Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2005-08-23 · SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION · Notices

Notices. Notice

17,953 words·~82 min read·/register/2005/08/23/05-16697

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. 34-52270; File No. SR-Amex-2005-066] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to the Calculation of the National Best Bid or Offer When Another Exchange is Disconnected From the Intermarket Option Linkage August 16, 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 June 17, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex”) 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 Amex.
On August 4, 2005, the Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 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 *See* Form 19b-4 dated August 4, 2005 (“Amendment No. 1”). Amendment No. 1 supersedes and replaces the original filing in its entirety. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Amex proposes to amend Amex Rules 933(g) and 933(g)—ANTE regarding the calculation of the national best bid or offer (“NBBO”) when another participant in the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (“Linkage Plan”) is disconnected from the Intermarket Option Linkage (“Linkage”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at the Amex's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Amex 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 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 The purpose of this proposed rule change is to set forth the Amex's policy in connection with declaring quotes from other options exchanges unreliable when such other exchange is disconnected from the Linkage.
The Amex currently relies on Amex Rules 933(g) and 933(g)—ANTE to determine whether quotes from another options exchange(s) are unreliable. Amex Rules 933(g) and 933(g)—ANTE provide that a Floor Governor or Exchange Official may determine that certain quotes from another options exchange(s) are not reliable. The existing Amex rules provide that a Floor Governor or Exchange Official may make such determination in the following circumstances:
(i)when another options exchange declares its quotes non-firm and directly communicates or disseminates a message through OPRA; and
(ii)when another options exchange communicates to the Amex that such options exchange is experiencing systems or other problems affecting the reliability of its disseminated quotes. The Amex believes that an additional circumstance whereby a Floor Governor or Exchange Official may determine the quotes from another options exchange to be unreliable should be added to Amex Rules 933(g) and 933(g)—ANTE. This additional circumstance would arise when another Participant Exchange 4 is disconnected from the Linkage and is not accepting Linkage orders. The Amex believes that this additional circumstance for determining quotes from away options markets unreliable is necessary because there are times when because of system malfunctions, a Participant Exchange is disconnected from the Linkage but has not declared its quotes to be “non-firm” and has not informed the other options exchanges that such Participant Exchange may have quote problems. As a result, access to the Participant Exchange is limited, and the Amex believes such Participant Exchange's quotes should be excluded from the Amex's calculation of the NBBO. 4 A “Participant Exchange” is a registered national securities exchange that is a party to the Linkage Plan. *See* Amex Rule 940 (b)(14). 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 5 in general and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act 6 in particular, in that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest. 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 Amex believes that the proposed rule change does not 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 Amex 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, 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-Amex-2005-066 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-2005-066. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-066 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4581 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52268; File No. SR-Amex-2005-077] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendments No. 1 and 2 Thereto Relating to a Temporary Suspension of Specialist Transaction Charges for the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock®
(QQQQ)August 15, 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 July 15, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by Amex. On July 20, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. 3 On August 11, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposal. 4 Amex has designated the proposed rule change, as amended, as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 5 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 6 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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, Amex added language to the purpose section to explain that the proposal is deleting certain provisions from its fee schedules because such provisions, by their terms, have already expired. 4 In Amendment No. 2, Amex made minor technical changes to the proposed rule text and provided furhter discussion on how the proposal is consistent with the requirement under Section 6(b)(4) of the Act to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 6 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 amend the Amex Equity and Exchange Traded Funds and Trust Issued Receipts Fee Schedules to suspend specialist transaction charges for the trading of Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock(®) (Symbol: QQQQ) from July 18, 2005 through July 31, 2005. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and from 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, 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 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 is proposing to suspend transaction charges for specialist orders in the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock(®)
(QQQQ)from July 18, 2005 through July 31, 2005. This proposed rule change also deletes the references in the Amex Fee Schedules regarding the suspension of transaction charges for customer/broker-dealer, specialist and registered trader orders in QQQQ through February 28, 2005 because those provisions are no longer effective due to their expiration. Similarly, the references in the Amex Fee Schedules regarding the suspension of transaction charges for specialist, registered trader, and broker-dealer orders in IAU from January 28, 2005 through February 28, 2005 will also be deleted because these provisions are also no longer effective due to their expiration. Specialists orders for transactions in the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock(®) currently are charged $0.0037 ($0.37 per 100 shares), capped at $300 per trade. Effective December 1, 2004, the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock(®) (formerly “QQQ”) transferred its listing from Amex to the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. It now trades on Nasdaq under the symbol QQQQ. After the transfer, Amex began trading QQQQ on an unlisted trading privileges basis. Amex previously suspended the transaction charges of specialist and registered trader orders in connection with QQQQ from December 1, 2004 through February 28, 2005. 7 The Exchange did not extend these fee waivers after February 28, 2005. In connection with the transfer of QQQQ to Nasdaq, the Amex Fee Schedules were amended to provide for transaction charges of $0.0015 per share ($0.15 per 100 shares) for customer orders, capped at $100 per trade in connection with QQQQ transactions. 8 Amex previously suspended those transaction charges for customer orders in connection with QQQQ from December 1, 2004 through February 28, 2005. 9 The Exchange did not extend this fee waiver after February 28, 2005. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 50811 (December 7, 2004), 69 FR 74547 (December 14, 2005); 50970 (January 6, 2005), 70 FR 2193 (January 12, 2005); and 51150 (February 8, 2005), 70 FR 7780 (February 15, 2005). 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50894 (December 20, 2004), 69 FR 77788 (December 28, 2004). 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 50894 (December 20, 2004), 69 FR 77788 (December 28, 2004); 50969 (January 6, 2005), 70 FR 2191 (January 12, 2005); and 51152 (February 8, 2005), 70 FR 7781 (February 15, 2005). The Exchange asserts that the proposed suspension of transaction fees for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act. 10 Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposal provides for an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Exchange members largely based on the fact that a specialist has greater obligations than other members and they are also subject to Exchange fees in addition to transaction fees. 10 Section 6(b)(4) of the Act states that the rules of a national securities exchange must provide for “the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities.” In connection with the proposal to suspend or waive transaction fees for specialist orders in QQQQ, the Exchange notes that specialists are subject to a variety of Exchange fees other than transaction charges. For example, the Exchange imposes floor fees solely on specialists such as a floor clerk fee, a floor facility fee, a post fee, and a registration fee. 11 In addition, for those members on the floor of the Exchange, a technology fee and membership fees are also charged by the Exchange. 12 Certain market participants—such as customers, non-member broker-dealers, market-makers, and member broker-dealers—are not subject to the majority of these fees. In addition, a specialist unit, in order to adequately “make a market” in assigned securities, must be sufficiently staffed and have adequate technology resources to handle the volume of orders (especially in QQQQ) that are sent to the Exchange. These operational costs borne by a specialist further support the Exchange proposal to temporarily suspend QQQQ transaction fees on specialist orders. 11 The floor clerk, floor facility, post, and registration fees on an annual basis are $900, $2,400, $1,000, and $800, respectively. 12 A technology fee of $3,000 per year is assessed on all specialists and other floor participants at the Exchange. Annual membership dues of $1,500 must be paid by all members, while annual membership fees are payble depending on the type of membership and circumstances. Non-members are not subject to these fees. Specialists also have certain obligations under Exchange rules, as well as the Act, that do not exist for other market participants. For example, a specialist is required to maintain a fair and orderly market in his or her assigned securities pursuant to Amex Rule 170. This affirmative obligation requires the specialist to maintain the price continuity of the security with reasonable depth, while also minimizing the effect of any temporary disparities between supply and demand. As a result, the Exchange believes that the proposed suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in QQQQ is reasonable and equitable given the numerous obligations that specialists must adhere to in making markets. As detailed above, the Exchange believes a suspension of transaction fees for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ is equitable and appropriate for the purpose of enhancing our competitiveness in trading this security. The Exchange further submits that the fee suspension will provide greater incentive to the specialist to continue to provide market liquidity, rendering the Exchange an attractive venue for market participants to execute orders. 2. Statutory Basis Amex believes that the proposed rule change consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 13 in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 14 in particular in that it is intended to assure the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Amex 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 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 rule change, as amended, has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 15 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 16 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. 17 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 17 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is July 20, 2005 and the effective date of the amendment is August 11, 2005. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as amended, under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on August 11, 2005, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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-Amex-2005-077 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-2005-077. 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 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-077 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 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. E5-4582 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52267; File No. SR-Amex-2005-081) Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to a Temporary Suspension of Specialist Transaction Charges for the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock®
(QQQQ)August 15, 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 August 1, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by Amex. On August 15, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. 3 Amex has designated the proposed rule change, as amended, as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 4 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 5 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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, Amex made minor technical changes to the proposed rule text and provided further discussion on how the proposal is consistent with the requirement under Section 6(b)(4) of the Act to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 5 7 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 amend the Amex Equity and Exchange Traded Funds and Trust Issued Receipts Fee Schedules (the “Amex Fee Schedules”) to extend the suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in connection with the trading of the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock® (Symbol: QQQQ) from August 1, 2005 through August 31, 2005. The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is available on Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and from 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, 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 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 is proposing to extend the suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock®
(QQQQ)from August 1, 2005, through August 31, 2005. The current suspension of specialist transaction charges in QQQQ will otherwise terminate on July 31, 2005. 6 6 *See* Amex File No. 2005-077 filed with the Commission on July 15, 2005. Specialist orders in QQQQ executed on the Exchange currently are charged $0.0037 ($0.37 per 100 shares), capped at $300 per trade. Effective December 1, 2004, the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock® (formerly “QQQ”) transferred its listing from Amex to the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. It now trades on Nasdaq under the symbol QQQQ. After the transfer, Amex began trading QQQQ on an unlisted trading privileges basis. As detailed in a recently filed proposed rule change (File No. SR-Amex-2005-077), the Exchange submits that a suspension of transaction fees for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ is consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the Act. 7 Specifically, the Exchange believes that extending the suspension of transaction charges for QQQQ specialist orders is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Exchange members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities. The fact that specialists have greater obligations than other members and are also subject to other Exchange fees, in addition to transaction fees, supports this proposal to temporarily extend the fee suspension. 7 Section 6(b)(4) of the Act states that the rules of a national securities exchange provide for “the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities.” The Exchange notes that specialists are also subject to a variety of Exchange fees other than transaction charges, such as a floor clerk fee, a floor facility fee, a post fee, and a registration fee. 8 In addition, specialists and other floor members of the Exchange are subject to technology and membership fees. 9 Certain market participants—such as customers, non-member broker-dealers, market-makers, and member broker-dealers—are not subject to the majority of these fees. In addition, specialist units, unlike registered traders and other floor members, must be sufficiently staffed and provide adequate technology resources to handle the volume of orders (especially in QQQQ) that are sent to the specialist post at the Exchange. These operational costs that are incurred by a specialist further support the Exchange proposal to extend the suspension of QQQQ transaction fees on specialist orders. 8 The floor clerk, floor facility, post, and registration fees on an annual basis are $900, $2,400, $1,000, and $800, respectively. 9 A technology fee of $3,000 per year is assessed on all specialists and other floor participants at the Exchange. Annual membership dues of $1,500 must be paid by all members, while annual membership fees are payable depending on the type of membership and circumstances. Non-members are not subject to these fees. Specialists have certain obligations under the Exchange rules, as well as the Act, that do not exist for other market participants. For example, a specialist is required to maintain a fair and orderly market in his or her assigned securities pursuant to Amex Rule 170. Other members of the Exchange, as well as non-member market participants, do not have this obligation. As a result, the Exchange believes that an extension of the transaction charge fee waiver for specialist orders in QQQQ is reasonable and equitable. The Exchange is amending the Amex Fee Schedules to indicate that transaction charges for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ executed on the Exchange will be further suspended from August 1, 2005, through August 31, 2005. The Exchange also submits that the fee suspension will provide greater incentive to the specialist to continue to provide market liquidity, rendering the Exchange an attractive venue for market participants to execute orders. 2. Statutory Basis Amex believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 10 in general and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4) of the Act 11 in particular in that it is intended to assure the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Amex believes that the proposed rule change does not 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 The foregoing rule change, as amended, has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 12 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 13 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. 14 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 14 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is August 1, 2005 and the effective date of the amendment is August 15, 2005. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as amended, under section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on August 11, 2005, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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-Amex-2005-081 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-2005-081. 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 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-081 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 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. E5-4584 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52273; File No. SR-Amex-2005-078] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to a Temporary Suspension of Specialist Transaction Charges for the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock®
(QQQQ)August 16, 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 July 15, 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, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by Amex. On August 12, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 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 In Amendment No. 1, Amex made minor technical changes to the proposed rule text and provided further discussion on how the proposal is consistent with the requirement under Section 6(b)(4) of the Act to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to retroactively apply a suspension of specialist transaction charges for the trading of Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock® (Symbol: QQQQ) from July 1, 2005 through July 17, 2005. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and from 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, Amex 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. 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 The Exchange in a companion filing (File No. SR-Amex-2005-077) proposed to suspend transaction charges for specialist orders in the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock (“QQQQ”) from July 18, 2005 through July 31, 2005. In order to waive transaction fees for specialist orders in QQQQ for the entire month of July 2005, the Exchange has proposed to retroactively suspend transaction fees for specialist transactions from July 1, 2005 through July 17, 2005. Under the existing Amex Equity and Exchange Traded Funds and Trust Issued Receipts Fee Schedules (the “Amex Fee Schedules”), specialist orders in QQQQ executed on the Exchange will be charged $0.0037 ($0.37 per 100 shares), capped at $300 per trade from July 1, 2005 through July 17, 2005. The Exchange believes that the retroactive suspension of transaction charges for specialist transactions from July 1, 2005 through July 17, 2005 is consistent with the companion filing to suspend transaction charges for specialist orders generally through July 31, 2005. The Exchange further believes that a retroactive suspension of transaction fees on specialist orders in QQQQ is appropriate to enhance the competitiveness of executions on Amex. The Exchange is amending the Amex Fee Schedules to indicate that transaction charges for specialist orders have been suspended from July 1, 2005 through July 31, 2005 in QQQQ. As detailed in File No. SR-Amex-2005-077, the Exchange submits that a suspension of transaction fees for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act. 4 Specifically, the Exchange believes that suspending transaction charges for QQQQ specialist orders is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Exchange members. The fact that specialists have greater obligations than other members and are also subject to other Exchange fees, in addition to transaction fees, supports this proposal to retroactively apply the fee suspension. 4 Section 6(b)(4) of the Act states that the rules of a national securities exchange must provide for the “equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities.” The Exchange notes that specialists are subject to a variety of Exchange fees other than transaction charges, such as a floor clerk fee, a floor facility fee, a post fee, and a registration fee. 5 In addition, specialists and other floor members of the Exchange are subject to technology and membership fees. 6 Certain market participants—such as customers, non-member broker-dealers, market-makers, and member broker-dealers—are not subject to the majority of these fees. In addition, specialist units, unlike registered traders and other floor members, must be sufficiently staffed and provide adequate technology resources in order to handle the volume of orders (especially in QQQQ) that are sent to the specialist post at the Exchange. These operational costs that are incurred by a specialist further support the Exchange proposal to extend the suspension of QQQQ transaction fees on specialist orders. 5 The floor clerk, floor facility, post, and registration fees on an annual basis are $900, $2,400, $1,000, and $800, respectively. 6 A technology fee of $3,000 per year is assessed on all specialists and other floor participants at the Exchange. Annual membership dues of $1,500 must be paid by all members while annual membership fees are payable depending on the type of membership and circumstances. Non-members are not subject to these fees. Specialists also have certain obligations required by Exchange rules as well as the Act that do not exist for other market participants. For example, a specialist pursuant to Amex Rule 170 is required to maintain a fair and orderly market in his or her assigned securities. Other members of the Exchange as well as non-member market participants do not have this obligation. As a result, the Exchange believes that this proposal to retroactively apply the transaction charge fee waiver for specialist orders in QQQQ is reasonable and equitable. As noted above, the Exchange is amending the Amex Fee Schedules to indicate that transaction charges for specialist orders in connection with QQQQ executed on the Exchange will be suspended from July 1, 2005 through July 31, 2005. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 8 in particular in that it is intended to assure the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 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 believes that the proposed rule change does not 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 Amex 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, 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-Amex-2005-078 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-2005-078. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-078 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4589 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52275; File No. SR-Amex-2005-003] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change, and Amendment No. 1 Thereto, to Expand the Types of Trusts Permitted to Directly Own Amex Memberships August 16, 2005. On January 7, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend Amex Rule 356 to expand the types of trusts permitted to directly own Amex memberships. On June 7, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 28, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised the proposed rule text to clarify that an Exchange member owner who does not conduct broker-dealer activities on the floor of the Exchange is not required to be registered with the Commission as a broker-dealer. Member owners can be individuals, partnerships, corporations, custodial accounts or, pursuant to the proposed rule change, grantor trusts. Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing in its entirety. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51900 (June 22, 2005), 70 FR 37139. The Exchange proposed to amend Amex Rule 356 to permit grantor trusts to directly own Exchange memberships. Currently, the Exchange permits certain pension trusts (generally comprised of trusts or custodial accounts, *i.e.* , Keoghs and IRAs) to directly own Exchange memberships for investment purposes and either lease the seat or designate a nominee to operate the seat. Under the proposed rule change, grantor trusts will be able to acquire one or more Amex memberships either by transfer from an existing owner of an Amex membership or by a direct purchase. The grantor of the trust ( *i.e.* , either the member transferring a membership to a trust or the grantor of the trust purchasing a membership) will be required during the grantor's lifetime or existence (in the case of a non-natural person) to be a beneficiary of the trust. In the event that the trust terminates or is amended such that it no longer qualifies to own an Amex membership, any memberships held by the trust will revert to the grantor. As is the case with pension trusts, the trustee and grantor will be required on behalf of the trust to execute an agreement with the Exchange acknowledging that the trust will own the membership subject to the Exchange's Constitution and Rules, as well as certain other limitations and indemnifications, and will also be required to provide a legal opinion confirming that the trust was validly created and is authorized to own a membership and that the trustee is vested with all necessary authority to either appoint a nominee to operate the seat on behalf of the trust and/or lease the seat, as well as to enter into the requisite agreement. Additionally, the trustee and the grantor will be required to become allied members or approved persons of the Exchange, as applicable. 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 5 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 6 and the rules and regulations thereunder. The Commission finds specifically that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 7 in particular, which requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be 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. 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. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission believes that permitting grantor trusts to directly own Amex memberships is designed to provide Amex members with increased estate and tax planning options and to achieve a reasonable balance between the Exchange's interest in providing members with the flexibility to plan their estates and the Exchange's interest in regulating and protecting its membership. The Commission notes that the grantor of the trust would be required during the grantor's lifetime or existence to be a beneficiary of the trust. Moreover, the trustee and grantor will be required on behalf of the trust to execute an agreement with the Exchange acknowledging that the trust will own the membership subject to the Exchange's Constitution and Rules. In addition, the trustee and grantor will be required to become allied members or approved persons of the Exchange, as applicable, and will remain subject to the Constitution and Rules of the Exchange. The Commission also notes that the proposal is similar to a Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE”) rule 8 that was previously approved by the Commission and permits trusts to directly own CBOE seats. 8 *See* CBOE Rule 3.25. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2005-003), as amended, be, and hereby 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. E5-4595 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52252; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-17] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Revenue Sharing Program for Trades in Tape B Securities August 15, 2005. On February 7, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to adopt a Revenue Sharing Program for trades in Tape B securities. 3 The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 15, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Tape B securities are securities listed on the American Stock Exchange or the regional national securities exchanges. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52005 (July 11, 2005), 70 FR 41063. The Commission finds CBOE's proposal to amend its Fee Schedule to adopt a Revenue Sharing Program for revenue CBOE receives under the Consolidated Tape Association Plan for trades in Tape B securities consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 5 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 which requires that the rules of the exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system. The Commission notes that CBOE will begin its Revenue Sharing Program upon the launch of its new stock trading platform. 7 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. 78f(b)(5). 7 The CBOE has filed a proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2004-21) to adopt a new set of rules to allow for the trading of non-option securities on CBOEdirect, the exchange's screen based trading system. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 8 that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2005-17) be, and it hereby is, approved. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4583 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52278, File No. SR-MSRB-2005-04] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule Change Relating to Solicitation of Municipal Securities Business under MSRB Rule G-38 August 17, 2005. I. Introduction On March 22, 2005, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB” or “Board”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “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 deleting existing Rule G-38, on consultants, and replacing it with new Rule G-38, on solicitation of municipal securities business. In addition, the proposed rule change would make related amendments to Rule G-37, on political contributions and prohibitions on municipal securities business, Rule G-8, on recordkeeping, Form G-37/G-38 and Form G-37x, as well as add new Form G-38t. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on April 21, 2005. 3 The Commission received four comment letters regarding the proposal. 4 On August 9, 2005, the MSRB filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change and a response to the four comment letters. 5 This order approves the proposed rule change, accelerates approval of Amendment No. 1, and solicits comments from interested persons on Amendment No. 1. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51561 (April 15, 2005), 70 FR 20782 (April 21, 2005). 4 *See* letter from Rick Santorum, Senator, United States Senate, to William H. Donaldson, Chairman, Commission, dated March 31, 2005 (“Senator Santorum's Letter”); letter from Chris Charles, President, Wulff, Hansen & Co. (“Wulff, Hansen”), to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, dated May 6, 2005 (“Wulff, Hansen's Letter”); letter from Lynnette Kelly Hotchkiss, Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel, The Bond Market Association (the “BMA”), to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, dated May 5, 2005 (“BMA's Letter”); and letter from Jonathan Stein, Director of Regulatory Affairs—Fixed Income, Raymond James & Associates, Inc. (“Raymond James”), to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, dated May 24, 2005 (“Raymond James” Letter). 5 Amendment No. 1 is described in Section II, *infra.* II. Description of the Proposal The proposal would delete existing Rule G-38, on consultants, and replace it with new Rule G-38, on solicitation of municipal securities business. The MSRB believes that it would be appropriate to apply the basic standards of fair practice and professionalism embodied in MSRB rules to all persons who solicit municipal securities business on behalf of dealers. A full description of the proposal is contained in the Commission's Notice. 6 6 *See supra* note 3. In Amendment No. 1, the MSRB provides that the proposed rule change would become effective on the first business Monday at least five business days after Commission approval. Amendment No. 1 also deletes the requirement in proposed Rule G-38(c) relating to transitional payments that the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer (“dealer”) must be selected by the issuer for municipal securities business on or prior to the effective date of the proposed rule change while adding a requirement that dealers include on their initial and all subsequent Form G-38t submissions each item of municipal securities business for which a transitional payment remains pending and the amount of such pending payment for each item of business. Amendment No. 1 also modifies Form G-38t to reflect the required reporting of pending payments. Finally, Amendment No. 1 modifies the definition of “affiliated person” and adds a definition of “registered person” so that affiliated persons would include independent brokers who are duly qualified registered persons of a dealer under MSRB or NASD professional qualification requirements. The text of Amendment No. 1 is available on the MSRB's Web site ( *http://www.msrb.org* ), at the MSRB's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. III. Discussion As previously noted, the Commission received four comment letters on the proposed rule change. 7 Senator Santorum's Letter opposed changing Rule G-38. Senator Santorum stated that he had been informed that consultants serve a legitimate and important role in the industry by permitting broker-dealers that do not have the resources to maintain an office in a particular jurisdiction to bid for municipal securities business in that jurisdiction. The MSRB stated in its proposal, 8 and the Commission agrees, that the benefits to the municipal securities market resulting from the proposed rule change outweigh the benefits that would accrue to permitting consultants to continue soliciting municipal securities business on behalf of dealers. 7 *See supra,* note 4. 8 *See supra,* note 3, at 20785. Wulff Hansen's Letter supported the proposed rule change, stating that “we believe that the social and economic costs of the present system (in the form of overt pay-to-play, more subtle forms of influence peddling, or similar undesirable practices) have come to outweigh the benefits.” 9 9 *See supra,* note 4, at 1. The BMA's Letter requested modification of the requirements for making transition payments to consultants and clarification of the definitions of “solicitation” and “affiliated employees.” The proposed rule change provided that a dealer could pay an outside consultant after the effective date of the amendment (the date that the Commission approved the amendment) only if, among other requirements, such payment was made with respect solely to solicitation activities undertaken on or prior to the effective date pursuant to a Consultant Agreement under former Rule G-38 and the dealer had been selected by the issuer to engage in such municipal securities business on or prior to the effective date. The BMA's Letter stated that as a practical matter, dealers will have no meaningful notice as to when the Commission will approve the amendment and thus will not have an opportunity to effectively close out their relationship with consultants. For example, the BMA's Letter stated that a dealer would be prohibited from paying consultants compensation, which they had legitimately earned, and be forced to renege on its contractual obligations simply because the dealer had not yet been selected for the deal. In addition, the BMA's Letter stated that other problems arise in those instances where a broker-dealer is part of a pool of selected underwriters and rotated to a senior manager position periodically or in instances where consultants are paid on a retainer basis (as opposed to a success fee arrangement) where they earn their compensation regardless of whether the broker-dealer is selected and moneys may still be contractually due for time worked but not paid as of the effective date. The MSRB believes, and the Commission agrees, that Amendment No. 1, including the new effective date and modified transitional payment provisions, as well as the modification to Form G-38t, addresses the BMA's concerns about transition payments and will facilitate dealer compliance with revised Rule G-38 in an orderly and timely manner while reducing the opportunity for circumvention of the purposes of the proposed rule change. The MSRB further believes, and the Commission agrees, that as modified, the transitional payment provision should avoid the potential for exposing dealers to legal liability under their contracts with consultants for failure to pay for services rendered. The BMA's Letter also stated that the definition of “solicitation” should be clarified. The MSRB has filed with the Commission a proposed interpretation providing such further clarification. 10 10 File No. SR-MSRB-2005-11. The BMA's Letter also requested clarification of the definition of affiliated employees, stating that the amendment prohibited a broker-dealer from paying anyone other than an “employee” of the broker-dealer or an affiliate for soliciting municipal securities business. The BMA's Letter stated that there are registered representatives who work for a dealer or an affiliate but do so as independent contractors, not as employees. The BMA's letter noted that as NASD licensed representatives of the dealer these independent contractors are also subject to the full array of MSRB rules. The BMA's Letter requested that the proposal be modified to permit a dealer to pay any licensed representative of that dealer or an affiliate to solicit municipal securities business. Raymond, James' Letter stated that Raymond James participated in BMA's Letter and fully supported that letter. Raymond, James' Letter also expressed concern that the proposed rule change did not recognize the important role that independent contractor financial advisors play in the market today, and stated that the definition of “affiliated person” should be expanded to include independent contractor registered representatives, by including NASD licensed representatives within the definition. The MSRB believes, and the Commission agrees, that the modified definition of “affiliated person” in Amendment No. 1 will address this concern and will further minimize the potential burden on competition of the proposed rule change in that it would treat dealer business models using independent brokers equally with dealer business models using directly employed brokers without reducing the effectiveness of the proposed rule change. After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the MSRB 11 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. 12 Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act requires, among other things, that the MSRB's rules be 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 municipal securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 13 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change will further investor protection and the public interest by ensuring that solicitations of municipal securities business are undertaken in a manner consistent with standards of fair practice and professionalism, thereby helping to maintain public trust and confidence in the integrity of the municipal securities market. 11 In approving this rule 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. 78o-4(b)(2)(C). 13 *Id.* IV. Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 1 The MSRB requested in Amendment No. 1 that the Commission find good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, for approving Amendment No. 1 (simultaneously with the proposed rule change) prior to the thirtieth day after publication of the notice of filing of Amendment No. 1 in the **Federal Register.** The Commission finds good cause to approve Amendment No. 1 to the proposal prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register.** The MSRB believes, and the Commission agrees, that
(i)the new effective date and modified transitional payment provisions, as well as the modification to Form G-38t, will facilitate dealer compliance with revised Rule G-38 in an orderly and timely manner while reducing the opportunity for circumvention of the purposes of the proposed rule change, and
(ii)the modified definition of “affiliated person” would further minimize the potential burden on competition of the proposed rule change in that it would treat dealer business models using independent brokers equally with dealer business models using directly employed brokers without reducing the effectiveness of the proposed rule change. For these reasons, the Commission finds good cause, consistent with Sections 15B(b)(2)(C) and 19(b)(2) of the Act, to accelerate approval of Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. V. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning Amendment No. 1, including whether Amendment No. 1 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-MSRB-2005-04 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-MSRB-2005-04. 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 MSRB's offices. 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-MSRB-2005-04 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. VI. Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 14 that the proposed rule change (SR-MSRB-2005-04) be, and hereby is, approved. 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 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. E5-4587 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURTITES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52271; File No. SR-NASD-2005-097] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend a Pilot Program That Increases Position and Exercise Limits for Equity Options August 16, 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 August 10, 2005, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) 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 NASD. NASD has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it 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). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD proposes to amend NASD Rule 2860 to extend a pilot program increasing certain options position and exercise limits for a pilot period. 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 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 is proposing to amend NASD Rule 2860 to extend a pilot program until March 3, 2006 (unless extended) increasing position and exercise limits for both standardized and conventional options (“Pilot Program”). 5 Unless extended, the Pilot Program will expire on September 2, 2005. 6 NASD believes that the Pilot Program should be extended so that it may continue without interruption for the same reasons that are discussed in the Pilot Program Notice. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51520 (April 11, 2005), 70 FR 19977 (April 15, 2005) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of File No. SR-NASD-2005-040) (“Pilot Program Notice”). Under the Pilot Program as set forth in NASD Rule 2860(b)(3), standardized and conventional options subject to a position limit of 13,500 contracts were increased during the pilot period to 25,000 contracts; those subject to a position limit of 22,500 contracts were increased to 50,000 contracts; those subject to a position limit of 31,500 contracts were increased to 75,000 contracts; those subject to a position limit of 60,000 contracts were increased to 200,000 contracts; and those subject to a position limit of 75,000 contracts were increased to 250,000 contracts. Options exercise limits, which are set forth in NASD Rule 2860(b)(4), and which incorporate by reference the position limits in NASD Rule 2860(b)(3), were also increased during the Pilot Period. 6 *See* NASD Rule 2860(b)(3)(A)(i). 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 7 which requires, among other things, that NASD's 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. The proposed rule change is being made so that the Pilot Program, which achieves these goals as discussed in the Pilot Program Notice, may continue without interruption. 7 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any 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. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the forgoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 9 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 10 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 11 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. NASD has requested that the Commission waive the five-day pre-filing notice requirement and the 30-day pre-operative delay. The Commission is exercising its authority to waive the five-day pre-filing requirement and believes that waiver of the 30-day pre-operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest. Waiving the five-day pre-filing requirement and 30-day pre-operative delay will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. 12 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 11 *Id.* 12 For the purposes only of waiving the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 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 No. SR-NASD-2005-097 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 No. SR-NASD-2005-097. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing will also 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NASD-2005-097 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4585 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52276; File No. SR-NASD-2004-131] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change and Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 3 Thereto, Relating to the Listing and Trading of Leveraged Index Return Notes Linked to the Nikkei 225 Index August 17, 2005. I. Introduction On August 30, 2004, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to list and trade Leveraged Index Return Notes Linked to the Nikkei 225 Index (“Notes”) issued by Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”). On March 21, 2005, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change and on March 31, 2005, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change and Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 were published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 12, 2005. 3 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51970 (July 5, 2005), 70 FR 40091 (July 12, 2005). The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended by Amendments Nos. 1 and 2. Simultaneously, the Commission provides notice of filing of Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change and grants accelerated approval of Amendment No. 3. The Commission has previously approved the listing of securities, the performance of which has been linked, in whole or in part, to the Nikkei 225 Index (the “Index”). The Notes, which are a series of non-convertible debt securities, will not be secured by collateral, will not pay interest and are not subject to redemption by Merrill Lynch or at the option of any beneficial owner before their maturity term of 4 1/2 years. At maturity, if the value of the Index has increased, a beneficial owner of a Note would be entitled to receive the original offering price ($10), plus an amount calculated by multiplying the original offering price ($10) by an amount equal to 123% (“Participation Rate”) of the percentage increase in the Index. If, at maturity, the value of the Index has not changed or has decreased by up to 20%, a beneficial owner of a Note would be entitled to receive the full original offering price. However, unlike ordinary debt securities, the Notes do not guarantee any return of principal at maturity. Therefore, if the value of the Index has declined at maturity by more than 20%, a beneficial owner would receive less, and possibly significantly less, than the original offering price: for each 1% decline in the Index *below* 20%, the redemption amount of the Note would be reduced by 1.25% of the original offering price. The Index, which is a modified, price-weighted index, is composed of 225 securities and is broad-based. As of July 8, 2005, the highest weighted stock in the Index had the weight of 2.9705%, and the top five stocks had the cumulative weight of approximately 13.2606%. In addition, as of July 8, 2005, the Index had an average daily trading volume for an average Index component of 3,228,120 shares. As of the same date, the market capitalization of the Index components ranged from approximately 13.04 trillion yen to 40 billion yen, which corresponded approximately to 116 billion U.S. dollars and 353 million U.S. dollars. II. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission believes that Nasdaq has adequately addressed the potential problems that could arise from the hybrid nature of the Notes. The Commission notes that since the Notes will be deemed equity securities for the purposes of NASD Rule 4420(f), the NASD and Nasdaq existing equity trading rules would apply to the Notes. The Commission also notes that pursuant to Rule 2310(a) and IM-2310-2, members must have reasonable grounds for believing that a recommendation to a customer regarding the purchase, sale or exchange of any security is suitable for such customer upon the basis of the facts, if any, disclosed by such customer as to his other security holdings and as to his financial situation and needs. Also, pursuant to Rule 2310(b) prior to the execution of a transaction in the Notes that has been recommended to a non-institutional customer, a member shall make reasonable efforts to obtain information concerning:
(1)The customer's financial status;
(2)the customer's tax status,
(3)the customer's investments objectives, and
(4)such other information used or considered to be reasonable by such member in making recommendations to the customer. Members are also reminded that the Notes are considered non-conventional investments for purposes of the NASD Notice to Members 03-71 (Nov. 2003). In addition, Nasdaq will distribute a circular to members that provides guidance regarding compliance responsibilities and requirements, including suitability recommendations, and highlights the special risks and characteristics of the Notes. Furthermore, the Notes will be subject to the equity margin rules and the regular equity trading hours of 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. will apply to transactions in the Notes. Nasdaq represents that the NASD's surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Notes. Specifically, the NASD will rely on its current surveillance procedures governing equity securities and will include additional monitoring on key pricing dates. Finally, Nasdaq will commence delisting or removal proceedings with respect to the Notes (unless the Commission has approved the continued trading of the Notes) if specified standards with respect to the Notes are not continuously maintained. After careful consideration, 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 association. The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A of the Act, 4 in general, and with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 5 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposed rule change should provide investors with another investment vehicle based on the Index and a means of participating in the market for foreign securities. The Commission believes that the Notes will permit investors to obtain returns based on the Nikkei while at the same time limiting the downside risk of the original investment as a result of the 20% threshold. As described more fully above, even if the value of the Index decreases more than 20%, in no event will the decline in the value of the Notes equal (unless the Index value drops to zero) or exceed the decline in the value of the Index. 4 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3. 5 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). The Commission finds good cause for approving Amendment No. 3 before the 30th day after the date of publication of notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register.** Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 3 solely for purposes of updating figures related to the Index. Because the updated figures are non-controversial and do not raise any concerns about the nature of the Index or the Notes, the Commission finds good cause for accelerating approval of Amendment No. 3 in order to prevent unnecessary delay in the approval of this proposed rule change in its entirety. III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 3 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-2004-131 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-NASD-2004-131. 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 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2004-131 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 6 that the proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2004-131), as amended by Amendments Nos. 1 and 2, be, and it hereby is, approved, and that Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change be, and thereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 6 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4586 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52277; File No. SR-NASD-2005-096] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Nasdaq Listing Fees for Closed-End Funds August 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 July 29, 2005, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. On August 15, 2005, the Exchange amended the proposed rule change (“Amendment No. 1”). 3 Nasdaq has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 4 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 5 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 6 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange deleted the proposed rule changes to NASD Rule 4520 that were included in the Exchange's original filing with the Commission on July 29, 2005. 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 5 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 6 The Nasdaq asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delya. *See* Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes changes to NASD Rule 4510. The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is below. Proposed new language is *italicized;* proposed deletions are in [brackets]. 4510. The Nasdaq National Market
(a)Entry Fee (1)-(2) No change. *(3) A closed-end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (a “Closed-End Fund”), that submits an application for a class of securities in The Nasdaq National Market shall pay to the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. an entry fee of $5,000 (of which $1,000 represents a non-refundable, application fee).* ([3] *4* ) An issuer that submits an application for inclusion of any class of rights in The Nasdaq National Market, shall pay, at the time of its application, a non-refundable application fee of $1,000 to The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. ([4] *5* ) The Board of Directors of The Nasdaq *Stock* [National] Market, Inc. or its designee may, in its discretion, defer or waive all or any part of the entry fee prescribed herein. ([5] *6* ) If the application is withdrawn or is not approved, the entry fee (less the non-refundable application fee) shall be refunded. ([6] *7* ) The fees described in this Rule 4510(a) shall not be applicable with respect to any securities that
(i)are listed on a national securities exchange but not listed on Nasdaq, or
(ii)are listed on the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq, if the issuer of such securities transfers their listing exclusively to the Nasdaq National Market. ([7] *8* ) The fees described in this Rule 4510(a) shall not be applicable to an issuer
(i)whose securities are listed on the New York Stock Exchange and designated as national market securities pursuant to the plan governing New York Stock Exchange securities at the time such securities are approved for listing on Nasdaq, and
(ii)that maintains such listing and designation after it lists such securities on Nasdaq.
(b)No change
(c)Annual Fee—Domestic and Foreign Issues
(1)The issuer of each class of securities *(not otherwise identified in this Rule 4500 series)* [other than an ADR,] that is a domestic or foreign issue listed in The Nasdaq National Market shall pay to The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. an annual fee calculated on total shares outstanding according to the following schedule: Up to 10 million shares—$24,500 10+ to 25 million shares—$30,500 25+ to 50 million shares—$34,500 50+ to 75 million shares—$44,500 75+ to 100 million shares—$61,750 Over 100 million shares—$75,000 (2)-(5) No change.
(d)Annual Fee—American Depositary Receipts
(ADRs)*and Closed-End Funds* (1)-(2) No change. *(3) A Closed-End Fund listed in The Nasdaq National Market shall pay to The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. an annual fee calculated based on total shares outstanding according to the following schedule:* *Up to 5 million shares—$15,000* *5+ to 10 million shares—$17,500* *10+ to 25 million shares—$20,000* *25+ to 50 million shares—$22,500* *50+ to 100 million shares—$30,000* *100+ to 250 million shares—$50,000* *Over 250 million shares—$75,000* *(4) For the purpose of determining the total shares outstanding, fund sponsors may aggregate shares outstanding of all Closed-End Funds in the same fund family listed in The Nasdaq National Market, as shown in the issuer's most recent periodic reports required to be filed with the appropriate regulatory authority or in more recent information held by Nasdaq. The maximum annual fee applicable to a fund family shall not exceed $75,000. For purposes of this rule, a “fund family” is defined as two or more Closed-End Funds that have a common investment adviser or have investment advisers who are “affiliated persons” as defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.* ([3] *5* ) The Board of Directors of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. or its designee may, in its discretion, defer or waive all or any part of the annual fee prescribed herein. ([4] *6* ) If a class of securities is removed from the Nasdaq National Market, that portion of the annual fees for such class of securities attributable to the months following the date of removal shall not be refunded, except such portion shall be applied to The Nasdaq SmallCap Market fees for that calendar year.
(e)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, Nasdaq 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. Nasdaq 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 Currently, Closed-End Funds listing on The Nasdaq National Market are required to pay entry and annual fees according to the applicable fee schedules set forth in NASD Rule 4510. 7 These entry fees range from $100,000 to $150,000 and the annual fees from $15,000 to $75,000. 7 Closed-End Funds are evaluated for listing on the Nasdaq National Market under the general initial listing criteria contained in NASD Rules 4420(a),
(b)or (c). Pursuant to the proposed rule change, as amended, the entry fee for listing a Closed-End Fund on the National Market will decrease to $5,000 (of which $1,000 is a non-refundable application fee) per fund. Annual fees will be based on the total number of shares outstanding, with a minimum fee of $15,000 and a maximum fee of $75,000. For the purposes of determining the annual fee, fund sponsors will be permitted to aggregate the shares outstanding of all Closed-End Funds listed on the Nasdaq National Market that are part of the fund family. As a result, the annual fee may not exceed $75,000 per fund family. For the purposes of this rule, a “fund family” is defined as two or more Closed-End Funds that share a common investment adviser or investment advisers who are “affiliated persons” as defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. Nasdaq believes there are several reasons to adopt new fees applicable to Closed-End Funds. First, the new annual fee schedule will accommodate the needs of fund sponsors more effectively than the current fee schedule because sponsors often choose to issue and list multiple funds in the same family. Currently, each fund that is listed on Nasdaq is assessed a separate annual fee. Capping annual fees at $75,000 per fund family will benefit fund sponsors and investors by reducing the costs associated with issuing fund shares. Second, in cases where multiple funds are listed, the new fee schedule will substantially lower fees payable by Closed-End Funds, permitting Nasdaq to compete more effectively for listings with other markets. In this regard, Nasdaq notes that the new entry fees are similar to entry fees charged by the American Stock Exchange for listing Closed-End Funds. 8 8 *See* Annex Company Guide Section 140. Nasdaq represents that the new fees proposed herein reflect a lowering of existing fees applicable to issuers of closed-end funds, listed on the Nasdaq National Market. 9 9 Telephone call between Yolanda Goettsch, Associate General Counsel, Nasdaq, and Forence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Commission, on August 12, 2005. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A of the Act, 10 in general, and with Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act, 11 in particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable fees, dues, and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the NASD operates or controls. The proposed change to the entry and annual fees will apply equally to all Closed-End Funds listing on The Nasdaq National Market. Furthermore, Nasdaq believes that the proposed fees are reasonable and fall within the range of fees charged by other markets. 10 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3. 11 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended, will 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 The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder 13 because the proposal:
(i)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(ii)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and
(iii)does not 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; provided that Nasdaq has given the Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Nasdaq satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 14 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(b)(iii), the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Nasdaq has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. 15 The Commission believes that such waiver is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposed rule change would lower listing fees for closed-end funds which may benefit those who invest in such funds by reducing the costs associated with the issuance of the shares. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change, as amended, to be effective upon filing with the Commission. 16 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 16 For 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. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 17 17 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is July 29, 2005 and the effective date of the amendment is August 15, 2005. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as amended, under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on August 15, 2005, the date on which the NASD submitted Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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-NASD-2005-096 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-2005-096. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2005-096 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4593 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52269; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-19] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change to Require Members That Use Appendix E to Calculate Net Capital to File Supplemental and Alternative Reports August 16, 2005. On March 8, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed a proposed rule change 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 under the Act. 2 The proposed rule change amends NYSE Rule 418 to require member organizations approved by the Commission to use Appendix E to Rule 15c3-1 under the Act 3 to calculate net capital (“CSE broker-dealers”) to file supplemental and alternative reports with the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 14, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 17 CFR 240.15c3-1e. The Commission amended Rule 15c3-1 to establish this voluntary, alternative method of computing net capital, which is applicable to firms that qualify for consolidated supervised entity (“CSE”) treatment. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49830 (June 8, 2004), 69 FR 34428 (June 21, 2004). 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51980 (July 6, 2005), 70 FR 40767 (July 14, 2005). Rule 17a-5 under the Act 5 contains broker-dealer reporting requirements. Broker-dealers file the monthly and quarterly reports required by Rule 17a-5(a) on Form X-17A-5 (the “FOCUS Report”). 6 Pursuant to Rule 17a-5(a)(5), 7 CSE broker-dealers are required to file certain additional monthly and quarterly reports. The Exchange has created a modified FOCUS Report form for CSE broker-dealers. The form contains new line items to capture the additional required reports. The proposed rule amendment is designed to require CSE broker-dealers to provide the additional reports to the Exchange. 5 17 CFR 240.17a-5. 6 17 CFR 249.617. 7 17 CFR 240.17a-5(a)(5). Under NYSE Rule 418, the Exchange may at any time require any member or member organization to be audited in accordance with the requirements of Rule 17a-5. The proposed amendment adds NYSE Rule 418.25, which would require member organizations that are CSE broker-dealers to file such supplemental and alternative reports as may be prescribed by the Exchange. A copy of the modified FOCUS report that CSE broker-dealers would have to file with the Exchange under proposed Rule 418.25 is available on the Exchange's Internet Web site ( *http://www.nyse.com* ). The Commission finds that the NYSE's proposal to amend Rule 418 is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national securities exchange. 8 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 which requires that the rules of the Exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 10 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2005-19) is approved. 8 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). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4580 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52274; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-21] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to the Temporary Reallocation of Securities Among Specialists August 16, 2005. On March 11, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE” 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 NYSE Rule 103.11 to introduce new procedures regarding the temporary reallocation of securities traded on the Exchange from one specialist organization to another specialist organization. On June 16, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 14, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves 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 NYSE provided information concerning the designee of the Chief Regulatory Officer and corrected technical errors in the rule text. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51985 (July 7, 2005), 70 FR 40768. After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act 5 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 6 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 7 which requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be 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 Exchange has determined that the temporary reallocation of a security is most likely to be required for regulatory reasons and has therefore proposed to transfer the responsibility for such decisions from the Chief Executive Officer to the Chief Regulatory Officer (“CRO”) or his or her designee. 8 The Commission also notes that the Exchange has proposed to specify that only non-specialist Board of Executive (“BoE”) Floor Representatives may join the CRO (or his or her designee) in making reallocation decisions in order to avoid any potential conflicts of interest that may exist with specialist BoE Floor Representatives participating in such decisions. The Commission also notes that the Exchange has provided an alternative that, if there are not two non-specialist BoE Floor Representatives available to participate with the CRO (or his or her designee) in the reallocation decision, the most senior non-specialist Floor Governor or Governors, based on his or her current length of service as a Floor Governor, would be authorized to act in place of the non-specialist BoE Floor Representative or Representatives. The Commission believes that the proposed changes to the Exchange's procedure for the temporary reallocation of securities are designed to appropriately assign the responsibility for making reallocation decisions to the Exchange's regulatory group and disinterested members of the BoE (or disinterested Floor Governors), and thereby to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest and strengthen regulatory independence. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f. 6 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 8 The Commission notes that the Exchange has represented that it expects that the designee would be an officer in the Exchange's regulatory group, with the Executive Vice President of the Market Surveillance Division being the primary designee. *See* Amendment No. 1. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2005-21) as amended, is approved. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4592 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52253; File No. SR-PCX-2005-16] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend Its Market Data Rebate Program To Allow Equity Trading Permit Holders To Receive Rebates on an Estimated Basis August 15, 2005. On February 1, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX”), through its wholly owned subsidiary PCX Equities, Inc. (“PCXE”), 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 its current market data rebate program to allow Equity Trading Permit Holders (“ETP Holders”) to receive market data rebates on an estimated basis when certain conditions are met. On July 5, 2005, PCX amended the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 14, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Amendment No. 1. In Amendment No. 1, PCX amended the purpose section of the filing to include examples of how estimated market data rebates would be calculated and how estimated market data rebates would be distributed. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51990 (July 7, 2005), 70 FR 40770. Currently, the rules governing the Archipelago Exchange (“ArcaEx”), the equities trading facility of PCXE, allow ETP Holders to receive Liquidity Provider Credit payments on a quarterly basis for limit orders posted by such ETP Holder in Tape B securities 5 that execute against inbound marketable orders. Under the current market data revenue program the Liquidity Provider Credit applied to ETP Holders for limit orders in Tape B securities that execute against inbound marketable orders is 50% of the revenue from the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) Plan generated for such trades. 5 Tape B securities include securities that are on the American Stock Exchange or the regional national securities exchanges. The Commission finds that PCX's proposal to pay eligible ETP Holders an estimated share of Liquidity Provider Credits on a monthly basis, before quarterly revenues from the CTA Plan are distributed, consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 6 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 7 which requires that the rules of the exchange be 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 facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system. The PCX states that distributing estimated Liquidity Provider Credits on a monthly basis will make the pricing of executions on ArcaEx more competitive. 6 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). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 8 that the proposed rule change (SR-PCX-2005-16), as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and it hereby is, approved. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4590 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration No. 10164] North Dakota Disaster No. ND-00002 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of North Dakota (FEMA-1597-DR), dated 07/22/2005. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Flooding, and Ground Saturation. *Incident Period:* 06/01/2005 through 07/07/2005. *Effective Date:* 07/22/2005. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/20/2005. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area Office 3, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 07/22/2005, applications for Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties: * Benson, Bottineau, Cavalier, Dickey, Grand Forks, Griggs, Kidder, Lamoure, McHenry, Mountrail, Nelson, Pembina, Pierce, Ramsey, Ransom, Renville, Richland, Rolette, Sargent, Sioux, Stark, Steele, Towner, Traill, Walsh, Ward; Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation; Portion of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation which lies within the state of North Dakota; Three affiliated tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation. The Interest Rates are: Other (including non-profit organizations) with credit available elsewhere: 4.750. Businesses and non-profit organizations without credit available elsewhere: 4.000. The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10164. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. 05-16697 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 7
5 references not yet in our index
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • 7 CFR 240.19
  • 15 USC 78
  • 17 CFR 240.15
  • 17 CFR 240.17
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice
U.S.C.§ 78s
U.S.C.§ 78f
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 200.30-3
U.S.C.§ 78c
U.S.C.§ 78o–4
C.F.R.§ 249.617
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Cite7 CFR 240.19
Cite15 USC 78
Cite17 CFR 240.15
Cite17 CFR 240.17
Cites 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.