility company, and Tri-State Improvement Company (“Tri-State”), a nonutility company, each at 139 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio, together with PSI Energy, Inc., an electric utility company (“PSI”) and wholly-owned subsidiary of Cinergy, at 1000 East Main Street, Plainfield, Indiana, and Cinergy Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned service company subsidiary of Cinergy, also at 139 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, (“Cinergy Services” and, collectively with the foregoing companies, “Applicants”), have filed an application-declaration (“Application”) with the Commission under sections 6(a), 7, 9(a) and 10 of the Act and rule 54 under the Act. Applicants request authorization to engage in certain short-term financing transactions as described below, involving
(i)loans and borrowings under the “money pool” arrangement described below,
(ii)bank borrowings and
(iii)commercial paper sales. Cinergy directly holds all the outstanding common stock of CG&E and PSI. Cinergy was created as a holding company in connection with the 1994 merger of CG&E and PSI. 8 Through CG&E (including its principal subsidiary, ULH&P) and PSI, Cinergy provides retail electric and/or natural gas service to customers in southwestern Ohio, northern Kentucky and most of Indiana. In addition to its Midwestern-based utility business, Cinergy has numerous non-utility subsidiaries engaged in a variety of energy-related businesses. 8 *See Cinergy Corp.* , HCAR No. 26146, Oct. 21, 1994 (“1994 Merger Order”). CG&E is a combination electric and gas public utility holding company exempt from registration under the Act in accordance with rule 2(b) under the Act. CG&E is engaged in the production, transmission, distribution and sale of electric energy and the sale and transportation of natural gas in southwestern Ohio and, through ULH&P, northern Kentucky. The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (“PUCO”) regulates CG&E with respect to retail sales of electricity and natural gas and other matters, including issuance of securities. A direct wholly-owned subsidiary of CG&E formed under Kentucky law, ULH&P is engaged in the transmission, distribution and sale of electric energy and the sale and transportation of natural gas in northern Kentucky. The Kentucky Public Service Commission (“KPSC”) regulates ULH&P with respect to retail sales of electricity and natural gas and other matters, including issuance of securities. In addition to ULH&P, CG&E has several other subsidiaries. None of these subsidiaries, individually or in the aggregate, is material to CG&E's business. Miami is an electric utility company whose business is limited to ownership of a 138 kilovolt transmission line extending from the Miami Fort Power Station in Ohio (in which CG&E owns interests in four electric generating units) to a point near Madison, Indiana. KO is a nonutility company that owns interests in natural gas pipeline facilities located in Kentucky. Tri-State is a nonutility company that acquires and holds real estate intended for future use in CG&E's utility business. PSI is engaged in the production, transmission, distribution and sale of electric energy in north central, central, and southern Indiana. The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (“IURC”) regulates PSI with respect to retail sales of electricity and other matters, including issuance of securities. Cinergy Services Inc. (“Cinergy Services”), Cinergy's service company subsidiary, provides centralized management, administrative and other support services to the utility and nonutility associate companies in Cinergy's holding company system. By order dated August 2, 2001, HCAR No. 27429 (“2001 Order”), the Commission authorized the Applicants to engage in various short-term financing transactions from time to time through June 30, 2006, as follows: 1. With respect to the Cinergy system “money pool,” (“Money Pool”) which was established by and among Cinergy, Cinergy Services, PSI and CG&E (including its subsidiaries) to help provide for the short-term cash and working capital requirements of the latter three companies, 9 PSI, ULH&P and Miami were authorized to make loans to and incur borrowings from each other; 9 *Cinergy Corp.,* *et al.,* HCAR No. 26362, (Aug. 25, 1995) authorizing establishment of Money Pool (“1995 Money Pool Order”). 2. Cinergy, CG&E, Cinergy Services, Tri-State and KO were authorized to make loans to PSI, ULH&P and Miami; 3. PSI, ULH&P and Miami were authorized to incur short-term borrowings from banks and other financial institutions; and 4. PSI was also authorized to issue and sell commercial paper. Under the 2001 Order, the maximum principal amount of short-term borrowings that PSI, ULH&P and Miami could incur and have outstanding at any one time (whether from
(i)the Money Pool,
(ii)banks and other financial institutions, or
(iii)in PSI's case, through sales of commercial paper) was as follows: PSI, $600 million; ULH&P, $65 million; and Miami, $100,000. Applicants state that the short-term borrowing limitation established in the 2001 Order is no longer appropriate for ULH&P, given that company's anticipated capital requirements following the consummation of its pending transaction with CG&E, in which it will acquire interests in three of CG&E's electric generating stations, with 1105 megawatts of total capacity. This transaction will significantly increase the overall size of ULH&P, with a commensurate impact on its ongoing capital requirements, including short-term borrowing needs. ULH&P now proposes to increase its short-term borrowing authority from $65 million to $150 million for the duration of the Authorization Period, as defined below. In addition, Applicants propose to engage in the following transactions, also in each case through the earlier of
(a)consummation of the pending merger between Cinergy Corp. (“Cinergy”), a Delaware corporation and registered holding company under the Act, and Duke Energy Corporation and
(b)the expiration of 12 months from the date of the Commission's order granting the authorizations requested in the Application (“Authorization Period”): 1. In connection with the continued operation of the Money Pool, PSI, ULH&P and Miami (“Nonexempt Subsidiaries”) 10 propose to make loans to and incur borrowings from each other; 10 Applicants state that the short-term borrowing authority requested for PSI, ULH&P and Miami (whether from affiliates, as under the Money Pool, or from non-affiliates, as with respect to borrowings from banks and other financial institutions and sales of commercial paper) is not subject to the securities issuance jurisdiction of the applicable state public utility commissions. Accordingly, the proposed short-term borrowings for these companies are not eligible for the exemption afforded by rule 52(a) under the Act. More specifically, neither the IURC nor the KPSC has authority over short-term borrowings (defined as
(i)in the case of the IURC, borrowings with a maturity of one year or less, and
(ii)in the case of the KPSC, borrowings with a maturity of two years or less). The PUCO, however, does have authority over short-term borrowings of any maturity; accordingly, short-term borrowings by CG&E are exempt from Commission authorization under rule 52(a). 2. In connection with the continued operation of the Money Pool, Cinergy 11 Services, CG&E, Tri-State and KO propose to make loans to the Nonexempt Subsidiaries thereunder; 11 Cinergy has Commission authority through June 23, 2005 ( *Cinergy Corp. et al.,* HCAR No. 27190, (June 23, 2000)) to use financing proceeds to “make loans to, and investments in, other system companies, including through the Cinergy system money pool [citation omitted].” Cinergy has filed an application (File No. 70-10281) to extend that authorization. 3. The Nonexempt Subsidiaries propose to incur short-term borrowings from banks or other financial institutions (collectively, “Banks”); and 4. PSI and ULH&P propose to issue and sell commercial paper. The maximum principal amount of short-term borrowings outstanding at any time by the Nonexempt Subsidiaries (whether pursuant to the Money Pool, Bank loans or sales of commercial paper) would not exceed the following amounts (each, a “Borrowing Cap”): PSI, $600 million; ULH&P, $150 million; and Miami, $100,000. (The Borrowing Caps for PSI and Miami are unchanged from those set forth in the 2001 Order.) Proceeds of short-term borrowings by the Nonexempt Subsidiaries (whether under the Money Pool, bank loans or sales of commercial paper) would be used by those companies for general corporate purposes, including
(1)interim financing of capital requirements;
(2)working capital needs;
(3)repayment, redemption, refinancing of debt or preferred stock;
(4)cash requirements to meet unexpected contingencies and payment and timing differences;
(5)loans through the Money Pool; and
(6)other transactions relating to those Applicants' utility businesses. Money Pool Subject to their respective Borrowing Caps, from time to time over the Authorization Period, the Nonexempt Subsidiaries propose to make loans to each other; and Cinergy Services, CG&E, Tri-State and KO propose to make loans to the Nonexempt Subsidiaries, in accordance with the Money Pool. 12 12 Borrowings by Cinergy Services, CG&E, Tri-State and KO from each other or from any of the other Money Pool participants under the Money Pool (namely, Cinergy and the Nonexempt Subsidiaries) are exempt (together with the corresponding loans) under rule 52(a) (in the case of CG&E) and rule 52(b) (in the case of Cinergy Services, Tri-State and KO). Applicants propose no changes to the Money Pool, the terms of which were originally authorized in the 1995 Money Pool Order and are set forth in the related Money Pool Agreement. (Cinergy, Cinergy Services, CG&E, Tri-State, KO, PSI, ULH&P and Miami are collectively referred to as the “Money Pool Participants.”) Short-Term Bank Borrowings & Commercial Paper Subject to their respective Borrowing Caps, from time to time over the Authorization Period,
(a)the Nonexempt Subsidiaries propose to borrow short-term funds from Banks pursuant to formal or informal credit facilities, and
(b)PSI and ULH&P propose to issue and sell commercial paper, as described below. Bank borrowings would be evidenced by promissory notes, each of which would be issued no later than the expiration date of the Authorization Period and would mature no later than one year from the date of issuance (except in the case of borrowings by ULH&P, which would mature no later than two years from the date of issuance); would bear interest at a rate no higher than the lower of
(a)400 basis points over the comparable London interbank offered rate or
(b)a rate that is consistent with similar securities of comparable credit quality and maturities issued by other companies; may require fees to the lender not to exceed 200 basis points per annum on the total commitment; and, except for borrowings on uncommitted credit lines, may be prepayable in whole or in part, with or without a premium. Subject to the applicable Borrowing Caps, from time to time over the Authorization Period, PSI and ULH&P also propose to issue and sell commercial paper through one or more dealers or agents (or directly to a limited number of purchasers if the resulting cost of money is equal to or less than that available from commercial paper placed through dealers or agents). PSI and ULH&P propose to issue and sell the commercial paper at market rates (either on an interest bearing or discount basis) with varying maturities not to exceed 270 days. The commercial paper will be in the form of book-entry unsecured promissory notes with varying denominations of not less than $1,000 each. In commercial paper sales effected on a discount basis, the purchasing dealer may re-offer the commercial paper at a rate less than the rate to PSI or ULH&P. The discount rate to dealers will not exceed the maximum discount rate per annum prevailing at the date of issuance for commercial paper of comparable quality and the same maturity. The purchasing dealer will re-offer the commercial paper in a manner that will not constitute a public offering within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933. In addition, solely with respect to the issuance by PSI, ULH&P and Miami of Bank debt and by PSI and ULH&P of commercial paper (in each case other than for purposes of funding the Money Pool):
(i)Within two business days after the occurrence of any Ratings Event, 13 Cinergy will notify the Commission of its occurrence (by means of a letter via fax, e-mail or overnight mail to the staff of the Office of Public Utility Regulation), and
(ii)within 30 days after the occurrence of any Ratings Event, Cinergy will submit to the Commission an explanation (in the form of an amendment to the Application) of the material facts and circumstances relating to that Ratings Event (including the basis on which, taking into account the interests of investors, consumers and the public as well as other applicable criteria under the Act, it remains appropriate for PSI, ULH&P and Miami to continue to avail itself of its authority to issue the securities for which authorization has been requested in the Application so long as each continues to comply with the applicable terms and conditions specified in the Commission's order authorizing the transactions requested in the Application). 13 For these purposes,
(A)a “Ratings Event” will be deemed to have occurred if during the Authorization Period
(i)any outstanding rated security of PSI, ULH&P or Miami is downgraded below investment grade, or
(ii)any security issued by PSI, ULH&P or Miami upon original issuance is rated below investment grade; and
(B)a security will be deemed “investment grade” if it is rated investment grade by any of Moody's Investors Service, Standard & Poor's, Fitch Ratings or any other nationally recognized statistical rating agency (as defined by the Commission in rules adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2862 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51748; File No. SR-NASD-2005-024] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Relating to Dissemination of the Underlying Index Value for Portfolio Depository Receipts and Index Fund Shares May 26, 2005. On February 9, 2005, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), submitted to 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 revise the listing standards for Portfolio Depository Receipts (“PDRs”) and Index Fund Shares to provide that the current value of the underlying index must be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the time the PDR or Index Fund Share trades on Nasdaq. On April 4, 2005, Nasdaq submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on April 21, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments regarding the proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing in its entirety. Amendment No. 1 revised the proposal to indicate that, among other things, the current index value must be disseminated by one or more major market data vendors during the time PDR or Index Fund Share trades on Nasdaq. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51559 (April 15, 2005), 70 FR 20787. After careful consideration, 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 association. 5 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 6 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities association be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 5 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). 6 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). Currently, the NASD's rules for listing and trading PDRs and Index Fund Shares pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act require that the current value of the underlying index be disseminated every 15 seconds over the Nasdaq Trade Dissemination System. 7 Nasdaq proposes to amend these listing standards to require that the current value of the underlying index be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the time the PDR or Index Fund Share trades on Nasdaq. 7 *See* NASD Rule 4420(i) and (j). By revising the index dissemination requirement, the proposal would expand the PDRs and Index Fund Shares eligible for listing under NASD Rules 4420(i) and
(j)to include not only PDRs and Index Fund Shares whose underlying index value is disseminated over the Nasdaq Trade Dissemination System, but also PDRs and Index Fund Shares whose current underlying index value is widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds by one or more major market data vendors during the time the PDR or Index Fund Share trades on Nasdaq. The Commission believes that this index dissemination requirement, which is similar to the index dissemination requirement used in the listing standards for narrow-based index options, 8 will help to ensure the transparency of current index values for indexes underlying PDRs and Index Fund Shares. 8 *See e.g.* , Chicago Board Options Exchange Rule 24.2(b); International Securities Exchange Rule 2002(b); Pacific Exchange Rule 5.13; and Philadelphia Stock Exchange Rule 1009A(b) (listing standards for narrow-based index options requiring that, among other things, the current underlying index value be reported at least once every 15 seconds during the time the index option trades on the exchange). It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 that the proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2005-024), as amended, is approved. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2829 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISISON [Release No. 34-51732; File No. SR-OC-2005-01] Self-Regulatory Organization; OneChicago, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to EFP Transaction Reporting Procedures May 24, 2005. Pursuant to section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-7 under the Act, 2 notice is hereby given that on May 9, 2005, OneChicago, LLC (“OneChicago” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. On May 6, 2005, OneChicago filed the proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), together with a written certification under section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act 3 in which OneChicago indicated that the effective date of the proposed rule change would be May 9, 2005. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-7. 3 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule Change OneChicago proposes to amend its policy regarding the reporting of exchange of futures for physical (“EFP”) transactions. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the principal office of the Exchange 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, the Exchange 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 OneChicago proposes to amend its current EFP Transactions: Guidelines and Reporting Procedures (“Procedures”) to permit Exchange members to report their proprietary EFP transactions, to permit authorized parties to report EFP transactions on a form and in a manner approved by OneChicago, and to make other non-substantive changes. The proposed rule change would permit OneChicago members with a reporting ID to report proprietary EFP transactions to OneChicago. In order to facilitate this amendment, the proposed rule change would also permit OneChicago members to directly contact OneChicago to request a reporting ID. The granting of a reporting ID would be at the discretion of OneChicago. Currently, only persons authorized by a clearing member firm may report EFP transactions. OneChicago believes that it would be more efficient to permit Exchange members that enter into EFP transactions for their proprietary account(s) to report those transactions to the Exchange. The proposed rule change would also permit authorized parties to submit an EFP Transaction Report in a form and manner approved by OneChicago. Under the current Procedures, the parties to an EFP transaction must deliver OneChicago's EFP Transaction Report. OneChicago believes that the proposed rule change would permit flexibility to accommodate new types and forms for reporting EFP transactions. Finally, the proposed rule change would also make other conforming and non-substantive changes. 4 4 Since the proposed rule change would permit reporting parties to submit an EFP Transaction Report in a manner approved by the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to delete the language requiring reporting parties to e-mail or fax the EFP Transaction Report. Furthermore, the Exchange proposes to make other non-substantive changes by adding the word “of” in the first sentence of the Procedures and adding to “OneChicago” to Procedure No. 2. 2. Statutory Basis OneChicago believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 5 in general, and section 6(b)(5) of the Act 6 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to protect investors and the public interest by amending the reporting requirements. OneChicago believes that expanding persons who are eligible to report EFP transactions to those members who are conducting EFP transactions for their proprietary account(s) promotes just and equitable principles of trade and prevents fraudulent and manipulative acts. Furthermore, OneChicago believes that the proposed rule change also promotes just and equitable principles of trade by permitting flexibility for the changing trading environment by permitting reporting parties to submit an Exchange approved EFP Transaction Report in a manner authorized by the Exchange. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition OneChicago does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because the proposed rule change only clarifies reporting requirements for EFP transactions. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change became effective on May 9, 2005. Within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act. 7 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 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-OC-2005-01 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-OC-2005-01. 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 Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of OneChicago. 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-OC-2005-01 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(75). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2833 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51740; File No. SR-PCX-2005-64] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Thereto Relating to the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism May 25, 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 May 2, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX” 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 Exchange. On May 19, 2005, the PCX filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 On May 23, 2005 the PCX filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 4 On May 24, 2005 the PCX filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change. 5 On May 24, 2005 the PCX filed Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change. 6 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. In addition, the Commission is granting accelerated approval of the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the PCX
(a)added language to establish certain criteria regarding the use of the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism and
(b)added language to PCX Rule 6.37(g)(1), which governs quoting obligations of Lead Market Makers (“LMMs”). 4 In Amendment No. 2, the PCX corrected certain typographical errors in the rule text and amended the proposed rule text of Rule 6.37(g)(1) to delete an incorrect reference to proposed PCX Rule 6.40(e). 5 In Amendment No. 3, the PCX corrected certain typographical errors in the rule text. 6 In Amendment No. 4, the PCX corrected certain typographical errors in Amendment No. 2. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt PCX Rule 6.40 to provide PCX Market Makers protection from the unreasonable risk associated with an excessive number of near simultaneous executions in a single options class through the implementation of a Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism. The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is below. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Rule 6 Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism Rule 6.40 [Reserved.] *(a) Trade Counter. The trading engine will maintain a “trade counter” for each Market Maker on each class to which the Market Maker is appointed. This trade counter will be incremented by one every time the Market Maker executes a trade on any series in the appointed class. The trade counter will automatically reset itself every “n” seconds.* *(b) Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism. The trading engine will activate the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism on an appointed class whenever the following conditions are met: The trade counter has reached “n” executions against the quotes of the Market Maker in the Market Maker's appointed class during a period of “n” seconds. When the above conditions are met, the trading engine will automatically cancel all quotes posted by the Market Maker on that class by generating a “bulk cancel” message.* *(c) The bulk cancel message will be processed in time priority with any other quote or order message received by the trading engine. Any orders or quotes that matched with the Market Maker's quote and were received in the trading engine prior to the receipt of the bulk cancel message will be automatically executed. Orders or quotes received in the trading engine after receipt of the bulk cancel message will not be executed against the Market Maker.* *(d) Once the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism has been activated for an options class, any bulk quote messages sent by the Market Maker on that class would continue to be rejected until the Market Maker submits a message to the trading engine to enable new quotes.* *
(e)In the event that a Lead Market Maker's (“LMM”) quotes are cancelled and there are no other Market Makers quoting in the issue, the trading engine will automatically provide two-sided legal quotes on behalf of the LMM until such time the LMM submits a message to the trading engine to enable new quotes. All quotes generated by the Exchange on behalf of an LMM will be considered “firm quotes” and shall be the obligation of the LMM. * *
(f)Each Market Maker that is quoting in an issue shall determine the appropriate trade counter threshold of “n” executions and the time period of “n” seconds as described in paragraph
(b)above to activate the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism. The trade counter threshold must be at least five executions. The time period must be at least 1/2 second. At no time may the trade counter be set for a trade rate of less than five executions in a one second period. * *(g) For purposes of this Rule 6.40, a “bulk quote” message is a single message from a Market Maker that simultaneously updates all of the Market Maker's quotes in multiple series in a class at the same time.* *Commentary:* *.01 A trade rate of five executions in a one second period will allow for Market Makers to provide different risk settings. Based on a minimum rate of five executions per second, permissible settings could be five executions in a one second period, ten executions in a two second period fifteen executions in three a second period and so forth, using the same minimum executions per second ratio.* Obligations of Market Makers Rule 6.37 (a)-(f) No change.
(g)Quoting Obligations of Market Makers.
(1)Lead Market Makers. Lead Market Makers must provide continuous two-sided quotations throughout the trading day in each of their appointed issues *for 99% of the time the Exchange is open for trading in each issue.* Such quotations must meet the legal quote width requirements of Rule 6.37(b). LMMs must also specify a size for each of their quotations applicable to: (A)-(B) No change. 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 Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it had received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The PCX 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 proposed rule change is to provide all PCX Market Makers protection from the unreasonable risk of multiple nearly simultaneous executions. Like auto-quote systems used on other options exchanges, the primary method for Market Makers to update their markets on the PCX is to post and update quotes on multiple series of options at the same time through the use of “bulk quotes.” Generally, these quotes are based on the Market Maker's proprietary pricing models that rely on various factors, including the price of the underlying security and that security's market volatility. As these variables change, a Market Maker's pricing model and automated quote system will continuously enter bulk quote updates for all series in the class. A PCX Market Maker's risk is not limited to the risk in a single series of a particular class. Rather, a Market Maker faces exposure in all series of a class, requiring the Market Maker off set or otherwise hedge its overall position in a class. In addition to the Market Maker's own proprietary quoting system, the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism would provide an additional tool to manage the risk associated with providing liquidity in a large number of series across an options class. Because Market Makers provide quotes in all series in a class, they are exposed to the possibility of nearly simultaneous multiple executions that can create huge unintended principal positions for the Market Makers and expose them to unnecessary market risk. Firm risk management procedures dictate that Market Makers must take into account the possibility of such actions and the corresponding risk to the Market Makers and the firm. As a result, the PCX believes that Market Makers widen their quotes, quote less aggressively, and limit their quote size in order to avoid such unintended executions and the attendant risks and costs involved, all to the detriment of customers and other market participants. The proposed rule addresses these concerns. Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism The Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism feature on the PCX would protect all PCX Market Makers from excessive multiple and unintended automatic executions. The Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism would begin with a “trade counter” for each class where the Market Maker has a market making appointment. This trade counter would be incremented by one every time the Market Maker executes a trade on any series of the assigned class. The trade counter would reset itself every “n” seconds. The individual Market Maker supplying the quotes in a particular issue would define the threshold number for the trade counter to reach in order to trigger the implementation of the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism. The individual Market Maker supplying the quotes in a particular issue would also define the time period for the trade counter to reset itself. The trade counter would have a minimum setting of five executions in a one second period. Using a trade rate of five executions in a one second period will allow for a Market Maker to provide different risk settings for different issue. This would limit the number of consecutive executions a given Market Maker could have automatically executed on an assigned class in a predefined period of time. Once the trade counter has reached the defined threshold number, the trading engine would automatically cancel all quotes posted by that Market Maker on that class by generating a bulk cancel message. The bulk cancel message would have the same time priority as any other quote update or order message the trading engine receives, so that any orders or quotes that matched with the Market Maker's quote and were received by the trading engine prior to the receipt of the cancel message would be automatically executed pursuant to PCX rules. Orders or quotes received by the trading engine after receipt of the cancel message would not be executed against the Market Maker. As soon as the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism is triggered, the Market Maker would receive a message to confirm the cancellation of the Market Maker's quotes on the given class. The Market Maker could then respond with an enabling message to the trading engine to update or refresh quotes. If there is no reply, PCX would assume there is a communication or system problem with the Market Maker. In the event that a LMM is unable to provide an updated quote, and there are no other quotes in the PCX Plus system for that issue, the trading engine will create two sided, legal spread markets on behalf of the LMM. Quotes generated by the exchanges on behalf of the LMM would be considered firm quotes and would be the obligation of the LMM. When there are other quotes in the PCX system for that issue, the Exchange would not generate quotes on behalf of the LMM. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend PCX Rule 6.37(g)(1) to lower a LMM's continuous quotation obligation from 100% of the trading day to 99% of the trading day. This is designed to provide the LMM an appropriate amount of time to replenish quotes when the Exchange does not do this on the LMM's behalf. The Exchange anticipates that this new proposed functionality would be used in limited circumstances and only for brief periods of time. The Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism would protect both Market Maker quotes currently posted and in the PCX Consolidated Book, as well as those incoming bulk quotes that a Market Maker may erroneously generate as part of an automatic update. For example, a new bulk quote message from a Market Maker that is immediately executable across multiple series would not generate a number of executions greater than the defined threshold number ( *i.e.* would not allow the Market Maker to unintentionally sweep the book). Without these protection mechanisms, multiple unintentional trades could automatically occur. These executions would not properly reflect the true nature of the market and would subject Market Makers to unreasonable market risk and multiple execution and clearing fees, with no real economic justification behind the trades. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would reduce these inefficiencies and risks by preventing a PCX Market Maker from erroneously trading automatically multiple times. Under normal circumstances, PCX Market Maker quotes do match and are automatically executed; however, these are usually only on a few series in a class and involve immediate quote updates after an execution. The trade counter would not reach the threshold level, nor would the Risk Limitation Mechanism be activated under most circumstances. The Exchange believes these protection mechanisms would eliminate trades that are involuntary, the result of technological error or inaccuracy, and that impede certain liquidity providers' ability to competitively quote. Also, the Exchange believes the protection mechanisms would increase the liquidity available in the PCX market and would enhance competition because Market Makers would be better able to quote large orders aggressively and with fewer concerns over technological breakdowns and system inaccuracies. These Market Maker protections do not relieve a LMM or Market Maker's obligations pursuant to PCX Rule 6.37(g), which addresses a Market Maker's obligation to enter quotations for the option classes to which it is appointed, except as noted in proposed change to PCX Rule 6.37(g)(1). In addition, these Market Maker protections do not relieve a LMM or Market Maker's obligations pursuant to Rule 6.86 to provide firm quotations. After a Market Maker protection has been utilized, all other Market Makers are expected to resume entering quotations for the options classes to which they are appointed as soon as practicable. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 8 in particular, in that it is designed to facilitate transactions in securities, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to enhance competition and to protect investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 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, would impose any burden on competition that is 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 Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, 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-PCX-2005-64 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-PCX-2005-64. 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 Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the PCX. 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-64 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2005. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, applicable to a national securities exchange. 9 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 which requires among other things, that the rules of the Exchange are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that the proposal does not alter the obligations of PCX Market Makers, except for the fact that it will reduce a LMM's continuous quoting obligation from 100% of the trading day to 99% of the trading day for each of its appointed classes. The Commission notes that this reduction should provide the LMM a brief amount of time to update its quotes when the Exchange does not generate quotes on behalf of the LMM because no other market makers are quoting. In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change should provide PCX Market Makers assistance in effectively managing their quotations. 9 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The PCX has requested that the Commission find good cause for approving the proposed rule change and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 thereto prior to the thirtieth day after publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission notes that similar proposals to provide protection from risk for market makers have been approved for other options exchanges. 11 The Commission believes that granting accelerated approval of the proposal should provide PCX Market Makers with similar protections from the risk associated with an excessive number of near simultaneous executions in a single options class. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 12 for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51049 (January 28, 2005), 70 FR 3756 (January 26, 2005) (SR-BSE-2004-52); and 51050 (January 18, 2005), 70 FR 3758 (January 26, 2005) (SR-ISE-2004-31). 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 13 that the proposed rule change (SR-PCX-2005-64), and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 thereto, are hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2830 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51728; File No. SR-PCX-2005-57] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating To Delay of Implementation Date of Revisions to the Series 4 Examination Program May 24, 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 April 22, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by PCX. PCX has designated the proposed rule change as one constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of PCX pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on May 16, 2005. 5 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 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). 5 In Amendment No. 1, PCX provided a new statutory basis for the proposed rule change and made technical corrections to the proposed rule change. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on May 16, 2005, the date on which the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act, 6 the Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change to delay until no later than November 30, 2005 the implementation date of the recent revisions to the Limited Principal—Registered Options (Series 4) examination program, including the study outline and selection specifications (“Series 4 Examination”). PCX is not proposing any textual changes to its rules. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, PCX 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. PCX 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 On April 12, 2005, PCX filed with the SEC for immediate effectiveness revisions to the Series 4 Examination. 7 The Series 4 Examination is an industry-wide examination that qualifies an individual to function as a Registered Options Principal. The Series 4 Examination is shared by PCX and the following self-regulatory organizations: the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex”), the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. Amex and NASD filed with the SEC similar revisions to the Series 4 Examination. 8 PCX intended to implement the Series 4 Examination revisions no later than April 29, 2005 in order to be consistent with NASD. 9 However, due to administrative issues, PCX is proposing to delay until no later than November 30, 2005 the implementation date of the revisions. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-51727 (May 24, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-51). 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51689 (May 12, 2005), 70 FR 28965 (May 19, 2005 (SR-Amex-2005-039); and 51216 (February 16, 2005), 70 FR 8866 (February 23, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-025). 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51216 (February 16, 2005), 70 FR 8866, 8867 (February 23, 2005), (SR-NASD-2005-025). PCX understands that Amex and NASD also will file with the SEC similar proposed rule changes to delay until no later than November 30, 2005 the implementation date of the revisions to the Series 4 Examination. 2. Statutory Basis PCX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(1) 11 in particular, in that it is designed to enforce compliance by Options Trading Permit (“OTP”) Holders and OTP Firms and persons associated with the rules of the Exchange. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will impose no burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received by the Exchange on this proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 13 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of PCX. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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, as amended, 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-PCX-2005-57 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-PCX-2005-57. 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 at the principal office of PCX. 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 the File Number SR-PCX-2005-57 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2831 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51727; File No. SR-PCX-2005-51] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Revisions to the Series 4 Examination Program May 24, 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 April 12, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX” 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 PCX. PCX has designated the proposed rule change as one constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of PCX pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on May 16, 2005. 5 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 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 1 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). 5 In Amendment No. 1, PCX provided a new statutory basis for the proposed rule change and made technical corrections to the proposed rule change. PCX also included a copy of a Commission letter regarding procedures for filing qualification exams. *See* letter from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation Commission, to Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President & General Counsel, NASD Regulation, Inc., dated July 24, 2000. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on May 16, 2005, the date on which the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Pursuant to the provisions of section 19(b)(1) of the Act, 6 the Exchange is filing with the Commission revisions to the study outline and selection specifications for the Limited Principal—Registered Options (Series 4) examination (“Series 4 Examination”). The proposed revisions update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules, and regulations covered by the Series 4 Examination. PCX is not proposing any textual changes to its rules. 6 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(1). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, PCX 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. PCX 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 Pursuant to section 6(c)(3) of the Act, 7 which allows PCX to examine and verify the standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with PCX Options Trading Permit (“OTP”) Holders or OTP Firms, PCX has developed examinations, and requires satisfaction of examinations developed by other self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”), that are designed to establish that persons associated with PCX OTP Holders or OTP Firms have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. PCX periodically reviews the content of examinations to determine whether revisions are necessary or appropriate in view of changes pertaining to the subject matter covered by the examinations. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(c)(3). PCX Rule 9.18 states that no OTP Firm or OTP Holder shall be approved to transact business with the public in options contracts, unless those persons associated with the OTP Firm or OTP Holder who are designated as Options Principals or who are designated as Registered Representatives have been approved by and registered with the Exchange. The Series 4 Examination, an industry-wide examination, qualifies an individual to function as an Options Principal. The Series 4 Examination tests a candidate's knowledge of options trading generally, the PCX's rules applicable to trading of options contracts, and the rules of registered clearing agencies for options. The Series 4 Examination covers, among other things, equity options, foreign currency options, index options, and options on government and mortgage-backed securities. The Series 4 Examination is shared by PCX and the following SROs: The American Stock Exchange LLC, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. A committee of industry representatives, together with the staff of PCX and the SROs referenced above, recently undertook a periodic review of the Series 4 Examination. As a result of this review and as part of an ongoing effort to align the Series 4 Examination more closely to the supervisory duties of a Series 4 principal, PCX is proposing to modify the content of the Series 4 Examination to track the functional workflow of a Series 4 principal. More specifically, PCX is proposing to revise the main section headings and the number of questions on each section of the Series 4 study outline as follows: Options Investment Strategies, decreased from 35 to 34 questions; Supervision of Sales Activities and Trading Practices, increased from 71 to 75 questions; and Supervision of Employees, Business Conduct and Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, decreased from 19 to 16 questions. PCX is further proposing revisions to the study outline to reflect the new Commission short sale requirements. The revised Series 4 Examination continues to cover the areas of knowledge required to supervise options activities. PCX is proposing similar changes to the corresponding sections of the Series 4 Examination selection specifications and question bank. The number of questions on the Series 4 Examination will remain at 125, and candidates will have three hours to complete the exam. Also, each candidate must correctly answer 70 percent of the questions to receive a passing grade. 2. Statutory Basis PCX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(1) 9 in particular, in that it is designed to enforce compliance by OTP Holders and OTP Firms and persons associated with the rules of the Exchange. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f( 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is 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 Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b--(f)(1) thereunder, 11 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of PCX. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 11 17 U.S.C. 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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, as amended, 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-PCX-2005-51 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-PCX-2005-51. 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 at the principal office of PCX. 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 the File Number SR-PCX-2005-51 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2832 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51731; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-02] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto Relating to Volume Weighted Average Price Crosses May 24, 2005. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 , and Rule 19b-4 2 thereunder, notice is hereby given that on January 25, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. On May 4, 2005, the Phlx submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, 3 and on May 18, 2005, the Phlx submitted Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 4 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 Phlx
(1)eliminated the concept of linking a VWAP cross to a “primary market” and instead proposed to link a VWAP cross to correspond to any single market, and
(2)requested relief from the provisions of SEC Rule 11Ac1-1 under the Act (the “Quote Rule”) with respect to VWAP crosses. 4 In Amendment No. 2, the Phlx
(1)eliminated the proposed rule text addressing the treatment of VWAP crosses in the case of trading halts,
(2)corrected a citing reference to Phlx auction market rules, and
(3)clarified the description of the “b” modifier. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Phlx proposes to amend Phlx Rule 126, “Crossing” Orders, by adding new subsection
(i)dealing with volume weighted average price (“VWAP”) crosses. The text of amended Phlx Rule 126 is set forth below. New language is *italicized.* Rule 126. “Crossing” Orders When a member has an order to buy and an order to sell the same security, he must offer such security at a price which is higher than his bid by the minimum variation permitted in such security before making a transaction with himself. Supplementary Material (a)-(h) No Change. *(i) This section applies to the execution of certain transactions hereinafter referred to as VWAP crosses which are customer-to-customer crosses that are equal to any single market or consolidated market volume weighted average prices either for the entire trading day from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., or for any portion of the trading day. VWAP crosses are not subject to the Exchange's auction market rules and thus, may not be broken-up upon entry to the Exchange. VWAP crosses must be identified as VWAP on each order ticket, entered by symbol and price, identified as ‘agency’ and, when applicable, identified as “short exempt”. The basis upon which the VWAP is to be calculated (including the time of day in which the trades to be included in the VWAP formula must occur, and whether such trades are limited to those occurring on a particular market or include all trades on the consolidated market) must be documented upon receipt of the order. VWAP crosses may be executed only during the Exchange's Post Primary Session and reported with the identifier “b”, to the nearest decimal eligible for reporting by the Exchange.* 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 Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, as amended, 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 Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange represents that the purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit certain customer-to-customer 5 crosses to be executed at a VWAP 6 during the Exchange's Post Primary Session. 7 The new crossing transactions would be permitted to be executed at prices which are equal to any single market or consolidated market volume weighted average prices calculated for the entire trading day from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., or for any portion of the trading day, as may be agreed to by the two parties to the trade. These trades would therefore not be subject to Exchange Rules 118, 119, and 120, 8 which collectively establish auction market rules of priority, parity and precedence of orders on the equity floor. 5 Pursuant to Phlx Rule 126(d) a “customer” order would include any order which a broker represents in an agency capacity, including any order of a market maker or other broker-dealer not affiliated with the broker, and it would not include any order of a broker-dealer affiliated with the executing broker, or any associated person of such broker-dealer. 6 The Commission has observed that the VWAP for a security is generally determined by:
(1)Calculating raw values for regular session trades reported by the Consolidated Tape during the regular trading day by multiplying each such price by the total number of shares traded at that price;
(2)compiling an aggregate sum by adding each calculated raw value from step one above; and
(3)dividing the aggregate sum by the total number of reported shares for that day in the security. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48709 (Oct. 28, 2003), 68 FR 62972, 62982 at n. 88 (Nov. 6, 2003) (the Regulation SHO Proposing Release). Pursuant to the Exchange's proposed rule change, however, members would be able to elect to calculate a VWAP using only a single market's prices rather than all trades reported by the Consolidated Tape, and could elect to base that calculation on trades reported during a particular time slice during the day rather than including all trades reported during the regular trading day. Members would be required to document the particular trades they have agreed to be used in the calculation. 7 According to Phlx Rule 101, the Post Primary Session (“PPS”) operates from 4 to 4:15 p.m. 8 *See* Amendment No. 2, *supra* note 4 (deleting a reference to Phlx Rule 123). For example, assume that a floor broker receives in the morning an order to sell 10,000 XYZ at the VWAP calculated based upon transactions reported in the consolidated market between noon and 2 p.m. later that day. The floor broker would immediately complete an order ticket with the details of the proposed trade, including the time the order was placed and an identification of the transaction as a “VWAP” trade. The floor broker would also prepare a document memorializing the basis upon which the VWAP is to be calculated ( *i.e.* , the VWAP of transactions reported in the consolidated market between noon and 2:00). Thereafter, the floor broker would perhaps contact other institutional clients and inform them of an indication of interest to sell XYZ security during the Post Primary Session at the specified VWAP. Once the floor broker located a buyer for the transaction, he would generate an order ticket for the buyer by entering the time the order was placed and identifying the trade as a “VWAP” trade to be executed at the stipulated VWAP. During the Post Primary Session, the two orders would be crossed and the trade would be executed at the stipulated VWAP and reported to clearing and the tape at that price. Pursuant to the proposed rule change, the trade would be reported to the tape with the identifier “b” to the nearest decimal eligible for reporting by the Exchange. The “b” would distinguish VWAP trades from other transactions that may possibly be reported after the close. 9 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 41210 (Mar. 24, 1999), 64 FR 15857 (Apr. 1, 1999) (approving Phlx's pilot program for the Volume Weighted Average Price Trading System and stating that trades thereunder will be reported to the Consolidated Tape System with the sale condition “B” to indicate volume weighted average pricing); and 41606 (July 8, 1999), 64 FR 38226 (July 15, 1999) (stating that rules governing reporting of transactions in Nasdaq securities contain a provision whereby a firm may aggregate transactions at the same price that would be impractical to report individually, provided that no individual order of 10,000 shares or more may be aggregated, and that these reports have a “.B” modifier appended by the reporting firm and are disseminated to the Nasdaq tape and vendors). In the past, the Exchange reported trades in the Volume Weighted Average Price Trading System to the Consolidated Tape System with the sale condition “B” to indicate volume weighted average pricing (the “B” distinguished VWAP trades from other transactions that may have possibly been reported after the close such as after-hours, crossing session, or late sales transactions). The Exchange no longer uses the Volume Weighted Average Price Trading System, so there is no chance that VWAP Crosses identified with a “b” sale condition will be confused with Volume Weighted Average Price Trading System trades. *See* Amendment No. 2, *supra* note 4. Under Commission Rule 10a-1 under the Act, 10 absent an exemption, a short sale of a security registered on a national securities exchange and reported in the consolidated reporting system may not be effected at a price either
(1)below the last reported price of a transaction reported in such system (“minus tick”) or
(2)at the last reported price if such price is lower than the previously reported different price (“zero minus tick”). This is known as the “tick test.” Because VWAP crosses are executed at a price that is based on the VWAP of trades during a particular time of day and executed in the Post Primary Session, it is possible that some VWAP crosses may not comply with the tick test because the VWAP cross price of a security may represent a minus tick or zero-minus tick with respect to the last sale reported by the Consolidated Tape. Thus, the Exchange intends also to apply to the Commission for exemptive relief from the tick test provisions of SEC Rule 10a-1 for crosses with a short sale component executed pursuant to new Phlx Rule 126(i). 11 The Exchange is also requesting relief from the provisions of Commission Rule 11Ac1-1 under the Act 12 (the “Quote Rule”) with respect to VWAP crosses. 10 17 CFR 240.10a-1. 11 *See* Draft letter from Carla Behnfeldt, Director, Legal Department New Product Development Group, Phlx, to Larry E. Bergmann, Senior Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated February 3, 2005. 12 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-1. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 14 in particular, in that it affords market participants a new means of executing transactions at a VWAP, thereby enhancing investors' choices. 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 will impose any inappropriate burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received by the Exchange. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: A. By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended; or B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change, as amended, should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, 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-Phlx-2005-02 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-Phlx-2005-02. 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, as amended, 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 office of the Phlx. 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-Phlx-2005-02 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-2843 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance; Oakland County International Airport; Pontiac, MI AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land. SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)is considering a proposal to change a portion of the airport from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to authorize the sale of the airport property. The proposal consists of 14 parcels of land totaling approximately 3.981 acres. Current use and present condition is vacant grassland. The land is zoned residential. The land was acquired under FAA Project Nos. 3-26-0079-0694, C-26-0079-0795, B-26-0079-1397, 3-26-SBGP-1098, and 3-26-SBGP-1799, and 3-26-SBGP-1999. There are no impacts to the airport by allowing the airport to dispose of the property. This land is to be sold for proposed use to accommodate the relocation of Williams Lake Road, which will provide a fully compliant runway safety area for Runway 9R. Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the disposal of the subject airport property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA. The disposition of proceeds from the disposal of the airport property will be in accordance FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the *Federal Register* on February 16, 1999. In accordance with section 47107(h) of title 49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the *Federal Register* 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose. DATES: Comments must be receive on or before July 5, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lawrence C. King, Project Manager, Federal Aviation Administration, Great Lakes Region, Detroit Airports District Office, DET ADO 607, 11677 South Wayne Road, Romulus, Michigan 48174. Telephone Number
(734)229-2933/FAX Number
(734)229-2950. Documents reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at this same location or at Oakland County International Airport, Pontiac, Michigan. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following is a legal description of the property located in Pontiac, Oakland County, Michigan, and described as follows: Parcel 130 (Lot 7 (Partial)) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 7 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N 87°34′40″ W 41.66 feet from the Northeast corner of said Lot 7; thence along a curve to the right 51.76 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 03°41′02″, and a chord bearing S 37°38′04″ W 51.75 feet; thence N 02°42′58″ W 42.45 feet; thence S 87°34′40″ E 33.64 feet to the Point Of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 725 square feet, or 0.02 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 131 (Lot 10) A Right of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 10 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Watership Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 87°34′40″ E 69.92 feet along the North line of said lot; thence continuing S 87°34′40″ E 5.38 feet along said lot line to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S 02°42′42″ E 178.41 feet along the East line of said lot to the Southeast corner of said lot; thence S 87°17′20″ W 75.00 feet along the South lien of said lot and the North right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide) to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N 02°42′49″ W 123.62 feet along the West line of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 88.98 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°47′00″, and a chord bearing N 48°50′48″ E 88.91 feet of the North line of said lot and the point of Beginning. Said acquisition containing 11,401 square feet, or 0.26 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of Lot 10 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 18, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S 87°34′40″ E 69.92 feet along the North line of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 88.98 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°47′00″, and a chord bearing S 48°50′48″ W 88.91 feet to the West lien of said lot; thence N 02°42′49″ W 61.53 feet to the Northwest corner of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 2,232 square feet, or 0.05 of an acre, more or less. Parce 132 (Lot 11) A Right of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 11 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 02°42′49″ E 61.53 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S 02°42′49″ E 123.62 feet along said lot line of the Southeast corner of said lot and the North right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence S 87°17′20″ W 75.00 feet along the South line of said lot and said right of way line to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N 02°42′47″ W 165.98 feet along the West line of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 80.40 feet, said curve having a radius of 180.00 feet, a central angle of 25°35′28″, and a chord bearing S 61°41′47″ E 79.73 feet; thence S 86°40′54″ E 7.03 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition containing 10,978 square feet, or 0.25 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of Lot 11 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E. Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plant No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S 02°42′49″ E 61.53 feet along the East line of said lot; thence N 86°40′54″ W 7.03 feet; thence along a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 180.00 feet, a central angle of N 61°14′47″ 79.73 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N 02°42′47″ W 25.92 feet along lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S 87°34′40″ E 75.30 feet to the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 3,161 square feet, or 0.07 of an acre, more or less. Part 133 (Lot 12) A Right of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 12 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 02°42′47″ E 25.91 feet along the east line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S 02°47′47″ E 65.27 feet along said lot line; thence along a curve to the left 64.58 feet, said having a radius of 120.00 feet, a central angel of 30°49′59″, and a chord bearing N 79°25′57″ W 63.80 feet; thence S 85°09′00″ W 12.91 feet to the West lien of said lot; thence N 02°42′44″ W 60.04 feet along said West lot line; thence N 85°09′00″ E 10.67 feet; thence along a curve to the right 76.10 feet, said curve having a radius of 180.00 feet, a central angle 24°13′19″, and a chord bearing S 85°54′29″ E 75.53 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also Beginning at a point distant S 02°42′47″ E 112,86 feet long the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S 02°42′47″ E 79.03 feet along said lot line to the Southeast corner of said lot and the North right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence S 87°17′20″ W 75.0 feet along said South lot line and said right of way line to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N 02°42′44″ W 46.67 feet long the West line of said lot; thence along a curve of the left 81.73 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°08′58″, and a chord bearing N 63°57′03″ E 81.68 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 9,241 square feet, or 0.21 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of Lot 12 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°42′47″ E 25.91 feet along the East line of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 76.10 feet, said curve having a radius of 180.00 feet, a central angle of 24°13′19″, and a chord bearing N85°54′29″ W 75.53 feet; thence S85°09′00″ W 10.67 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′44″ W 23.70 feet along said lot line; thence S87°34′40″ E 75.30 feet to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S87°34′40″ E 75.30 feet to the Northeast corner of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also Beginning at a point S02°42′47″ E 91.18 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′47″ E 21.68 feet long said lot line; thence along a curve to the left 81.73 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°08′58″ and a chord bearing S63°57′03″ W 81.68 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′44″ W 68.21 feet along said lot line; thence N85°09′00″ E 12.91 feet; thence long a curve to the right 64.58 feet, said curve having a radius of 120.00 feet, a central angle of 30°49′59″, and a chord bearing S79°25′57″ E 63.80 feet to the East line of said lot and Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 5,403 square feet, or 0.12 of an acre more or less. Parcel 134 (Lot 13) A Right of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 13 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S02°42′44″ E 23.70 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′44″ E 60.04 feet along the East line of said lot; thence S85°09′00″ W 75.05 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′42″ W 60.04 feet along said lot line; thence N85°09′00″ E 75.05 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning; also Beginning at a point distant S02°42′44″ E 151.95 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′44″ E 46.67 feet along the East line of said lot the Southeast corner of said lot and the North right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence S87°17′20″ W 75.00 feet along the South line of said lot and said right of way line to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N02°42′42″ E 18.63 feet along West line of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 65.45 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 04°39′30″, and a chord bearing N66°28′41″ E 65.43 feet; thence along a curve to the left 14.65 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 01°16′53″, and a chord bearing N68°09′59″ E 14.65 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 6,995 square feet, or 0.16 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of Lot 13 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°42′44″ E 23.70 feet along East line of said lot; thence S85°09′00″ W 75.05 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′42″ W 33.24 feet along said lot line the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S87°34′40″ E 75.30 feet to the Northeast corner of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also Beginning at a point distant S02°42′44″ E 83.74 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′44″ E 68.21 feet along said lot line; thence along a curve to the right 14.65 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 01°16′53″, and a chord bearing S68D09′59″ W 14.65 feet; thence along a curve to the left 65.45 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 04°39′30″, and a chord bearing S66°28′41″ W 65.43 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′42″ W 93.45 feet; thence N85°09′00″ 75.05 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 8,155 square feet, or 0.19 an acre, more or less. Parcel 135 (Lot 14) A Right of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 14 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S02°42′42″ E 33.24 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeeast corner of said Lot; thence continuing S02°42′42″ E 60.04 feet along said lot line; thence S85°09′00″ W 75.05 feet to the West line of said lot, thence S02°42′40″ W 60.04 feet along said lot line; thence N85°09′00″ E 75.05 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also beginning at a point S02°42′42″ E 186.73 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′42″ E 18.63 feet along said lot line to the Southeast corner of said lot and the North right of way of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence S87°17′20″ W 40.46 feet along said South line and said right of way; thence along a curve to the right 44.55 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 03°10′14″, and a chord bearing N62°33′49″ E 44.54 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 4,889 square feet, or 0.11 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of lot 14 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°42′42″ E 33.24 feet along east line of said lot; thence S85°09′00″ W 75.05 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N02°42′40″ W 42.78 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S87°34′40″ E 75.30 fet along North line of said lot to the Northeast corner of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Also beginning at a point distant S02°42′42″ E 186.73 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 44.56 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 13°10′14″, and a chord bearing S62°33′49″ W 44.54 feet to the South line of said lot and the North right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence S87°17′20″ W 34.54 feet along said lot line and said right of way line to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N02°42′40″ W 109.38 feet along the West line of said lot; thence N85°09′00″ E 75.05 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 10,766 square feet, or 0.25 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 136 (Lot 15—West) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of the West 1/2 Lot 15 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 136” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 0°45′00″ E 60.55 feet along the West line of said lot and subdivision line from the Northwest corner of said lot and subdivision corner; thence N 85°09′00″ E 68.86 feet to the East property line; thence S O3°45′14″ E 60.01 feet along said property line; thence S 85°09′00″ W 67.82 feet to the West line of said lot and subdivision line; thence N 04°45′00″ W 60.00 feet along said line to the Point Of Beginning; Also Beginning at a point distant S 04°45′00″ E feet along the West line of said lot and N 87°17′20″ E 62.68 feet along the South line of said lot from the Northwest corner of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 2.74 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 00°11′42″, and a chord bearing N 52°39′32″ E 2.74 feet to the east property line; thence S 03°45′14″ E 1.56 feet along said property line to the Southeast corner of said property; thence S 87°17′20″ W 2.28 feet along the South line of said lot to the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 4,110 square feet, or 0.09 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of the West 1/2 Lot 15 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said lot and subdivision; thence S 87°34′40″ E 70.31 feet along said lot line to the Northeast corner of said property; thence S 03°45′14″ E 51.66 feet along the East property line; thence S 85°09′00″ W 68.86 feet to the West lot line; thence N 04°45′00″ W 60.55 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also Beginning at a point distant S 04°45′00″ E 120.55 feet along the West lot line from the Northwest corner of said lot; thence N 85°09′00″ E 67.82 feet to the East property line; thence S 03°45′14″ E 165.21 feet along said property line; thence along a curve to the left 2.74 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 00°11′42″, and a chord bearing S 52°39′32″ W 2.74 feet to the South lien of said lot; thence S 87°17′20″ W 62.68 feet along said lot line to the Southwest corner of said lot thence N 04°45′00″ W 164.31 feet along the West line of said lot to the Point Of Beginning. Said permit contains 14,868 square feet, or 0.34 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 223 (Lot 15—East) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of the East 1/2 Lot 15 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S02°42′40″ E 42.78 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said Lot; thence continuing S02°42′40″ E 60.04 feet along said lot line; thence S85°09′00″ W 68.04 feet to the West property line; thence N03°45′14″ W 60.01 feet along the West property line; thence N85°09′00″ E 69.14 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning; Also beginning at a point distant S02°42′40″ E 230.23 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′40″ E 41.87 feet along said lot line to the Southeast corner of said lot; thence S87°17′20″ W 64.96 feet along the South line of said lot to the Southwest corner of said property; thence N03°45′14″ W 1.56 feet along West property line; thence along a curve to the right 76.51 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 05°26′44″, and a chord bearing N55°28′44″ E 76.48 feet to the East line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 5,573 square feet, or 0.13 of an acre, more or less. A Grading Permit being a part of the East 1/2 Lot 15 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°42′40″ E 42.78 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S85°09′00″ W 69.14 feet to the West property line; thence N03°45′14″ W 51.66 feet along said property line; thence S87°34′40″ E 75.31 feet along the North line of said lot to the Northeast corner of said lot; Also Beginning at a point distant S02°42′40″ E 102.82 feet along the East line of said lot from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence continuing S02°42′40″ E 127.41 feet along said lot line; thence along a curve to the left 76.51 feet , said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle 05°26′44″, and a chord bearing S55°28′44″ W 76.48 feet to the West line of said property; thence N03°45′14″ W 165.21 feet along said property line; thence N85°09′00″ E 68.04 feet to the east line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 12,967 square feet, or 0.30 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 224 (Lot 8—Partial) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 8 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N 02°42′55″ W 49.83 feet along the West line of and the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N 02°42′55″ W 121.84 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S87°34″E 75.30 feet along the North line of said lot to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°42′58″E 42.45 feet along the East line of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 104.49, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 07°26′14″ and a chord bearing S43°11′41″W 104.42 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point Of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 6,279 square feet, or 0.14 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 225 (Lot 9—Partial) A Right Of Acquisition being a part of Lot 9 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 87°17′20″ W 65.04 feet along the Northerly right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence continuing S 87°17′20″ W 9.96 feet along said right of way line to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence N 02°42′52″ W 178.41 feet along the West line of said lot to the Northwest corner of said lot; thence S 87°34′40″ E 75.30 feet to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S 02°42′55″ E 121.84 feet; thence along a curve to the right 81.98 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 05°50′05″, and a chord bearing S 49°50′50″ W 81.94 to the North right of way line of said Tull Court and the point Of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 11,564 square feet, or 0.27 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 230 (Lot 20—Partial) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 20 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant S 87°17′20″ W 58.50 feet along the north line of said lot and the South right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide) from the Northeast corner of said lot; thence along a curve to the right 18.28 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 01°18′04″, and a chord bearing S 61°52′07″ W 18.28 feet to the West line of said lot; thence N 02°40′57″ W 7.84 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot; thence N 87°17′20″ E 16.50 feet along the North line of said lot and said right of way line of Tull Court to the Point Of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 65 square feet, or 0.001 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 231 (Lot 19—Partial) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 19 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N 02°41′00″ W 266.17 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N 02°41′00″ W 37.99 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot and the South right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence N 87°17′20″ E 75.00 feet along the North line of said lot and said right of way line to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S 02°40′57″ E 7.84 feet along the East line of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 80.87 feet, said curve having a radius of 805.00 feet, a central angle of 05°45′22″, and a chord bearing S 65°23′50″ W 80.84 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 1,773 square feet, or 0.04 of an acre, more or less. A Drainage Easement being a part of Lot 19 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N 02°41′00″ W 70.19 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N 02°41′00″ W 50.14 feet along said lot line; thence N 83°05′15″ E 75.20 feet to the East line of said lot; thence S 02°40′57″ W 50.14 feet along said lot line; thence S 83°05′15″ W 75.20 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point of Beginning. Said permit contains 3,760 square feet, or 0.09 of an acre, more or less. Parcel 232 (Lot 18—Partial) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N02°41′03″ W 242.27 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N02°41′03″ W 67.40 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot and the South right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence N87°17′20″ E 75.00 feet along the North line of said lot and said right of way line to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°41′00″ E 37.99 feet along the East line of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 73.15 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 06°23′55″, and a chord bearing S65°36′28″ W 73.11 feet to the West line of said lot and the point of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 3,888 square feet, or 0.09 of an acre, more or less. A Drainage Easement being a part of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N02°41′03″ W 50.14 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N02°41′03″ W 192.13 feet along said lot time; thence along a curve to the right 73.15 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 06°23′55″, and a chord bearing N65°36′28″ E 73.11 feet to the East line of said lot; thence S02°41′00″ E 145.84 feet along said lot line; thence S83°05′15″ W 75.20 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point Of Beginning. Said permit contains 15,370 square feet, or 0.35 of an acre, more of less. Parcel 233 (Lot 17—Partial) A Right Of Way Acquisition being a part of Lot 17 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, and a replat of Lot 18 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 36” of part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford Township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N02°41′06″ W 206.84 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N0°41′06″ W 108.34 feet along said lot line to the Northwest corner of said lot and the South right of way line of Tull Court (60 feet wide); thence N87°17′20″ E 75.00 feet along the North line of said lot and said right of way line to the Northeast corner of said lot; thence S02°41′03″ E 67.40 feet along the East line of said lot; thence along a curve to the left 85.52 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°28′51″, and a chord bearing S58°40′04″ W 85.46 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point Of Beginning. Said acquisition contains 6,511 square feet, or 0.15 of an acre, more or less. A Drainage Easement being a part of Lot 17 of “Supervisor's Plat No. 59” being a part of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18, T3N, R9E, Waterford township, Oakland County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 72 of Plats, Page 10, Oakland County Records, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant N O2°241′06″ W 50.14 feet along the West line of said lot from the Southwest corner of said lot; thence continuing N O2°241′06″ 156.70 feet along said lot line; thence along a curve to the right 85.52 feet, said curve having a radius of 655.00 feet, a central angle of 07°28′51″, and a chord bearing N 58°40′04″ E 85.46 feet to the East line of said lot; thence S 02°41′03″ E 192.13 feet along said lot line; thence S 83°05′15″ W 75.20 feet to the West line of said lot and the Point Of Beginning. Said permit contains 13,160 square feet, or 0.30 of an acre, more or less. Total acres to be released are 3.981, more or less. Dated: Issued in Romulus, Michigan, on May 17, 2005. Irene R. Porter, Manager, Detroit Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region. [FR Doc. 05-11116 Filed 6-2-05; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 7
Traces to 7 documents
U.S. Code
- Registration, responsibilities, and oversight of self-regulatory organizations§ 78s
- Definitions and application§ 78c
- Registered securities associations§ 78o–3
- Common provisions applicable to registered entities§ 7a–2
- National securities exchanges§ 78f
- Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings§ 552
5 references not yet in our index
- 17 CFR 240.19
- 15 USC 78(b)(1)
- 17 USC 240
- 17 CFR 240.10
- 17 CFR 240.11
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Cite15 USC 78(b)(1)
Cite17 USC 240
Cite17 CFR 240.10
Cite17 CFR 240.11
Cites 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources