Notices. Notice

14,542 words·~66 min read·/register/2005/06/24/05-12572·

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. 34-51873; File No. SR-Amex-2005-033] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend Rule 918—ANTE(a)(4) Regarding Closing Rotations June 17, 2005. On March 17, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 to amend Amex Rule 918—ANTE(a)(4) to eliminate the requirement that a closing rotation be held in every option series at the end of every trading day.

The Amex submitted an amendment to the proposal on April 14, 2005. 3 The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on May 13, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Form 19b-4 dated April 14, 2005 (Amendment No. 1), replacing the original filing in its entirety. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51671 (May 9, 2005), 70 FR 25629. After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposal, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 5 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to and facilitating transactions in securities, 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. 5 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

Specifically, the Commission believes that the proposal to eliminate the requirement that a closing rotation be held in every option series at the end of every trading day is reasonable given the Exchange's representations that use of the ANTE System during the last eleven months has shown closing rotation to be unnecessary when no market-on-close or limit-on-close orders have been submitted. Accordingly, the Commission believes it is appropriate for the Exchange to revise Amex Rule 918—ANTE(a)(4) to provide that closing rotations shall only occur in those options series in which market-on-close and limit-on-close orders have been submitted. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 7 that the proposed rule change, as amended, (SR-Amex-2005-033) be, and it hereby is, approved. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3276 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51868; File No. SR-Amex—2005-044] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Dissemination of the Underlying Index Value for Portfolio Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares June 17, 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 American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” 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 Amex. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

In addition, the Commission is granting accelerated approval of the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Amex proposes to amend the listing standards for Portfolio Depositary Receipts (“PDRs”) and Index Fund Shares (“IFSs”) 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 IFS trades on the Exchange.

The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at the Amex's principal office, 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 had received on the proposed rule change.

The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The Amex 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 Amex Rule 1000, Commentary .02 and Amex Rule 1000A, Commentary .03 provide listing standards for PDRs and IFSs, respectively, to permit listing and trading of these securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act. 3 Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative securities product by a self-regulatory organization shall not be deemed a proposed rule change, pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 19b-4, if the Commission has approved, pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act, the self-regulatory organization's trading rules, procedures and listing standards for the product class that would include the new derivative securities product and the self regulatory organization has a surveillance program for the product class. 4 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (December 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22,1998).

The Amex rules for PDRs and IFSs currently provide that the current index value for the index underlying a series of PDRs (in the case of Amex Rule 1000) and IFSs (in the case of Amex Rule 1000A) will be disseminated every 15 seconds over the consolidated tape. The Amex believes that, rather than identifying specifically in their rules the index dissemination service (that is, the consolidated tape), it is preferable to reflect in the rules a requirement for wide dissemination of the underlying index values.

This proposed rule change would make clear that the value of the underlying index must be widely disseminated by a reputable index dissemination service, such as the Consolidated Tape Association, Reuters or Bloomberg. The Amex believes that the specific identity of the index dissemination service is not necessary, and the purpose of the rule would be achieved, as long as the service used for dissemination is reputable, accepted in the investment community, and effects appropriately wide dissemination of the particular index.

The Exchange therefore proposes to change the listing standards for PDRs and IFSs to provide that the 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 when the PDR or IFS trades on the Exchange. As currently is the case, if the official index does not change during some or all of the period when trading is occurring (as is typically the case with pre-market-open and after-hours trading, and also with foreign indexes because of time zone differences or holidays in the countries where such indexes' components trade), then the last official calculated index value must remain available throughout the Amex trading hours. 2.

Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6(b) of the Act, 5 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 particular, in that it is designed 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 Amex believes that clarifying the rules helps all market participants. 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 The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 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-Amex-2005-044 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-044.

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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549.

Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Amex. 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-Amex-2005-044 and should be submitted on or before July 15, 2005. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change 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 exchange. 7 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 8 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 believes that the proposed index dissemination requirement, which is similar to the index dissemination requirement used in the listing standards for narrow-based index options, 9 will help to ensure the transparency of current index values for indexes underlying PDRs and IFSs. 7 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 9 *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). The Amex has requested that the Commission find good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** .

The Commission notes that it has recently approved a similar proposal regarding the dissemination of the underlying index value for PDRs and IFSs traded on Nasdaq. 10 The Commission believes that granting accelerated approval of the proposal will allow the Amex to immediately implement these similar listing standards already in place on Nasdaq. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 11 for approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51748 (May 26, 2005) (order approving File No.

SR-NASD-2005-024 relating to dissemination of the underlying index value for PDRs and IFSs trading on Nasdaq). 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 12 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2005-044) be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc.

E5-3278 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51879; File No. SR-BSE-2004-58] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, and Amendments No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Thereto, Relating to the Composition of the Board of Directors and Executive Committee of Boston Options Exchange Regulation LLC June 20, 2005. I. Introduction On December 9, 2004, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.

(“BSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend certain sections of the By-laws of Boston Options Exchange Regulation LLC (“BOXR”) relating to BSE Governor representation on BOXR's Board of Directors (“BOXR Board”) and Executive Committee. BOXR is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Exchange and the Exchange has delegated certain functions to BOXR so that BOXR is responsible for the regulatory oversight of the Boston Options Exchange, a facility of the BSE. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

On December 13, 2004, the BSE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 On December 16, 2004, the BSE filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 4 On March 8, 2005, the BSE filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change. 5 On March 10, 2005, the BSE filed Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change. 6 The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on March 24, 2005. 7 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised the proposed rule text.

Amendment No. 1 replaced the BSE's original filing in its entirety. 4 In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange withdrew its request that the proposed rule change become immediately effective and requested that the proposed rule change become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 5 In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange revised the purpose section and rule text of the proposed rule change. Amendment No. 3 replaced Amendment No. 1, as amended by Amendment No. 2, in its entirety. 6 In Amendment No. 4, the Exchange amended its filing to reflect that Amendment No. 3 was incorrectly filed pursuant to Rule 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and should have been filed pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51388 (March 17, 2005), 70 FR 15135.

II. Description of the Proposal The Exchange proposed the following amendments to BOXR's By-laws:

(1)Replace the requirement in Section 4 that the BSE Chairman be a member of the BOXR Board with the requirement that at least one Governor of the BSE Board of Governors must be a member of the BOXR Board;

(2)replace the requirement in Section 14 that the BSE Chairman must be a member of BOXR's Executive Committee with the requirement that at least one Governor of the BSE Board of Governors, who shall also be a member of the BOXR Board, must be a member of BOXR's Executive Committee; and

(3)eliminate language in both Sections 3 and 4 that provides that the BSE Chairman shall not be considered a member of the BOXR Board for “qualification purposes.” Section 4 of BOXR's By-laws provides that at least 50% of the Directors on the BOXR Board must be Public Directors 8 and at least 20% of the Directors on the BOXR Board must be representatives of BOX Options Participants. 9 However, currently, the BSE Chairman is not considered to be a Public Director, BOX Options Participant Director or Industry Director 10 and is not taken into account when determining whether the composition of the BOXR Board complies with the composition requirements of Section 4, although the BSE Chairman is a voting member of the BOXR Board. The proposed rule change, however, would require BOXR to consider the BSE Governor representative on the BOXR Board for the purpose of determining compliance with the composition requirements of Section 4, whether the BSE Governor representative is the BSE's Chairman or another member of the BSE Board of Governors. 8 *See* Definitions, Paragraph

(p)of the BOXR By-laws. 9 *See* Definitions, Paragraph

(o)of the BOXR By-laws. 10 *See* Article II, Section 1 of the BSE Constitution. III. Discussion and Commission Findings 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 11 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 12 and the rules and regulations thereunder. The Commission finds specifically that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act, 13 in that the proposal is designed so that the Exchange is organized and has the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Act; Section 6(b)(3) of the Act, 14 in that the proposal is designed so the rules of the Exchange assure a fair representation of its members in the selection of its directors and the administration of its affairs; and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 15 in that the proposal is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and to protect investors and the public interest. 11 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission notes that the proposal is designed to provide the Exchange with greater flexibility with respect to the appointment of a BSE Governor to serve on the BOXR Board and Executive Committee. The Exchange's Constitution permits, but does not mandate, that the Exchange's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) positions be separated. If the positions are in fact held by two individuals, then the Exchange's Chairman would be responsible for the regulatory functions of the Exchange and it would be consistent with BOXR's regulatory mandate to have the BSE Chairman be a member of the BOXR Board and Executive Committee. However, in the event that the positions are held by a single individual, then the Exchange's Board would be able to appoint a BSE Governor other than the BSE Chairman to the BOXR Board. The Commission considers it appropriate for the Exchange to have a BSE Governor other than the Exchange's Chairman be appointed to the BOXR Board and Executive Committee, particularly in light of the Exchange's goal to maintain an adequate separation between its business and regulatory functions. In addition, the proposal would allow the BSE Governor that serves on the BOXR Board to be considered for the purpose of determining the qualification percentages of the BOXR Board. The Commission notes that this provision would not alter the current requirement of the BOXR By-laws that at least 20% of the BOXR Directors (but no fewer than two Directors) be officers or directors of a firm approved as a BOX Option Participant. Therefore, in the Commission's view, the proposal is consistent with the Act's requirement that the Exchange assure the fair representation of members in the selection of its directors and administration of its affairs. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 16 that the proposed rule change (SR-BSE-2004-58), as amended, be, and hereby is, approved. 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 17 17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3274 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51881; File No. SR-BSE-2005-15] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Listing Fees June 20, 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 31, 2005, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (“BSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its Listing Fees schedule by increasing its listing fees. The text of the proposed rule change appears below. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. LISTING FEE SCHEDULE Stocks Listing Application Fee: [$250.00] *$500* per original listing application. Fee is non-refundable, but will be applied toward the [$7,500.00] *$10,000* original listing application fee upon acceptance for listing. Original Listing Fee: [$7,500 each] *$10,000* for *one* security applied for in the original listing application on the date of filing *and $15,000 for two or more securities applied for in the original listing application on the date of filing* . Annual Listing Maintenance Fee: [$1,000] *$1,500* for the first and $750 for each subsequent issue, payable on the anniversary date of listing. Listing Fees for Additional Shares: In the event that a listed corporation applies for listing of additional shares subsequent to the original listing, a fee will be charged on the basis of [ 1/2 ] *1* cent for each additional share applied for, not to exceed [$5,000] *$7,500* (i.e., if the additional amount applied for exceeds [1,000,000] *750,000* shares the fee is [$5,000] *$7,500* regardless of the amount). The minimum fee for each such applicant is [$250] *$500* . The original listing fee schedule also shall be applied, but not limited, to the following circumstances where a listed company: • Authorizes a change of a listed security where, in the opinion of the exchange, a new security is created or such change alters any of the listed security's rights, preferences or privileges; • Merges or consolidates with another listed company which results in the creation of a new company or into an unlisted company which becomes listed; or • Creates a holding company or a new company is created by operation of law or through an offer to exchange shares. In the event that a listed corporation reduces its outstanding stock through an exchange of shares whereby the shares listed on the Exchange are exchangeable for a lesser amount, the fee for the listing of the number of shares of new stock issuable in exchange for shares previously listed will be charged on the basis of [ 1/2 ] *1* cent for each new share. The maximum fee on each such application is [$5,000] *$7,500* ; the minimum fee is [$250] *$500* . Supplemental Applications: Should a listed corporation change its name or the par value of its listed shares without any increase or decrease in outstanding stock, the fee for such application will be the minimum of [$250] *$500* . Bonds Original Listing Fee: $7,500 for each class of indenture applied for in the original listing application on the date of filing. For additional listing under the same indenture, the fee is $50 per one million dollars face value in a maximum fee of $2,500 and a minimum fee of [$250] *$500* . 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 parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The BSE proposes to amend its Listing Fee schedule by increasing its listing fees. The purpose of this change is to better reflect the Exchange's costs and the value of the services that the Exchange provides. 3 3 The Commission notes that the Exchange has not raised its listing fees since 1991. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29276 (June 5, 1991), 56 FR 27060 (June 12, 1991). 2. Statutory Basis The BSE believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 4 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 5 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The BSE 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 No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. 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 will:

(A)By order approve such proposed rule change; or

(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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 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-BSE-2005-15 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2005-15. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the BSE. 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-BSE-2005-15 and should be submitted on or before July 15, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 6 6 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3294 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51880; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-38] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Sales Value Fee June 20, 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 13, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE. The Exchange filed a proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Rule 2 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act, 3 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to amend its Fees Schedule and rules and issue a Regulatory Circular relating to its “Sales Value Fee.” The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is italicized; proposed deletions are in brackets. Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.—Fees Schedule [May 2] *May 13,* 2005 1.-4. Unchanged. Notes: (1)-(15) Unchanged. 5. ETFs, STRUCTURED PRODUCTS, RIGHTS, WARRANTS (per round lot):

(A)TRANSACTION FEES: MAXIMUM FEE: Customer $.00 N/A Member Firm Proprietary .10 $100 per side Market Maker .05 $100 per side

(B)LISTING FEES: Initial Fee (minimum) $10,000 Annual Fee 2,500—10,000

(C)SEC VALUE FEE: $0.00252 for every $100 of value sold (seller only)] *6. SALES VALUE FEE:* *The Sales Value Fee (“Fee”) is assessed by CBOE to each member for sales of securities on CBOE with respect to which CBOE is obligated to pay a fee to the SEC under Section 31 of the Exchange Act. To the extent there may be any excess monies collected under this Section 6, the Exchange may retain those monies to help fund its general operating expenses. The sales transactions to which the Fee applies are sales of options (other than options on a security index), sales of non-option securities, and sales of securities resulting from the exercise of physical-delivery options traded on CBOE. The Fee is collected indirectly from members through their clearing firms by OCC on behalf of CBOE with respect to options sales and options exercises. CBOE collects the Fee indirectly from members through their clearing firms with respect to non-option sales. Consistent with CBOE Rule 3.23, the Fee is collected by billing the member's designated clearing firm for the amount owed by the member to the Exchange. The amount of the Fee is calculated as described below.* Calculation of Fee for Options Sales and Options Exercises: The Sales Value Fee is equal to

(i)the Section 31 fee rate multiplied by

(ii)the member's aggregate dollar amount of covered sales resulting from options transactions occurring on the Exchange during any computational period. *Calculation of Fee for Non-Options Sales: The Sales Value Fee is calculated using the same formula as the formula above for options transactions, except as applied only to the member's covered sales other than those resulting from options transactions.* 6.-9. Renumbered 7.-10. Otherwise unchanged. [10. {Reserved}] 11.-23. Unchanged. Remainder of Fee Schedule—Unchanged. CHAPTER XXX Stocks, Warrants and Other Securities [Rule 30.60. Securities and Exchange Commission Transaction Fee There shall be paid to the Exchange by each member and member organization, in such manner and at such time as the Exchange shall direct, the sum of one cent for each $300 or fraction thereof of the dollar volume of securities sold by such member or member organization on the Exchange. The monies so paid to the Exchange shall be paid to the Securities and Exchange Commission as the transaction fee imposed upon the Exchange under the Exchange Act. * * * Interpretations and Policies: .01 The fee required to be paid under this Rule does not apply to any bond, debenture, or other evidence of indebtedness, or any security which the Securities and Exchange Commission may, by rule, exempt from imposition of the fee.] II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change 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 CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Pursuant to Section 5(c) of the CBOE Fees Schedule and CBOE Rule 30.60, the Exchange currently assesses a fee on its members for sales of securities on the Exchange to recoup amounts paid by the Exchange to the Commission under Section 31 of the Act. 4 On June 28, 2004, 5 the Commission established new procedures governing the calculation, payment, and collection of fees and assessments on securities transactions owed by national securities exchanges and associations under Section 31 of the Act (“Adopting Release”). 6 In the Adopting Release, the Commission stated that the fees SROs pass to their members and the fees members pass to their customers are not “Section 31 Fees” or “SEC Fees” and should not be labeled as such. 7 4 15 U.S.C. 78ee. 5 In the notice prepared by the CBOE in its Form 19b-4 filing, the CBOE inadvertently referred to this date as July 28, 2004. Telephone conversation between Jamie Galvin, Senior Attorney, CBOE and Hong-Anh Tran, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, dated May 17, 2005. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49928 (June 28, 2004), 69 FR 41060 (July 7, 2004). 7 *Id.* at 41072. In response to the statements made by the Commission in the Adopting Release, the Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to change the name of its fee, provide greater explanation and description of the fee and how it is collected, and clarify that it applies with respect to both covered sales of options and covered sales of non-option securities. The Exchange also proposes to delete CBOE Rule 30.60 since the fee will be set forth and fully described in the CBOE Fees Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to delete Section 5(c) of the CBOE Fees Schedule, which is currently labeled “SEC Value Fee.” The Exchange proposes to add a new CBOE Section 6 to the Fees Schedule labeled “Sales Value Fee.” Proposed new CBOE Section 6 defines the Sales Value Fee (“Fee”) as the fee assessed by CBOE to each member for sales of securities on CBOE with respect to which CBOE is obligated to pay a fee to the SEC under Section 31 of the Act. Proposed CBOE Section 6 provides that, to the extent the Exchange may collect more from members under CBOE Section 6 than is due from the Exchange to the Commission under Section 31 of the Act, for example due to rounding differences, the excess monies collected may be used by the Exchange to fund its general operating expenses. Proposed CBOE Section 6 explains that the transactions to which the Fee applies are sales of options (other than options on a security index), sales of non-option securities, and sales of securities resulting from the exercise of physical-delivery options traded on CBOE. The Fee is collected indirectly from members through their clearing firms by the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) on behalf of the Exchange with respect to options sales and options exercises. The Exchange collects the Fee indirectly from members through their clearing firms with respect to non-option sales. Consistent with CBOE Rule 3.23, the Fee is collected by billing the member's designated clearing firm for the amount owed by the member to the Exchange. Proposed CBOE Section 6 also sets forth the formula for calculating the Fee with respect to covered options and non-options transactions. The Fee with respect to options sales and options exercises is equal to

(i)the Commission's Section 31 fee rate multiplied by

(ii)the member's aggregate dollar amount of covered sales resulting from options transactions occurring on the Exchange during any computational period. The Fee with respect to non-options sales is calculated using the same formula as the formula for options transactions, except as applied only to the member's covered sales other than those resulting from options transactions. The Exchange notes that, if the Commission's Section 31 fee rate changes in the middle of a month, the Exchange will perform a separate calculation with respect to covered sales under the new fee rate for the remaining portion of the month. In further response to the statements made by the Commission in the Adopting Release, the Exchange proposes to issue a Regulatory Circular to its members that prohibits members from characterizing the pass-through of the CBOE Sales Value Fee to their customers as a “Section 31 fee,” “SEC fee,” or other label that implies an SEC rule or requirement that these funds be collected from broker-dealers or customers. The proposed Regulatory Circular would become effective approximately 45 days following effectiveness of the proposed rule change. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that for this proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 8 which permits the rules of an Exchange to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, and issuers and other persons using its facilities. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, including the proposed Regulatory Circular, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 9 in that it is 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. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder 11 because it does not:

(i)significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing (or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 12 and designate the proposed rule change to become operative immediately. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). The Commission hereby grants that request. 13 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative date is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because doing so will allow the Exchange's Fees Schedule and Rules to be consistent with the Commission's guidance on Section 31 without undue delay. 13 For the purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 C.S.C. 78c(f). 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form *(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml)* ; or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2005-38 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2005-38. 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. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2005-38 and should be submitted on or before July 15, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3295 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51870; File No. SR-DTC-2005-03] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to a Modification of the Fee Structure June 17, 2005. I. Introduction On April 26, 2005, The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) proposed rule change SR-DTC-2005-03 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”). 1 Notice of the proposal was published in the **Federal Register** on May 13, 2005. 2 No comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51675, (May 9, 2005), 70 FR 25630. II. Description DTC is a subsidiary of the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”). Participants of DTC and their affiliates may from time to time utilize the services of DTCC subsidiaries that are not registered as clearing agencies with the Commission. Such subsidiaries include Global Asset Solutions LLC and DTCC Deriv/Serv LLC. In addition, participants of DTC and their affiliates may utilize the services of other third parties through DTCC. DTC has determined that it would be more efficient and less costly if the fees that participants agree to pay for such services were collected by DTC rather than through independent billing mechanisms that would otherwise have to be established by each subsidiary of DTCC that is not a registered clearing agency and by each third party that is not a registered clearing agency. The proposed rule change will make clear that DTC may collect from its participants fees and charges of other subsidiaries of DTCC and of other third party service providers. DTC will enter into appropriate agreements with such subsidiaries and other third party service providers regarding DTC's collection of fees. Furthermore, the rule change makes clear that as a part of its collecting fees and charges for services provided to its participants, DTC may similarly collect fees and charges for services provided to affiliates of its participants. III. Discussion Section 17A(a)(1)(B) of the Act provides that inefficient procedures for clearance and settlement impose unnecessary costs on investors and persons facilitating transactions by and acting on behalf of investors. 3 Although the services provided by unregulated DTCC subsidiaries and by other third parties are not core clearance and settlement services, they are related to the clearance and settlement operations of DTC and of its participants. By streamlining the fee collection process for these services so that DTC's participants will pay these fees to DTC as a part of their normal monthly DTC bills, the proposed rule change should help to improve efficiency in the operations of DTC participants and thereby should remove unnecessary cost for DTC participants and for the persons ( *i.e.,* the DTCC subsidiaries and the other entities providing services to DTC participants) facilitating transactions by and acting on behalf of investors. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act. 3 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(a)(A)(B). IV. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2005-03) be and hereby is approved. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3283 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51875; File No. SR-FICC-2005-01] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Timely Notification of Significant Events That Effect a Change in Control of a Member or Could Have a Substantial Impact on a Member's Business or Financial Condition June 17, 2005. On January 6, 2005, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (“FICC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and on May 13, 2005, amended the proposed rule change. 2 Notice of the proposal was published in the **Federal Register** on May 10, 2005. 3 No comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 Republication of the notice is not required because the amendment to the proposed rule change merely renumbered certain proposed and existing sections of the rule text that were included in the original filing. 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51643 (May 2, 2005); 70 FR 24665. I. Description The proposed rule change will require certain FICC members to notify FICC when they experience an event that would effect a change in control of such member or could have a substantial impact on such member's business or financial condition. Under the rule change, GSD netting members and MBSD participants will be required to notify FICC upon experiencing a “reportable event.” The term “reportable event” is defined as an event that would effect a change in control of a GSD netting member or an MBSD participant or an event that could have a substantial impact on a netting member's/participant's business or financial condition including, but not limited to:

(a)Material organizational changes including mergers, acquisitions, changes in corporate form, name changes, changes in the ownership of a netting member/participant or its affiliates, and material changes in management;

(b)material changes in business lines, including new business lines undertaken; and

(c)status as a defendant in litigation which could reasonably impact the netting member's/participant's financial condition or ability to conduct business. 4 4 A similar requirement was added as Addendum T to the National Securities Clearing Corporation's Rules in 1998. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40582 (Oct. 20, 1998), 63 FR 57346 (Oct. 27, 1998). In order to provide FICC with enough time to analyze the implications of a “reportable event” and to determine an appropriate course of action, a netting member/participant must submit written notice to FICC at least 90 calendar days prior to the effective date of such “reportable event” unless the netting member/participant demonstrates that it could not have reasonably done so and also has provided oral and written notice to FICC as soon as possible. Failure to so notify FICC will result in a $5,000 fine. II. Discussion Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in its custody or control. 5 The proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder because it should enhance FICC's ability to collect and evaluate in a timely manner the type of information that it needs in order to properly manage risks and thereby to better safeguard the securities and funds for which it is in control. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). III. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act 6 and the rules and regulations thereunder. 6 15 U.S.C. 78q-1. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FICC-2005-01) be, and hereby is, approved. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3281 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51865; File No. SR-FICC-2005-11] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Institute a Netting Process for Fail Deliver and Fail Receive Obligations for Netting Members in Its Government Securities Division June 17, 2005. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 notice is hereby given that on May 19, 2005, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (“FICC”) 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 primarily by FICC. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend the rules of FICC's Government Securities Division (“GSD”) to institute a process to net netting members' fail deliver and fail receive obligations with their current settlement obligations on a daily basis. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, FICC 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. FICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and

(C)below, of the most significant aspects of these statements. 2 2 The Commission has modified the text of the summaries prepared by FICC.

(A)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change The rules of the GSD provide that FICC may, in its sole discretion, net a netting member's fail deliver and fail receive obligations with the member's current settlement obligations. FICC is proposing to amend the GSD's rules to institute this fail netting process on a daily basis. Since the implementation of the GSD's netting system (by FICC's predecessor, the Government Securities Clearing Corporation), outstanding fails have been processed separately from new trading activity. Demand by members for the netting of fails was initially low due to the fact that many members could not properly account for netted fails in their proprietary systems. In addition, demand for netting of fails remained low until the summer of 2003 when the market experienced significant fails in the Treasury 10-year note due May 2013. In recent years, FICC has been integrally involved in assisting the industry in addressing significant fail situations. On several occasions, FICC intervened by supporting special netting of fails with members' current settlement activity. While this procedure helped alleviate the number of open fails and associated settlement issues and risks, it was only an intermediate step in resolving the need for the more regular fail processing proposed herein. Moreover, the industry's continued experience with fails has caused a heightened demand on the part of members for the GSD to institute such a process. Pursuant to the proposed rule change, the GSD would implement a methodology whereby outstanding member fail obligations will be netted with current settlement activity. This process will provide reduced risk exposure to members because it will facilitate settlement by allowing members to close open fails on their books on a daily basis, as well as reduce the number of outstanding clearance obligations at FICC. FICC does not anticipate an undue burden on members as a result of this proposal. The GSD has issued an Important Notice 3 to all members seeking feedback on the proposed change, and to date, the substance of any feedback received has been positive. 3 Important Notice GOV028.05 (March 10, 2005). FICC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act 4 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to FICC because it allows FICC to reduce the risks posed by large numbers of open fail positions. As such, the proposed rule facilitates the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and assures the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of FICC or for which it is responsible. 4 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.

(B)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition FICC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any impact or impose any burden on competition.

(C)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants, or Others Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet been solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within thirty-five 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 ninety 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 self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

(A)By order approve such proposed rule change or

(i)Amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(3)(A)(i) to offer an optional enterprise-based flat fee for the internal display of real-time transaction data relating to its Transaction Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”) on an unlimited number of interrogation or display devices; and

(ii)amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(1)(A) to lower the monthly fee for the first user ID purchased to obtain Level II Full Service Web Browser Access. The text of the proposed rule change is available on NASD's Web site ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at NASD's principal office, 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, NASD 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 IV below. NASD 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 NASD proposes to amend NASD Rule 7010(k) to add an enterprise fee structure and lower another fee related to the receipt of real-time TRACE transaction data paid by users of such data (“Subscribers”). NASD proposes to amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(3)(A)(i), the Bond Trade Dissemination Service (“BTDS”) Professional Real-Time Data Display Fee, to enable an enterprise such as a broker-dealer to display real-time TRACE transaction data within the enterprise on an unlimited number of internal display devices for a fee of $7,500 per month. NASD also proposes to amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(1)(A), Web Browser Access, to lower the fee for Level II Full Service Web Browser Access, so that the charge for the first user ID obtained for such access would be $50 per month rather than the current $80 per month. Subscribers typically receive real-time TRACE transaction data in one of two ways—either through a market data vendor that redistributes such data through its services/desktops or through NASD's Level II Full Service Web Browser Access, which provides the Subscriber both reporting functionality and access to real-time TRACE transaction data. Although NASD has achieved positive results delivering real-time TRACE transaction data to the professional trading community, NASD also is striving to make real-time TRACE transaction data more widely available to individual investors so that they may use it in making investment decisions. In an effort to achieve this goal, recently NASD eliminated the BTDS Non-Professional Real-Time Data Display Fee for “Non-Professionals” as defined in NASD Rule 7010(k)(3)(C)(ii) to encourage Subscribers, especially retail brokers, to redistribute real-time TRACE transaction data to their retail customers via their Web-based services. 3 NASD believes it would enhance investor protection to further expand the availability of real-time TRACE transaction data and foster an environment where such data is an integral part of the discussions between investors and the persons serving them. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50977 (January 6, 2005), 70 FR 2202 (January 12, 2005)(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-NASD-2004-189). NASD is proposing two amendments to the TRACE fee structure that NASD believes may significantly increase the use of real-time TRACE transaction data among registered representatives, investment advisors, and other persons serving retail investors as well as address member cost concerns that are discussed further below. NASD believes that broadening the distribution of real-time TRACE transaction data would facilitate its use by persons who provide brokerage and/or advisory services to retail investors, and would provide such professionals with an additional tool to better serve and inform retail investors. In addition, access to real-time TRACE transaction data should enhance the ability of Subscribers that are NASD members to comply with various regulatory obligations. Finally, broadening the distribution of real-time TRACE transaction data is likely to have an incremental beneficial effect on corporate bond market transparency and pricing by generally raising the level of awareness and overall knowledge of specific bond issues as well as the bond market generally. Proposed “Enterprise” Fee Currently, NASD charges a Subscriber $60 per month, per terminal (the BTDS Professional Real-Time Data Display Fee) to display real-time TRACE transaction data. Members have indicated that this $60 per month, per terminal charge is cost prohibitive for organizations with large numbers of potential internal users of the data. Subscribers serving large numbers of retail investors have indicated that they likely would distribute real-time TRACE transaction data much more widely within their organizations if the costs were reduced. To address these concerns, NASD is proposing to amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(3)(A)(i) to provide Subscribers the option of paying a flat, enterprise fee of $7,500 per month instead of $60 per terminal ( *i.e.* , per screen or interrogation or display device). The proposed rule change would benefit Subscribers that have a large staff of potential internal data users who desire access to real-time TRACE transaction data. Instead of paying multiple $60 BTDS Professional Real-Time Data Display Fees, a Subscriber would have the option to pay a flat fee of $7,500 per month to display real-time TRACE transaction data on an unlimited number of internal terminals/workstations. The proposed $7,500 monthly enterprise fee option would lower the fees paid by Subscribers who currently pay to display real-time TRACE transaction data on more than 125 terminals. In addition, the proposed $7,500 fee option may encourage certain Subscribers that currently pay to display real-time TRACE transaction data on fewer than 125 terminals to pay the proposed $7,500 flat fee and broaden distribution of real-time TRACE transaction data within their organizations. The proposed amendment to NASD Rule 7010(k)(3)(A)(i) would apply only to a Subscriber's internal display of real-time TRACE transaction data and would be independent of access method or data vendor. The proposed $7,500 enterprise fee option would include unlimited terminal display use for individual access for all of a Subscriber's employees and the employees of certain of its corporate affiliates. 4 4 A Subscriber wishing to take advantage of this option would enter into an agreement directly with NASD, which in turn would notify the data vendors with which the Subscriber does business to provide blanket permission for use of real-time TRACE transaction data to any user within that organization. Level II Full Service Web Browser Access Fee To ensure a fair and balanced approach to the real-time TRACE transaction data fee structure and encourage use of such data among Subscribers of varying sizes, NASD also is proposing to amend NASD Rule 7010(k)(1)(A) to reduce fees paid by Subscribers who receive real-time TRACE transaction data through Level II Full Service Web Browser Access. Such smaller Subscribers are unlikely to benefit directly from NASD's enterprise pricing proposal. Currently, the implicit cost for the portion of Level II Full Service Web Browser Access for real-time TRACE transaction data is $60 per month (per user ID). 5 NASD proposes to reduce the cost of the first user ID per Subscriber to receive Level II Full Service Web Browser Access from $80 per month to $50 per month. The proposed rule change would reduce a Subscriber's marginal cost for the data portion of Level II Full Service Web Browser Access for the first user ID by 50% to $30 per month. The proposed rule change would reduce the costs of acquiring real-time TRACE transaction data for current Level II Full Service Web Browser Access Subscribers and may encourage some smaller professional market participants not currently obtaining real-time TRACE transaction data through any service to obtain it through the Level II Full Service Web Browser Access. 5 Level II Full Service Web Browser Access today costs $80 per month. However, Level II Full Service Web Browser Access also grants users Level I Web Trade Report Only Browser Access (for trade reporting), which otherwise would cost an additional $20 per month per user ID. Therefore, today the marginal cost of Level II Full Service Web Browser Access is $60 per month, per user ID. Finally, NASD no longer refers to itself using its full corporate name, “the Association,” or “the NASD.” Instead, NASD uses the name “NASD” unless otherwise appropriate for corporate or regulatory reasons. Accordingly, the proposed rule change replaces, as a technical change, several references to “the Association” in Rule 7010 with the name “NASD.” NASD would announce the effective date of the proposed rule change in a *Notice to Members* to be published no later than 60 days following Commission approval, if the Commission approves the proposed rule change. The effective date would be no later than 45 days following publication of the *Notice to Members* announcing Commission approval. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 6 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules must 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, and Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act, 7 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system that NASD operates or controls. NASD believes that reducing the cost to display real-time TRACE transaction data would empower Subscribers to widen distribution of such data, allow Subscribers and their employees to better serve retail investors, and facilitate retail investor awareness of the importance of pricing in the corporate bond market as well as enhance the ability of certain Subscribers who are NASD members to comply with various regulatory obligations. In addition, NASD believes that introducing the $7,500 enterprise fee as an option and reducing the cost of Level II Full Service Web Browser Access would result in an equitable allocation of fees for real-time TRACE transaction data among Subscribers. 6 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). 7 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change would result in 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 were neither solicited nor received. 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 NASD consents, the Commission will:

(A)By order approve such proposed rule change; or

(B)institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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 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-NASD-2005-063 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place,100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2005-063. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NASD. 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-NASD-2005-063 and should be submitted on or before July 15, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3275 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51871; File No. SR-NSCC-2005-03] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Collecting of Fees for Services Provided by Other Entities June 17, 2005. I. Introduction On April 26, 2005, National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2005-03 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”). 1 Notice of the proposal was published in the **Federal Register** on May 13, 2005. 2 No comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the proposed rule change. 1 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51674, (May 9, 2005), 70 FR 25636. II. Description NSCC is a subsidiary of the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”). Members of NSCC and their affiliates may from time to time utilize the services of DTCC subsidiaries that are not registered as clearing agencies with the Commission. Such subsidiaries include Global Asset Solutions LLC and DTCC Deriv/Serv LLC. In addition, members of NSCC and their affiliates may utilize the services of other third parties. NSCC has determined that it would be more efficient and less costly if the fees that members agree to pay for such services were collected by NSCC rather than through independent billing mechanisms that would otherwise have to be established by each subsidiary of DTCC and third party that is not a registered clearing agency. NSCC's rules currently allow for fee collection arrangements with respect to collection of fees from members. The rule change further clarifies this practice and makes clear that NSCC may similarly collect fees and charges for services provided to affiliates of its members. NSCC will enter into appropriate agreements with such subsidiaries and others regarding the collection of fees. III. Discussion Section 17A(a)(1)(B) of the Act provides that inefficient procedures for clearance and settlement impose unnecessary costs on investors and persons facilitating transactions by and acting on behalf of investors. 3 Although the services provided by unregulated DTCC subsidiaries and by other third parties are not core clearance and settlement services, they are related to the clearance and settlement operations of NSCC and of its members. By streamlining the fee collection process for these services so that NSCC's members will pay these fees to NSCC as a part of their normal monthly NSCC bills, the proposed rule change should help to improve efficiency in the operations of NSCC members and thereby should remove unnecessary cost for NSCC members and for the persons ( *i.e.,* the DTCC subsidiaries and the other entities providing services to NSCC members) facilitating transactions by and acting on behalf of investors. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act. 3 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(a)(A)(B). IV. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NSCC-2005-03) be and hereby is approved. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3282 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-51872; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-42] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to a Specialist Marketing and Investor Education Fee for Investment Company Units June 17, 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 June 13, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE” 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. The proposed rule change has been filed by the Exchange as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 4 thereunder, which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change 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)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to charge a fee to specialists allocated listed Investment Company Units (“ICUs”) in circumstances where the Exchange undertakes to provide funds to a third party for marketing and investor education in connection with the listing of those ICUs. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in *italics* . 2005 Price List Facility and Equipment Fees *Specialist Marketing and Investor Education Fee—payment by the specialist unit allocated an issue of Investment Company Units of any amount payable by the Exchange to a third party for marketing and investor education expenses in connection with trading on the Exchange—billed quarterly.** Five-sixths (83.33%) of the amount payable by the Exchange.* Notes: ***The amount paid by a specialist unit will be apportioned each calendar quarter among the specialist units allocated ICUs subject to an Exchange payment to a third party. Such amount will be apportioned to a specialist unit based on the specialist unit's share of the “Notional NYSE ADV” for the ICUs subject to the payment. Notional NYSE ADV is defined as the average daily share volume on the NYSE for the quarter for an ICU multiplied by the average consolidated closing price for the quarter for such ICU.* *The following hypothetical demonstrates how the apportionment will operate. Assume three ICUs with a Notional NYSE ADV for the preceding calendar quarter of 50,000, 100,000 and 150,000, respectively. The three ICUs are allocated to Specialist Units A, B and C, respectively. Specialist Units A, B and C would be billed 16.67%, 33.33% and 50% of the amount apportioned to the specialist units for the quarter (i.e., in the aggregate, five-sixths of the amount payable by the Exchange). Each calendar quarter, the Exchange will notify each specialist unit of the amount payable for the preceding quarter* . 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 The Exchange anticipates that it may undertake in the future to provide funds to third parties for marketing and investor education with respect to certain listings of ICUs, also known as Exchange Traded Funds. In such circumstances, the Exchange believes it is appropriate for the specialists allocated those listed ICUs to participate in the provision of such funds to the relevant third party. The Exchange therefore proposes to implement a Specialist Marketing and Investor Education Fee to be imposed in connection with payments made to third parties in connection with the listing of any ICUs subject to such third party payments. This fee would be separate from the current Specialist License Fee. 5 The Exchange believes that the fee would be imposed in a fair and equitable manner on all specialists trading the securities subject to a third party fee or payment. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50109 (July 28, 2004), 69 FR 47192 (August 4, 2004) (File No. SR-NYSE-2004-35) The amount paid by the specialists would be calculated and apportioned following each calendar quarter among the specialist units allocated ICUs that are subject to an Exchange payment to third parties. This amount would represent five-sixths (83.33%) of the annual amount payable by the Exchange, as apportioned for the quarter. Such amount would be apportioned to specialist units for each ICU that is subject to the fee, calculated based on the “Notional NYSE ADV” for each relevant ICU. Notional NYSE ADV would be defined as the average daily share volume on the NYSE for the calendar quarter for the particular ICU multiplied by the average consolidated closing price for the quarter for such ICU. The following hypothetical demonstrates how the apportionment would operate. Assume three ICUs with a Notional NYSE ADV for the preceding calendar quarter of 50,000, 100,000, and 150,000, respectively. Also assume that the three ICUs are allocated to Specialist Units A, B, and C, respectively. Specialist Units A, B, and C would be billed 16.67%, 33.33% and 50% of the amount apportioned to the specialist units for the quarter ( *i.e.* , in the aggregate, five-sixths of the amount payable by the Exchange). Each calendar quarter, the Exchange would notify each specialist unit of the amount payable, if any, under the Specialist Marketing and Investor Education Fee for the preceding quarter. The Exchange believes that the Notional NYSE ADV is an appropriate mechanism for allocating the fee among the specialists as it takes into account both trading volume and share price. Therefore, a relatively high-priced ICU with a relatively low share volume might be subject to a fee comparable to a relatively low-priced ICU with relatively high share volume. According to the Exchange, the proposed manner of apportioning the fee among specialist units attempts to equalize the fee among ICUs with different trading characteristics, instead of apportioning the fee based on a single characteristic ( *e.g.* , NYSE share volume). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 7 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 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 The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act, 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 9 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 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. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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-NYSE-2005-42 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-42. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-NYSE-2005-42 and should be submitted on or before July 15, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-3284 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5118] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Lords of Creation: the Origins of Sacred Maya Kingship” AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Lords of Creation: the Origins of Sacred Maya Kingship,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign lenders. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, CA, from on or about September 10, 2005, to on or about January 2, 2006; Dallas Museum of Art, Dallas, TX, from on or about February 12, 2006, to on or about May 7, 2006; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, from on or about June 11, 2006, to on or about September 10, 2006, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Julianne Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State, (telephone:

(202)453-8049). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: June 17, 2005. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. 05-12572 Filed 6-23-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

U.S. Code